Levelling up: Why the UK should follow Biden’s lead on community-led regeneration

Matt Leach takes a look at what the UK government can learn from US President Biden’s new push for neighbourhood level regeneration.

Launching the New Atlantic Charter last month, Boris Johnson and Joe Biden set out a bold vision of shared global ambitions and values for our two nations.   

Perhaps less noted in the document alongside statements on climate change and geo-security was a joint commitment “to build back better in a way that benefits all communities that have experienced the pain of economic change and advances equality for all – not just in cities, but also small towns and post-industrial areas”.  Essentially a new, transatlantic commitment to what in the UK has become known as ‘levelling up’. 

Sharing approaches to regeneration across the Atlantic has some history to it.  Some of the larger place-based initiatives of the last forty years have their roots in learning from the United States; ‘urban development’, ‘urban renewal’ and ‘community organising’ are all terms that emerged in America before transitioning (in adapted form) here.  And Robert Putnam’s ideas on social capital and American community have had an enduring impact on UK social policy for almost a quarter of a century. 

The argument for investing in ‘left behind’ areas

Now might be a time to look to the US again, to get a sense of where levelling up could go next. In June, the Biden administration launched a massive new $10bn Community Revitalization Fund, aimed at turning around deprived inner-city areas and rustbelt towns through primarily community-led delivery. This contrasts significantly with the mostly local government-led, economic infrastructure-focused approach to levelling up so far taken in the UK.

In June, the Biden administration launched a massive new $10bn Community Revitalization Fund aimed at turning around deprived inner–city areas and rustbelt towns through primarily community-led delivery

Even in the UK, the evidence base for investment in social infrastructure of communities at a neighbourhood level, alongside wider economic regeneration programmes, is increasingly strong.  Local Trust research on ‘left behind areas’, and – more recently – the work of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on ‘left behind’ neighbourhoods, has highlighted the particular challenges facing communities that are both deprived and lack social infrastructure. They are home to 2.4 million people across England and are predominantly located in coastal areas and on the outskirts of post-industrial towns and cities in the North and Midlands.  

This week Frontier Economics, the consultancy chaired by former Civil Service head Sir Gus O’Donnell launched a new report ‘The Impact of Social Infrastructure Investment’. The research highlighted the fiscal and wider economic case for investment in ‘left behind’ areas, alongside current economic regeneration priorities.  It found that a  £1million investment in social infrastructure (including in transport links and places to meet) in a left behind area, can potentially deliver £2 million in economic and social returns, as well as an estimated £1.2 million in increased tax contributions over a 10-year period.  

A £1million investment in social infrastructure…in a left behind area, can potentially deliver £2 million in economic and social returns, as well as an estimated £1.2 million in increased tax contributions. 

And as it becomes a priority in the United States, the value of investment in social infrastructure at a community level, as part of any programme to level up the nation, is starting to hit mainstream policy discussions in the UK. Earlier this month, former chief economist at the Bank of England Andy Haldane highlighted the extent to which “without social infrastructure ‘left behind’ places find themselves stuck in a circle of decline, repelling rather than attracting people and skills, finance and commerce – the raw building blocks of economic success.” 

without social infrastructure ‘left behind’ places find themselves stuck in a circle of decline, repelling rather than attracting people and skills, finance and commerce.

How COVID-19 has advanced the debate

Getting it right has never been more important. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed and exacerbated old inequalities. But it also saw communities come together in a way which hadn’t been seen since the Second World War, and there is clear desire across the nation to build on those connections and what they mean to us and our neighbourhoods. 

Yet research has also highlighted how places that are both deprived and lacking in social infrastructure had lower levels of mutual aid activity, and received only a third of the COVID-response funding of other deprived communities. Whilst it is shocking that the areas that needed most help failed to receive it, this only reflects wider trends in funding that predate the pandemic.   

The evidence tells us how important this infrastructure is in the most ‘left behind’ areas.  It creates a sense of belonging and identity, generates civic pride and improves residents’ satisfaction with the neighbourhoods in which they live.  

The loss of social infrastructure in some of our most deprived communities represents a significant additional axis of inequality.

The loss of social infrastructure in some of our most deprived communities represents a significant additional axis of inequality which needs addressing as part of any comprehensive levelling up agenda.  

What should be done?

In Local Trust’s submission to the government’s Levelling Up White Paper, published this week, we were clear that investment needs to be at the hyperlocal or neighbourhood level. Investment in town centres and high streets alone won’t be sufficient in reaching people living on peripheral estates or in deprived city suburbs and coastal areas. Resources need to be targeted at the places and individuals who need them most, on a least first basis.  

Resources need to be targeted at the places and individuals who need them most.

Critically, this funding needs to be a long-term commitment for government over the next 10 – 15 years. Relatively small-scale investment may help kick things off, but short term bidding pots will not deliver the change that is needed in places in need of long term rebuilding of social infrastructure and community confidence. As part of the Community Wealth Fund campaign, an alliance of over 400 civil society funders, local authorities and community-based organisations, Local Trust has been making the case for a long term endowment funded by the next wave of dormant assets to take on this challenge. 

Looking again to the United States, what is notable about the Community Revitalization Fund is the extent to which community leadership is seen as vital to the fund’s success. Past evaluations of local area initiatives indicate that community involvement and control is a key success factor. Regeneration programmes that parachute in consultants and organisations from outside the area do not build community confidence or capacity, nor do they create change that is sustainable.

The Biden administration have provided a template for extending levelling-up to communities…might now be a time for the UK government to make a similarly ambitious commitment?

The Biden administration have provided a template for extending levelling-up to communities and neighbourhoods, rebuilding the social infrastructure that sustains community life alongside turning around their local economies. With a Levelling Up White Paper due for publication shortly, might now be a time for the UK government to make a similarly ambitious commitment to community-focused regeneration at a neighbourhood level across the country?

Want to find out more about what the UK could learn from Biden’s approach to community-led regeneration?

Watch our webinar with Bright Blue: Strengthening communities in ‘left-behind’ areas: lessons from the US.