Localism, Levelling Up and Taking Back Control: Tensions in the Ambiguous Justification of English Devolution

Abstract There is an increasingly powerful argument for the decentralisation of policy making in England's highly centralised political context. In recent years, this issue has represented one of the clearest examples of consensus in the UK's increasingly polarised party politics. However, this consensus has risked obscuring the conflicting justifications and ambitions of English devolution that have been stitched together by successive governments. In this article, we consider three common justifications of English devolution: that it enhances democracy; that it promotes policy efficacy and government efficiency; and that it disrupts concentrations of power. Since 2010, these justifications of devolution have all been prominent features of government policy rhetoric, but there has been little reflection on the tensions between them and the different implications they have for the design of devolution in practice. This paper demonstrates why reconciling these inherent tensions will be critical to the long‐term stability of the devolution project in England.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
The Political Quarterly
Published
2025-07-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923x.13570
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Political Systems and Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
8.52
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Localism, Levelling Up and Taking Back Control: Tensions in the Ambiguous Justification of English Devolution

Jack Newman, James Hickson
1 citations
The Political Quarterly
Political Systems and Governance
8.52
article

Localism, Levelling Up and Taking Back Control: Tensions in the Ambiguous Justification of English Devolution

Jack Newman, James Hickson
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract There is an increasingly powerful argument for the decentralisation of policy making in England's highly centralised political context. In recent years, this issue has represented one of the clearest examples of consensus in the UK's increasingly polarised party politics. However, this consensus has risked obscuring the conflicting justifications and ambitions of English devolution that have been stitched together by successive governments. In this article, we consider three common justifications of English devolution: that it enhances democracy; that it promotes policy efficacy and government efficiency; and that it disrupts concentrations of power. Since 2010, these justifications of devolution have all been prominent features of government policy rhetoric, but there has been little reflection on the tensions between them and the different implications they have for the design of devolution in practice. This paper demonstrates why reconciling these inherent tensions will be critical to the long‐term stability of the devolution project in England.

The Political QuarterlyVol. 96(4)
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Political Systems and Governance
8.52
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Localism, Levelling Up and Taking Back Control: Tensions in the Ambiguous Justification of English Devolution — Jack Newman, James Hickson · The Political Quarterly (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS