ESRC End of Award Report For awards ending on or after 1 November 2009 This End of Award Report should be completed and submitted using the grant reference as the email subject, to reportsofficer@esrc.ac.uk on or before the due date. The final instalment of the grant will not be paid until an End of Award Report is completed in full and accepted by ESRC. Grant holders whose End of Award Report is overdue or incomplete will not be eligible for further ESRC funding until the Report is accepted. We reserve the right to recover a sum of the expenditure incurred on the grant if the End of Award Report is overdue. (Please see the ESRC Research Funding Guide for details.) Please refer to the Guidance notes when completing this End of Award Report. Grant Reference ES/J010618/1 Grant Title Building the Low Carbon Economy on Merseyside: Follow on funding Grant Start Date 1 st April 2012 Total Amount 98,982.04 Grant End Date 31 st May 2013 Expended: Grant holding University of Liverpool Institution Grant Holder Dr Peter North Grant Holder s Contact Details Address Email Department of Geography and Planning University of Liverpool Liverpool L698TZ Co-Investigators (as per project application): Institution P.J.North@liverpool.ac.uk Telephone 0151 794 2849 1
1. Non-technical summary Please provide below a project summary written in non-technical language. The summary may be used by us to publicise your work and should explain the aims and findings of the project. [Max 250 words] Follow on Funding maximised the impact of the ESRC-funded Knowledge Exchange Project Developing the Low Carbon Economy on Merseyside, Project Ref RES-185-31-0113. The project was a Knowledge Exchange Partnership which explored the extent that a revitalised Liverpool has the right policies to combine a healthy, vibrant and socially inclusive local economy with what we need to do to avoid dangerous climate change. Specifically, it explored what this means for the support of new and existing businesses and social enterprises. How can the partners ensure that socially excluded communities can benefit from low carbon opportunities? Follow on Funding maximised the impact of the project through funding for (a) support for reciprocal exchanges between Liverpool and previous and existing Green Capitals to facilitate a decision about whether to embark on a formal bid to be Green Capital and for a Green Partnership to facilitate the process; (b) support for a programme of seminars mainstreaming low carbon into the city s economic development strategy; (c) a dedicated Research Fellow to be based at the University of Liverpool, but spending time on secondment to the three partners, and (d) support for wider dissemination of findings 2. Project overview a) Objectives Please state the aims and objectives of your project as outlined in your proposal to us. [Max 200 words] To carry on follow-on work from the Developing the Low Carbon Economy on Merseyside project (RES:185-31-0113). In particular: 1. Work with partners to facilitate the development of the key strategic outcome from previous bid, which is the development of a bid for Liverpool to be European Green Capital and establish a Green Partnership to facilitate that process. 2. Work with low carbon business advisors on Merseyside to capacity-build their ability to intensify reductions of energy use and carbon emissions from businesses 3. Work with low carbon business advocates on Merseyside (businesses people and social entrepreneurs who have pro-actively identified low carbon as a key driver of their business) to capacity build their ability to engage with less innovative SMEs and social 4. Building on five seminars successfully organised, to organise four more seminars aimed 2
at mainstreaming low carbon into the city-region's strategic drivers: 5. Develop the Low Carbon Liverpool website as a portal for Low Carbon Liverpool's work facilitating the transition from carbon intensive to low carbon modes of development. b) Project Changes Please describe any changes made to the original aims and objectives, and confirm that these were agreed with us. Please also detail any changes to the grant holder s institutional affiliation, project staffing or funding. [Max 200 words] No substantive changes were made to the project, beyond a change of emphasis as the project developed and relatively more time was spent on the project on the bid for Liverpool to be a Green Capital and associated policy work focussing on establishing a Green Partnership for the city. As a result of the change of government in the UK and associated public spending cuts meant that many of the business support agencies that we had envisaged working with closed operation, meaning that we had to work more with individual businesses taking action than with business support agencies. The city of Liverpool also adopted an elected Mayor, and his agenda needed to be engaged with. c) Methodology Please describe the methodology that you employed in the project. Please also note any ethical issues that arose during the course of the work, the effects of this and any action taken. [Max 500 words] Our methodology was action research. We worked closely with our partners Liverpool Vision and Liverpool Chamber, and later with the wider Liverpool Green Partnership to progress the objectives of follow on funding as articulated in the bid. Between bidding for Follow On funding and the appointment of the project Research Associate the effects of the reductions in public spending under the newly elected coalition government on Liverpool meant that the agencies supporting the private sector to transition to a low carbon agenda closed (including one of our three initial partners, Groundwork Merseyside) which meant that we could no longer work with them to the extent that we had planned. On the other hand, and much more positively, the impact of the first tranche of KE funding on local low carbon policy making was significant, and a larger group or partners began to form around a new Green Partnership for the city beyond the original three partners, including the Environment Agency, Merseytravel, Arup, the Eldonians, Merseyside Environmental Advisory Agency,, the LEP, and Merseyside Waste Authority. With the support of our original partners, it was agreed that the best way to support the impact of our project was to support the emergence of the Green Partnership, which was launched 3
as a formal partnership for the city at an event we organised in July 2013. Our Research Associate, Dr Alex Nurse, worked closely under the direction of the PI, Dr Peter North, and the Green Partnership s policy advisor Mr Murray Grant to an agenda identified by and agreed with our partners in the Green Partnership to progress the impact of the KE partnership, and in particular to progress and catalyse the low carbon policy making process in the city through the development of the now much larger and robust process, and through identifying the issues the city needed address to improve its environmental performance through consideration of a bid to be European Green Capital. The RA and the PI organised four events, carried out policy work with the partners to develop the partnership and to progress a Green Capital bid, carried out desk research on low carbon strategies in other cities, attend a conference of NGOs from Green Capitals in Vitoria, Spain. In support of the process in developing a low carbon strategy for the city, the Research Associate was seconded to Liverpool City Council for two months to work with the councils sustainability team to develop an audit of the city s environmental performance under the 14 criteria set by the Green Capital bidding process, The PI also undertook research visits to previous Green Capitals Hamburg and Stockholm, while our partners visited Nantes (Green Capital 2013). Papers were written for the partners specifying what actions other leading green cities had undertaken, and the benefits on progressing and catalysing the city s environmental performance through a green capital bid. These working papers were made available on our website, and are being written up for academic papers. No problematic ethical issues emerged in the work. d) Project Findings Please summarise the findings of the project, referring where appropriate to outputs recorded on the ESRC website. Any future research plans should also be identified. [Max 500 words] The project s findings come from a deep engagement at a local level with our partners that has provided a front row position from which to observe the policy making process in a city as it struggles to understand what the implications for its future prosperity as a result of the need to adapt to and mitigate dangerous climate change are (North 2013). Liverpool suffered severely from economic restructuring in the last decades of the 20th century, but which has been recently revitalised (although significant problems of social exclusion remain). Significant private sector and EU investment as rebranded Liverpool from a struggling to a vibrant city, and this has meant that the city has not been affected by the recession that broke out in 2007 as deeply as it has been by previous recessions (North 2010). 4
The result is that some economic development policy makers have been reluctant to do anything that they feel would impact adversely on the city s new found prosperity, and have seen arguments that the city should act to improve its environmental performance and reduce its emissions as part of a global mission to avoid dangerous climate change (as advocated by, for example, the US Mayors compact on climate change or ICLEI, for example) as at best an irrelevance, and worst a break on growth. Others have reacted warmly to the project s findings, which show that the city should engage with low carbon initiatives to maintain its future competitiveness, as well as for moral reasons. The project has observed partners who share a vision to a low carbon future for Liverpool coming together to form a Green Partnership, observed and helped them develop their arguments, observed which arguments seem to be accepted by whom, and who rejects them, and observed a city s economic development agencies as they grapple with new ideas that may threaten accepted wisdom, through the period of a change in national government, through changes in public opinion about the significance of climate change, and through the introduction of new agencies in the form or LEPs and a Mayoral system. The result is a detailed local study of the complexities of low carbon policy making in postindustrial Northern cities as some actors accept, while others reject, conceptions that the city needs to put the need to reduce emissions at the heart of its economic development strategies. The study identified ways to catalyse the process of mainstreaming low carbon policy making through (a) a consideration of the value of bidding to be a green capital and though an audit of the city s environmental performance to see if a bid is credible, through the identification of strong and weak environmental policy in the city, and through the identification of ways to improve poor performance that are of benefit irrespective of whether a bit is or is not formally made (b) developing multi-partner policy making and identifying good policy from other cities and (c) working with the literature on motivations for private sector engagement with the low carbon agenda. e) Contributions to wider ESRC initiatives (eg Research Programmes or Networks) If your project was part of a wider ESRC initiative, please describe your contributions to the initiative s objectives and activities and note any effect on your project resulting from participation. [Max. 200 words] Not relevant 5
3. Early and anticipated impacts a) Summary of Impacts to date Please summarise any impacts of the project to date, referring where appropriate to associated outputs recorded on the Research Outcomes System (ROS). This should include both scientific impacts (relevant to the academic community) and economic and societal impacts (relevant to broader society). The impact can be relevant to any organisation, community or individual. [Max. 400 words] The project s key recommendations, that Liverpool look to strengthen its policy making on low carbon issues and accelerate the transition to a low carbon economy were acted on. Partners came together to establish a Green Partnership, involving a wider range of partners. The audit of Liverpool s environmental performance was completed in March 2013. The project organised a four seminars to take the process forward, which each drew some 60 to 100 participants. The proposals were widely discussed in the city. Impact can particularly be demonstrated by the ethos of co-production which has led to a growth of trust and coherence in policy making in a city which has for years been characterised by conflict and disagreement. The journey in exploring what a set of policies for the city might look like, what is likely to be accepted, what rejected, has been owned by and shared by the partners. Partners have welcomed the ability to explore ideas that at first felt uncomfortable, for example critiques of growth as the overarching aim of policy, without having to sign up to them all. Debate was seen as healthy. The project has provided a trusted, neutral space where all could work together, with the university fulfilling the role of facilitator and trusted arbiter, and proposal developed which were enthusiastically taken forward by the partners, with the university now acting as a key part of the wider partnership. Local partners are working together with a new coherence, although this new ethos of partnership working has had to be adjusted to take account of the introduction of a mayor for the city. The Mayor of Liverpool has established a Mayoral Commission to further explore the city s future environmental strategy, which the project will feed into, prompted by the work of the project which, it is expected, will embed climate change into the city s policy making process, and taken forward by the Green Partnership. The key argument, that the climate change means that cities now have a responsibility to measure and cut emissions, and should not be seen as a distraction from growth on any terms, has been taken on board. Discussions about the importance of emissions reduction as a specific objective of policy, about the responsibility of city to act on climate change, and the place of the low carbon sector in the city s economy continue to be robust. 6
b) Anticipated/Potential Future Impacts Please outline any anticipated or potential impacts (scientific or economic and societal) that you believe your project might have in future. [Max. 200 words] The impact of the project to date is to get a city s responsibility for avoiding dangerous climate change on the agenda locally, as opposed to seeing it as an irrelevant diversion from the main project of securing continued growth. There has been significant local debate, with some local partners being more convinced by the arguments than others, with climate change written into some local agendas, and still ignored by others. As a result of this debate and a lack of consensus locally on the importance of climate change as a key element of local decision making, a Green Partnership has been formed and a Mayoral Commission is taking submissions from a range of partners. The project has therefore been able to study the detail of local economic development policy making in a contested political environment in a city that has experienced significant problems in the past, and which is not an early adopter of climate policy. We expect in the future as the Mayoral Commission reports and the Green Partnership develops to be able to report on changed local policies and programmes that will be of interest to other formerly struggling cities not at the forefront of climate policy making. You will be asked to complete an ESRC Impact Report 12 months after the end date of your award. The Impact Report will ask for details of any impacts that have arisen since the completion of the End of Award Report. 7
4. Declarations Please ensure that sections A, B and C below are completed and signed by the appropriate individuals. The End of Award Report will not be accepted unless all sections are signed. Please note hard copies are not required; electronic signatures are accepted and should be used. A: To be completed by Grant Holder Please read the following statements. Tick one statement under ii) and iii), then sign with an electronic signature at the end of the section (this should be an image of your actual signature). i) The Project This Report is an accurate overview of the project, its findings and impacts. All coinvestigators named in the proposal to ESRC or appointed subsequently have seen and approved the Report. y ii) Submissions to the Research Outcomes System (ROS) Output and impact information has been submitted to the Research Outcomes System. Details of any future outputs and impacts will be submitted as soon as they become available. or This grant has not yet produced any outputs or impacts. Details of any future outputs and impacts will be submitted to the Research Outcomes System as soon as they become available. y iii) Submission of Data Data arising from this grant have been offered for deposit with the UK Data Service. or Data that were anticipated in the grant proposal have not been produced and the UK Data Service has been notified. or No datasets were proposed or produced from this grant. y 8