Levelling up left behind places: The scale and nature of the economic and policy challenge , by Ron Martin, Ben Gardiner, Andy Pike, Peter Sunley, and Peter Tyler Levelling up left behind places: The scale and nature of the economic and policy challenge , by Ron Martin, Ben Gardiner, Andy Pike, Peter Sunley, and Peter Tyler, Abingdon, UK, Regional Studies Association and Routledge Publishing, 2021 Abingdon, UK, Regional S
Levelling up left behind places: The scale and nature of the economic and policy challenge , by Ron Martin, Ben Gardiner, Andy Pike, Peter Sunley, and Peter Tyler Levelling up left behind places: The scale and nature of the economic and policy challenge , by Ron Martin, Ben Gardiner, Andy Pike, Peter Sunley, and Peter Tyler, Abingdon, UK, Regional Studies Association and Routledge Publishing, 2021 Abingdon, UK, Regional S
复制标题
提升落后地区：经济和政策挑战的规模和性质，作者：Ron Martin、Ben Gardiner、Andy Pike、Peter Sunley 和 Peter Tyler 提升落后地区：经济和政策挑战的规模和性质
DOI：
10.1080/07352166.2023.2174304
复制
发表时间：
2023
影响因子：
2.1
通讯作者：
MacKinnon D
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
MacKinnon D
自2016年以来，“落后地区”一词已成为关于空间不平等的国际辩论的一个关键主题。“落后”是经济停滞或衰退地区的代名词，尤其是后工业城镇和农村地区，因为知识经济工作集中在城市而被边缘化。在英国，长期存在的空间不平等与自由城市和日益保守的“落后地区”（主要在英格兰北部和中部地区）之间日益扩大的政治分歧有关。这些不平等和分歧促使时任首相鲍里斯·约翰逊（Boris Johnson）在2019年承诺，通过投资于这些普遍投票脱欧的“落后地区”来“提升”英国的水平，并于2022年2月发布了一份白皮书，列出了政府的升级计划。该书主要以英国为研究对象，旨在“了解‘落后地区’的经济困境”。5)并为旨在“提升”地方和地区之间经济繁荣和机会的政策提供信息。作为区域研究协会政策影响系列的一部分，它是由英国领先的经济地理学家团队撰写的，他们寻求将他们积累的专业知识用于应对这一紧迫的国家和国际政策挑战。《提升落后地区水平》的章节涵盖区域差异、更广泛的经济转型的不均衡影响、经济冲击和复原力、过去的区域政策以及提升落后地区水平的制度和政策的制定。它是在白皮书发布前几周发布的，不仅针对学术研究人员，也针对政策受众，撰写白皮书的公务员也会阅读。在更广泛的国际背景下，《平衡落后地区》对英国地区不平等的演变和本质进行了非常清晰和全面的分析。它将“落后地区”的问题定位于20世纪80年代初战后空间趋同让位于分化的“大转折”。超越南北鸿沟的总体标签，作者研究了经济表现和繁荣的地方差异，重点关注产出和就业。这揭示了“地方表演的拼凑地理”。37)，尽管许多表现较好的地区在英格兰南部。与美国不同，英国的大型“核心城市”不仅与伦敦相比表现不佳，而且与农村地区和城镇相比也表现不佳。有趣的是，这是基于知识密集型制造业和服务业从城市向城镇和农村地区的空间分散，与以知识为基础的集聚的主导范式相反。
The term left behind places has emerged as a key leitmotif of international debates on spatial inequalities since 2016. Left behind acts as a shorthand label for places experiencing economic stagnation or decline, particularly post-industrial towns and rural areas marginalized by the concentration of knowledge-economy jobs in cities. In the United Kingdom (UK), long-standing spatial inequalities are associated with growing political divisions between liberal cities and increasingly conservative “left behind places,” mainly in the North and Midlands of England. These inequalities and divisions prompted then–Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s 2019 pledge to “level up” the UK by investing in these generally Brexit-voting “left behind places,” resulting in the publication of a white paper setting out the government’s levelling up plans in February 2022. Focusing primarily on the UK, Levelling Up Left Behind Places seeks to “understand the economic predicament of ‘left behind places’”(p. 5) and to inform policies aimed at “levelling up” economic prosperity and opportunity between localities and regions. Produced as part of the Regional Studies Association Policy Impact series, it is written by a team of leading British economic geographers seeking to bring their accumulated expertise to bear on this urgent national and international policy challenge. Levelling Up Left Behind Places consists of chapters covering regional divergence, the uneven effects of broader economic transformations, economic shocks and resilience, past regional policies and the formulation of institutions and policies for levelling up. Published a few weeks before the levelling up white paper, it is aimed at a policy audience as well as academic researchers, and was read by the civil servants writing the white paper.Levelling Up Left Behind Places offers a very clear and comprehensive analysis of the evolution and nature of regional inequalities in the UK in a broader international context. It locates the problem of “left behind places” in the “great turnaround” when postwar spatial convergence gave way to divergence from the early 1980s. Moving beyond the overarching label of the North-South divide, the authors examine local variations in economic performance and prosperity, focusing on output and employment. This reveals a “patchwork geography of local performance”(p. 37), although many of the better performing areas are in the South of England. Unlike the United States (US), the UK’s large “core cities” have performed poorly compared to not only London, but also rural areas and towns. Interestingly, this is based on the spatial dispersal of knowledge-intensive manufacturing and services from cities to towns and rural areas, contrary to the dominant paradigm of knowledge-based agglomeration.