½¿É«µ¼º½

Much has been said about the need for more coherence and collaboration across the various parts currently making up the tertiary sector in England – not least by the Labour government itself (and while in opposition). Launching Skills England in July 2024, Education Secretary of State Bridget Phillipson said: ‘’. In its set out before the election, Labour pledged a post-16 skills strategy to:

• break down barriers to opportunity
• better integrate further education (FE) and higher education (HE)
• set out the role for different providers, and how students can move between institutions.

Each of our existing systems in England – whether for FE or HE or apprenticeships – are largely centralised and market driven, albeit in their very different ways. As other blog posts in this special issue highlight, it is helpful to think about how a more co-ordinated tertiary approach might be better organised at the regional level convened by (MCAs). The previous Conservative government agreed ‘trailblazer deals’ with Greater Manchester and the West Midlands for ‘joint governance’ over 16–18 policies. The Labour government’s recent sets out plans for mayors to have joint oversight of Local Skills Improvement Plans (LSIPs).

Current fragmentation, however, between existing sectors and overlaps between the patchwork of different bodies and frameworks remains a real problem for employers, individuals and for the economic performance of the country as a whole. This complexity has fuelled compelling arguments for rationalisation and reform, and specifically for the creation of . Labour ministers have also stressed the need to move away from market-based, competitive regimes towards a more collaborative model especially between FE and HE via a single post-16 strategy.

However, when policymakers think about how this might happen, they tend to focus on the wiring of funding and regulation sitting above and directing providers – potentially duplicating bureaucracies and centralisation but in ‘City Hall’ rather than Whitehall. More optimally we might explore how individual institutions might help to design and deliver a more integrated system while also contributing to broader challenges across public services and local economies. We might then think more of universities and colleges as strategic partners, driving mission and industrial strategies as well as helping to build strategic capacity and broader institutional capital.

‘We might then think more of universities and colleges as strategic partners, driving mission and industrial strategies as well as helping to build strategic capacity and broader institutional capital.’

Currently there are few incentives for colleges and universities to engage in local growth. This needs to change – so they can work more effectively and more flexibly with local firms, communities and learners, as well as with MCAs. Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves in her extolled the importance of institutions, and this applies as much at local as at the national level. Here their role extends beyond traditional activities such as teaching and research to being an active part of the broader institutional ecosystem of places. This is a core objective of the and adapted in the previous government’s ‘Levelling Up’ white paper. They are: natural, human, social, knowledge, physical and institutional capital, and they act as a mutually-reinforcing system, driving economic growth and improving social outcomes, including personal wellbeing. As principles for a successful tertiary system, they show the breadth of areas in which colleges and universities can contribute to thriving local areas.

Our goal then should be to build regional tertiary systems with strong institutions at their heart (Pabst & Westwood, 2021) – convened and co-ordinated by mayors and pursuing local economic growth and improved public services. However, improved incentives and more autonomy will only go so far. To thrive and help drive local economic growth, institutions will also have to take risks and make strategic choices to do so. Playing an active, deliberate role in devolution and ‘place-based policy’ requires time, long-term commitment and resource.

We can already see some examples of these approaches taking shape in the places where devolved institutions and ecosystems have been in place for the longest. In Greater Manchester there is an , supported by Innovate UK and including nine FE colleges and the University of Manchester. The university has also established – a team dedicated to technological diffusion and regional economic growth. All together the colleges and universities are also collaborating with the mayor and combined authority on the delivery of the city region’s investment zone – .

There is much more that can be done – both at local and national levels – but leaders and institutions will need to come together to make it happen. That way colleges, universities and others can help drive – as well as thrive in – a tertiary future.

References

Pabst, A., & Westwood, A. (2021). The politics of productivity: Institutions, governance and policy. (Working Paper No. 015), The Productivity Institute.