Search results

The form of crisis-governance responses to austerity urbanism that is the focus of this paper is ‘fleet-of-foot’ partnerships. These non-statutory mechanisms which champion dispersed forms of leadership are crafted in policy discourse as lean, mean, crisis-tackling fighting machines. Their perceived agility and entrepreneurialism are often lauded, yet empirical evidence for these traits remains sparse. This paper investigates this concern through the lens of the Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) in England, which are deemed by some to exude some of the defining characteristics of ‘fleet-of-foot’ mechanisms.

A mixed method approach was utilised, including analysis of socio-economic datasets and qualitative policy analysis of primary and secondary material. The quantitative element includes analysis of employment and journey-to-work data, whereas the qualitative material originated from a review of LEP proposals, and narrative analysis of transcripts of interviews undertaken since 2010, together with other textual artefacts.

The findings reveal that dispersed public leadership is problematic as a mode of crisis-governance. LEPs were adopted as a crisis-governance fix. These loose (or looser) constellations of many, varied actors, are considered to be more flexible, responsive and delivery-orientated than more traditional and statutory democratic-administrative mechanisms: lean, mean, crisis-tackling fighting machines. Flexibility is a primary trait of ‘fleet-of-foot’ configurations and perhaps the defining feature of LEPs.

The programme of research remains on-going, which reflects the continual shifts in the form and configurations of LEPs.

Detecting some of the primary weaknesses of ‘fleet-of-foot’ public leadership arrangements, the research draws attention to some of the dangers of pushing austerity down and through ‘fleet-of-foot’ formations. The practical implications are highlighted by examining the limits of LEPs to achieve efficient outcomes or to open up a shared leadership space.

Through an engagement with current conceptual and policy debates where austerity ‘blows out’ across Europe, it is observed that austerian politics may be pushing partnership bodies too far, thus risking the danger of overburdening and under-resourcing the very distributed leadership mechanisms that are expected to reconcile local economic crises and stimulate local growth. This paper also contributes to the literature on dispersed public leadership, which runs counter to traditional command and control leadership constructs.

This chapter examines whether Type 1 and Type 2 models of Multi-Level Governance (MLG) are suitable frameworks for analysing the operation of local enterprise partnerships (LEPs) as significant new partnerships at the sub-national level of governance in England. In doing so it bridges some gaps in knowledge, largely absent from MLG literature, by demonstrating how actors in economic development attempt to solve governance problems through co-operation rather than central steering and control.

The approach follows Stubbs (2005) who called for more political anthropological or ethnographic analyses, and the chapter draws on primary interview data and secondary documentary evidence from two LEPs in the north east of England.

Some advocates of MLG believe that governance should serve citizen needs but it is clear from the contents of this chapter that MLG has a number of weaknesses in this respect, as well as neglecting power relationships and misinterpretations of the concept of territory. The conclusion shows that LEPs as multi-agency partnerships need to be accountable and it is essential to adopt models that facilitate a clearer understanding of new spaces of interactions and multiple accountabilities. Using a stakeholder analysis fills some gaps in understanding of how partnerships work and who they are accountable to, as well as assessing how public services delivery models operate within a multi-level governance setting. All 39 LEPs have varying levels of trust between partners, as well as responding to multiple accountabilities. Neither Type I nor Type II MLG is sufficient on its own as an explanatory framework for analysing LEPs, but each does offer a useful entrée into this important field of enquiry.

The MLG concept is a helpful starting point, but its utility is governed by how it is augmented with other, more appropriate models of analysis. LEPs are a challenge to the dynamics of public accountability as they involve private actors at the heart of public service delivery; they are also interesting examples of persistent contestation between actors with different mind sets on outcomes and on legitimacy, accountability and representativeness. Stakeholder analysis allows a deeper appreciation of the interactions in space and multiple accountabilities of actors in LEPs.

LEPs in England are the preferred instrument for driving economic growth in regions and sub-regions. The findings help to explain more fully some of the intricate power and trust relationships in these partnerships. The chapter also examines multiple accountabilities and how actors connect within territories.

Critically the findings show an absence of real citizen engagement or expression of public opinions and feedback loops to citizens/publics/individuals/other organisations within such diffuse partnership arrangements. In an era of Localism it is essential for partnerships to be accountable to a wider group of societal stakeholders

The chapter takes a novel approach to analysing LEPs and builds on some existing work on MLG to obtain a deeper analysis of some of the complex inter-relationships and connections between actors on LEPs.

This chapter explores the importance of place in the creation of new enterprise and wealth.

The chapter deploys a case study of the Liverpool city-region and provides a critical review of the conditions for small enterprise in the locality, with attention paid to enterprise in low income communities.

The argument here suggests that place and public investment are important contributory factors to help understand how enterprise can contribute to wealth creation.

Further work is required to comprehend the wider aspects of enterprise in the context of place and particularly its relevance to low income communities.

Policy makers may acknowledge how enterprise as a tool of wealth creation can reinforce local dynamics of social and economic exclusion and that the nuance of place needs to be taken into account.

Small enterprises have a wider potential beyond their economic role to impact local communities.

There are some studies in entrepreneurship that consider the propinquity between enterprise, place and wealth creation although placing this in the context of local economic decline and low income communities is a relatively under researched and misunderstood domain.

Refining and updating Harvey’s theorisation of the shift from managerialism to entrepreneurialism, this chapter charts the changing business of entrepreneurial governance through an examination of English economic development practice. Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs), sub-national entrepreneurial governance entities, provide the empirical lens to understand the contemporary role of private interests in the pursuit of public goals in securing innovative approaches to economic development.

Comparative analysis of the strategic priorities, ways of working and interventions of LEPs operating across Greater Birmingham and the North East of England is undertaken against the backdrop of a competitive environment where the mantra is ‘the market knows best’.

The key finding is that while some policy outcomes are prosaic, albeit across contextually distinct entrepreneurial governance places, more innovative policy approaches are emerging.

The chapter shows that there remains value in business involvement in urban governance in its present mode. A more permissive, entrepreneurial mode of governance with the liberation of private enterprise may be leading to imaginative as well as boosterist ways of securing sustainable growth.

The chapter suggests some options for policy-makers and a series of challenges for decision-makers.

The purpose of this paper is to understand how important networks are for the emergence and growth of social enterprises as well as how social enterprises use their networks throughout the life course of their organisation. A comparative approach is used by contrasting social enterprises with traditional commercial enterprises along the dimensions of obtaining resources and legitimacy through their networks.

An abductive approach is used starting from existing knowledge on how commercial enterprises use networks during the start-up and growth of their enterprise. Qualitative interviews with 23 entrepreneurs were conducted. Using a matched-pairs design, the network importance and use of social and commercial enterprises is compared.

It is found that networks are highly important for both commercial and social enterprises throughout their life course. However, they substantially diverge in how they use their networks. Social enterprises tend to access more intangible resources through their networks than do commercial enterprises. Moreover, social enterprises rely more strongly on their networks for legitimacy in both the start-up and growth phase of the enterprise.

This paper takes a novel approach by empirically comparing the networks of social and commercial enterprises. New insights are offered in the resource flows within networks and how entrepreneurs use resources obtained from their networks.

The chapter aims to explore the themes of enterprise, leadership and partnership through examining aspects of the changing roles of and relationships between public, private and third sectors in the city of Leeds.

The chapter draws on the author’s long involvement in the city of Leeds, augmented by recent interviews with a range of different senior actors and set within the context of relevant literature.

The chapter suggests that despite a history of diverse enterprise, there have been some elements of external forces and internal culture and operational style that have held the city back. Recent national, city region and local reforms may have positive impacts and enable the city to realise more of its potential, though there remain formidable obstacles to progress.

Despite providing rich and meaningful insights that enhance understanding, the single case approach limits the potential for generalising the findings.

Other cities can learn from the experience of Leeds and how the ways of working here relate to findings by academics in other cities.

The general forces of change in enterprise, governance and leadership can only really be understood in terms of how they play out in specific settings.

This chapter addresses two main questions; firstly, whether the public sector should seek to play an entrepreneurial role in its local economy and, secondly, what kinds of roles it could undertake. This chapter addresses these questions through an engagement with Cooke and Morgan’s (1998) concept of the animateur. The chapter uses examples drawn from Leicester City Mayor’s 100 Days in office programme to illustrate how the public sector provides a ‘breath of life’ to defunct areas in the City’s built environment and its economic activity. In this way, the animateur is a mode of engagement appropriate to characterize public sector entrepreneurship.

The chapter takes a case study approach drawing on the author’s previous research in Leicester and current involvement in the governance structures in the City.

The chapter examines the ways in which the public sector may be seen to be ‘entrepreneurial’. It argues that while the public sector should be seen as a legitimate entrepreneur in local economic development, their focus should be on innovative use of space and infrastructure. Here the role of the public sector should be to provide the ‘urban plumbing’ that would not be a cost-effective role for the private sector to undertake. The chapter uses the example of Leicester in England where the public sector has attempted to use culture and heritage to drive economic development in the City. Here the City authorities used these industries as a mechanism for the physical regeneration of large parts of the City Centre and have created spaces for private sector enterprises to flourish. The chapter argues that the success here was due to the City Council and the LEP understanding their role in entrepreneurship as an enabler rather than driver.

Policy-makers need to better understand the role the public sector can play in local entrepreneurship. This role should not be restricted to physical regeneration projects as the public sector should also be an innovative leader in the governance of enterprise and entrepreneurship at the local and regional tiers.

The purpose of this paper is to explore a resource-constrained Destination Marketing Organization (DMO) to assess the power struggles inherent in community tourism initiatives when leadership is weakened through shrinking resources.

Using a comparative instrumental case study approach, this paper analyses three separate studies within Experience Bedfordshire to develop a comprehensive picture of governance within a single tourism destination.

The results show that privately held attractions, hospitality businesses, and transportation authorities retain control over key marketing messages. Visitor and stakeholder surveys indicate that a more sustainable form of rural development, based on natural/cultural attractions and the development of bed and breakfast and artisan small businesses is the preferred development path. Unfortunately, the increasing use of Tourism Information Centres by local residents, as opposed to tourists, has reduced support by key power holders in the community, thereby forcing major industry restructure.

This research was conducted during the transitionary period as the Rural Development Agencies were being dissolved in the UK and the new Local Enterprise Partnership system was being implemented in early 2011. It is still too early to anticipate how this new system will affect destination marketing in the long run.

This paper argues that commercial interests ultimately control the destination image in this resource-constrained region, and its marketing messages which are currently focused on high adventure and large scale development are pursued to the detriment of local wishes and rural landscape development.

This paper is the first article to address the transition from the Rural Development Agencies to the Local Enterprise Partnerships within a tourism and destination marketing framework.

Entrepreneurship is increasingly recognised as a crucial element in fostering economic development and growth, especially at the regional level. The purpose of this paper is to examine the evolution of regional enterprise policies and associated governance mechanisms in the UK to address the following questions: How are evolving systems of regional governance in the UK impacting on the capability of regional policy to foster entrepreneurship? To what extent does enterprise policy form a key part of the overall economic development strategy of regions? and are different forms of regional enterprise policy and priorities emerging?

The study draws on a series of key interviews with policy makers across the regions of Wales, Scotland and England (using the case study of the Yorkshire and the Humber region). The approach adopted in this study facilitates an exploration of the perspectives of those responsible for the formulation and delivery of such support. The paper seeks to ascertain and analyse policy maker opinion on the nature of previous policy, as well as future requirements if policies are to become more effective. It focuses on the period from 1997, with the election of the Labour Government, and the period from 2010 to 2015 represented by the Conservative-Liberal Democratic Coalition Government.

The paper finds that regional entrepreneurship differentials emerge due to the spatial and place-based nature of three underlying factors: first, the nature of markets; second, the nature of innovation systems; and third, the nature of place-based cultures, communities and the institutions they establish. In the regions studied, failings and limitations in these factors suggest two potential requirements: first, the introduction of public policy in the form of a range of interventions and support mechanisms, second, the introduction of a system of policy governance to establish appropriate interventions and support mechanisms. In the case study regions, clear attempts have been made to address each of the three limiting factors through a range of policy and governance systems, but due to a complex range of issues these have often achieved limited success.

From an intellectual perspective, the paper positively points toward the establishment of governance and policy frameworks that have been both led and informed by the theory underpinning an explanation of regional differentials in entrepreneurial capacity and capability. However, from a more applied perspective it questions the effectiveness and strategic implementation of the policy frameworks and the sustainability of the associated governance mechanisms.