Local Economic Assessment: Learning from International Practice
Local Economic and Employment Development
Programme (LEED)
Dr Jonathan Potter
Senior Economist, OECD
Structure
• The OECD
• Strategy issues
• Good practice
• Case study: regional strategies in Latvia
• Pitfalls
• Messages for North East England
OECD
Forum for governments to work together . . .
on the economic, social and
environmental challenges of interdependence and globalisation.
30 member countries – countries pursuing democracy and market economies.
Process of enlargement and enhanced engagement.
OECD
OECD Member countries
Non-Members working with OECD
LEED Programme
Messages
• Integrated strategies
• Partnerships
• Entrepreneurship as a job generator
• Culture of evaluation
Activities
• Peer reviews
• Guidance
• Conferences and seminars
• Training events
1. Defining the problem: rationale, objectives and base lining↓ Baseline and reference case comparison with objectives to define
the problem
2. Defining alternative options/actions↓ Identification of options available to achieve the objectives
3) Identifying and measuring inputs (costs)↓ What will the options cost?
4) Identifying and measuring outputs and outcomes↓ Examination of the likely impacts of the options
5) Results presentation and interpretation↓ Effectiveness of options in achieving objectives, risk, comparison
with alternatives
6
Strategy issues
Source: ODPM, 2003.
Strategy issues
Source: ODPM, 2003.
Strategy fundamentals
Aim of strategy• Where are we?• Where do we want to get to? • How do we want to get there?
Best strategies are• Clear and explicit on objectives and priorities• Clear on needs and opportunities• Practical and implementable• Creative and flexible
Good practice
• Defining objectives
• Identifying options
• Assessing expected impacts
• Using evidence
• Implementation plan
Good practice
Defining objectives• Consider indicators to assemble and areas for
benchmarking• Consider scale of intervention and ensure that
objectives complement at different scales• Take a long-term perspective• Identify beneficiaries
10
Good practice
Identifying options• Make sure options fit objectives• Make process transparent• Fit to needs of specific groups• Include stakeholders in defining and selecting
options• Consider management questions• Set out the full costs and benefits to society• Use evidence to assess options
11
Good practice
Assessing expected impacts• Have a clear sense of purpose• Set targets to achieve• Use the logic model• Have a clear sense of relevant indicators on
intermediate and final effects• Be prepared to offer a range of estimates
12
Good practice
Implementation plan• Have strong commitment and leadership• Define review milestones and progress measures• Report progress, encouraging good behaving and
impose sanctions for inappropriate behaviour• Conduct regular checks
• Recycle learning and establish communities of
practice
13
Case study: regional strategies in Latvia
• Mobilising the region • Understanding the region• Defining a strategy and
action plan• Financing the strategy• Evaluating and improving
• Assessment • Guidelines• Learning models
Latvian planning system
• Set up 1991 – challenge not to reject planning but set up a democratic approach
• Three spatial levels: national, regional, local• Three time scales: long term (25 years), medium
term (7 years), short-term (2 years)• Process of administrative reform underway
15
Mobilising the region
Strengths• Presence of
competent staff• Transparency of
documents• Widespread
knowledge of the system
Weaknesses• Only target group was
private entrepreneurs• Considered as a
bureaucratic process subject to change
• Surprising similarities between national, regional and local plans
• Formal, not real consultation
16
Understanding the region
Strengths
• Political will for evidence-based policies
• NSO collecting wide range of data
• Research projects on NSO data
• Evidence of both quantitative and qualitative techniques
Weaknesses
• Lack of shared evidence bases
• Limited skills and resources at local level
• Little city-region or rural analysis
• Little sub-regional data• No attempt to fix NSO data
gaps locally• Little attempt at causal
analysis• Limited use of scenarios
17
Defining strategy and action plan
Strengths
• Desire to develop long term vision
• A lot of work being undertaken
Weaknesses
• Regional level creates strategies but has no autonomy or resources
• Some localities developing too many plans, some developing none
• Existing plans are really spatial plans not strategy
• Competitive niches are not clear
• Disconnect with finance and implementation tools
18
Financing
Strengths
• Clear plan to absorb EU financing
Weaknesses
• Little understanding of potential private sources
19
Evaluating and improving
Strengths
• Good regional data• EU emphasises role of
monitoring and evaluation• Strengthened strategic
capacity in central government
Weaknesses
• Top-down steering system• Hostility to evaluation• Limited skills and
resources• Stakeholders not used as
information source• Focus on monitoring not
evaluation• Lack of intermediate
results information• Lack of self assessments
20
Pitfalls
Defining objectives• Data – too aggregated, no time trajectory• Ignoring the relationship with the surrounding
area• Excluding particular stakeholder groups• Ignoring sustainability• Ignoring local specificities• Relying on markets to distribute benefits• Assuming monitoring and evaluation can be set
up later
21
Pitfalls
Identifying options• Ignoring the ‘do nothing’ option• Concentrating on infrastructure at the expense
of social and innovation• Being afraid of different approaches• Ignoring stakeholders• Forgetting to look at risks• Neglecting the ‘Plan B’
22
Pitfalls
Assessing expected impacts• Being over-sophisticated• Omitting important expected effects• Ignoring factors likely to influence the problem• Ignoring key groups of beneficiaries• Ignoring the possibility that things may turn out
differently
23
Pitfalls
Using evidence• Assume that assessment results will
automatically be used• Rely on a single written report
24
Pitfalls
Implementation plan• Trying to turn everyone into a strategist• Stifling innovation and flexibility• Undervaluing experience against theory• Making processes overcomplicated• Frequently changing performance metrics• Raising expectations of short-term impact• Allowing a gap to grow between strategic
messages and staff, customer and stakeholder understanding
25
Messages for North East England
• Move from evidence to policy choices by considering: – options – alternatives – expected impacts
• Use logic models• Focus on beneficiaries• Consider scenarios• Focus on where policy can make a difference • Look for distinctiveness to other regions• Fill data gaps locally
26