Cities, solidarity & agglomeration strategy

The 2016 EU Referendum results map presented us with a stark illustration of the divisions within Britain. Whatever form of Brexit eventually occurs (or, indeed, if it is revoked), the need to bridge those divisions will be a challenge.
I don’t think we hear the phrase, “I can now see what I got wrong” enough in the political discourse around Brexit. Politicians who were shocked at the result continue to maintain that it, in fact, simple proved what they had been saying all along to be accurate. This is patently nonsense. So, let me buck the trend. Here are two things that I misunderstood in my politics and have been forced to revisit.
Firstly, I was a keen advocate of the principle of the global city. An urban entity which was interconnected around the World. London is the preeminent example, but it is not the only one. Indeed, locally to me both Bristol and Cardiff could be seen as examples. These are prominent cities which are open to and engaged with the wider world. The difficulty is that they can be far less open and engaging to near neighbours. There is no physical barrier to overcome, but there is a psychological one. Economic and cultural hubs are bridging the world to one another, but the success is too often elusive to neighbouring settlements.
Secondly, I misunderstood the balance between economic growth and local identity when defining a measure of success. Plenty of places which would gain economically from large scale home building or mass migration, placed that long term financial benefit as secondary to the concern that their towns and cities were changing rapidly beyond recognition and losing their identity which had gradually developed over centuries. That is not to say the residents of these places were necessarily hostile to some moderate growth to the settlement or unwelcoming to those moving to their town. The issue was the scale and speed of change and what was being lost in the process.
Yet, there is an importance to economic growth in correcting both of these issues. At the heart of globalisation is the principle of economic agglomeration. This is the idea that businesses in a similar field want to cluster together because it sparks innovation and ensures a well qualified potential workforce. The public sector has a role to play in providing relevant academic institutions and infrastructure. Agglomeration raises the economic prospects of the sector rather than just an individual business. It is hard to think of a better example than Silicon Valley. In the UK, there are examples of economic agglomeration such as science in Cambridge or media in Salford. However, I think we have only scratched the surface of what could be achieved.
Geography also has a part to play. Large proportions of the UK population live in clusters of cities. Think in terms of Bristol-Newport-Cardiff or Sheffield-Leeds-Bradford for example. Now, I accept parochialism runs deep, but let’s look beyond that for a moment. Some effort has been made to bring these clusters together through initiatives such as the Northern Powerhouse and similarly branded loosely based regional units. This is a step in the right direction, but it has tended to focus on conversations among the business community and politicians rather than seeking to explain the strategy to the public. As such, it is hard to assess or to engender widespread interest. Infrastructure delivery is too slow.
I think that approximately seven to ten of these multi-city regions (MCR) could be developed into pragmatic economic entities which could be seen as a modern version of the old city state. The cities within them would have greater autonomy from national government, accountability to local people and would work in partnership with neighbouring authorities in the region. A broader version of the metro-mayor regions, but with it accepted that the different cities have distinct identities.
Each MCR would have a strategy to identify existing economic strengths and local skills. This would then be put to use to develop those industries but also to introduce complementary sectors within the MCR. It would be incumbent upon the public sector to provide the infrastructure to cut connection times within the regions. There is a clear role for planning in this process. The aim is to facilitate an attractive growth location for business, while spreading the wealth across the MCR. This is easier said than done, but it is deliverable. The current predicament of thriving small cities and left behind neighbours is only a recipe for stunted growth and greater division in society. Others argue the merits of the foundational economy and I do agree that this has a place, but it needs to be complementary to the agglomeration model rather than be seen as a simple alternative to it. Opting out of the globalised economy would harm the UK, the challenge is to best harness it in a way which spreads the economic benefit within regions and across the nation.
