IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/loceco/v29y2014i4-5p412-428.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Borderlands: Rescaling economic development in Northern England in the context of greater Scottish autonomy

Author

Listed:
  • Keith Shaw
  • Fred Robinson
  • Jonathan Blackie

Abstract

This article argues that the space created by the clearing away of the English regional ‘institutional architecture’ after 2010 allows local authorities, in particular, to consider new flexible place-based approaches to economic development not possible under the old system. In this context, economic development activities, initiatives and alliances can now be developed to cover geographical areas that ‘make sense’, rather than being imposed or being chosen through habit: it is an opportunity to rescale or recalibrate traditional spatial approaches to place-based economic development. Here we discuss some implications of that, particularly how local authorities in the North East of England and Cumbria are responding – or could respond – to the potential granting of greater economic and fiscal powers to Scotland resulting from pressures for further devolution and the 2014 referendum on independence. We look at the emerging opportunities for collaborative approaches to cross-border economic development; this is an issue that is virtually absent from any contemporary studies of local economic development in the UK. Drawing upon recent research, the article outlines the case for a ‘Borderlands’ approach – which brings together the five local authority areas adjacent to the border – to develop joint approaches to economic development in areas such as transport, tourism, business development and superfast broadband. In addition to such cross-border alliances, we also point to opportunities to reinvigorate co-operation between the North East and Cumbria. The prospect of further autonomy for Scotland is stimulating a new interest in the North East, Cumbria and Scotland in working more collaboratively together, but the outcome of that (whatever the referendum result) may depend upon how the Anglo-Scottish border is perceived. We argue that it needs to be seen less as a barrier and more as an enabling mechanism which brings new opportunities for a relationship based on ‘co-optition’.

Suggested Citation

  • Keith Shaw & Fred Robinson & Jonathan Blackie, 2014. "Borderlands: Rescaling economic development in Northern England in the context of greater Scottish autonomy," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 29(4-5), pages 412-428, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:loceco:v:29:y:2014:i:4-5:p:412-428
    DOI: 10.1177/0269094214537959
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0269094214537959
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0269094214537959?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert Huggins & Piers Thompson, 2013. "Competitiveness and the post-regional political economy," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 28(7-8), pages 884-893, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Robert Huggins & Daniel Prokop, 2017. "Network structure and regional innovation: A study of university–industry ties," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(4), pages 931-952, March.
    2. Will Rossiter, 2016. "A tale of two cities: Rescaling economic strategy in the North Midlands," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 31(8), pages 836-856, December.
    3. Robert Huggins & Daniel Prokop & Piers Thompson, 2020. "Universities and open innovation: the determinants of network centrality," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 718-757, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:loceco:v:29:y:2014:i:4-5:p:412-428. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/index.shtml .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.