Consultation 01/18

Higher education and the regions

HEFCE policy statement

Responses to consultation
[ MS Word 41K | Zipped Word 9K | Adobe PDF 25K | Zipped PDF 21K ]

Executive summary (read on-line)

Download

Full Report and Annexes
[ MS Word 149K | Zipped Word 47.7K | Adobe PDF 64.9K | Zipped PDF 53.9K ]

Executive summary

Purpose

1. This document sets out the HEFCE's policy in responding to the emerging regional agenda in England and in encouraging collaboration between higher education providers in each region.

Key points

2. We are committed to working in partnership, and we have focused on building our regional partnerships since the creation of the Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) in 1999. But many of our policies and programmes are national in view, and we support higher education institutions in their international, national, regional, sub-regional and local roles.

3. This document aims to review the priority we should give to regional issues. It describes the roles that higher education institutions (HEIs) are adopting in the region, and what we are doing to support them.

4. The main conclusions we draw are:

1. The HE sector has always had a regional role. With the establishment of RDAs, more emphasis is now being placed on the economic regeneration and skills development aspects of this role. In recent years HEIs have made significant progress in addressing the regional agenda, supported by the introduction of the Higher Education Reach-out to Business and the Community (HEROBC) fund. Many now see it as a significant part of their mission.
2. HEIs have, nonetheless, missions at international, national, sub-regional and local levels as well as the regional. Regions are diverse and make different demands of their HE sector. There will thus be a great range of roles that HEIs can appropriately play in their regions. Responsibility should continue to rest with each institution to determine which role best suits its own mission and circumstances.
3. Our approach to the regions needs to recognise the diversity of HEIs and of regions, not seeking to impose any blueprint, but supporting the relationships that are being developed between regional bodies and HEIs.
4. While maintaining the principle of national funding methods for the allocation of mainstream teaching and research funds, we should keep under review which programmes should properly reflect regional considerations (such as the allocation of additional student numbers, HEROBC and widening participation). We should work closely in administering those programmes with RDAs, the Further Education Funding Council/Learning and Skills Council (FEFC/LSC) and other regional partners; and encourage those partners to be creative in reaching out to HEIs at the same time as HEIs are seeking engagement with them.

Action required

5. This document is a position statement. We will be disseminating it widely within the regions, through our regional consultants, to increase understanding of the role of HE in the region and to contribute to debate. We are also participating later this year in a DfEE/HEFCE/RDAs Working Group which will be reviewing the relationships between HE and RDAs. We would welcome comments on this document to feed into these national and regional discussions. It would be helpful if they could be structured under the following headings:

1. Have we correctly articulated the regional agenda, and the roles of HE within it?
2. Are we right to conclude that we should not take a uniform approach to the regional agenda, but leave discretion with each HEI and region to determine its own priorities and roles?
3. Is the regional dimension being suitably and sufficiently reflected in HEFCE programmes and policies? Are there other ways in which we could support the regional role of HE?
4. Is the role of Regional Consultants, as set out in Annex A, clear and appropriate?

6. Please send comments, by 31 May 2001, to: