Devolution and the economy: a Scottish perspective

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

In their interesting and challenging chapter John Adams and Peter Robinson assess the consequences for economic development policy of the devolution measures enacted by the UK Labour government post 1997. Their chapter ranges widely over current UK regional disparities, the link between devolution and economic growth, the balance of responsibilities in policy between Whitehall and the devolved administrations, and finally, they raise questions about the developing "quasi-federal" role of Whitehall in regulating or coordinating the new devolved policy landscape. In response, we propose to focus on four issues that we believe are key to understanding the economic consequences of devolution both at the Scottish and UK levels. First, we argue that the view of Scotland's devolutionary experience in economic policy is partial and so does not fully capture the nature and extent of change post 1999. Secondly, we examine the role of devolution in regional economic performance. There is much in their paper on this topic with which we agree but we contend that there are significant omissions in the analysis, which are important for policy choice. Our third section highlights an area not discussed in depth by Adams and Robinson's paper: the funding of the devolution settlement. Here we consider some of the implications of funding arrangements for economic performance and the options for a new funding settlement. Finally, we deal with the difficult issue of co-ordination between the centre and the devolved regions. We contend that co-ordination is largely conspicuous by its absence. Moreover, where coordination is deployed it reflects an inadequate understanding of the extent to which the economies of the regions and devolved territories of the UK are linked.
LanguageEnglish
Title of host publicationDevolution in Practice
Pages160-171
Number of pages11
Publication statusPublished - 2006

Publication series

NameDevolution in Practice II: Public Policy Differences within the UK
PublisherIPPR

Fingerprint

Devolution
Funding
Economic performance
Labor
Regional economics
Economic development policy
Economic growth
Regional disparities
Government
Economic consequences
Policy choice
Responsibility
Scotland
Economic policy

Keywords

  • devolution
  • scottish economy
  • Scotland
  • regional policy

Cite this

Ashcroft, B. K., McGregor, P. G., & Swales, J. K. (2006). Devolution and the economy: a Scottish perspective. In Devolution in Practice (pp. 160-171). (Devolution in Practice II: Public Policy Differences within the UK).
Ashcroft, Brian K. ; McGregor, Peter G. ; Swales, J. Kim. / Devolution and the economy : a Scottish perspective. Devolution in Practice. 2006. pp. 160-171 (Devolution in Practice II: Public Policy Differences within the UK).
@inbook{6aef26e5211840839f25d0e17322d1a5,
title = "Devolution and the economy: a Scottish perspective",
abstract = "In their interesting and challenging chapter John Adams and Peter Robinson assess the consequences for economic development policy of the devolution measures enacted by the UK Labour government post 1997. Their chapter ranges widely over current UK regional disparities, the link between devolution and economic growth, the balance of responsibilities in policy between Whitehall and the devolved administrations, and finally, they raise questions about the developing {"}quasi-federal{"} role of Whitehall in regulating or coordinating the new devolved policy landscape. In response, we propose to focus on four issues that we believe are key to understanding the economic consequences of devolution both at the Scottish and UK levels. First, we argue that the view of Scotland's devolutionary experience in economic policy is partial and so does not fully capture the nature and extent of change post 1999. Secondly, we examine the role of devolution in regional economic performance. There is much in their paper on this topic with which we agree but we contend that there are significant omissions in the analysis, which are important for policy choice. Our third section highlights an area not discussed in depth by Adams and Robinson's paper: the funding of the devolution settlement. Here we consider some of the implications of funding arrangements for economic performance and the options for a new funding settlement. Finally, we deal with the difficult issue of co-ordination between the centre and the devolved regions. We contend that co-ordination is largely conspicuous by its absence. Moreover, where coordination is deployed it reflects an inadequate understanding of the extent to which the economies of the regions and devolved territories of the UK are linked.",
keywords = "devolution, scottish economy, Scotland, regional policy",
author = "Ashcroft, {Brian K.} and McGregor, {Peter G.} and Swales, {J. Kim}",
note = "Seminar 3, Conference room A, First Floor, Welsh Assembly Government, Crickhowell House, Cardiff Bay, Cardiff CF99 1NA Friday 13 May 2005",
year = "2006",
language = "English",
isbn = "1860302858",
series = "Devolution in Practice II: Public Policy Differences within the UK",
publisher = "IPPR",
pages = "160--171",
booktitle = "Devolution in Practice",

}

Ashcroft, BK, McGregor, PG & Swales, JK 2006, Devolution and the economy: a Scottish perspective. in Devolution in Practice. Devolution in Practice II: Public Policy Differences within the UK, pp. 160-171.

Devolution and the economy : a Scottish perspective. / Ashcroft, Brian K.; McGregor, Peter G.; Swales, J. Kim.

Devolution in Practice. 2006. p. 160-171 (Devolution in Practice II: Public Policy Differences within the UK).

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

TY - CHAP

T1 - Devolution and the economy

T2 - a Scottish perspective

AU - Ashcroft, Brian K.

AU - McGregor, Peter G.

AU - Swales, J. Kim

N1 - Seminar 3, Conference room A, First Floor, Welsh Assembly Government, Crickhowell House, Cardiff Bay, Cardiff CF99 1NA Friday 13 May 2005

PY - 2006

Y1 - 2006

N2 - In their interesting and challenging chapter John Adams and Peter Robinson assess the consequences for economic development policy of the devolution measures enacted by the UK Labour government post 1997. Their chapter ranges widely over current UK regional disparities, the link between devolution and economic growth, the balance of responsibilities in policy between Whitehall and the devolved administrations, and finally, they raise questions about the developing "quasi-federal" role of Whitehall in regulating or coordinating the new devolved policy landscape. In response, we propose to focus on four issues that we believe are key to understanding the economic consequences of devolution both at the Scottish and UK levels. First, we argue that the view of Scotland's devolutionary experience in economic policy is partial and so does not fully capture the nature and extent of change post 1999. Secondly, we examine the role of devolution in regional economic performance. There is much in their paper on this topic with which we agree but we contend that there are significant omissions in the analysis, which are important for policy choice. Our third section highlights an area not discussed in depth by Adams and Robinson's paper: the funding of the devolution settlement. Here we consider some of the implications of funding arrangements for economic performance and the options for a new funding settlement. Finally, we deal with the difficult issue of co-ordination between the centre and the devolved regions. We contend that co-ordination is largely conspicuous by its absence. Moreover, where coordination is deployed it reflects an inadequate understanding of the extent to which the economies of the regions and devolved territories of the UK are linked.

AB - In their interesting and challenging chapter John Adams and Peter Robinson assess the consequences for economic development policy of the devolution measures enacted by the UK Labour government post 1997. Their chapter ranges widely over current UK regional disparities, the link between devolution and economic growth, the balance of responsibilities in policy between Whitehall and the devolved administrations, and finally, they raise questions about the developing "quasi-federal" role of Whitehall in regulating or coordinating the new devolved policy landscape. In response, we propose to focus on four issues that we believe are key to understanding the economic consequences of devolution both at the Scottish and UK levels. First, we argue that the view of Scotland's devolutionary experience in economic policy is partial and so does not fully capture the nature and extent of change post 1999. Secondly, we examine the role of devolution in regional economic performance. There is much in their paper on this topic with which we agree but we contend that there are significant omissions in the analysis, which are important for policy choice. Our third section highlights an area not discussed in depth by Adams and Robinson's paper: the funding of the devolution settlement. Here we consider some of the implications of funding arrangements for economic performance and the options for a new funding settlement. Finally, we deal with the difficult issue of co-ordination between the centre and the devolved regions. We contend that co-ordination is largely conspicuous by its absence. Moreover, where coordination is deployed it reflects an inadequate understanding of the extent to which the economies of the regions and devolved territories of the UK are linked.

KW - devolution

KW - scottish economy

KW - Scotland

KW - regional policy

M3 - Chapter

SN - 1860302858

T3 - Devolution in Practice II: Public Policy Differences within the UK

SP - 160

EP - 171

BT - Devolution in Practice

ER -

Ashcroft BK, McGregor PG, Swales JK. Devolution and the economy: a Scottish perspective. In Devolution in Practice. 2006. p. 160-171. (Devolution in Practice II: Public Policy Differences within the UK).