India Woodward’s Post

NEW report, out today! Our first big output from the Reimagining the Local State programme is now live. We explore the elements needed for a successful 'devolution revolution', and local systems equipped to succeed with powers at every scale. From levelling up to the ‘devolution revolution’, there is growing recognition that England is drastically overcentralised. Attempts are continuing to correct this, with devolution deals being offered to Combined Authorities at a more strategic, regional scale.   But this approach will not, in itself, be enough. For real regional governance, a far broader sweep of powers should be available to be devolved to combined authorities and the GLA by default. This would mean a deep effort to build the maturity and capacity of this emerging institutional scale.  Kick-starting stronger regionalism is a necessary, but not a sufficient, solution for the challenges faced in England. Indeed, without specific efforts, there is a risk that this new ‘layer’ will reinforce a top-heavy system that continues to marginalise the very communities it aims to empower.  There is also significant need, then, for local and hyper-local governance in England, with clear responsibilities and ways to effectively propose the drawing-down of powers from higher tiers when appropriate. For now, this smaller scale of local government is all but overlooked by the policy world.  At hyper-local scales, the state can operate very differently, fostering deep neighbourhood resilience and facilitating the activities and self-governance of communities themselves.  For devolution to work, all of these layers must be aligned, and each playing to its distinct strengths within the larger local system.  What powers where? Achieving the ‘devolution revolution’, kindly sponsored by Power to Change, is the first major policy report in Reform’s Reimagining the Local State programme. It sets out design principles for local systems, recommendations for whole regional systems to work together and distribute powers at every scale. It also sets out the notional distribution of powers for a much more devolved system.  'What powers where? Achieving the 'devolution revolution', from Simon Kaye, India Woodward, and Giorgia Vittorino, is available to download now! https://lnkd.in/e4w5qy3A

REPORT 📄 | We're pleased to partner with Reform Think Tank to bring you 'What Powers Where?': a deep dive into what is needed for a successful 'devolution revolution'. While England is overcentralised, there are also moves to devolve more power to a regional level. This is a start but it's not enough. The paper argues that powers should be rearranged in a way that sees specialisation attached to different scales of governance: a collaborative and facilitative hyperlocal tier, a delivery-focused mid-tier, and a strategic and co-ordinating regional tier. For devolution to work, all of these layers must be aligned, and each playing to its distinct strengths within the larger local system. At Power to Change, we're especially interested in the ways this can foster deep neighbourhood resilience and enable the self-governance of communities themselves. Read the report for design principles and recommendations for whole regional systems to work together and distribute powers at every scale 👇 👇 https://lnkd.in/e4w5qy3A #devolution #devolutionrevolution #localgovernment #community

Interesting new report from Reform Think Tank today on hyperlocal governance, subsidiarity by default and scaling #devolution across different geographies within England 👀

Is the 'devolution revolution' really coming? "This is not quite the revolution that the local government system needs. This is devolution by increments, and devolution as a narrowly-defined project. It leaves the fundamental structure of governance largely unchanged. And by focusing tightly on the creation of a regional (well, quasi-regional) layer, it misses the opportunity for what I have been calling whole system devolution, where regional, local constituent authorities, and hyper-local institutions are all aligned behind a shared vision and a fully decentralised array of powers to deliver on it.“ Latest from me in politics .co. uk! https://lnkd.in/eJiF8HVg

On the day of the Kings Speech the initial stance of the new government is becoming clear: > competence and professionalism, > a methodical discovery, unpicking and communication of their inheritance, > growth at the heart of their legislative agenda, Alongside this, tentative but positive noises about devolution and adopting a more preventative approach (health and criminal justice flagged as early examples) Given the scale of challenge, this is unlikely to be sufficient. Moreover, there is a paradox – being ‘competent’ ‘measured’ ‘incremental’ ‘pragmatic’ are attributes not commonly associated with fast paced transformational change. Overcoming this tension is likely to be found in the conscious phasing of actions. We can learn from Councils that have overcome long term structural challenge. First it takes time – five to ten years on average and should be planned on this basis. Second, effort is usually delivered over three distinct stages: emergency recovery, some form of reset; and then deep transformation. Finally given the cross cutting and interdependent nature of changes required there is a need for co-ordination. A single controlling mind that can oversee the moving parts and knit together a cohesive management and political narrative. What is the equivalent for central government? A recognition of a phased approach either explicitly or implicitly. For example, a one-year financial settlement to stabilise government with a long-term transformation plan and a spending review to inform a second multi-year phase of change and delivery. We should also be looking at the appetite for cross department policy integration and action, including across tiers of government. To understand what this might in practice, look no further than this piece by my colleague Evie John in last week’s MJ that called for growth initiatives to be conceived from a place perspective with objectives that go explicitly beyond fiscal benefits: tackling inequality and social cohesion and the democratic deficit. Achieving this will require structural reform. Today we will get an opportunity to see whether this government can will the means to deliver it Inner Circle Consulting Ben Glover https://lnkd.in/eERS5c8T

A series of short blogs from Geoff that often challenge the orthodoxy and help give context to our work. They help me rise above the day to day noise of working life and think a little differently....Enjoy!

Well argued from Sir Geoff Mulgan. Because technological innovation in the private sector will only lead to societal transition and transfornation, when it is paralleled with public sector and social innovation. ”…energetic innovation and experiment is as important for care for the elderly, recycling, neighbourhood design, mental health, childhood support and homelessness as it is for electric vehicles and AI chips. ” #innovation #transformativeinnovationpolicy

The federal government transfers approximately $1.1 trillion dollars every year to state and local governments. Yet most states and localities are not evaluating whether the programs deploying these funds are increasing community well-being. Despite an emerging awareness of the importance of state and local government innovation capacity, there is a shortage of plausible strategies to build that capacity. But that capacity can be built. Here's how. ✍ Roseanna Ander, Laura Feeney, Anna Harvey, Elizabeth Linos + Evan White #DayOne2025 #statecapacity #federalcapacity https://lnkd.in/erbYSKan

This blog perfectly articulates my experiences and thoughts of late on the role for civil and civic society, and purpose-driven decision-making by local, national and international governments. My career and life has spanned (and still bridges) science, arts, academic institutions, grassroots charities, NHS, commercial companies, entrepreneurship, analogue, digital/tech, local, international, and more. The spaces in-between fascinate me - they’re where all the fun stuff happens! In-between is where the seeds of new ideas have space to grow, where disparate threads of ideas get spun and woven together. In-between tries out something different because the old is no longer working, without waiting for someone else to try it first in a similar but different context and evaluate its impact using easily-quantified metrics. In-between adapts and evolves responsively, iteratively, thoughtfully, as needed. In-between is where “failure” is expected and encouraged, because how else do we create room and resource for something different if not through processes of death, decay and composting? Social innovation supports communities to flourish by operating in the in-between. More of this please. Perhaps policy can learn from it.

I've written a blog on why it would be both good politics and policy for the UK government to take social innovation seriously. At the moment there is little clear approach to civil society, and a narrowing of policy for science and innovation, which means almost no support for social creativity in all its forms. This is particularly odd for a centre-left government. Any plausible approach to missions and big goals, whether on housing or net zero, has to involve exploration and experiment as well as top-down policy. And government has to find better ways to mobilise intelligence right across society, not just at the top. These are relatively easy problems to fix (at least compared to some of the other ones government faces) but it's not clear that they are yet recognised as problems. https://lnkd.in/em2UjxW4