Oxfordshire Inclusive Economy Initiative

 

Summary Report Findings

Foreword

 

Baroness Janet Royall, Principal of Somerville College Chair, Oxford Strategic Partnership

 

Oxfordshire has one of the strongest economies in the UK, and has grown strongly over the past 15 years. We are home to the world’s number one ranked university, a highly educated population, innovative companies and research institutes in leading fields such as life sciences, clean energy, and artificial intelligence, and we are one of the only net contributors to gross value added (GVA) in England.

 

And yet Oxfordshire, despite our economic successes and assets, has a very unequal distribution of income. And our recent growth has exacerbated rather than reduced inequality. The lack of sustainable economic opportunities and income inequality are national and global issues and this is very much being felt locally. Oxford is ranked as the 2nd most unequal city in the UK and housing affordability is a critical long-term issue along with divergent educational attainment, health outcomes and food poverty for too many of our residents.

 

The publication of this report follows a series of inclusive economy seminars that I had the privilege to moderate and participate in with many of the UK’s leading thinkers and doers, along with local experts and practitioners. When we started the seminars in October 2019, we called this Inclusive Growth but quickly pivoted to Inclusive Economy to emphasise that our collective work to reduce inequality and expand opportunities needs to be ‘hard-wired’ into the economy irrespective of growth trends.

 

As we progressed through thought-provoking and challenging discussions to understand the factors driving inequality, exploring place-based issues and strategies, and identifying how the private sector and employers can partner with public sector and non-profits to work collaboratively towards a more inclusive economy, three of the strongest messages we heard were that:

 

 

1.    Words and metrics are important to define clarity of purpose and accountability, but it is essential to work at pace on action and implementation.

 

2.   Our inclusive economy agenda of work must include a system approach that accounts for both soft and hard infrastructure as well as the business environment, financing and institutional capacity.

 

3.   The inclusive economy initiative needs to reflect more voices from the communities of Oxfordshire and more engagement with the people we’re seeking to help in this work.

 

More recently, the COVID-19 global pandemic has resulted in personal and financial loss for many with staggering impacts to public health and the economy. As we embark on recovery in all aspects of life, one thing is certain – the importance of our agenda of work to creative a more inclusive economy is more important than ever. And so, we must take action. And we must move swiftly to start tackling the priorities identified in this report, including the creation of an Inclusive Economy Commission to guide and oversee this ambitious but necessary endeavour.

 

Published together with our core partners at the Oxfordshire Local Enterprise Partnership (OxLEP), Oxford City Council with input and support from other partners, are proud to publish this report reflecting the discussions and findings of our seminar series while embracing the challenges and opportunity to create a sustainable inclusive economy throughout Oxfordshire.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contents

 

1.	Background to Inclusive Economy Initiative	4
2.	Summary Notes from Inclusive
	Growth Seminars	7
	Seminar 1: Defining the Challenge and
	Potential Interventions	7
	Seminar 2: Place-based Strategies	11
	Seminar 3: Economic Opportunities for All	18
	Seminar 4: Advancing an Inclusive Economy
	Initiative for Oxfordshire	22

 

3.        Summary of Key Findings, Messages and

 

Themes to date

25

 

4.        Potential Priority Areas for Inclusive

 

Economy Agenda in Oxfordshire	27
Economic impact of COVID-19 and
implications for inclusive economy	29

 

5.        Next Steps to Advance Inclusive

 

Economy Initiative

31

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.

 

 

           Background to

1.       Inclusive Economy

Initiative

 

Oxfordshire has one of the strongest economies in the UK, and has grown by almost 4% per annum since 2006. Yet, Oxfordshire, like the UK, has a very unequal distribution of income. Oxford is ranked the 2nd most unequal city in the UK and housing affordability is also a critical long-term issue. Some of the key areas of concern include:

 

Earnings:

 

A significant number of people in Oxford and Oxfordshire are earning below the national real living wage of £9 p/h (10.3% and 14.6% respectively). The figures are stark when compared by gender or part-time and full-time.

 

Housing:

 

The Housing Affordability ratio for Oxford was 17.3 in 2018, making Oxford the least affordable city in the UK (Centre for Cities, 2019) with average rents 57% of average monthly income and over 3,000 households on housing waiting lists in Oxfordshire.

 

Educational attainment:

 

22% of Oxford’s population is poorly qualified. A significant proportion of people may not be able to share in local prosperity gains or indeed contribute to them. This will be exacerbated by the changing structure of the economy and jobs created in future.

 

 

Health outcomes:

 

Inequality in life expectancy at birth has widened from 8.5 years in 2010/12 to 9.5 years in 2017/18 in Oxford, demonstrating the stark differences in health and quality of life between lower and upper income individuals.

 

Food poverty:

 

Good Food Oxford has estimated that a typical family in Oxford needs to spend 42% of their income after housing costs on food and would need to earn approximately £16,000 (gross yearly @35 hrs a week) to be described as not being in food poverty. An individual paid at the national living wage (minimum wage) would only earn £14,250 (gross yearly @35 hrs a week).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.

   The Inclusive Economy Seminar Series:

Partners across Oxfordshire want to ensure that benefits of our local economy are spread more widely across the region. Evidence to date tells us that growth alone does not intrinsically reduce inequality so proactive interventions are needed. OSP have decided to undertake the Inclusive Economy Initiative –and when LIS commitment was agreed, to take the initiative forward in partnership, building on previous discussion with Oxfordshire Growth Board and the engagement of all Growth Board partners.

 

 

The Oxfordshire Local Industrial Strategy (LIS) aims to build on the County’s world leading science and technology clusters to form the basis of a future economy with growth prospects of 10% per annum, creating new business sectors and revolutionise existing industries. This strategy sets an ambitious vision for Oxfordshire to be a top three innovation ecosystem by 2040.

 

As part of these ambitions the Oxfordshire Local Industrial Strategy (LIS) commits to supporting an inclusive economy and establishing an Inclusive Economy Commission to carry the work forward. This commission will identify bold and ambitious interventions, which partners from the public, private and community sectors across Oxfordshire can support and deliver. These interventions will build on strategic initiatives underway such as early years education, Oxford Living Wage, Community Employment Plans and inclusive recruitment practices to harness the potential of local people. There are opportunities to build on this work by setting out clear ambitions to create a more cohesive society and balanced economy that emphasises opportunities for all as a top priority.

 

This work also requires alignment across a broader regional dimension with the Oxford-Cambridge Arc. The Arc contributes over £117bn Gross Value Added (GVA) to the UK economy and the settlements between Oxford, Milton Keynes and Cambridge present a unique opportunity to nurture an economic asset of international standing

 

– shaping places that demonstrate a world-class innovation economy. Yet, there is also desire across the Arc to ensure the benefits of economic success are felt across local communities as well as UK PLC. This will require new ways of working between the Government, local partners and businesses, along with long-term commitments and a thoughtfully crafted request for devolved powers and authority to enable implementation of inclusive economy initiatives. This is particularly timely based on the expected Devolution & Local Recovery White Paper in Autumn 2020 which will set out how further powers and funding would be devolved across England. The Government has said the legislation would aim to increase economic growth, productivity, and devolve decision-making, which should provide Oxfordshire with opportunities to influence policy options.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To pave the way for the establishment of the Oxfordshire Inclusive Economy Commission, a series of four seminars, initiated by Oxford City Council, the Oxford Strategic Partnership (OSP) and Oxfordshire Local Enterprise Partnership (OxLEP) were run to facilitate dialogue with partners to understand what the inclusive economy ambition should be, and begin to identify priority strategic interventions. The four Inclusive Growth seminars held are presented herein as a set of findings, suggested priority areas, and ideas on the proposed next steps which have emerged in these sessions.

 

Senior stakeholders from across all sectors of the city and county were invited to participate in the seminars. Stakeholders included senior leaders from business and the private sector, Chief Executive Officers and Leaders of the Oxfordshire Districts, Health Service, the University of Oxford and Oxford Brookes University, social enterprises and charities, and researchers and practitioners in economic development, skills training and further education and other groups identified throughout the process.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6.

Summary Notes

2. from Inclusive Growth Seminars

 

This section presents a summary of notes from the presentations and discussion at each of the four (4) Inclusive Growth seminars.

 

Seminar 1: Defining the Challenge and Potential Interventions

 

HELD ON: Wednesday, 16th October 2019 at Somerville College, University of Oxford

 

SPEAKERS AND PANELISTS:

 

•   Ed Cox, Royal Society of Arts (the RSA)

 

•   Dr. Mark Fransham, London School of Economics

 

•   Professor Brian Nolan, Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford

 

•   Will Hutton, Principal of Hertford College, University of Oxford

 

Summary Notes from Presentations and Discussion

 

The first Inclusive Growth seminar focused on the research, policy and data on economic and social inequality to define the real scale of the challenge nationally and locally. The seminar also started the discussion on potential interventions to be developed through the seminar series and beyond.

 

 

 

 

Whole-System Change for Inclusive Growth (Ed Cox RSA)

 

 

Social		Social		Business		Finance		Institutional
infrastructure		infrastructure		Environment		Public spending		Capacity
Education and Skills		Housing		Business support		Agile investment		Governance
Health		Transport		Innovation		Fiscal devolution		Scale
Employment		Digital		R&D				Devolution
support / welfare		Energy

 

 

Inter-agency / cross - sector integration

 

 

 

 

 

 

Central-Regional-
Local Integration

 

 

 

 

7.

 

•

 

•

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

•

KEY PRESENTATION POINTS AND DISCUSSION COMMENTS INCLUDED:

 

There are three key aspects to inclusive growth: 1) people and places; 2) who contributes and who benefits; and 3) opportunities and outcomes.

 

Social (or soft) infrastructure such as education, skills, health and well-being is as important if not more so than physical (or hard) infrastructure like transport, telecommunications, and housing.

 

It’s relatively easy to adopt language in support of inclusive growth but more challenging to convert that into action. But there are examples of action from the UK and beyond that the RSA and others are highlighting as best practices that others (like Oxfordshire) can follow.

 

Working towards a more inclusive economy requires a change in mind-set in many ways related to quality of economic opportunities, what we measure, involving communities in decision-making, etc.

 

There are lots of inclusive growth measurement indicators – the key is to not use a single index indicator (which can seem abstract) but rather focus on a small combination of metrics that matter to the community.

 

Income distribution trends over the past 20-30 years have shown that the lower and middle income workers are not doing well economically, with fewer job opportunities for lower and middle-skilled workers.

 

Drivers of wage inequality include the very high wage gains and rates of the finance sector (compared to other sectors) as well as a broader global decline in competition within sectors, especially technology, which allows large firms to moderate pay gains.

 

 

Strategic Mindset for Inclusive Growth (Ed Cox, RSA)

 

From	To	Type of Systemic Intervention
Economic and social impacts of	Economic and social impacts are	Policy integration
policy are considered separately	considered together
Emphasis on the quantity of growth	Emphasis on the quality of growth
(number of jobs, dollar amount of		Quality jobs
	(e.g. growth distribution, job, quality)
investment)
Physical investment in communities	Equitable investment in people
	and places as a combined means to	Equitable infrastructure
distributed in an inequitable manner
	inclusive growth
Public, private and philanthropic	Public, private and philanthropic
resources distributed in a	resources distributed in a	Co-ordinated, long-term
widespread, scattershot, one-time	concentrated, coordinated and	investment
fashion	sustained fashion
Top-down, non-participatory	Inclusive policy setting that
decision-making on policies	leverages the talents, voice and	Shared decision making
impacting communities	experience of local residents
Wealth building opportunities	Wealth building opportunities for	Widespread financial security
restricted to top income earners	Those on low income or BAME

 

 

 

8.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Population Growth in Oxford 1801-2021 (Mark Fransham, LSE)

 

180,000																					15,000
160,000																		3,000
140,000
													10,000
120,000
100,000				5,000 per
80,000				decade
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
1801	1811	1821	1831	1841	1851	1861	1871	1881	1891	1901	1911	1921	1931	1941	1951	1961	1971	1981	1991	2001	2011	2021

 

 

Oxford is a historically divided city with 1) the universities and 2) the Mini auto manufacturing plant illustrating this economic, physical and cultural divide. In 2018, Oxford contributed 6.75bn to the national economy and with currently around 122,300 jobs in city of Oxford, 14% more than in 2013 this growth rate is stronger than the national level of 10%. Despite this 11 areas in Oxford are in the most deprived decile nationally on Indices of Multiple Deprivation.  Life expectancy for Oxford residents is above average at 81 years for men and 85 years for women however this can vary by up to 10 years for women and 15 for men depending on where in Oxford you live.

 

These growth pressures, with wages at the lower and middle levels rising slowly, have resulted in a staggering housing affordability gap for the city of Oxford that has extended throughout Oxfordshire with longer transport commutes one of the results (though longer commutes are due to many factors). Oxford’s housing affordability ratio is now the worst in the UK, with average house prices 17 times the average salary

 

There is also an educational divide within Oxford with some areas of the city and county performing below average on educational attainment, despite Oxford’s international brand as a centre for learning. Educational attainment in state schools in Oxford is below the average for England and latest figures show the average attainment 8 (equivalent to GCSE level) score per pupil in Oxford is 45.9 which is below the national and Oxfordshire averages of 46.9 and 47.7 respectively.

 

 

There are many positive assets and initiatives in Oxfordshire underway to support a more inclusive economy, including a growing number of successful social enterprises, living wage employers and skills-training opportunities. Oxford has the chance to be a laboratory to incubate socially-minded firms and social enterprises.

 

Opportunities to cultivate and encourage ‘inclusive firms’ dedicated to social betterment, including local procurement spending practices, inclusive recruitment and other public benefits. To address key challenges like housing affordability, can Oxfordshire pilot innovative and bold programs such as permanently designating some housing at discounted prices through housing associations and other institutional property owners?

 

 

 

An Inclusive Economy of Inclusive Stakeholder Firms?   Will Hutton, Principal of Hertford College, University of Oxford and renowned academic, journalist and author of among many influential works ‘The Stakeholding Society’ outlined in his presentation a unique opportunity for Oxfordshire:   The University of Oxford could play an integral role as an Anchor Institution in partnering with the Public Sector (especially Police, NHS and Emergency services) and Local Authority (Oxfordshire County and City Councils) to use its procurement leverage to make a requirement of its contractors to commit to public benefit and provide the mechanisms and framework to deliver it. This would generate significant social value as well as model practical applications of an inclusive economy.   This would build on and further the Community Employment Planning initiatives already underway in the city.    Forthcoming University of Oxford and Local Authority partnership developments in the pipeline that would be particularly suitable to adopt this approach include:   ·   Oxford North ·   Oxford Station Redevelopment ·   West End Development (Oxpens, Osney Mead and Island Site)   The University of Oxford could in addition require its spin-outs to incorporate around an agreed declaration of purpose to incorporate this approach. The network of Inclusive firms generated and scaled up in this way would all be committed to this purpose and therefore deliver long-term social betterment and value for the city and Oxfordshire as a Social Enterprise county.

 

 

Discussion Questions

 

1.         Who is the inclusive growth for? It should mean improved outcomes and opportunities for all – young and old, rich and poor, etc.

 

2.         What can be done about lower wage jobs? More wide-spread adoption of living wages is a start, along with improved education and targeted job skills training, and keeping more of local procurement spending local. This could contribute to the economic sustainability of local service businesses who are more likely to employ local residents. In this way, a small change for larger organisations could have a significant positive local impact.

 

3.         How can the universities (which are fundamentally a non-profit ‘charity’) be more engaged in inclusive growth with the City?

 

4.         Can an inclusive growth program be used partly to help highlight, promote and scale-up the positive work already being done in Oxfordshire?

 

5.         Are there effective ways to measure ‘well-being’ for inclusive growth?

 

6.         There is a fundamental need to add more housing (consistent with the Housing plans contained within the Local Plans of Local Authorities).

 

7.         Individual businesses often lack the ability to engage with the community (charity work) or to hire apprentices – can these kinds of efforts be pooled together for stronger collective action? ‘Team Oxford’ being launched by Aspire is one option here.

 

 

 

 

 

Oxford Residents in Employment by Industry, 1841-2011, (Mark Fransham, LSE)

 

 

 

 

Oxford Residents in Work by Type of Occupation 1841-2001, (Mark Fransham LSE)

 

Residents working in each industry (not total of both)

 

60,000																				100%
																				90%							Unskilled
50,000
																				80%							Partially skilled
40,000																				70%
																				60%
30,000																				50%							Skilled
																				40%
20,000													Services
																				30%
10,000																				20%
																				10%							Managerial & technical									Professional
										Manufacturing
																				0%
0
																				1841			1851	1861	1871	1881	1891	1901	1911	1921	1931	1941	1951	1961	1971	1981	1991	2001
1841		1851	1861	1871	1881	1891	1901	1911	1921	1931	1941	1951	1961	1971	1981	1991	2001	2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.

Seminar 2: Place-based Strategies

 

HELD ON: Monday, 28th October 2019 at Kellogg College, University of Oxford

 

SPEAKERS AND PANELISTS:

 

•  Bev Hindle, Director of Oxfordshire Growth Board

 

•  Gareth Hart, Chair of Plymouth Inclusive Growth Group

 

•  Jayne Woodley, CEO of Oxfordshire Community Foundation

 

•  Neil McInroy, Centre for Local Economic Strategies (CLES)

 

Summary Notes from Presentations and Discussion

 

Economic inequalities and deprivation are often concentrated in specific areas of cities and towns, or affect places in specific ways. The solutions to the inequality challenge can also lie within these places strengths and opportunities. This seminar focused on lessons learned from cities and organisations that are taking the initiative to lead public-private place based strategies and investments.

 

 

 

 

Housing Affordability (Bev Hindle, Oxfordshire Growth Board)

 

Affordability is not just city vs. county

 

Housing affordability (map)

 

 

 

 3.4 -5.1

 

 5.2 - 6.0

 

 6.1 - 6.5

 

 6.6 - 7.0

 

 7.1 - 13.3      Country towns

 

 

 

 

 

MAP: Housing affordability

 

(ration of house prices to income)

 

Source: District Data Service analysis

 

 

 

Oxfordshire’s county towns are circled blue.

 

•     These are more affordable than their rural hinterlands, largely due to the housing mix available.

•     Areas coloured red are less affordable than the Oxford average.

 

•     Many rural areas are as unaffordable as Oxford

 

 

 

 

 

 

11.

The Oxfordshire Growth Deal (Bev Hindle, Oxfordshire Growth Board)

 

Using growth to support healthy living

and address health inequalities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Affordable	The
	Oxfordshire	Infrastructure	Productivity
Homes
	Plan 2050

 

Healthy Place Shaping

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

KEY PRESENTATION POINTS AND DISCUSSION COMMENTS INCLUDED:

 

The Oxfordshire Housing and Growth Deal and Housing Infrastructure Fund represent a £500m plus investment in infrastructure and housing to support economic growth. More investment will follow. If unguided and unchecked, economic growth can worsen inequality. The opportunity is that if growth is guided through the work of the Inclusive Economy Commission, it could be the catalyst to reduce inequality, promote wealth sharing and invest in people and communities.

 

A fundamental understanding of Oxfordshire and the aspirations of local people is needed (listening beyond the louder voices). This is the only way to address the inequality being experienced and make the most of our many local assets. We need to listen especially to younger people and those excluded from the growth debate, considering social and environmental issues as well as economic. The Oxfordshire Plan 2050 provides an opportunity to state our inclusivity aspirations clearly.

 

We can address health inequalities through a scaled up ‘healthy place shaping’ approach, learning from programmes alongside housing development at Barton Park and Bicester.

 

When we consider infrastructure investments, we need to consider the social and community impacts up front. For example, how might Cowley Branch Line impact existing residents of Blackbird Leys? Will it benefit local people or displace communities and how do we influence the best outcomes?

 

Affordability of homes and the challenges of desirable location are prevailing factors county-wide. Neighbourhood deprivation is not solely an Oxford issue. Banbury and other areas within affluent Oxfordshire also have significant challenges.

 

 

 

                                                                                                          

Plymouth’s Definition of Inclusive Growth, Objectives and Lessons Learned (Gareth Hart)

 

 

PLYMOUTH’S DEFINITION OF

 

‘INCLUSIVE GROWTH’

 

 

‘Growing prosperity

 

that reduces inequality

 

and is sustainable’

 

 

 

OBJECTIVES

 

01		02		03
Integrate Inclusive		Ensure recruitment,		Embed Inclusive
Growth in policy		retention and		Growth in
of businesses and		development of all		procurement and
organisations across		sections of society		commissioning across
the city				the city

 

LESSONS LEARNED

 

•  Needs to be a strategic priority not an afterthought

 

•   Clarity of purpose

 

•   Political engagement (control vs laissez faire)

 

•   Business engagement

 

•   Language and concepts matter deeply

 

•   It takes time and it is a journey

 

 

 

•         We are part of the Oxford to Cambridge Arc ‘a posterchild for Economic Growth’, expected to grow to £180Bn GVA. Yet, it is possible for the area to decline or underperform. If it does, inequality will be a key cause of any underperformance. Productivity growth requires all sections of the available workforce to contribute. There are encouraging words from Arc policy makers but action is now required.

 

•         Other places have a head start on Oxfordshire in terms of concerted action and place-wide partnership. Plymouth is one example having clearly defined the aim; ‘growing prosperity that reduces inequality and is sustainable’ and a set of objectives. They have also agreed key performance metrics such as income inequality and work based poverty. Partners are now working together on inclusive economy initiatives that have cross-sector leadership. Although the Plymouth context is different to that of Oxford, there is scope for shared and transferable learning from the model.

 

•         The legacy of Austerity and the resulting reductions in public spending over the last decade are part of the inequality issue we face and we need to secure greater investment through whatever means will work. New long-term funding and investment models will be a key enabler alongside how we spend our money. See Bristol City Funds for example, case studied below.

 

Bristol City Funds is a £10 million investment fund set up to target the causes and effects of inequality in the city to help build Bristol as a city that works for everyone. The fund aims to reduce the barriers which create inequality        and poverty, to create a sustainable city where people thrive and are proud to call it home.   The Bristol City Funds enable partners to work together, bringing local businesses, communities, funders and the public sector round the same table, to share resources, expertise and pool knowledge. Through City Funds partners can raise money locally and attract national finance, earmarking new money for Bristol to help the city to address its key priorities.   The City Funds aim to see positive change that transforms the lives of individuals and communities, and to build an environmentally sustainable city. The initiative allows the value of every pound invested in the city to be amplified, through strategic, cooperative partnerships addressing the root causes of inequality and poverty.   For more information see: https://www.bristolcityfunds.co.uk/ info@bristolcityfunds.co.uk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

13.

 

 

•

 

 

 

•

 

 

The success of local initiatives must also be about long-term impact and strategy and not reliance on attracting time-limited grants. We must consider how to incubate and scale up the initiatives that make a difference with partners.

 

We should not forget we already have great local initiatives underway including the Oxfordshire Homeless Movement, Makespace Oxford (meanwhile property use), and Age Friendly Banbury. Partners should work together to incubate and then scale up what works well. An example proposed was ‘Growing Young Minds’ a new Oxfordshire Community Fund initiative aimed at investing in early years education in family homes to avoid the attainment gap that creates disadvantage for many young learners. Considering the low educational attainment in some Oxford schools could this work be expanded to more areas of need? There is demonstrable economic rationale behind such investments that is being missed.

 

 

 

Inclusive Economy: Everyone Benefits (Jayne Woodley, OCF)

 

Prosperity	Dynamism and	Inclusion and
	opportunity	equality

 

Health, wellbeing	Resilience and	Community, trust
and happiness	sustainability	and belonging

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

We have a global wealth issue in terms of its distribution as the ten richest men have the same wealth as 50% of the rest of the world. There is a clear disconnect between growth and poverty. The economy is a social construct and one we can change over time. Why are public services seen as a cost to the economy rather than an investment? Many commentators from across the political spectrum are signalling the need for a new economic paradigm. This will require a cultural shift over time.

 

A range of cities and regions in the UK are taking forward a community wealth building approach. Oxfordshire has the economic strength and assets to make a real success of such an approach. The question is how ambitious we wish to be and how many anchor organisations we can get behind the agenda. Which of the principles of wealth building will we employ locally?

 

What is an inclusive economy? It should be conceived in terms of the economy as a whole rather than growth. It is one where inclusivity is hard-wired in and not an add-on. For example, North Ayrshire is spending all of its £250m Growth Deal through the lens of community wealth building.

 

 

 

 

14.

Trends in National Educational Attainment and Disadvantage (Jayne Woodley, OCF)

 

Disadvantaged

 

 

Secondary School 19.3 Months

 

 

 

Primary Year 6 (KS2) 9.5 Months

 

 

 

Primary Year 6 (KS1) 5.4 Months

 

 

Early Years

 

4.3 Months

Non-Disadvantaged

 

-30	-15	0	15	30
Months behind		Average		Months ahead
average				of average

 

‘Closing the Gap?’ Trends in educational attainment and disadvantage’,

 

Education Policy Institute (July 2017)

 

 

 

 

 

The Power of Agency, Anchor Institutions (Neil McInroy, CLES)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Housing                                          Police                                        Private

Providers                                                                                               Businesses

 

 

 

 

 

 

Education                              Local                                                   Hospitals

Providers                               government

 

 

 

 

 

 

15.

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Questions:

 

1.         We must focus on the inclusivity of the economy as a whole, whether it is set to grow, remain static or decline.

 

2.         There is a call from the audience for a concerted effort to bring partners together on this agenda.

 

3.         There was a consistent call to ensure that all communities have a say in economic and growth issues.

 

4.         We should consider prioritising inward investment that generates wealth locally over that which extracts local wealth. Alongside social value from our collective spend, should we also be more ambitious in pursuing new company ownership models such as worker owned co-ops?

 

5.         It should be noted that most spin-outs first have a social aim, and second have an aim to be commercially sensible. We need to realise and work with that. It’s not all about profit for most spin-outs; it’s about change and disruption to solve major issues. Our

 

Industrial Strategy embeds this concept and shows we can attract the right type of investment.

 

6.         We should however consider how we ensure our new ‘innovation districts’ are planned county-wide, and are inclusive rather than enclaves

 

7.         Key workers, travelling from ever greater distances harms productivity and the lives of workers making long-commutes. Consider this in housing and transport policy.

 

8.         Are we in danger of having too many pledges that ultimately become time consuming and less impactful? Should we focus on the instruments we already have instead?

 

9.         We should absolutely build on the good work already happening but within a partnership framework with broadly agreed ambition and objectives. Then we can ensure greater impact over the long-term. This requires ongoing commitment from those involved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

16.

Community Wealth Building – Five Principles (Neil McInroy, CLES)

 

Fair employment and just labour markets

 

Anchor institutions have a defining impact on the prospects of local people. Recruitment from lower incomes areas, paying the living wage and building progression routes all improve local economies.

 

Progressive procurement of goods and services

 

Developing dense local supply chains of businesses likely to support local employment and retain wealth locally: SMEs; employee-owned businesses; social enterprises, cooperatives and community business.

 

Plural ownership of the economy

 

Developing and growing small enterprises, community organisations, cooperatives and municipal ownership is important because they are more financially generative for the local economy – locking wealth in place.

 

Socially just use of land and property

 

Deepening the function and ownership of local assets held by anchor institutions, so that financial and social gain is harnessed by citizens. Develop and extend community use – public sector land and facilities as part of “the commons”.

Making financial power work for local places

 

Increase flows of investment within local economies by harnessing and recirculating the wealth that exists, as opposed to attracting capital. This includes redirecting local authority pension funds, supporting mutually owned banks.

 

 

 

 

 

How Progressive Do You Want To Be? (Neil McInroy, CLES)

 

Spend		Land and	Local	Ownership	Anchor
	Employment	Property	Finance	of the	approach
				Economy
Preston		Started	Started

 

Islington

 

Wirral

 

Manchester

 

Gateshead

 

Oldham

 

 

 

 

17.

 

Seminar 3: Economic Opportunities for All

 

HELD ON: Wednesday, 20th November 2019 at Oxford City College, Blackbird Leys

 

SPEAKERS AND PANELISTS:

 

•  Trevor Phillips, Co-Founder of Webber-Phillips

 

•  Dominic Hare, CEO of Blenheim Palace

 

•  Penny Rinta-Suksi, Partner at Blake Morgan LLP

 

•  Paul Roberts, CEO Aspire Oxfordshire

 

•  Sally Dicketts, CEO Activate Learning

 

Summary Notes from Presentations and Discussion

 

This seminar focused on the themes of workforce skills and training, employer engagement and initiatives, and the role the business sector can play to expand economic opportunities to all. The presentations and panel discussion covered how businesses can have a positive impact on their communities, such as local procurement spending policies and inclusive recruitment, as well as opportunities around skills, training and education that can reduce inequality in Oxfordshire.

 

KEY PRESENTATION POINTS AND DISCUSSION POINTS:

 

Educational attainment, parity of esteem for technical education, and low take up of apprenticeships are all significant issues. Coupled with the ongoing transformation in the world of work, the direction of which is ‘unknowable’, we need to ensure that local people are not left with ‘their noses pressed against a glass dome, looking in to our knowledge economy but with no prospect of participating in or benefitting from the prosperity created’.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

18.

Major trends and challenges we face include:

 

•  Digital transformation and what it means for employment

 

•   Demographics (age & global middle-east and Africa fastest growing populations) – ‘do we need to do much about skills locally when we can get them overseas?’

 

•  Harnessing the potential of diversity of our workforce

 

•         Technology-specific skills will quickly become relevant and then redundant. So we also have to focus on fundamental skills and adaptability with even closer working between education and business. Skills that will matter regardless include independent critical thinking, resilience and confidence, advanced social skills (team working, negotiation), and raising educational attainment.

 

•         The ability to access training budgets at various career stages is important. Devolution of control over local budgets for further education to enable this should allow improved local ability for training providers and partners to adapt to shifting employer training needs. It was also highlighted that there has been a fall of 40% in employer investment in skills in recent years. Training should be viewed by employers as an investment and not a cost.

 

•         Autonomy of workers matters in the evolving world of work, so we should give people more responsibility to change things as people are happier in work if given power to help shape their work.

 

 

 

 

 

Delivering Our Purpose (Dominic Hare, Blenheim Palace)

 

1.        Triple our economic contribution to the local economy

 

2.        Train over 100 apprentices in 10 years plus training goal for developing own staff

 

3.        House 300 families in truly affordable homes

 

4.        Receive 750k paying visitors with a top quartile satisfaction rating

 

5.        Become a net generator of green energy

 

6.        Be rated as a top 100 best employer

 

7.        Have transformed the Palace and Park by completing a £40m restoration programme

 

8.        Have reacquired key works from the old collections and established a new one

 

9.        Create an additional endowment portfolio of £45m dedicated to the conservation and enhancement of our World Heritage Site,

 

10.     Double our charitable contribution to the community

 

 

 

19.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

•

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Roles have to be financially sustainable – for living wage policies; employers cannot justify pay if the work is not worth the living wage. We might focus on the value of jobs and ensuring that new jobs are designed to achieve higher pay, for example where business support is provided.

 

Landed estates and institutions (public, private or charitable) have particular power and opportunity to make a difference through their assets. In the long-term, their own fortunes are linked to those of the local economy and the population based around them.

 

Blenheim Palace has provided local best practice here through strategic initiatives that help fulfil their stated purpose of being the lifeblood of the local economy. These cover housing, tourism, educational partnerships and enterprise among others. The social impact of these initiatives is being measured in a focused and sophisticated way (e.g. community well-being scores). If more landed estates follow suit, the impact will likely be transformative.

 

Organisations should be encouraged to understand and measure the costs as well as the benefits of their activity to make a measurable difference. Consumers and employees are demanding more and organisations of all types will need to adapt to this societal change. In line with this, we need an ecosystem where social enterprise and social aims in business are normalised. We need to get to a place of purposeful, collaborative businesses.

 

We should ask ourselves as organisations – how we are recruiting, (hiring, inspiring and developing), how fairly are we paying people, and how are we investing wealth? Ultimately, what social purpose do organisations have and what value are we generating alongside commercial success?

 

We should urgently consider how we can pool the apprenticeship levy among partners more effectively. Otherwise we have a missed opportunity. What other skills funding opportunities are we missing?

 

How do we support environmental sustainability and decarbonisation for those on low incomes? There are ways to decarbonise at pace and boost local skills to in the process (e.g. property retrofit schemes).

 

Genuinely affordable housing in sufficient numbers is a key priority for all employers. They need talented young workers who can afford to live here. How do employers play a role in solving this issue?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

20.