We may start by identifying factors which taken together can measure the viability of any partial autonomy.

Experience of regional development elsewhere reveals that the following four general headings are important:-

Human factors

Geographical factors

Administrative factors

Empowerment factors

Under these headings generally recognised elements may be listed:-

HUMAN FACTORS

"A dialect is a language without an army and a navy." - expression used by linguists

Popular identification with the proposed area. This includes issues of history, culture, dialect, etc.

Alignment with traditional counties.

Continuity of identification with existing services.

GEOGRAPHICAL FACTORS

Geographical size and population are not considered critical up to around ten million people, when the possibility of involved democracy is called into question. However the area should be geographically cohesive.

Respect for natural geographical boundaries where possible.

ADMINISTRATIVE FACTORS

Major conurbations should be kept intact.

Adequate internal transport links.

Complementary relationship with local government.

EMPOWERMENT FACTORS

Enough real power to justify a devolved administration.

Adequate revenue raising powers through progressive local taxation.

Ability to form economic and social pacts directly with other areas.

TOWARDS A WIDER DEBATE

The above outline requires further elaboration as well as critical analysis as part of the ongoing work on territorial devolution - a debate that has been restricted and postponed by the limited proposals for English devolution recently on offer. If we judge the revised Westminster project against the above four headings, we find:-

Human factors: a new commitment to community empowerment.

Geographical factors: limited consideration.

Administrative factors: partially addressed.

Empowerment factors: some commitment to devolved powers.

Different regional 'spaces' are further explored in 'A Rough Guide to Regions' issued as Devolve! Information Sheet 6. The core notion is that these 'spaces' - territorial, functional, cultural, political, environmental - can be considered to overlay each other to create the complexity of social geography and can also give rise to 'space conflict'.

The complexities of these regional spaces in contemporary mobile societies are further explored in Territorial, Scalar, Networked, Connected: In What Sense a 'Regional World'? by Gordon Macleod and Martin Jones. Among the many sources they quote is this one from Kevin Morgan:

To overcome the debilitating binary division between territorial and relational geography we need to recognise that political space is bounded and porous: bounded because politicians are held to account through the territorially-defined ballot box, a prosaic but important reason why we should not be so dismissive of territorial politics; porous because people have multiple identities and they are becoming ever more mobile...

Other bodies have also drawn up criteria against which the merits of regional proposals may be measured. For example the six 'tests' for regional devolution drawn up by the Local Government Association. A link to the LGA Web Site may be found on our Links and Allies page.