A Framework for City Leadership

Recent work on mobilising leadership in cities and regions has highlighted its importance, pointing out that place-based leadership in existing multilevel governance (MLG) settings can be key to understanding differences in socio-economic performance, resilience and recovery of localities. But where does governance end and leadership begin?

A Framework for City Leadership in Multilevel Governance Settings: The Comparative Contexts of Italy and the UK, a paper by Leslie Budd and Alessandro Sancino published in Regional Studies, Regional Science, has contributed to this enquiry by examining the role of city leadership and providing a conceptual framework for its understanding. As both Italy and the UK face increased pressure towards decentralisation, the authors compare their main actors, structures and processes to shed light on common features such as the trend towards strengthening the executive (rather than representative) side of political leadership, and the growing relevance of civic leadership in creating public and social value.

However, while Italy seems to be returning to greater centralisation as the more vertically structured type I MLG is reinforced, in the UK, current proposals for increased devolution seem to be moving towards type II governance and the empowerment of local communities. One example is the 'Northern Powerhouse', whose discourse of economic growth rests partly on creating a single transport body that incorporates various local and regional interests.

Despite the differences, in both countries the three forms of city leadership discussed – managerial, political and civic – appear not only to provide the bridge between the vertical and horizontal dimensions of MLG, but also the multilateral means of managing governmental change. And, in this sense, they confirm Sotarauta's contention that city leadership starts where governance ends.

Read A Framework for City Leadership in Multilevel Governance Settings.