“Levelling up will require long-term local strategies for cultivating development in rural places. These should be tailored to the underlying strengths, needs and goals of rural areas, rather than seeking to fit with centrally determined priorities or measures, which may be predicated on urban-centric conceptions of development.”[Economics Observatory]
Meanwhile, today it’s been announced that the government’s Rural Services Delivery Grant has increased.
Businesses in rural areas perceive new opportunities for growth but long-standing challenges such as affordable housing, transport and broadband capacity are hampering take-up, according to a major new survey from the National Innovation Centre for Rural Enterprise (NICRE).Almost half of rural firms in the North East, South West and West Midlands see opportunities for providing products or services relating to health and well-being and the environment as consumer priorities and interests change post-pandemic.
But deep-rooted issues in rural areas threaten firms’ ability to grasp opportunities with 40% citing a lack of availability of affordable housing locally, compared to a third of urban firms, and 39% a lack of transport services/infrastructure, compared to 26% of urban firms. A third of rural firms also identified inadequate broadband capacity, compared to a quarter of urban businesses. The most common constraint for both rural and urban firms was staff recruitment and retention (50%).
The Rt Hon Michael Gove has today (24th Jan) through written statement announced that he proposes to increase the Rural Services Delivery Grant by £15million for 2024/2025 resulting in a total of £110 Million. The Rural Services Network has long campaigned for fair funding for rural areas and welcomes the increase to this grant.
While this increase is welcome, it does not however solve the problem for rural councils of the years of underfunding by successive Governments. In addition, not all rural councils are eligible for the Rural Services Delivery Grant, and yet they face the additional costs of providing services to their sparsely populated communities.
This all suggests that levelling up – if we understand this broadly as an attempt to reduce spatial inequalities – will require long-term local strategies for cultivating development in rural places. These should be tailored to the underlying strengths, needs and goals of rural areas, rather than seeking to fit with centrally determined priorities or measures, which may be predicated on urban-centric conceptions of development.
This means that rural places should have a degree of capacity and autonomy, as well as sustained support and resources to enact these strategies. It should also be recognised that the question of what type of development should be pursued in a particular place can be open to contestation and conflict.
On the other hand, if the aim of levelling up is to reduce disparities in economic performance, a more interventionist approach might be necessary. One study indicates that places’ development opportunities are structured by their existing economic activity (Mealy and Coyle, 2021). Specifically, it can be very difficult for areas to move from economies based on low-value activities to high-value ones. This poses a challenge for many rural places with economies predominantly based on low-productivity jobs and sectors.
In such circumstances, an approach that seeks solely to build on local strengths may serve to disadvantage these places further and to exacerbate spatial inequalities. This suggests that any attempt to level up rural places could require a more actively redistributive approach and funding by national government.
