1. Evaluating regional decision making in the UK
There has been a resurgence of interest across Western Europe in rescaling public administration
In England, growing weight has been given to the regional tier
But, concerns remain about the substance underpinning regional governance structures
This paper presents a framework to explore procedures in regional decision making by:
Setting out the rationale underpinning English regionalism from a policy perspective
Drawing on key literatures to identify characteristics that might be used to appraise regional decision making
Presenting a Regional Governance Assessment Framework that can be employed to evaluate regional decision making

2. Regional structures in the UK
UK state in transition - intergovernmental relations changing
Pattern asymmetric - no devolution to English regions - administrative decentralisation - dominated by central government
Since mid 1990s regional tier ‘beefed up’:
‘Integrated’ Government Regional Offices
Regional Development Agencies
Unelected assemblies
Regionally based non-departmental public bodies
Social & Economic partners
Range of regional strategies
2002 White Paper - prospect of elected regional government but failed at public referendum
Post the ‘failed’ devolution attempt the Government introduced a raft of initiatives to achieve their aims under administrative decentralisation

3. English regionalism: Restating the rationale
There are a number of drivers underpinning the Labour Government’s regional reform agenda:
Improving service delivery through modernizing central & local government structures
Reducing economic disparities by building on the productive capacity of regions
Recognising the need to develop regional solutions, which take account of regional diversity
The desire to democratize sub-national governance structures via political devolution (Ayres and Pearce, 2004)

4. What should regional decision making look like?
New Labour’s regional agenda is underpinned by a range of aspirations that have fluctuated in their importance since 1997
Promoting horizontal & vertical Intergovernmental relations
Partnership & consensus
Accountability & transparency
Effective leadership
Building on Indigenous strengths & promoting local synergies
Taking account of regional diversity
Generating & utilizing a robust evidence base
Promoting policy co-ordination
These aspirations should shape how regional actors make policy decisions

5. Developing a Regional Governance Assessment Framework
Drawing on a network approach, this paper presents a methodology for exploring regional decision making
The evaluation framework draws on the actor, game and network analysis developed by Koppenjan and Klijn (2004)
Actor analysis: Identifying actors, perceptions & dependencies
Game analysis: Identification of arenas, progress & stagnation
Network analysis: Identifying interactions, relations & rules

6. Good regional governance characteristics Intention Research Questions
5, 6, 7, 8
2, 3, 4
5, 6, 7
1, 2, 3, 4
1, 5, 6, 8
1, 3, 4
Actor analysis
Identification of policy problem
Identify actors involved
Reconstruct perceptions of actors
Analyze actor position & dependencies
Game analysis
Determine the relevant arenas
Identify & analyze stagnation
Network analysis
Inventory of interaction patterns of actors
Inventory of patterns in
actors’ perceptions
Inventor of rules & procedures
What is the government’s objective for RFAs?
What is regarded as the cause of the problem?
What goals and criteria underlie this?
What solutions are presented?
Which actors are involved in the problem?
What does government guidance say about their involvement?
Which actors are important for policy success?
What are actors’ perceptions of the problem?
Do these perceptions differ?
What obstacles can be caused by perceptual difference?
What resources do different actors bring to the table?
Can individual resources be acquired elsewhere?
Is there mutual dependency between actors?
How committed to the policy initiative are actors?
Where are the decisions made that are important to the policy?
Which actors interact in which context?
What linkages are there between different actors?
Is there stagnation or conflict between partners?
What is the nature of the conflict?
What actors and involved?
Can this conflict be overcome?
What actors interact frequently and which infrequently?
Which actors are central and peripheral?
What is the nature and quality of interaction?
What perceptions do actors hold with regard to the policy problem?
Is there perceptual convergence between:
Whitehall departments?
Whitehall and the regions?
Regional actors?
What is the government’s guidance on RFAs?
Do Whitehall departmental motives differ from the formal guidance?
What formal procedures exist to make decisions about RFAs?
What informal rules of engagement have emerged?

7. Conclusions
The authors intend to develop this paper in the following ways:
Using Funding Allocations as an exemplar, develop the framework to respond directly to this specific policy initiative
The research/investigative questions in the Assessment Framework will be refined after pilot interviews
Issues & concepts in the policy networks & collaborative governance literatures will be developed
Develop the linkages between the three core elements of the paper:
The policy context
The eight good governance characteristics
The Regional Governance Assessment Framework