Social Sciences, Devolution and Liverpool City Region
Devolution is once again moving to the centre of national policy debate, with anticipation that this will be a major priority for the next Prime Minister. For those who have long advocated for greater local powers, there is reason to be optimistic.
Before joining the University of Liverpool’s Heseltine Institute for Public Policy, Practice and Place, I worked in local government and at Liverpool City Region Combined Authority during the early stages of devolution, gaining first-hand insight into its opportunities and challenges. I have since continued to engage with these issues through research and policy development.
Why devolution matters
The case for devolution starts with a simple fact. England remains one of the most politically centralised countries in the developed world, while also being one of the most regionally unequal. Compared with countries such as Germany, France and the Netherlands, local government in England has historically exercised far less control over the decisions that shape economic and social outcomes.
Evidence suggests that places achieve better economic and social outcomes when decisions on transport, skills, housing and economic development are coordinated through place-based institutions operating at the appropriate geographical scale. This is why city regions matter. They reflect the economic geography of how people live and work, providing the scale for strategic coordination while remaining close enough to local priorities.
Successful devolution depends on three things:
- Agreed areas of policy autonomy.
- Stable long-term funding.
- Strong democratic accountability.
When those elements come together, places are better equipped to deliver outcomes that meet local needs.
What have we learned?
England’s modern devolution journey began in 2014 with the landmark Greater Manchester deal. Government subsequently invited places across England to negotiate bespoke agreements centred on mayoral combined authorities, which were seen as providing a clear mechanism for accountability.
Initially, these deals focused on transport, skills, economic development, investment funding and planning, with some places securing additional responsibilities in areas such as housing and, in Greater Manchester, health. Over the following decade, devolution expanded significantly. Now, almost half of England’s population is represented by a directly elected mayor.
A major milestone is the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act 2026 which marks a significant shift from the piecemeal approach that has characterised devolution to date. It has introduced a more structured devolution framework, with three tiers of strategic authorities to be rolled out across the country – foundational, mayoral and established mayoral – and a clearer set of devolved competencies. Importantly, the new framework begins to move beyond a purely economic focus and places greater emphasis on public service reform, and health and wellbeing.
Liverpool City Region has been part of the English devolution journey from the start. Since the establishment of the combined authority in 2014 and the election of Steve Rotheram as the city region’s first Metro Mayor in 2017, powers and responsibilities have steadily increased. In April 2026, Liverpool City Region was designated as an established mayoral strategic authority and gained access to an Integrated Settlement worth £1.5bn over multiple years. This offers greater funding flexibility and longer-term certainty.
Stronger local leadership
Mayoral strategic authorities have created visible and accountable leadership for places. In Liverpool City Region, devolution has strengthened strategic coordination across transport, skills, housing, innovation and economic development. It has also facilitated longer-term economic development planning rather than short-term responses driven by national funding cycles.
Equally important has been the growth of mayoral soft power. City Region mayors can act as ambassadors for their places, championing regional interests nationally and internationally. They can convene business, universities, public services and communities around shared priorities. That convening power can be as important as formal devolved powers.
Local innovation
Perhaps devolution’s greatest strength has been its ability to support innovation. National programmes tend to be designed for broad populations and can struggle to reflect local circumstances. Devolution creates space for services to be designed around the realities people experience.
A good example is Liverpool City Region’s Households into Work programme. The programme recognised that barriers to employment are often interconnected. By taking a whole-household approach and providing personalised support, it has helped thousands of residents move closer to employment while improving wellbeing.
What comes next?
Despite the progress made, the next phase of devolution needs to be deeper and more ambitious. I would highlight three priorities.
Fiscal devolution
While policy powers have expanded, financial autonomy has not kept pace. Fiscal devolution represents a critical next step, with the potential to strengthen the resilience, capacity and independence of strategic authorities in ways that help address deep-rooted inequalities of power and prosperity across the country.
Yet, the scope of fiscal devolution remains unclear, and careful consideration is needed regarding which fiscal powers should be devolved and to which level of government. Any new framework must include mechanisms for redistribution and national equity to prevent geographical disparities from widening, particularly in areas with a limited capacity to generate local revenue. At the same time, it should provide incentives for strategic authorities to drive economic growth and strengthen their revenue bases.
Integrated public services
The next phase of devolution must move beyond economic development alone. Many of our most pressing challenges – poor health, economic inactivity, homelessness and educational disadvantage – do not fit neatly within organisational boundaries. Services remain fragmented across separate institutions and multiple funding streams.
Devolution offers an opportunity to align health, housing, employment and other public services around people and places rather than administrative silos. The growing interest in place-based public service reform through the test, learn and grow programme provides a significant opportunity to move in this direction.
Democratic innovation
Finally, we need stronger public engagement. For many residents, devolution can still feel remote. If growth is to be genuinely inclusive, communities must play a greater role in shaping decisions. Residents’ assemblies, deliberative forums and new forms of digital engagement can help ensure devolution is about empowering communities, not simply creating new institutions.
The capacity challenge
Greater powers alone will not guarantee success. One of the most important challenges facing devolution is institutional capacity. Research undertaken by the Heseltine Institute and the Local Policy Innovation Partnership Hub identifies a growing “place capacity gap” across England. Years of funding pressures and organisational change have reduced the analytical, policy and delivery capacity available to many local and strategic authorities.
If devolution is to succeed, investment must extend beyond powers and funding streams to include people, skills, institutions and evidence infrastructure. Without this capacity, even the best-designed devolution framework will struggle to realise its full potential.
Conclusion
Devolution is ultimately about understanding places: how economies function, how communities experience change, and how institutions can work together to improve outcomes. These are fundamentally social science questions, making evidence-informed policymaking increasingly important as devolution enters its next phase. The key question is no longer whether devolution will continue, but how far it will go. The willingness of national government to devolve meaningful powers and resources will determine whether England can build a more inclusive and locally responsive model of growth. If it does, social science research will play a vital role in ensuring devolution delivers better outcomes for the communities it is intended to serve.
About the author
Sue Jarvis is Co-Director of the Heseltine Institute for Public Policy, Practice and Place at the University of Liverpool and has extensive expertise in policy development, public service reform, and regional devolution. Sue has over 20 years of senior leadership experience in local and regional government, where she has led complex, multi-agency programmes and policymaking in economic development, regeneration, and skills. She has played a central role in shaping and delivering place-based policy in Liverpool City Region and Greater Manchester. Notably, Sue coordinated the strategic governance review that led to the establishment of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority in 2014, negotiated the skills components of its Devolution Deal, and oversaw the successful devolution of an annual £51 million Adult Skills Budget.
Photo Credit: Marcus Cramer on Unsplash