IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/regstd/v36y2002i7p797-810.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

English Question: Regional Perspectives on a Fractured Nation

Author

Listed:
  • Kevin Morgan

Abstract

England remains the 'gaping hole in the devolution settlement'. Debate about how England as a whole should engage with devolution overlooks how regionally fractured England is in terms of culture, society and economic fortunes. The discourse of 'north- south divide' underscores this unevenness. But it is also used to support an often unreflected assumption - by government and regional campaigners - that devolution to the (northern) regions will bring an 'economic dividend'. Equally, assumptions about the capacity of regional devolution to overcome the 'democratic deficit' and introduce more effective governance need a more nuanced evaluation, not least with regard to the (paradoxical) reluctance of a devolving central government to release the levers of power. The English devolution project does, though, promise to undermine the Anglocentric narrative of Britishness and open the way to a radically different notion of Britishness as a culturally diverse and politically devolved polity. L'Angleterre reste 'le trou beant de l'accord qui porte sur la regionalisation'. Le debat sur comment l'Angleterre dans son ensemble devrait se lancer dans la regionalisation ignore l'importance de la rupture de l'Angleterre sur le plan regional pour ce qui est de son climat culturel, social et economique. Le discours a propos du 'clivage Nord-Sud' souligne cette inegalite. Mais on s'en sert aussi pour soutenir une supposition qui souvent n'est pas faite - et par l'administration et par les militants en faveur de la regionalisation - que le transfert des competences aux regions (du nord) apportera des 'dividendes economiques'. De la meme facon, il faut une evaluation plus nuancee des suppositions quant a la capacite de la regionalisation de surmonter 'le deficit democratique' et d'executer simultanement des decisions plus efficaces, entre autres eu egard a la reticence (paradoxale) d'une administration centrale sur la voie de la regionalisation a lacher le pouvoir. Cependant, le projet anglais en faveur de la regionalisation promet de tirer parti de l'histoire anglocentrique d'etre britannique et d'ouvrir la voie a une notion tout a fait differente d'etre britannique qui comporte un regime politique qui est culturellement divers et regionalise. England ist weiterhin die 'klaffende Lucke in der Dezentralisierungsregelung'. Debatten daruber, wie England als Ganzes sich an Dezentralisierung beteiligen soll, ubersehen, wie regional ungleichartig England hinsichtlich Kultur, Gesellschaft und wirtschaftlichem Wohlstand ist. Der Diskurs der 'Kluft zwischen Nord-Sud' unterstreicht diese Ungleichheit. Andrerseits wird er auch dazu benutzt, die oft - von der Regierung und Verfechtern der Regionen - unuberlegte Annahme zu stutzen, dass Dezentralisierung den (nordlichen) Regionen eine 'wirtschaftliche Dividende' bescheren werde. Ebenso verlangen Annahmen bezuglich der Fahigkeit regionaler Dezentralisierung, das 'demokratische Defizit' zu uberwinden, und gleichzeitig wirksamere politische Entscheidungen herbeizufuhren, eine feiner nuancierte Bewertung, nicht zuletzt im Hinblick auf die (paradoxe) Abneigung der dezentralisierenden Landesregierung, das Steuer der Macht fahren zu lassen. Das englische Dezentralisatierungsprojekt verspricht jedoch, die anglozentrische Legende des britischen Wesens zu berichtigen, und den Weg fur eine grundlegend anderartige Vorstellung des britischen Wesens als ein kulturell verschiedenartiges und politisch selbstandiges Staatswesen zu erschliessen.

Suggested Citation

  • Kevin Morgan, 2002. "English Question: Regional Perspectives on a Fractured Nation," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(7), pages 797-810.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:regstd:v:36:y:2002:i:7:p:797-810
    DOI: 10.1080/0034340022000006114
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0034340022000006114
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0034340022000006114?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kevin Morgan, 2001. "The New Territorial Politics: Rivalry and Justice in Post-devolution Britain," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 343-348.
    2. Robert Hazell, 0. "The English Question," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 36(1), pages 37-56.
    3. Ash Amin, 1999. "An Institutionalist Perspective on Regional Economic Development," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 365-378, June.
    4. J Murdoch & M Tewdwr-Jones, 1999. "Planning and the English Regions: Conflict and Convergence Amongst the Institutions of Regional Governance," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 17(6), pages 715-729, December.
    5. Michael Keating, 1998. "The New Regionalism in Western Europe," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1193.
    6. John Tomaney & Neil Ward, 2000. "England and the 'New Regionalism'," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(5), pages 471-478.
    7. Andy Pike, 2002. "Post-devolution blues? Economic development in the Anglo-Scottish borders," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(9), pages 1067-1082.
    8. Stephen Fothergill, 2001. "The True Scale of the Regional Problem in the UK," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(3), pages 241-246.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John Lovering, 2001. "The Coming Regional Crisis (And How To Avoid It)," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 349-354.
    2. James Wesley Scott, 2007. "Smart Growth as Urban Reform: A Pragmatic 'Recoding' of the New Regionalism," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 44(1), pages 15-35, January.
    3. John Harrison, 2013. "Configuring the New 'Regional World': On being Caught between Territory and Networks," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(1), pages 55-74, January.
    4. John Tomaney & Neil Ward, 2000. "England and the 'New Regionalism'," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(5), pages 471-478.
    5. Andy Pike & John Tomaney, 2004. "Subnational Governance and Economic and Social Development," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 36(12), pages 2091-2096, December.
    6. Martin Quinn, 2013. "New Labour’s regional experiment: Lessons from the East Midlands," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 28(7-8), pages 738-751, November.
    7. Mark Goodwin & Martin Jones & Rhys Jones, 2005. "Devolution, constitutional change and economic development: Explaining and understanding the new institutional geographies of the British state," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(4), pages 421-436.
    8. Laranja, Manuel & Uyarra, Elvira & Flanagan, Kieron, 2008. "Policies for science, technology and innovation: Translating rationales into regional policies in a multi-level setting," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 823-835, June.
    9. Andy Pike & Peter O'Brien & John Tomaney, 2004. "Trade Unions in Local and Regional Development and Governance: The Northern Trades Union Congress in North East England," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 19(2), pages 102-116, May.
    10. Sean Markey & Sarah-Patricia Breen & Kelly Vodden & Jen Daniels, 2015. "Evidence of Place: Becoming a Region in Rural Canada," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 874-891, September.
    11. Mark Goodwin & Martin Jones & Rhys Jones & Kevin Pett & Glenn Simpson, 2002. "Devolution and Economic Governance in the UK: Uneven Geographies, Uneven Capacities?," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 17(3), pages 200-215, August.
    12. John Harrison, 2008. "Stating the Production of Scales: Centrally Orchestrated Regionalism, Regionally Orchestrated Centralism," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(4), pages 922-941, December.
    13. Muringani, Jonathan & Dahl Fitjar, Rune & Rodríguez-Pose, Andrés, 2019. "Decentralisation, quality of government and economic growth in the regions of the EU," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 91023, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Chiasson, Guy & Angelstam, Per & Axelsson, Robert & Doyon, Frederik, 2019. "Towards collaborative forest planning in Canadian and Swedish hinterlands: Different institutional trajectories?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 334-345.
    15. Dejan Stjepanović, 2015. "Territoriality and Citizenship: Membership and Sub-State Polities in Post-Yugoslav Space," Europe-Asia Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 67(7), pages 1030-1055, August.
    16. David Doloreux & David Rangdrol & Émilie Dionne, 2010. "Francophone Minority Economic Development in Canada: Addressing Political or Economic Issues?," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 24(2), pages 143-153, May.
    17. Michael Longo, 2003. "European Integration: Between Micro‐Regionalism and Globalism," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(3), pages 475-494, June.
    18. Emil Evenhuis, 2017. "Institutional change in cities and regions: a path dependency approach," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 10(3), pages 509-526.
    19. Manfred Walser & Roland Scherer, 2012. "How to Improve the Region’s Ability to Learn: A Micro-level Model on Regional Actor's Knowledge and (Informal) Learning Processes," Chapters, in: Knut Ingar Westeren (ed.), Foundations of the Knowledge Economy, chapter 9, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Raquel Ortega-Argilés, 2022. "The evolution of regional entrepreneurship policies: “no one size fits all”," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 69(3), pages 585-610, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:regstd:v:36:y:2002:i:7:p:797-810. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CRES20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.