Praxis: Geography matters: The importance of sub-national perspectives on employment and skills
A sub-national perspective in employment and skills policy is an important complement to national and international analyses because, there are sub-national variations in employment structures and skills profiles; such that, economic opportunities and life chances vary across space – in a way that matters more for some people than for others, which in turn has led to a greater emphasis than formerly on policy making and delivery at sub–national level.
Praxis: Geography matters: The importance of sub-national perspectives on employment and skills (PDF, 261 Kb)
Published November 2009
This edition of Praxis raises a number of issues with implications for employment, skills and regionally focused policy intervention. Here Abigail Gibson, Senior Policy Analyst at the UK Commission for Employment and Skills highlights some of these.
1. In this paper Anne Green highlights that the impact of occupational segregation in the UK is somewhat ameliorated at present by the dispersed nature of relatively high quality public sector jobs. Given the strong and growing likelihood of significant cuts in public sector employment what are the implications of this for regional occupational segregation and should this consideration be built into the decision making process?
2. Economic polarisation has implications for economic inequality within and between regions – what role can industrial and skills activism play in proving more space ‘in the middle’ for occupational progression as well as wider skills reforms promoting the increased importance and take up of vocational skills?
3. “People do not have full or perfect information” (p19) about labour market opportunity and the information they do access is processed through a ‘perceptual filter’. How can Labour Market Information (LMI) generally, and Information, Advice and Guidance (IAG) services at a local level, be best shaped in light of this?
4. This paper highlights the fact that the UK’s “public transport infrastructure does not coincide with the economic geography of the 21st century” (p10) – what are the implications of this for transport planning in the UK? How can the system be improved to enable wider travel to work areas for the most disadvantaged?
5. Anne Green states that “multiple initiatives have at times threatened to swamp local economic development and skills policy within a web of organisational complexity (Nunn and Johnson, 2008) in a manner that causes confusion for employers” (p28). The UK Commission’s Simplification programme seeks to investigate the best ways in which to achieve a simplified system in terms of how the system is accessed, assessed, financed and structured. What are the implications of the simplification agenda at a local level?
