Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Seaside Town Network Cases

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Impact of Networks on Unemployment

  • 258 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter has four sections reporting on five network cases which took place in Great Yarmouth, a seaside town in the east of England, during a period of Conservative-control. A sampling strategy identified the case sites, two ward clusters with persistent unemployment but different local cultures, socio-economic histories and structural conditions, and cases of formal and informal networks tackling unemployment. Section 1 introduces the local authority and its economic problems. Section 2 compares ward clusters, including demographics, unemployment, environment, culture and politics, overall policies and network culture. Section 3 profiles the case network attributes, activities and sociograms visualising network connectivity. The final section compares the factorial impact on cases.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The Integreat Partnership includes Great Yarmouth Tourist Authority, Great Yarmouth Heritage Partnership, Great Yarmouth Town Centre Partnership, Great Yarmouth Community Partnership, Seachange, Great Yarmouth Borough Council (GYBC) and Norfolk County Council (NCC). The funding partners are the East of England Development Agency (EEDA), European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) Objective 2, Heritage Lottery Fund, NCC and GYBC.

  2. 2.

    Eastport took decades to raise capital and secure planning. In 1567, Yarmouth bailiffs attempted to fund a new harbour by entering the first lottery in England to raise money for public works, but the gamble with ratepayers’ money was unsuccessful (Meeres 2007: 31).

  3. 3.

    The policies to incentivise regional growth over the next few decades are immensely challenging. The employment forecast for 2014–31 is not expected to grow; finance to develop new products is lacking; recent economic performance suggest productivity in terms of GVA is lower than the English average, business spending and investment has been low; the business stock is below the English average; employment participation is strong but part-time work is higher than the English average and wage growth is low; moreover, weak broadband and transport infrastructure makes global competition logistically inadequate and a self-sufficiency outlook is not even considered (NALEP 2013).

  4. 4.

    Previously, NCC, Government Office for the East of England (GOE), EEDA and the East of England Regional Assembly had authority over the LSP for business and transport development for the subregion of Yarmouth and Lowestoft.

  5. 5.

    From December 2002, Regent Ward, the nineteenth most deprived ward in England, split into Central and Northgate, and part of Nelson Ward (ODPM 2000). Nelson Ward was the thirty-seventh most deprived ward. Southtown and Cobholm was formerly Cobholm and Lichfield Ward. Data is sometimes inconsistent since the wards ranked in the ODPM 2000 refer to old wards.

  6. 6.

    Wage inequalities were not national targets and financial well-being projects received the smallest amounts of Neighbourhood Renewal Funding.

  7. 7.

    Development control and planning present major issues in Yarmouth; land for industrial development is limited due to poor ground conditions.

  8. 8.

    Single Regeneration Budget 5 (SRB5) funded (£12 million) the health centre, a credit union, business advice and improvements to education and skills training, including an FE college engineering department, and community safety projects. Funding ceased in 2006.

  9. 9.

    For historical facts see Meeres (2007: 149–55).

  10. 10.

    Two years previously, the Economic Forum had identified that more joined-up working was needed with the URC board and that this would require a mechanism through which to disseminate information (see minutes, GYLSP 2005).

  11. 11.

    LEGI was a joint programme between the ODPM, HM Treasury and the DTI that distributed £419 million to 20 local authorities in two competitive funding rounds between 2006–07 and 2010–11 (DCLG 2010b: 28). GYBC received in total £12.64 million LEGI funding, managed under the auspices of ‘enterpriseGY’ Board from August 2006.

  12. 12.

    Neighbourhood Management expanded in response to the Local Government White Papers Strong and Prosperous Communities (DCLG 2006) and Communities in Control, Real People, Real Power (DCLG 2008).

  13. 13.

    For an account of merchant leaders in the government of Great

    Yarmouth in the 17th century, see Gauci 1996: 78–88.

  14. 14.

    Between 2001 and 2008, GYLSP received £12.3 million NRF to meet national floor targets.

  15. 15.

    A decade later, despite network evolution the NCVO states 65 per cent of LEPs have no voluntary sector representation, and 18 per cent ‘have little or no engagement at all with the voluntary sector’ (NCVO website, accessed March 2016: https://knowhownonprofit.org/how-to/how-to-get-your-head-around-local-enterprise-partnerships-leps).

  16. 16.

    Notably the proposed sub-network arrangements were still being discussed a year later (GYLSP 2009).

  17. 17.

    Case A findings were similar across CN and SC ward clusters.

  18. 18.

    In 2007, the author returned to these premises; however, they were vacant with no sign of a forwarding address or contact telephone number, and the neighbouring shops had no information.

  19. 19.

    GOE was the Eastern Regional Government Office that supported local authorities and partners in the East Anglia region to develop LSPs and community strategies, rate partnership performance against six indicators: strategic, inclusive, action-focused, performance managed, efficient, and learning and development, and deliver an improvement plan.

  20. 20.

    The Local Area Agreement was a three-year agreement (2008–11) between NCSP and central government. It aimed to deliver Norfolk’s Sustainable Community Plan, and 75 negotiated local and national indicators set against outcomes, measures baselines and targets (see details on Norfolk Ambition website, http://www.norfolkambition.gov.uk/norfolkambition/home.asp, accessed on the 7 February 2009).

  21. 21.

    http://www.gylsp.org.uk/lsp/; this link is no longer available.

  22. 22.

    Refers to the Gershon Efficiency Review of public spending carried out by Peter Gershon in 2003-04 who was tasked to make recommendations for the Comprehensive Spending Review 2004, and achieve £21 billion spending cuts by delivering joined-up government.

Bibliography

  • Beatty, C., & Fothergill, S. (2003). The seaside economy: the final report of the seaside towns research project, CRESR. Sheffield: Sheffield Hallam University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beatty, C., Fothergill, S., & Wilson, I. (2008). England’s seaside towns: A ‘benchmarking’ study. A research report. London: DCLG.

    Google Scholar 

  • ComeUnity (CU). (2010, May). Outcomes report 2006–2010. GYBC and GYLSP. Retrieved from http://www.comeunity.info/

  • Connexions. (2006). Not in Employment, Education or Training (NEET): Statistical data. Retrieved from http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/14-19/index.

  • DCLG, & DWP (2007). The working neighbourhood funds. London: DCLG.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG). (2006). Strong and prosperous communities: The local government white paper. Cm 6939-I. London: DCLG.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG). (2008). Communities in control; Real people, real power: The local government white paper. Cm7427. Norwich: The Stationery Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG). (2010a). Index of deprivation 2010. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010

  • Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG). (2010b, December). National evaluation of the local enterprise growth initiative programme. Amion Consulting.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewson, S. (2005). Evaluation of the working neighbourhoods pilot: Year one. DWP research report No. 297. Leeds: Corporate Document Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewson, S., Casebourne, J., Darlow, A., Bickerstaffe, T., Fletcher, D., Gore, T. & Krishnan, S. (2007). Evaluation of the working neighbourhoods pilot: Final report. DWP research report No. 411. Leeds: Corporate Document Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, P. (2008). Stocktake of the Great Yarmouth Local Strategic Partnership: A consultation paper. From the interim local government re-organization adviser to the GYBC. Retrieved from http://www.communityconnections.org.uk/

  • Gauci, P. (1996). Politics and society in Great Yarmouth 1660–1722. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Borough Council (GYBC). (2004, October 12th). Minutes of the policy development committee.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Borough Council (GYBC). (2011). Great Yarmouth economic development strategy 2011–2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Borough Council (GYBC). (2012a, May). Borough profile (facts and figures).

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Borough Council (GYBC). (2012b, December 7th). Employment and skills group minutes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Borough Council (GYBC). (2013a, December 4th). Employment and skills group minutes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Borough Council (GYBC). (2013b, 17th October). Economic Reference group minutes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Borough Council (GYBC). (2014a) Borough profile (facts and figures) 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Borough Council (GYBC). (2014b). Scrutiny committee minutes, 6 March 2014, Appendix 1. Measuring the Impact of Welfare Reform November 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Borough Council (GYBC). (2014c, June 10th). Yarmouth area committee minutes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Borough Council (GYBC). (2014d, June 11th). Employment and skills group minutes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Borough Council (GYBC). (2014e, July 22nd). Full council minutes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Borough Council (GYBC). (2014f, February 19th). Employment and skills group minutes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Local Strategic Partnership (GYLSP). (2002). GY Local Strategic Partnership Great Yarmouth 2020 vision: The revised path to the future. Great Yarmouth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Local Strategic Partnership (GYLSP). (2005, September 15). Minutes of the Great Yarmouth, Economic Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Local Strategic Partnership (GYLSP). (2006a, January 20). Minutes of the LSP Executive.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Local Strategic Partnership (GYLSP). (2006b, March 9). Minutes of the LSP, Economic Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Local Strategic Partnership (GYLSP). (2006c, February 09). Minutes of the LSP Economic Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • GYURC (Great Yarmouth Urban Regeneration Company 1st East). (2007a). Area action plan preferred option January 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • GYURC (Great Yarmouth Urban Regeneration Company 1st East). (2007b). Area action plan preferred options consultation: Consultee responses September 10, 2007. Retrieved from http://www.great-yarmouth.gov.uk/1steast

  • Great Yarmouth Local Strategic Partnership (GYLSP). (2008, September 11). Minutes of the Economic Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Yarmouth Local Strategic Partnership (GYLSP). (2009, September 25). Meeting of the Great Yarmouth LSP delivery executive. Great Yarmouth.

    Google Scholar 

  • LEPN (Local Enterprise Partnerships Network). (2014). Building local advantage: Review of Local Enterprise Partnership area economies in 2014. Athey Consulting Ltd, www.atheyconsulting .co.uk

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, K. (2015, December 03). New staff arrive in Great Yarmouth for wind farm project. Great Yarmouth Mercury. Retrieved from http://www.greatyarmouthmercury.co.uk

  • Meeres, F. (2007). A history of Great Yarmouth. Chichester: Phillimore.

    Google Scholar 

  • NALEP. (2013). New Anglia Local Enterprise Partnership economic profile 2013. Wymondham, Norfolk.

    Google Scholar 

  • NALEP. (2014a). New Anglia Local Enterprise Partnership strategic economic plan (April 2014). Wymondham, Norfolk: NALEP.

    Google Scholar 

  • NALEP. (2014b, November 20). New Anglia Local Enterprise Partnership board. Agenda Item 5, Managing Director’s report. BTAdastral Park, Ipswich.

    Google Scholar 

  • NALEP. (2014c, January). European investment strategy.

    Google Scholar 

  • NALEP. (2015, March 20). New Anglia Local Enterprise Partnership Board. Agenda Item 10, Business Performance Reports-March 2015. Beacon Park, Great Yarmouth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norfolk County Council (NCC). (2013, April 17). Report to Norfolk Health and Wellbeing Board. Norfolk Joint Health and Wellbeing Strategy – Responding to the priorities. Item 6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norfolk County Council (NCC). (2014a). NCC public health outcomes framework summary.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norfolk County Council (NCC). (2014b, May 6). Report to Norfolk Health and Wellbeing Board, Norfolk Joint Health and Wellbeing Strategy 2014–2017. Item 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norfolk County Council Strategic Partnership Board (NCCSP) (2009, January 14). Minutes of the joint scrutiny panel.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Gorman, S. (2011). Engage and enable: Project evaluation. NIACE November 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Office for National Statistics (ONS). Labour market profile - Great Yarmouth. See https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/reports/lmp/la/1946157234/report.aspx?town=great yarmouth

    Google Scholar 

  • Office for National Statistics (ONS). Neighbourhood statistics. See https://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/

    Google Scholar 

  • Office for National Statistics (ONS). (2014, March). Local labour market statistics. Retrieved from http://www.nomisweb.co.uk

  • Office for the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM). (2000). The English indices of multiple deprivation 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selby, P. (2008). Net impact evaluation of the Department For Work And Pensions Working Neighbourhoods Pilot. Working paper No. 51. A report of research for the DWP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, M. (2003). Public policy in the community. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Work and Pensions Committee (WPC). (2010, December). Youth unemployment and the future jobs fund. First Report of Session 2010–11, Volume II, additional written evidence. London: Stationery Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Work and Pensions Committee (WPC). (2014, January). The role of Jobcentre Plus in the reformed welfare system. Second Report of Session 2013–14, HC479. Norwich: Stationery Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • WP (Work Programme). (2013). Work programme statistics website. Retrieved from http://www.gov.uk/government/collections/work-programme-statistics-2

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UK, UK

    J. M. Hurst

Authors
  1. J. M. Hurst
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2016 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hurst, J.M. (2016). Seaside Town Network Cases. In: The Impact of Networks on Unemployment. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-66890-8_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation