In this ‘Ask the Expert’ interview, academic and writer Alex Niven discusses the lasting impact of deindustrialisation on the North of England. Questioning whether the government’s recent devolution commitments will deliver meaningful change for marginalised regions, he advocates for more radical reforms.
The North of England has long been shaped by its rich industrial history. However, the decline of traditional industries, combined with austerity, and the centralisation of wealth and power in London and the South, has left many Northern communities with limited opportunities.
For Alex Niven, an academic at Newcastle University and author of works such as New Model Island and The North Will Rise Again, this blend of pride and frustration has shaped a distinct Northern cultural identity. Yet he argues that radical reform is desperately needed to address long-standing inequalities.
In this Ask the Expert interview, Niven discusses the lasting effects of deindustrialisation on Northern areas, the cultural resistance to these impacts, and approaches to rebalancing regional economies. He advocates for a more transformational approach, pointing to constitutional change as a potential path forward.
What is the current state of the North?
“My angle is a cultural one”, Niven begins. He draws heavily on the work of Irish political scientist Benedict Anderson, best known for his concept of ‘imagined communities’, which argues that nations are socially constructed through shared beliefs and cultural symbols. In his work, Niven examines how culture is shaped by notions of place, and how it overlaps with politics.
To understand the identity of the North, Niven contends that we must look back to the industrial revolution and its aftermath. While acknowledging the risk of being overly reductive – he views the region as culturally cohesive, despite its vastness and subregional diversity – Niven notes that, having endured several “disaster periods”, from the miners’ strike to the recent era of austerity, many Northern areas have yet to find a replacement for their industrial past. While this social history of the North is far from groundbreaking, Niven insists that its significance makes it worth repeating.
We still haven’t found a sequel to the disappearance of industry. The most recent nightmare was austerity, have we moved out of it?
Reflecting on previous governments, Niven highlights that, starting with New Labour, policy agendas have aimed to use culture – nightlife, leisure, and the service economy – to drive regeneration in post-industrial regions. Other sectors have also played a role, with cities such as Manchester illustrating that economic transformation involves a broad range of sectors. Beyond cultural investment, the city’s growth has been driven by improvements in areas such as education and infrastructure, resulting in job creation and GDP growth rates that exceed the national average.
Despite these localised and somewhat patchy efforts, the UK remains highly centralised, leaving much of the North still disenfranchised and uncertain of its future. Nevertheless, Niven argues that the North’s strength often lies in its distinctiveness from the South and the London-centric institutions that have largely defined British identity.
The great strength is that it offers something counteractive to a centralised identity. It’s radically different.
Niven points to architecture as an example, noting how the skylines of cities like Liverpool, Manchester, and Newcastle reflect technological innovations – railway infrastructure, steam power, and iron and steel construction – as legacies of the industrial revolution, which of course began in the North. The sadness, he says, lies in the fact that iconic buildings and structures from this pivotal era, such as the Tyne Bridge, have become dilapidated due to austerity.
This, Niven says, is the “inheritance of the North”. Places, buildings, and people are alienated from a political system that fails to serve them, and often they do not neatly fit into conventional notions of ‘Britishness’. This difference makes them more future-facing, creating an identity that defies traditional clichés like aristocracy or cricket. Yet they remain left behind.
That is the inheritance of the North. It’s this desire to drag the country into a better future, partly because it’s not very well served by the current system.
What would a more equitable political system look like?
When asked about the new Labour Government’s commitment to devolving powers to local regions – including through new legislation for establishing more combined authorities, increased mayoral powers, and simplified funding structures – Niven expressed a sense of cautious optimism.
He believes that expanding combined authorities is a positive and long-overdue step, and points out that in his region, North East Mayor Kim McGuinness has promised significant improvements in transport, similar to the positive changes implemented by Andy Burnham in Greater Manchester. For Niven, these developments provide reasons to be cheerful.
Despite these assurances, he remains sceptical that the national government can deliver the radical reforms necessary to truly ‘level up’ the country. While devolving more power to metro mayors is a step in the right direction, he argues that “the fundamental problem is the historical concentration of power in London and the South East.”
For “real change”, Niven believes bolder action is needed. He suggests federal governance as a potential solution – a system that would decentralise power and give local governments greater control over policy, finances, and decision-making, akin to models in the United States, Canada, and Australia. Niven argues that establishing federal states, reflecting the distinct needs of regions from the North East to the South West, would be “necessary to balance things out.”
We need to continue forms of political devolution with a bolder, more radical impetus. The model for me is federalism, which doesn’t seem too pie in the sky given that lots of countries already have it.
Is federalism feasible?
Germany is a good example, Niven says. After reunification, the country transformed the East side’s highly centralised governance into a federal system with strong municipalities, designed to narrow the many gaps between East and West. According to Centre for Cities, this overhaul tackled deep-rooted social and economic inequalities, and demonstrated that comprehensive institutional change is possible “if the political will is there”.
The Centre says the German case serves as a valuable lesson for other nations facing regional divides. Today, the federal system supports diverse industrial hubs and has empowered multiple urban areas – including Berlin, Munich, Frankfurt, Hamburg, and Wolfsburg – to develop their own economic specialties, rather than disproportionately concentrating resources and opportunities in one or two major cities. While inequality still exists, Germany continues to close regional gaps since reunification thirty years ago, and it is now considered to be a country with “modest” inequalities.
Malcolm Harvey, an expert in constitutional studies at the University of Aberdeen, says that federalism would help to accommodate the cultural differences between the UK’s regions. However, he notes that significant barriers – including the deep-seated tradition of parliamentary sovereignty, political resistance, and a lack of public appetite for an additional layer of governance – make the outright adoption of it unlikely. Echoing this, Niven suggests that while such changes may not be imminent, significant constitutional events, such as Scotland potentially gaining independence or the possible reunification of Ireland, might one day prompt the government to reconsider.
I’m in favour of big reconciliations of nationhood and identity.
The Centre on Constitutional Change argues that while a specific form of federalism may not currently be feasible for the UK, the broader notion refers to a “mindset” focused on redistributing power and dismantling centralised authority. Niven supports this perspective, highlighting that many people do not strongly identify with ‘Britain’, suggesting a new political arrangement may be desirable in the future. Indeed, a 2020 YouGov poll found that 43% of adults in Great Britain identify more as English, Scottish, or Welsh than as British, while only 24% primarily identify as British.
“We have to continually reassert that regional inequality not only exists, but is a huge problem”, Niven concludes. Looking ahead, he believes it is time to change the conversation, as terms like the ‘Northern Powerhouse’, the ‘Red Wall’, ‘Levelling Up’, and ‘Northern Independence’ have all had their moment. While Niven is uncertain about the specific way forward, he maintains that the focus should now be on more radical alternatives.
