𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝗮 𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗺𝗶𝗰 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝘆. 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝗶𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗽𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝘀𝗵𝗲𝗱 𝗶𝗻 𝟭𝟵𝟵𝟲 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗼𝗴𝗼𝘀 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗱?

Growth corridors. Gateway sites. A new business workspace building. Business support. A skills push. An innovation ecosystem. A place-marketing campaign.

If the intervention list is the one the field has been running since the 1990s, you are not strategising. You are reprinting.

The world has changed around the playbook. Megatrends in technology, demography, climate and the geography of work have redrawn what a local economy even is. Artificial intelligence is restructuring occupations faster than any strategy refresh cycle. And yet the strategies keep arriving with the same seven interventions, in the same order, with a new photograph on the cover.

‘Refresh’ is the word that should worry you. Strategies are refreshed instead of rethought – and a refreshed strategy is usually last decade’s diagnosis with this year’s date.

The best economic developers I know are thinking several steps ahead: designing interventions that will still be meaningful decades out, aimed at the industries that are the future of growth rather than the ones that are easiest to convene.

𝘚𝘰 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵. 𝘐𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘨𝘺 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝟣𝟫𝟫𝟨, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘨. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘴 𝘯𝘦𝘹𝘵: 𝘥𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘮𝘦, 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘮𝘦.

Do you like the cover image? I tried to show some taste in choice. Think yourself lucky – it could have easily been Boyzone, Celine Dion, Robson & Jerome, or the Smurfs – all scoring top 10 albums in 1996!

This post is part of the prosperity in every postcode series. To deliver this – we need to be truly great at local and regional economic development. Follow me to get these posts prioritised in your LinkedIn newsfeed.

#EconomicStrategy #EconomicDevelopment #LocalGovernment #Innovation #FutureOfWork