Lead Economist | Economic Growth Specialist for Cities & Regions | Strategist for MENA Urban & Regional Development
The latest research from Griffith Centre for Systems Innovation on governance is spot on > https://lnkd.in/gGq4aVSm We (Stantec) are in the midst of developing an Economic Development Strategy for a regional area in Australia. When reading this latest research, it strikes me as though you could place the role of local governments into each one of these typologies. Alternatively, they can be seen as THE key intermediary that facilitates the system changes necessary for local economic growth. Over several years of working both in and for local government, I have seen firsthand the enormous pressure they are under to maintain and improve infrastructure, deliver the level of services their communities expect, improve outcomes, and meet national goals like achieving net zero and housing delivery. The research highlights that "Unfortunately, intermediaries in the social change landscape are susceptible to becoming institutionalised at different points in their life cycles — shifting their focus to survival rather than their overall purpose and role within a larger system." In my view, the shift in federal and national government funding towards competitive, tied funding, combined with local governments' inability to raise revenue, has significantly hindered the proper functioning of local areas, their economies, and the communities that depend on them. Many of them are in survival mode. Prime examples in my experience include the North West of England, Regional Victoria, and the North East of Tasmania. In the short run (to benefit the longer run), I've advocated that local governments need to develop clear and effective frameworks for coproduction, closely aligned with typologies that support collective action and resource sharing (capital and staff time). In the long run, we all need to advocate for systemic changes in local government funding. This will be necessary - if not critical - to ensure that national objectives (like housing delivery and net zero) can be achieved. This will require increased trust from federal and national governments that local people know what is best for their areas, and that national agendas (housing delivery and net zero) are in their interest to deliver effectively and efficiently. In other words, rebalancing local government funding away from tied, competitive grants towards increased levels of fixed assistance will prevent institutionalisation and allow local governments to focus on goals that are ultimately aligned with national agendas.
Strategy and Policy Delivery| Transport & Urban Planning | Investment Strategies & Sustainable
5moExcellent, especially this: rebalancing local government funding away from tied, competitive grants towards increased levels of fixed assistance will prevent institutionalisation and allow local governments to focus on goals that are ultimately aligned with national agendas. #ThinKLocal2IMPACTGLOBAL