|
Devolution
and the Policy Process in the UK: Seminars/Research Programme
|
AN ESRC DEVOLUTION
RESEARCH PROGRAMME / IPPR PROJECT
SUMMARY
The proposal is for one year IPPR / ESRC Devolution Programme project
to explore implications of devolved government across a wide range of
policy areas. Combining the policy breadth and political influence of
IPPR with the specialist expertise of the ESRC devolution programme, the
proposal is for a high profile project that will inform policy thinking
in relation to the devolution agenda.
BACKGROUND
The establishment of devolved government in Scotland, Wales, Northern
Ireland and London has arguably been this government's most radical reform,
yet comparatively little attention has been paid to the consequences of
differentiated policy making.
The UK has always had a differentiated policy process. Territorial departments
have housed separate administrative structures for Scotland, Wales and
Northern Ireland and allowed for significant territorial variations in
policy process and outcomes. The impact of devolution takes the differentiated
policy process to new levels, however. Firstly, it opens up territorial
policy variation to new forms of scrutiny and accountability both within
the devolved institutions and at a popular level in devolved elections.
Secondly, the existence of devolved authorities with asymmetrical powers
will produce even higher degrees of policy variation around the UK, as
is already become apparent.
Three sets of questions arise from this. The first is about the policy-making
process. Though an integrated civil service remains in Great Britain,
the fields of activity of civil servants in the different parts of the
UK have become more discrete, especially where extensive powers have been
devolved. New forms of intergovernmental relations are the result, some
of which have been formalised and codified, while others are emerging
informally and organically. What does the new map of intergovernmental
relations look like, and how well does it work? Does it work better in
some parts of the UK than others? Are lessons being shared? How does the
'new' intergovernmental relations deal with policy-making for England,
where strong devolved bodies are absent? How well does it accommodate
the very different administrative arrangements that exist in Northern
Ireland? How far have 'horizontal' intergovernmental links emerged to
complement the 'vertical' links that exist between Whitehall and the devolved
bodies.
The second set of questions is about whether policy variation matters.
There may be variation in process - policy-making may be more inclusive
of private sector actors, or be better 'joined up' across departments,
in some parts of the UK than others. The outcomes of policy-making may
also differ as different territorial and electoral priorities leave their
mark. This has already been seen in relation to education and health policy,
for example. Differences - and therefore new inequalities - will emerge.
Is this problematic, or when does it become problematic? How much variation
is feasible or legitimate? In what circumstances can devolved governments
act as 'policy laboratories' for promoting innovation and spreading good
practice? How much central regulation is necessary in order to keep the
'playing field' level for economic competition and public expectations?
The third set of questions flows from the previous two and concerns the
future direction of the devolution process itself. Given these policy,
procedural and structural implications, what lessons should we learn for
the future of devolution in the UK - both for any extension of devolution
to Cardiff, Belfast and Edinburgh and for the development of regional
government in England?
The ESRC has established a comprehensive devolution programme and much
of the current work is focused on understanding devolution as it unfolds.
With IPPR's input across a wide range of policy areas, a joint ESRC/IPPR
programme of work would fill a much-needed gap - to consider implications
of differentiated policy-making and the consequences for the future of
the devolution process.
THE PROJECT
The project will consist of a seminar series to consider papers, based
on original research, which explore these issues. The programme of work
will result in a publication to be jointly published by IPPR and the ESRC
Devolution Programme.
The seminar series will be addressed to policy-makers at all levels of
government and in all territories of the UK and is designed to promote
exchange of ideas and good practice. It will consist of at least six separate
sessions spread over twelve months from July 2001. Sessions will be led
by members of the ESRC Devolution Programme and the IPPR and draw on the
work of ESRC and IPPR researchers, academics and policy makers. Most sessions
will be held in London, though at least one will take place in Edinburgh
(possibly jointly with the Scottish Council Foundation), Cardiff (possibly
with the Institute of Welsh Affairs) and Belfast (possibly with Democratic
Dialogue). A session in an English regional venue - e.g. Newcastle or
Birmingham - may be possible.
The first seminar will set the scene by exploring intergovernmental relations
and policy differentiation in other decentralised political systems. It
will build on a seminar held under the auspices of IPPR's Remodelling
Government project in February 2001 . Subsequent sessions will be on particular
policy areas chosen to highlight different aspects of the post-devolution
policy process in the UK: where extensive powers have been devolved; where
Whitehall remains the key partner; where 'joined-up' government is an
aspiration; where policy remains highly sectoral; and so on. The programme
will be flexibly designed in order to allow for topical policy issues
to be the focus of seminars. The final session will draw together patterns
and insights from the series as a whole.
The seminar programme will be commissioned co-ordinated by a senior researcher
based at IPPR, who will commission and compile background papers. The
researcher will be supported on a day-to-day basis by Peter Robinson,
Senior Economist, IPPR. The overall programme of work will be jointly
managed by Professor Charlie Jeffery of the ESRC Devolution Programme
and Peter Robinson.
A publication will be produced as a result of the research and seminar
series - building on commissioned seminar papers, research undertaken
by the IPPR researcher and additional commissioned papers.
INDICATIVE LIST OF SEMINAR TOPICS
- The policy making
process: mapping the current intergovernmental process.
- Social Exclusion/Inclusion:
Realising Joined-Up Governance?
- Health: How Much
Policy Variation in a National Health Service?
- Further and Higher
Education in the UK's 'Policy Laboratories'
- Unequal opportunities?
The impact of devolution on the equality agenda
- Industrial and
regional policy: inward investment and the future of the DTI's UK functions.
- Beyond Barnett:
financing devolution
- Transport: an
integrated strategy?
- Differentiation
and Regulation: The New Dynamics of Policy-Making in the UK
BACKGROUND TO
RESEARCH PARTNERS
ESRC Devolution Programme
This programme of research is running from 2000 to 2005 to examine a wide
range of matters relating to devolution, constitutional change and consequential
effects. The research programme has three themes - nationalism and national
identity; governance and constitutional matters; and economic and social
policy. The programme's Director is Professor Charlie Jeffery.
IPPR
IPPR is Britain's leading left of centre think tank developing new routes
to social justice. Its purpose is to contribute to public understanding
of social, economic and political questions through research, discussion
and publication. IPPR currently has a team of 30 researchers working in
seven project teams: health and social policy, education and employment,
media and new technologies, citizenship and governance, sustainability,
public involvement and the Commission on Public Private Partnerships.
IPPR has previously undertaken work on constitutional reform and devolution
and published The State and the Nations (Tindale, 1997).
Return to top
|