Start city thinking from the outside

It is hard going sometimes, requiring many power-pointed pie-charts, and a great many freebies to Barcelona, before the message is (dimly) grasped.

And it is “dimly” that we are grasping it for, at one such recent presentation, I was struck by the fact that not only do we attempt to repeat the trick — the creation of culturally and economically-vibrant city regions throughout Britain — by rebranding, instead of the necessary devolution of real power from Westminster, but that we also get starstruck by the bright lights of the big city. We concentrate on looking up at them in awe, to the exclusion of the health of their “region”, their hinterland — and to the disadvantage of both.

Our city region professionals duly show us the figures and analysis to demonstrate why Barcelona works and Berlin doesn’t, and we start to think that only big is important, and that we should all attempt to be pale shadows of Barcelona or New York.

The examination of the “city region” concentrates almost exclusively on the first word and neglects the second. I think that we also need to be interested in what makes a successful hinterland.

What we big city-types see from our seats of government is a wide service-zone around our cities. The countryside, and its towns, developed — as we see it — to serve the needs of the city, for pleasant places for our commuters to live in and for recreation space for our metropolitan-types to play in at the weekend.

I have no problem with these uses — except when our thinking goes no further than this. For these places, that we have reduced to dormitories and playpens, were once strong and proud, and had dignity and civitas and, significantly, local economies of their own.

These places that we have reduced to dormitories and playpens were once strong and proud, with local economies of their own

While some of this economic activity has been lost to agribusiness and supermarket supply chains, much still exists in these regions, and much can be built anew around tourism and the development of business in places whose “quality of life” is markedly different from the cities they encircle.

In Britain, our centralist thinking works at all levels. Nationally we need a lead city — but London leads to an absurd, dysfunctional degree, to the detriment of our other regions. (And I can’t help but add a contrary observation to the welcome that has naturally greeted the award of the Olympics; for the increased concentration on London this brings will negate all efforts to foster opportunity in the rest of Britain, and increase the unbalanced, dysfunctional nature of our economy.)

More locally it is necessary to understand that the vibrancy of a region is not based on activity at the centre and a service-zone all around, but on a network of centres, with one dominant but feeding off the vigour of the others, much like the workings of a magnetic field. To make a business analogy, what we are asking for is a chief executive surrounded by pliant yes men, when what we want is for the centre to be challenged, with ideas and initiatives thrown out from all around.

With apologies, I cannot help but return to Barcelona, and observe how the smaller centres in Catalonia, such as Girona or Figueras, have no sense of servility to their chief city, but a bustle and activity of their own. Perhaps the profession that has developed to preach the importance of the major cities, will turn its attention to these regional centres, so paving the way for a whole new series of junkets for our brave leaders.