What does the literature tell us about what’s particular about PBW in the UK?
Lagging, but with an opportunity
The global literature shows that the core principles of place-based working are common across nations, which focus on long-term, collaborative change in a specific location that brings together multiple stakeholders.
However, as discussed in our earlier blog, the UK has a more nascent field of practice in comparison to other countries (like the US, Canada or Australia) where this work is more commonplace. What are some of the reasons for this? And what else might be some of the opportunities for the UK to catch up?
In the UK, in comparison to other countries practicing place-based working, we see:
A more centralised model of government – compared to federal systems e.g. in the US, Canada and Australia. This can be limiting in the UK, where areas are less free to explore local autonomy and innovation, and are more bound to comply with centralised funding and policy decisions set in Westminster
Impact of austerity: More than a decade of austerity measures has significantly reduced the capacity of local government and civil society, which limits the ability to engage in the complex, time-intensive work required for place-based initiatives. While other countries also face resource constraints, the scale and specific impact of austerity in the UK are significant. However, this has led to an increase in non-governmental interest in place-based working, with independent foundations and other non-statutory bodies increasingly investing in these approaches.
Fragmentation and silos within state-led institutions: Different ‘mission-led’ government departments can struggle to join up working, and other state-led institutions (like the NHS) are large, insular and complex, which can make it difficult for more collaborative, place-based approaches to gain traction.
Historic context of government initiatives: Previous government funded programmes like the New Deal for Communities and the Neighbourhood Renewal Programme often brought substantial investment but lacked sustained, long-term commitment required for systemic change. This led in some cases to community fatigue about these approaches. However, these initiatives led to some people and places developing skills that place-based work can build on in future.
Lack of professional identity: In the context of a more nascent field, there are fewer established frameworks and a lack of consistent language for practitioners to articulate what they do. This contrasts with frameworks used elsewhere, e.g. the ‘Collective Impact’ principles in the US - although these are increasingly adapted to the UK context.
Lack of maturity in evaluation practice: While similar challenges in evidence are experienced everywhere, some sources suggest that the UK has lagged behind other countries in developing its evaluation practice – in part due to a lack of sustained investment. There is a perception that evaluation in the UK has historically focused on demonstrating "what works" through traditional methods (like RCTs, which are often unsuitable for complex place-based initiatives), sometimes at the expense of learning and adaptation.
What does this mean for the UK moving forward?
Place is currently at the forefront of policy discussions in the UK, with a stated government commitment to a "more collaborative place-based approach" and a return to the language of neighbourhoods in policy. In the June 2025 Spending Review there were three principles guiding the work of public reform, and one of those was:
To devolve power to local areas that understand the needs of their communities best, with services that are designed with and for people, in partnership with civil society and the impact economy
This suggests it is a good time to reflect on the opportunities the UK has to move its practice forward. What our look at the literature suggests is that it is not just money that is lacking. In fact, money is not the main problem. There needs to be shifts in behaviours and assumptions, different types of investments, and different approaches to governance and collaborative working. Some suggestions from the literature include the following, and all of these underline the particular challenges facing this practice in the UK:
Learning from the models and approaches used in other countries and adapting these to the UK context
Strengthening the evidence and learning ecosystem, with reference to the evidentiary approaches used in other countries, alongside build a UK identity
Developing a shared professional language and identity through clear structured learning processes, fostering communities of practice, and creating frameworks and tools for understanding
Investing in developing better place-based data systems, mapping existing assets and needs to improve the design and targeting of interventions. This needs to particularly consider the governance shifts of MCAs and local government reorganisation, alongside changes to NHS structures.
Harnessing the increased attention and energy around place based working in order to develop UK-based innovation where this arises.