Chris McDonald Political economy of local and regional partnerships – limits and possibilities Institute for Regional Studies, Regions in a time of globalisation and climate change 12 December, 2008

Overview Purpose: My approach to a critical engagement with the work of partnerships in local and regional development strategies Policy journey Theoretical journey My approach Discussion points: UK and Australian policy trends Theoretical origins, approaches, and debates Political economy of partnerships – limits and possibilities

Policy idea in Victoria: local and regional communities have agency and this can be organised Learning Cities and Regions Conference (2002) - working with regions to promote innovation and social inclusion A Fairer Victoria (2004/ 05) - working with local communities to address disadvantage Local Team and Laverton Community Renewal (2006/ 07) - organising and working with communities to invest in their assets and promote social inclusion Common idea: place based communities have agency (they can influence the distribution of resources), and government can organise it by working in partnership

Positive argument: Local and Regional Partnerships have agency Localities and regions are more important because of increasing globalisation and the emergence of a knowledge economy Localities and regions have assets (human/ social/ natural/ financial) – development occurs when you capitalise on them Dependent upon private, public and not for profit working together to invest in these assets and leverage the links between them Partnerships plan and coordinate these activities – these collaborations hold and generate power that influences the distribution of resources

Critique: local and regional partnerships have limited agency State driven by Neoliberal reform agenda that aims to extend and deepen capital accumulation, increase the power of capital, and reduce power of other social interests Reforms since 1980s have led to structural change that has increased spatial inequalities Local and Regional partnerships: narrow focus on boosterism, meeting needs of capital accumulation, lack of commitment to improving equity etc. Small fry and controlled by public managers and business interests –devolution or empowerment of communities uneven and contested

(1) Critical engagement: power both constrains and enables the agency of partnerships Concepts of power e.g. Question e.g. What it looks like Centered - power is asymmetrical and its about domination Whose interests are served in the partnership? Relative balance of power between business interests, other social groups and public managers in setting priorities Networked - power is a resource that is generated through action Who talks to who in getting things done? Network nodes or hotspots: where people go to seek advice and information Foucauldian/ interpretive - power as attempts to influence the conduct others How do people mobilise bias and consensus? How arguments are assembled and influence choices about the allocation of resources

(2) Critical engagement: role of ideas in shaping the agency of partnerships Keynesian Neo-Classical Institutionalist Region Fixed / stable within nation state Fixed/ dynamic in global economy Fluid / complex region in a global context Development Export orientated industry Comparative advantage Learning and innovation Role of government Mixed economy – central planning and (re)distribution Market led – invest in supply side Catalyst and broker Policy levers Capital investment, subsidies Deregulation, invest in human capital Engagement, relationship building

Synthesis - focus on how these ideas are used to shape the work of partnerships Research question: How and by whom are local and regional partnerships built and maintained? Whom…Public Managers, Universities, Business interests, Workers, Community and Environmental Groups How…these actors draw upon different interpretations of the economy to: Establish the partnership Set outcomes Act to influence these outcomes Result…better understanding about the limits and possibilities of partnerships as a means to build the competitive advantage of localities and regions

Two case studies – Leicestershire (East Midlands, UK) and Cradle Coast (Tasmania)

In summary Local and Regional partnerships becoming more important in Victoria and comparable jurisdictions Political economy is contested: problem of agency Focus on economic ideas: how and by whom they are used to influence the distribution of resources through partnerships 2 Case Studies: Leicestershire and Cradle Coast Result: better understanding about the limits and possibilities of partnerships as a means to build the competitive advantage of localities and regions