Geographical inequalities and sub-national funding in Australia

This case study is the result of a review of intergovernmental transfers and other sub-national funding in Australia and to what extent these funding streams are designed and able to reduce geographical inequalities. The aim of this review is to draw out lessons for England, and the UK more broadly, in terms of how funding mechanisms can be used to better address spatial inequalities. The review is mostly based on desk research of academic and policy publications, complemented by interviews with several key informants in Australia, including academic experts and policymakers at the federal and state level.The review highlights several key issues relevant for the UK and English context, including the key role of horizontal fiscal equalisation in mitigating geographical inequalities, the importance of robust institutions protecting sub-national government autonomy, and bi-directional coordination and engagement between national and sub-national governments.This report is for the Improving Public Funding Allocations to Reduce Geographical Inequalities project funded by the ESRC.The project brings together a highly experienced interdisciplinary team from the Universities of Birmingham, Bristol, De Montfort, Newcastle, Nottingham, Plymouth and Sheffield, together with the National Centre for Social Research and Metro Dynamics.<br/

Geographical inequalities and sub-national funding in Australia

This case study is the result of a review of intergovernmental transfers and other sub-national funding in Australia and to what extent these funding streams are designed and able to reduce geographical inequalities. The aim of this review is to draw out lessons for England, and the UK more broadly, in terms of how funding mechanisms can be used to better address spatial inequalities. The review is mostly based on desk research of academic and policy publications, complemented by interviews with several key informants in Australia, including academic experts and policymakers at the federal and state level.The review highlights several key issues relevant for the UK and English context, including the key role of horizontal fiscal equalisation in mitigating geographical inequalities, the importance of robust institutions protecting sub-national government autonomy, and bi-directional coordination and engagement between national and sub-national governments.This report is for the Improving Public Funding Allocations to Reduce Geographical Inequalities project funded by the ESRC.The project brings together a highly experienced interdisciplinary team from the Universities of Birmingham, Bristol, De Montfort, Newcastle, Nottingham, Plymouth and Sheffield, together with the National Centre for Social Research and Metro Dynamics.<br/

A review of funding allocations in England to address geographical inequalities

This report analyses 48 funding streams in operation in England from 2014 to 2024, for local and regional areas that are either explicitly aimed at addressing geographical inequalities or are likely to have a direct or indirect impact on such inequalities. We explore mechanisms for allocation and delivery. We aim to provide actionable lessons for policy reform to improve funding allocation mechanisms, positively impacting policy, people, and places. Our analysis emphasises the complex nature of the funding landscape. Key findings include that:•A very limited number of funds studied are specifically geographically targeted, with a high proportion of funds allocated to administrative geographic areas. However, where funding has been available to particular kinds of administrative areas, there might still be an implicit/’de facto’ targeting of geographic inequality in the spread of funding to certain administrative areas across urban and rural areas in England.•Whilst the majority of the funds analysed focus on reducing geographical inequalities, only a quarter of the funding provided is targeted at addressing spatial inequalities. Rather, almost three-quarters of the total funding considered is focused on achieving aims that are not geographically specific.•The majority of funds analysed involved competitive processes for allocation, although formula funding made up the greatest proportion of total funding awarded.•Recent years have seen the introduction of multiple, often short-term funding streams.•More than half of the funding programmes analysed had as one of their aims to reduce geographic inequalities or support disadvantaged regions. This would appear to be positive in terms of the potential to address geographical inequalities. However, this only represents 25% of the total funding analysed. This report is for the Improving Public Funding Allocations to Reduce Geographical Inequalities project funded by the ESRC.The project brings together a highly experienced interdisciplinary team from the Universities of Birmingham, Bristol, De Montfort, Newcastle, Nottingham, Plymouth and Sheffield, together with the National Centre for Social Research and Metro Dynamics

A review of funding allocations in England to address geographical inequalities

This report analyses 48 funding streams in operation in England from 2014 to 2024, for local and regional areas that are either explicitly aimed at addressing geographical inequalities or are likely to have a direct or indirect impact on such inequalities. We explore mechanisms for allocation and delivery. We aim to provide actionable lessons for policy reform to improve funding allocation mechanisms, positively impacting policy, people, and places. Our analysis emphasises the complex nature of the funding landscape. Key findings include that:•A very limited number of funds studied are specifically geographically targeted, with a high proportion of funds allocated to administrative geographic areas. However, where funding has been available to particular kinds of administrative areas, there might still be an implicit/’de facto’ targeting of geographic inequality in the spread of funding to certain administrative areas across urban and rural areas in England.•Whilst the majority of the funds analysed focus on reducing geographical inequalities, only a quarter of the funding provided is targeted at addressing spatial inequalities. Rather, almost three-quarters of the total funding considered is focused on achieving aims that are not geographically specific.•The majority of funds analysed involved competitive processes for allocation, although formula funding made up the greatest proportion of total funding awarded.•Recent years have seen the introduction of multiple, often short-term funding streams.•More than half of the funding programmes analysed had as one of their aims to reduce geographic inequalities or support disadvantaged regions. This would appear to be positive in terms of the potential to address geographical inequalities. However, this only represents 25% of the total funding analysed. This report is for the Improving Public Funding Allocations to Reduce Geographical Inequalities project funded by the ESRC.The project brings together a highly experienced interdisciplinary team from the Universities of Birmingham, Bristol, De Montfort, Newcastle, Nottingham, Plymouth and Sheffield, together with the National Centre for Social Research and Metro Dynamics

Geographical inequalities and sub-national funding in Australia

This case study is the result of a review of intergovernmental transfers and other sub-national funding in Australia and to what extent these funding streams are designed and able to reduce geographical inequalities. The aim of this review is to draw out lessons for England, and the UK more broadly, in terms of how funding mechanisms can be used to better address spatial inequalities. The review is mostly based on desk research of academic and policy publications, complemented by interviews with several key informants in Australia, including academic experts and policymakers at the federal and state level. The review highlights several key issues relevant for the UK and English context, including the key role of horizontal fiscal equalisation in mitigating geographical inequalities, the importance of robust institutions protecting sub-national government autonomy, and bi-directional coordination and engagement between national and sub-national governments. This report is for the Improving Public Funding Allocations to Reduce Geographical Inequalities project funded by the ESRC. The project brings together a highly experienced interdisciplinary team from the Universities of Birmingham, Bristol, De Montfort, Newcastle, Nottingham, Plymouth and Sheffield, together with the National Centre for Social Research and Metro Dynamics

A review of funding allocations in England to address geographical inequalities

This report analyses 48 funding streams in operation in England from 2014 to 2024, for local and regional areas that are either explicitly aimed at addressing geographical inequalities or are likely to have a direct or indirect impact on such inequalities. We explore mechanisms for allocation and delivery. We aim to provide actionable lessons for policy reform to improve funding allocation mechanisms, positively impacting policy, people, and places. Our analysis emphasises the complex nature of the funding landscape. Key findings include that: •A very limited number of funds studied are specifically geographically targeted, with a high proportion of funds allocated to administrative geographic areas. However, where funding has been available to particular kinds of administrative areas, there might still be an implicit/’de facto’ targeting of geographic inequality in the spread of funding to certain administrative areas across urban and rural areas in England. •Whilst the majority of the funds analysed focus on reducing geographical inequalities, only a quarter of the funding provided is targeted at addressing spatial inequalities. Rather, almost three-quarters of the total funding considered is focused on achieving aims that are not geographically specific. •The majority of funds analysed involved competitive processes for allocation, although formula funding made up the greatest proportion of total funding awarded. •Recent years have seen the introduction of multiple, often short-term funding streams. •More than half of the funding programmes analysed had as one of their aims to reduce geographic inequalities or support disadvantaged regions. This would appear to be positive in terms of the potential to address geographical inequalities. However, this only represents 25% of the total funding analysed. This report is for the Improving Public Funding Allocations to Reduce Geographical Inequalities project funded by the ESRC. The project brings together a highly experienced interdisciplinary team from the Universities of Birmingham, Bristol, De Montfort, Newcastle, Nottingham, Plymouth and Sheffield, together with the National Centre for Social Research and Metro Dynamics

Childhood disability, social class and social mobility : a neglected relationship

Disability theorists have long highlighted the role of institutional, social, and environmental barriers in constructing disability, emphasizing its parallels with other socially constructed axes of stratification. However, despite theoretical developments toward sociological understandings of disability, social stratification and life-course research have largely neglected childhood disability as a social division. As a result, we still know little surrounding the socio-economic attainment of disabled children and young people. Drawing on Next Steps data, this research note highlights stark overlooked inequalities between disabled and non-disabled young people's activity status and social mobility in early adulthood. We specifically focus on the importance of social class for disabled young people's outcomes, emphasizing the need for intersectional analyses of disability inequalities. We also outline longitudinal survey data enhancements necessary for life-course research on childhood disability and its intersections

The temporal dynamics of daily stress, affect, and several affect regulation processes, in patients with chronic mood and anxiety disorders before and after a mindful yoga intervention

Background and Objectives: Patients with chronic mood and anxiety disorders experience many life stressors and are more reactive to these stressors. Although mindful yoga might reduce stress reactivity, little is known about the affect regulation mechanisms involved, such as repetitive negative thinking, fear of emotion, acting with awareness and body awareness. Design and Methods: Using experience sampling methodology, 12 patients with chronic mood and anxiety disorders completed five daily assessments for 15 days before and after a 9-week mindful yoga intervention. Interrupted time-series analyses were used to assess mean-level change from pre-to-post intervention and vector autoregressive models to assess change in the temporal associations. Results: Most individuals experienced positive changes in affect and the proposed affect regulation processes. Fear of emotion showed changes from pre-to-post intervention for most individuals (67%), followed by acting with awareness (58%), body awareness (58%) and repetitive negative thinking (50%). In the dynamic relationships between stressors, the four affect regulation processes and affect, there were individual differences in which pathways changed and how they changed. Conclusions: After a mindful yoga intervention, affect and several affect regulation processes improve in most individuals. Achieving this in the context of daily life stress, seems to be more complicated. Trial registration: ISRCTN register (study ID ISRCTN13612864).</p

Improving public funding allocation to reduce geographical inequalities

This report proposes improved ways to allocate public funding within and between different areas in England to reduce geographical inequalities and enable more places to contribute meaningfully to national economic growth and renewal. It draws on the research of a multi-disciplinary team of academics, researchers and consultants undertaken between June 2024 and March 2025.This research included evidence reviews, international case studies, analysis of spatially targeted funding streams, ‘deep dives’ into specific topics, interviews with policy practitioners, and citizen engagement. Addressing the role of public funding in reducing geographical inequalities in England, the research identified ten guiding principles and ten key problems with incremental, moderate and radical proposals to help resolve them.The main messages for policy practitioners and decision-makers are:• prioritising and resourcing geographical inequality reduction within the national growth and renewal agenda are critical to improving public funding allocation• the problems in the existing funding allocation system are largely recognised and accepted by national, subnational and local policymakers and there is genuine appetite for reform. Early progress on positive reform – such as funding simplification – needs further support, acceleration and expansion to achieve meaningful change• meaningful and sustained decentralisation of powers and resources from national to subnational and local government is integral to building capacity and capability for improving funding allocation to reduce geographical inequalities• strengthened accountability is central to enhancing the effectiveness and wider transparency, oversight and scrutiny of public funding• monitoring and evaluation require substantive resources and strengthening alongside improvement of data and legibility for users, stakeholders and the wider publicThis report is for the Improving Public Funding Allocations to Reduce Geographical Inequalities project funded by the ESRC.The project brings together a highly experienced interdisciplinary team from the Universities of Birmingham, Bristol, De Montfort, Newcastle, Nottingham, Plymouth and Sheffield, together with the National Centre for Social Research and Metro Dynamics