Shaping our research priorities

‘Starter for ten’ project proposals

In addition to mapping the South-West Coastal LPIP with respect to key indicators, collecting evidence from existing consultations and strategy documents and surveying our VCSE partners to collate a repository of projects, we are seeking stakeholder input into the research areas we will prioritise in the Phase 2 bid.
To this end, we have started to write a number of ‘starter for ten’ project areas. These capture issues that our stakeholder conversations have raised to date and provide brief background overviews of the ‘issue’ under consideration.
Stakeholders are invited to propose more specific ideas for areas for research, intervention development, piloting and evaluation under these starter for ten themes. We will present these ideas for consultation via our stakeholder workshops and an online survey to support prioritisation.
If you feel like writing a couple of sentences, a paragraph or a couple of pages, please send your ideas (indicating which starter for ten project you are referring to) to: swcoastallpip@plymouth.ac.uk. Let us know whether you would like your idea to be presented anonymously, on behalf of your organisation or with both your name and your organisation.

Cross-cutting themes

Evaluating and capturing the learning around the work of community assets
Background
Inequalities are widening, with cuts to public services and a cost-of-living crisis as well as the ongoing recovery from the pandemic. Services are stretched, seemingly almost to breaking point. And increasingly communities and their assets are seen as the answer. There are understandable concerns about this narrative. Yet communities have demonstrated that they can self-organise and respond rapidly to local needs, and having a hub to locate community activity can be an important catalyst. Additionally, we hypothesise that in some situations community assets will have an important role in linking those most in need to statutory services for effective treatment or support which also addresses inequalities.
It is important therefore to evaluate and capture the learning around the work of community assets and the role they can play in addressing inequalities. It is also recognised that community assets and statutory services are part of one system but unclear how they should be integrated optimally. Given their complexity across multiple layers of embedded systems, developing robust evidence has been challenging. There have been moves towards using complex systems approaches to support inter-related challenges, and community assets are self-organising complex systems. However, we need better innovative ways of evidencing their work and understanding the nature of their approaches? How can we support commissioners and care providers to understand the value of activities and spaces – where people go and meet and somehow, mostly, generate hard to measure wellbeing? How, without constraining them to deliver 'services' which potentially alters the nature of the offer, do we monitor and understand activity in a way which supports improvement rather than box ticking? And how to we encourage community organisations to work together rather than encouraging them to compete with each other for limited pots of funding? How do we understand the value of the physical environment and create incentives to improve and sustain it? How do we understand links between community and statutory assets in order to optimise integration?
Providing evidence of self-organising groups in complex systems requires methods which can capture the dynamic evolving nature of the 'assets' and developing feedback loops so the wider systems recognise and learn from and about such assets. It is this premise which informs this ‘starter for ten’ research focus. If you have specific ideas for research in LPIP phase 2, please let us know.

Addressing policy complexity through a Human Learning Systems approach
Background
Most of the key determinants and indeed outcomes of coastal disadvantage are interlinked. Thus, it is reasonable to suggest that there are potentially causal (but modifiable) relationships between key phenomena (such as local and regional industrial, economic, housing and demographic structures, transport links and geographical isolation, access to employment, educational and cultural opportunities, and age-specific patterns of seasonal and permanent migration) and outcomes relating to economic, social and cultural well-being. Added to these are the direct and indirect effects on the same outcomes of the state of the coastal marine environment and its accessibility and use for development of the innovative blue economy, achievement of net zero and biodiversity gain. 
We have a very limited understanding of the complex ways in which these factors are inter-linked in coastal areas (raising questions about the most appropriate ‘entry points’ for intervention). The evidence base on ‘what works’ in addressing coastal challenges is limited. There are also organisational barriers to effective action. 
The development of complex interventions requires a high level of interconnectedness between diverse organisations. Unfortunately, the organisational context of traditional service delivery tends to work against the development of joined-up solutions to problems that cross departmental, organisational, administrative, and sectoral boundaries. Performance monitoring regimes allow for little synergy between commissioning strategies and tend to lead to the prioritisation of discrete, downstream interventions rather than investment in upstream strategies, while effective inter-sectoral working tends to rely much more on influence and persuasion than the management of resources that are within the direct control of one organisation. Limited funding also results in ‘precarious partnerships’, financial stress making it more likely that partners stop working together and, in some cases, start competing against each other. 
Given the complexity and interdependence of factors shaping coastal disadvantage, uncertainty in relation to the risks and consequences of action, and divergence in viewpoints, values and strategic intentions, coastal inequality is undoubtedly a ‘wicked problem’. It is therefore important to explore policy solutions that might inform a process of cultural and organisational change that could strengthen partners’ ability to address complexity and make the most of their limited resources.

Human Learning Systems
One possible solution is provided by Human Learning Systems (HLS). HLS is an alternative approach to public management which embraces the complexity of the real world. According to this perspective, complexity is characterized by (1) variety – people’s strengths and needs are different. As a result, what a ‘good outcome’ for people, and how it is achieved, looks different for each person. (2) Change – what works in public service today will not necessarily work tomorrow. What works for one person or one place will not necessarily work for another. (3) Lack of control – the outcomes that we seek are influenced by a range of people, organisations and structures – public, private and civil society – which tend to be beyond the direct control of Government – either central or local.
HLS proposes that public servants, and others who undertake social action must hear, understand and respond to variety, change and lack of control. To do end, they need to form effective human relationships to have a deep understanding of the people’s lives and context. They must also have the autonomy to respond appropriately to each person’s strengths and needs.
This can be quite challenging for commissioners and service managers who are more used to making decisions based on clearly defined ‘results’. How do you commission a service if you recognise that there is no simple intervention that “works”? How do you transform a system to support the understanding that “what works” is an ongoing process of learning and adaptation in which the job of managers is to introduce measures to enable staff to learn continuously rather than being subject to a system of performance improvement that leads to perceptions of reward/punishment? How can we encourage our staff to be honest about their mistakes and uncertainties and to share reflective practice between and across peer groups without fear of being judged? How can we build relationships and networks of trust across services and systems of services to incentivise co-operation and mitigate the damaging effects of competition? How do we share the insights of innovative work (which is limited with respect to formal evaluation and peer review) with those working with similar challenges in different contexts?
What might an HLS approach look like in practice? One emphasis is on the need for continuous learning – to better understand what works, why and under which circumstances (financial, contextual and organisational). Another is to have the autonomy to experiment and adapt (we have often not been good at abandoning policies that show limited evidence of ‘working’). Another is to be open to the art of the possible. Are we at risk of using ‘governance’ as an excuse to not improve the effectiveness and efficiency of our services due to the ‘rules’ against sharing funding, data, role responsibilities and so on? How can we open up freedoms to make the most of the resources we have?
Might exploring the barriers, enablers, strengths and limitations of a HLS approach be of interest to stakeholders and one we might prioritise in the LPIP Phase 2 bid? If you have any thoughts about this (and ideas for specific project foci), get in touch!

Coastal Community Organising

Place-based partnerships can support agency and activism for positive change within communities. In coastal communities in England social and political engagement is low, sustained by local disenfranchisement caused by low, seasonal, part-time or unemployment; limited access to affordable housing and isolation from cultural opportunities, which has persisted over generations.
For too long many disadvantaged communities have been treated as problems and passive recipients of paternalistic service provision. We are seeing a move away from deferential representative democratic to one where people want to participate in shaping their futures. We need to understand what this means for them and for the provision of services. 
“Community Organising is for people who are angry with the ways things are and want to do something about it; for people who feel powerless or frustrated with the system, or worried about the direction the country is going.” Citizens UK. 
We intend to connect with coastal communities to develop an in-depth understanding of key local needs experienced by members of those communities. We will listen and support those communities in listening to each other. We will explore with and support a shift in the balance of power back towards, those feeling inequity in coastal communities. Ultimately, the agency of coastal community members is key in community organising. With agency comes the ability for coastal community members to hold decision makers to account for the social and economic factors that have negatively impacted on their health, wellbeing, education, employment and futures.
We want members of coastal communities to tell us what key issues they want to change in their communities, such as housing access, living wages for seasonal work, and how these issues have impacted on them. We want to support coastal communities organising themselves, feeling they have agency, hearing each other’s voices, and activating change. Using an assets-based approach we propose to research the constraints that exist in developing community partnerships, both with other organisations (see Figure 1) and for themselves. Every community has strengths. 
Figure 1 Barriers constraining capacity for partnership working with communities PDF 
An asset-based approach seeks to recognise, value and build on the positive factors within a community that helps maintain health, creates a sense of wellbeing and supports reconnection. Community assets include the:
  • skills, knowledge, commitment of community members
  • friendships, community cohesion and neighbourliness 
  • local groups and organisations, informal networks 
  • physical, environmental and economic resources
  • assets of external agencies.
We will use findings from this research to support coastal communities organising themselves to challenge key spatial inequities through policy change. We recognise that relationships move at the speed of trust and that social change moves at the speed of relationships (Covey, 2006), and will work to support a relationship, intentional, action and support network (see figure 2).
Figure 2 Networks PDF 

Inclusive and sustainable economy

Digital Innovation and Skills

In the original application for LPIP Phase 1, we proposed that one approach to stimulating and inclusive and sustainable local economy in the South-West Coastal LPIP could be by demonstrating what works in the diffusion of innovation, with a particular focus on the digital and creative economies. 
Peripheral coastal and rural economies tend to have low productivity. Traditional industries such as farming, mining, fishing and port activity have all declined, with alternative, often high-wage digital sectors (which have the highest multiplier effects) struggling to emerge, resulting in an exodus of younger skilled people. Those left behind tend to be from poorer backgrounds, lacking secure and well-paid jobs or a clear sense of career ambition. Given the Government’s ‘levelling up’ agenda, it is of national importance to understand if coastal Britain can have digital employability equity.
There are several approaches to digital innovation that may play a key role in levelling up. Having expanded significantly during the Covid19 pandemic, digital provision and skills are set to continue to play an essential role in not only modernising but enhancing education. Insofar as digital outreach transcends the physical barriers associated with living in peripheral and geographically dispersed communities, there are hitherto unexplored opportunities such as digital mentoring and work experience (e.g. as part of corporate social responsibility) which may be of interest to local stakeholders. 
Another focus for skills development is supporting entry into the health and care system (the largest employer after retail in this region). It is worth noting that universities in the Peninsula are expanding their training offer with respect to digital health, offering pipelines to wider career opportunities than offered by e.g. basic health and social care training. 
There are implications for business development. The South-West Coast has a higher proportion of small and medium enterprises (SMEs), particularly micro-businesses, a lower business density than elsewhere and higher concentrations of business in lower-paid sectors. Businesses spend a lower proportion of turnover on R&D, which impacts negatively on both innovation and exports. However, though academic partnerships, they have been supported in co-design, development and commercialisation of appropriate and human-centred technologies that respond to growing health and social care needs for digital health technologies and the use of digital technologies to enhance existing cultural and environmental assets, examples include immersive experiences to improve access to heritage sites, sites of special scientific interest and coastal landscapes. 
There are also significant economic opportunities from growth areas such as marine autonomy, clean energy (e.g. nuclear and floating offshore wind) and clean aerospace. Where such opportunities can be supported, communities and people need to be connected to these new jobs and provided with the skills required to access them.

Housing affordability
Background
In March 2023, Homes for the South West (H4SW), in collaboration with the University of the West of England (UWE), published a report on housing affordability and affordable housing need in the South West[1]. This found that the South-West is the fourth least affordable region in England for all property types (after London, South East and the East of England). In 2021, median house prices were approximately ten times greater than the median earnings (up from four times greater in 1997).
Factors affecting housing affordability include high house prices. The South-West has the fourth highest median house prices of any English region (after London, South East and the East of England). Demand for new housing has exceeded supply. Developable land is scarce – due, in part to the South West’s high quality, protected natural environment – and subject to market premium prices that undermine the viability of affordable housing. 
At the same time, the South-West has the sixth lowest median individual earnings of any English region (exceeding only the North West, North East and Yorkshire and the Humber). This reflects a labour market characterised by seasonal, low paid work in agriculture (rural communities) or tourism (coastal communities), a particular feature of the South-West Coastal LPIP footprint.
Second homes and holiday lets also impact on housing affordability, particularly in coastal areas. This has an inflationary effect on local property prices and an adverse effect on school rolls and the sustainability of local business during ‘out of season’ periods. In Cornwall the proportion of second homes in 2018 was estimated to be as high as 25% to 40% in tourist “hotspots” (e.g., Padstow and Polzeath, and Fowey, St Mawes, Looe and Torpoint) and, typically, 10% in other coastal areas.
Other factors affecting housing affordability include migration, the in-flow of retirees, people working from home and those commuting to London and the South-East introducing people with greater purchasing power than locals into the housing market. Less significant than in other regions, Right to Buy has also depleted the total affordable housing stock in the South-West. Between 1997 and 2021, some 33,220 local authority-owned homes were sold through Right to Buy, whereas local authorities in the South-West delivered only 2,320 new homes.
Local authority profiles for the SWC LPIP area
H4SW and UWE produced local authority profiles on the affordability ratio (calculated by dividing median house price by median individual earnings per year); the difference between housing supply (the number of new permanent dwellings) and demand (the number of new household formations), adjusted for affordability; future housing need (projected requirement for new homes between 2022–39 as an average annual and total); and estimated future affordable housing need (projected requirement for affordable homes between 2022–39 as a total). More indicators are available in the report.
These have been replicated here for the SWC LPIP. Unfortunately, no data are provided for what was West Somerset. 
Affordability ratio Difference between supply and demand Future housing need 2022-2039 Average annual Future housing need 2022-2039
Average total 		Estimated future affordable housing need 2022–2039
Cornwall 11.0 19771 1951 35115 53193
Plymouth 7.3 4820 541 9739 12205
Torbay 8.9 3682 437 7865 10678
South Hams 12.6 2305 206 3715 5949
Teignbridge 11.4 2775 490 8811 13452
Torridge 10.3 3465 271 4880 7054
North Devon 10.5 775 225 4048 5909
East Devon 10.9 4691 622 11194 16536
Consequences of a lack of housing affordability
The lack of affordable housing has a complex range of consequences, from the rise of homelessness (whether through sofa surfing or rough sleeping) and associated barriers to accessing education, work and other services; the negative impact on basic needs, households entering into low quality housing or cutting back on other needs such as diet); to income segregation, a lack of social diversity with, according to some researchers, negative impacts on creativity, innovation and economic productivity. High housing costs in the South-West, for example, have been associated with the out-migration of young people, with consequences for the labour market.
Policy approaches
All the local authorities in the SWC LPIP have an affordable housing policy in an adopted local development plan document, the Core Strategy or Local Plan, though there are concerns as to whether definitions of affordable housing are actually affordable. Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) tend to be more prescriptive and provide an opportunity for more flexibility in terms of interpretation and delivery. Neighbourhood Plans also allow for the inclusion of affordable housing, often with local connection requirements. Community-led housing projects, while small in aggregate terms, costly and time consuming, tend to be valued, e.g. for their ability to provide homes for young people in the places they have grown up, reversing the trend towards unsustainable retirement villages where the cleaners, the gardeners etc. come in from a long way out of the village.
In a stakeholder survey administered by H4SW and UWE, housing associations, local authorities and smaller housebuilders all highlighted the importance of building relationships, collaboration and partnership working in delivering affordable homes. Among housing associations, there was a particular interest in working with Small and Medium sized Enterprises (SMEs), which were broadly seen as focused on a delivering a higher quality product (building a local reputation) and more closely aligned with the ethos of housing. Housing associations also talked about productive partnerships with particular landowners (including local authorities and public bodies) with shared interests in the legacy of development: “we want to work with people who want to create something more than just housing – a great place.”
Local authorities also reflected on the housing crisis as a corporate priority for the council and the deployment of multi-disciplinary teams (including housing, planning, transport) to expedite the delivery of additional stock. This was linked to the ‘enabling’ (and ‘de-risking’) role they see themselves taking at all stages of the development process.
In addition to joint ventures with SME housebuilders, the H4SW/UWE report highlights the importance of working with partners to deliver sustainable homes. For example, the Centre for Sustainable Energy in Bristol is undertaking pilots of different home standards, such as Passivhaus, EPCs and modular homes with different developers to learn what provides the most effective environmental performance. SWC LPIP partners could similarly work with their local universities to learn and share good practice.
Other innovative approaches that have been proposed in the wider literature include the more effective use of empty properties, community self-build projects, providing more age-friendly developments to release housing stock, and designing intergenerational, communal and co-housing residences (a model tried out in both Denmark and the Netherlands).
It would also be useful to review some of the policy instruments that local authorities have in relation to second homes, a key factor determining housing availability. The Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill, which is currently in the House of Lords, would enable Councils to charge second home owners a double Council Tax rate, although this will not be implemented for some time there is the question of how local authorities have been applying (or not applying) Council Tax discounts on second home owners and whether the removal of such discounts (which used to be quite high) has affected second home purchasing at all. 
Another angle that should be looked at is around housing quality and improvements to the rental sector. There is evidence that people in private rented accommodation have worse health than those in both owner-occupied and social housing. This may be due to the poor quality of many homes in the private rented sector as well as the limited security in terms of private tenancies (albeit this will hopefully be addressed at least in part by the proposed abolition of Section 21 ‘no fault’ evictions in the Renters Reform Bill). A study around the health impacts of tenancy insecurity, and the impact of any future changes to landlord regulation, on tenant health could be useful.     

(1) Danielle Sinnett, Zaky Fouad, Katie McClymont, Hannah Hickman, Cat Loveday, Stephen Hall, Rebecca Windemer and Jessica Lamond (2023). Housing affordability in the South West of England. Homes for the South West (H4SW) and the University of the West of England (UWE). https://homesforthesouthwest.co.uk/home/affordability-report/.

Offshore Renewable Energy (ORE) Innovation and Skills

In the original application for LPIP Phase 1, we proposed that one approach to stimulating an inclusive and sustainable local economy in the South-West Coastal LPIP could be associated with the development of Floating Offshore Wind (FLOW) in the Celtic Sea combined with the significant cluster of marine technology and ORE innovation related businesses in the region and the deep university expertise in this area. 
We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to achieve an ambitious development of FLOW in the Celtic Sea with established targets of 4GW deployed by 2035 and a further 20GW by 2045. This is a significant part of the UK requirement for at least 75GW of offshore wind energy by 2050. The Celtic Sea Cluster (CSC) estimates that 100GW of FLOW deployment can deliver £43.6bn in UK gross value add (GVA) by 2050, whilst boosting industry and socio-economic opportunity in Wales and the South West (SW). The ORE Catapult estimated that the benefit to the SW economy of building 1GW of floating offshore wind in the Celtic Sea would equate to £315m GVA, 1,788 local jobs, offsetting 21,199 tonnes of CO2. The Crown Estate (TCE) is committed to helping the UK achieve its Net Zero ambitions and in 2023 is delivering a new leasing opportunity in the Celtic Sea for the first generation of commercial-scale floating offshore windfarms, reinforcing industry in the Celtic Sea region, and providing power to almost four million homes. When developing new technology at this scale, innovation is mandatory.
There is an opportunity to work together on addressing challenges identified by the Offshore Wind Industry Council and the Supergen Offshore Renewable Energy Hub and to enrich existing industry development in the region by drawing on academic research to inform and accelerate the local supply chain capability, creating local jobs, and attracting major developers to the Celtic Sea as one of the leading regions in the world in the deployment of low carbon floating offshore wind technologies and services. We take a whole system, multi-disciplinary approach that is deliberately intended to provide opportunities for growth and investment and key to the sustainable development of the UK floating wind sector over the long term. Opportunities for local and regional economic growth include through skills development, outreach and public awareness engagement to inspire the next generation, supply chain development, small and medium-sized enterprise growth, generation and growth of spinouts, development of research, development and innovation infrastructures.
Local companies and individuals can be supported to take part in collaborative research to understand Floating Offshore Wind (FLOW) and address identified challenges and barriers concerning infrastructure, grid integration, workforce upskilling & training and supply chain innovation and enable capacity and capability through access to University of Plymouth expertise and facilities.
Research will help to accelerate impact, mitigate risk and reduce costs across environmental issues, supply chain strategy, operational and technical solutions. For example, assessment of Celtic Sea design conditions for FLOW technology, moorings and cabling optimisation and cost reduction. Extremes analysis on Celtic Sea metocean data could be carried out and design conditions determined to assess cost benefits of integrated floating wind turbine specific designs. Informed by previous hydrodynamics testing of floating turbine, foundation and mooring systems, dynamic and structural analysis would deliver optimal design and materials resilience and reliability. Mitigation of loads through application of novel materials to achieve cost reduction in the design of moorings, anchors and structural hulls. 

Addressing long-term structural change and low productivity (GDP)
For many Southwest coastal communities, their historical role of serving as the connecting point between land and the sea has dramatically changed and an over-reliance on industries such as fishing, defence, tourism and shipbuilding, affected by long-term decline and/or economic restructuring, has resulted in low productivity (measured as GDP per capita). While the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic was significant across the whole of the Southwest, it had a particularly substantive effect on particular sectors and parts of the workforce. The visitor economy was one of the hardest hit, further exposing the lack of economic and social resilience of those coastal communities most dependent on it. 
Low productivity is often associated with the visitor economy, and is a consequence of low paid, low skilled, transient, highly seasonal employment, combined with poor multiplier effects, due to the low spending attributed to a dominant day visitor market. It is a policy priority of the UK government, featuring prominently in their ‘Build Back Better’ and ‘Levelling Up’ Strategies. It is also therefore of crucial importance to the Southwest, evident in all coastal local enterprise partnership’s productivity plans. 
However, raising the productivity of the visitor economy is challenging due to an over-reliance on domestic holidaymakers, the concentration of overseas tourism in London, and seasonal variations in demand (including both changes in numbers of visitor and visitor spend). Additionally, a lack of investment in capital and infrastructure is restricting productivity growth in the tourism sector. Poor connectivity due to limited transport infrastructure and broadband bandwidth and speed are a significant drag on tourism productivity levels, especially in rural and coastal areas. Moreover, high labour turnover/low staff retention and difficulties in recruitment are a major dampener on tourism productivity due to the loss of skilled and experienced workers (exacerbated by Brexit), and the disincentive to training. 
There are of course many solutions to addressing low productivity. One such approach entails encouraging economic diversification (high-value as opposed to low-value tourism) within the visitor economy by finding innovative ways of enabling and capitalising on the wealth of natural capital and cultural assets that the Southwest coast is blessed with. Place-making offers an opportunity here but rarely is there intersectoral collaboration between organisations responsible for the management and development of these resources. How can place-making effectively be achieved and who should drive such initiatives? Increased accessibility to data can generate insights from data analytics and data-driven innovation, which can enhance productivity in the long-run; but infrastructural weaknesses are barriers to realising these benefits. How can these be mitigated? Moreover, emerging automation and AI capabilities are productivity enhancers, but costs, skills shortages and lack of investment mean this is still in the very early stages for the majority of the industry. How can coastal visitor economies take advantage of these technological developments? This ‘starter for ten’ project considers some of these issues.

Low productivity and the visitor economy
Addressing long-term structural change and low productivity (GDP)
For many Southwest coastal communities, their historical role of serving as the connecting point between land and the sea has dramatically changed and an over-reliance on industries such as fishing, defence, tourism and shipbuilding, affected by long-term decline and/or economic restructuring, has resulted in low productivity (measured as GDP per capita). While the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic was significant across the whole of the Southwest, it had a particularly substantive effect on particular sectors and parts of the workforce. The visitor economy was one of the hardest hit, further exposing the lack of economic and social resilience of those coastal communities most dependent on it.
Low productivity is often associated with the visitor economy, and is a consequence of low paid, low skilled, transient, highly seasonal employment, combined with poor multiplier effects, due to the low spending attributed to a dominant day visitor market. It is a policy priority of the UK government, featuring prominently in their ‘Build Back Better’ and ‘Levelling Up’ Strategies. It is also therefore of crucial importance to the Southwest, evident in all coastal local enterprise partnership’s productivity plans. 
However, raising the productivity of the visitor economy is challenging due to an over-reliance on domestic holidaymakers, the concentration of overseas tourism in London, and seasonal variations in demand (including both changes in numbers of visitors and visitor spend). Additionally, a lack of investment in capital and infrastructure is restricting productivity growth in the tourism sector. Poor connectivity due to limited transport infrastructure and broadband bandwidth and speed are a significant drag on tourism productivity levels, especially in rural and coastal areas. Moreover, high labour turnover/low staff retention and difficulties in recruitment are a major dampener on tourism productivity due to the loss of skilled and experienced workers (exacerbated by Brexit), and the disincentive to training. 
There are of course many solutions to addressing low productivity. One such approach entails encouraging economic diversification (high-value as opposed to low-value tourism) within the visitor economy by finding innovative ways of enabling and capitalising on the wealth of natural capital and cultural assets that the Southwest coast is blessed with. Place-making offers an opportunity here but rarely is there intersectoral collaboration between organisations responsible for the management and development of these resources. How can place-making effectively be achieved and who should drive such initiatives? Increased accessibility to data can generate insights from data analytics and data-driven innovation, which can enhance productivity in the long-run; but infrastructural weaknesses are barriers to realising these benefits. How can these be mitigated? Moreover, emerging automation and AI capabilities are productivity enhancers, but costs, skills shortages and lack of investment mean this is still in the very early stages for the majority of the industry. How can coastal visitor economies take advantage of these technological developments? This ‘starter for ten’ project considers some of these issues.

Surfing to benefit coastal communities experiencing disadvantage
The North Devon surfing economy has been valued at £52.1 million, which means 72 percent of the total northern Devon coastal tourism economy. In terms of employment, this represents approximately 1,470 jobs through direct and induced effects. In this area of North Devon there are pockets of deprivation for communities within the market towns of Ilfracombe, Barnstaple and Bideford. In April 2022, North Devon became the first region in the UK – and 12th in the world – to be awarded World Surfing Reserve (WSR) status. When its surfing community decided to pursue a bid to join WSR locations in California, Australia and elsewhere, it needed a means of quantifying the intersection of environmental quality and surfing and the exceptional and unique quality of the region’s waves.
Designation of a WSR and potential growth of the surf economy need to be managed to directly benefit those living in coastal communities, including increased access to the waves for health and wellbeing benefits. Investment in an LPIP project in North Devon would prime deliver the research to understand how the surfing economy and the WSR can deliver benefits for coastal communities experiencing disadvantage.

Combating youth disenfrancisement through heritage crafts
Background
It has been widely documented that young people from UK coastal regions attain poorer educational outcomes than those from non-coastal regions. The focus of the core educational curriculum in recent decades to feed an increasingly narrow definition of economic productivity has led to the exclusion of creative and haptic subjects that previously contributed to the development of socially well-adjusted and empowered human beings. The result has been an increasing sense of disenfranchisement and a loss of personal agency, particularly amongst young people whose learning styles and/or neurological profile do not lend themselves to today’s academic expectations. Meanwhile, the socio-cultural association of attainment with office-based labour in an increasingly digital economy has resulted in a separation of work from tangible productivity and a disconnect with the material world. It is no surprise that we are witnessing a mental health crisis amongst today’s young people, with poor mental health and neurodiversity barriers the most cited factor in funding applications received by Heritage Crafts, the national charity set up to support and safeguard traditional craft skills.
Meanwhile, many traditional craft skills in the UK are on the brink of extinction in the UK, with the Heritage Crafts Red List of Endangered Crafts (fourth edition, 2023) listing 62 crafts as ‘critically endangered’. Crafts classified as ‘critically endangered’ are those at serious risk of no longer being practised in the UK. They may include crafts with a shrinking base of craftspeople, crafts with limited training opportunities, crafts with low financial viability, or crafts where there is no mechanism to pass on the skills and knowledge. A disproportionally large number of the endangered crafts are endemic to the South West, including withy pot making, Cornish hedging, basketwork furniture making and commercial handmade paper making.
Many older people assume that young people are so caught up in the digital world that they have no interest in craft careers. After 18 months focusing on the topic as a result of funding from the Dulverton Trust as part of its #iwill funding stream, Heritage Crafts has found this assumption to be entirely untrue, resulting largely from an inter-generational breakdown in communication. Whenever asked, young people have generally expressed high levels of enthusiasm for heritage crafts careers, bordering on a longing underpinned by a deep sense of disenfranchisement and dissatisfaction at the options provided to them through the mainstream education system. Often any perceived reticence has been as a result of a lack of awareness of the craft career options available to them and a lack of confidence fed by the scarcity of opportunity to develop haptic skills.
So what is the barrier between a social need for more fulfilling livelihoods, a cultural need to safeguard heritage crafts skills and an economic need for a more diverse skills economy on the one hand, and a generation of young people hungry to opt out of the narrow educational paradigm laid out before them on the other hand? Primarily it is a structural issue around funding, with 96% of the circa 210,000 heritage crafts workers in England working as sole traders or in microbusinesses employing ten or fewer employees (Mapping Heritage Crafts, Department of Business, Innovation and Skills, 2012). These businesses are often serving marginally profitable (but nevertheless profitable) markets, and cannot afford to take months or years out of their productive work to train someone, for fear of the huge impact on their bottom line and that their customers will not wait for them to return to full productivity, something that could take two or three years in many cases. Of the 259 crafts that Heritage Crafts monitors only 26% have apprenticeship standards that would allow trainers to access government funds to assist with training. In reality far fewer of these standards are currently being developed due to the fact that each requires a classroom based training provider, and the cohort sizes are not big enough for FE colleges and specialist institutions to consider them viable in the competitive market in which they themselves are increasingly operating. Heritage Crafts is working with the Institute of Apprentices and Technical Education which has acknowledged the structural problems of this one-size fits all model of apprenticeship training.
Heritage Crafts has developed a model (‘Pre-Apprenticeship’) for taking the risk out of first-time encounters between craftspeople wishing to pass on their skills and young people wishing to enter this sector, often having been let down by mainstream education. From the craftsperson’s perspective the risk is financial, and so they are compensated for the time spent away from production over a six-week period. For the young person the risk is often psychological, in crossing the threshold into a very alien environment the education system has not prepared them for. The administrative burden of logistics, safeguarding and insurance are all taken care of, allowing the craftsperson and their young trainees to focus on the time spent together. Heritage Crafts has trialled this approach in West Somerset (2017) and West Cornwall (2023) with great success, the first pilot resulting in the continuation of Zoe Collis at Two Rivers Paper, with follow-on apprenticeship funding secured and completed, and Zoe becoming a key figure in the continuation of this critically endangered craft. The project in West Cornwall finished in June 2023 and has already resulted in the raising of the status of Cornish hedging as an endangered craft, leading to the award £235,000 over the next two years from the Farming in Protected Landscapes Fund to fund a new Cornwall Rural Education and Skills Trust.
Heritage Crafts wishes to run a version of the Pre-Apprenticeship project in Devon, including withy crab and lobster pot making, a critically endangered craft which is currently undergoing new scrutiny as the subject of a research study at Bangor University concerning sustainable fishing methods that could lead to a sharp upsurge in the demand for withy pot making skills.
Such a project could contribute to a number of cross-cutting priorities including sustainability, economic development and nurturing local economies, educational achievement and mental wellbeing.

Economic resilience and coastal economies

Background
Coastal communities are vulnerable to a myriad of threats, risks and challenges posed by the impacts of climate change and unsustainable levels of resource exploitation associated with population and economic growth, a lack of economic diversification, and patterns of deprivation and poor socio-cultural, economic and environmental outcomes; (ii) it is essential to equip these spaces with the mechanisms and solutions that enable adaptation to change, protection of lives and livelihoods, infrastructure, natural habitats and cultural heritage, preservation of biodiversity, ecosystem services and the overall health of the marine environment, and the maintenance of community cohesion, wellbeing and social sustainability; (iii) it is imperative to enable interventions to be targeted at areas and individuals most in need, reinforcing the UK's commitment to international agreements and frameworks relating to sustainable development (reducing poverty and health inequalities), climate action and marine conservation; and (iv) due to the need to preserve and take advantage of the growing evidence of health and wellbeing benefits accrued from ecosystem services.
We need a resilient coast characterised by healthy environments, sustainable economies, and inclusive and thriving communities. There is general agreement among academics and policymakers about the key components comprising resilient communities (social cohesion and community engagement, economic diversity and stability, access to essential services, provision of infrastructure, environmental sustainability, effective governance, reducing social and economic inequalities, education and knowledge exchange and past experiences), and emerging evidence of the health and wellbeing benefits accrued from coastal and marine ecosystem services. Addressing these vulnerabilities and building resilience amongst our coastal communities and seas presents many challenges not least because little is known about exactly how resilient they are, how their resilience is influenced by interactions between communities and land-sea intersections, and how resilience may be achieved. 
This is perhaps because our knowledge of the complex ways in which factors impacting resilience are inter-linked (raising questions about the most appropriate ‘entry points’ for intervention) is limited as is the evidence base on ‘what works’ in addressing the challenges coastal communities face. Such a knowledge gap is highly significant since it is reasonable to suggest that there are potentially causal (but modifiable) relationships between key phenomena (such as local and regional industrial, economic, housing, and demographic structures, transport links and geographical isolation, access to employment, educational and cultural opportunities, and age-specific patterns of seasonal and permanent migration) and outcomes relating to economic, social, cultural and health well-being. Added to these are the direct and indirect effects on the same outcomes of the state of the coastal marine environment and its accessibility and use for development of the innovative blue economy, achievement of net zero and biodiversity gain.
Most recently, the blue economy (the sustainable use of ocean resources for economic growth, improved livelihoods, and jobs while preserving the health of ocean ecosystem) has been widely posited as a practical solution to building and strengthening the resilience of coastal communities and its marine environment. In targeting resilience, blue economies must pay due cognisance to the triple bottom line of sustainable development, targeting balanced outcomes across socio-cultural, economic, and ecological domains. But how can a sustainable blue economy be developed so that it maximises the economic opportunities and benefits, particularly for deprived coastal communities where arguable economic growth is most needed, while minimising the risk and threats for, and as a result of, its development and climate change? 

Small to Medium Sized Enterprises and coastal communities
Background
Coastal areas often have unique characteristics and resources that are attractive to Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs) across various industries. These include tourism (e.g. hotels, restaurants, souvenir shops), fisheries (e.g. fish processing, packing and distribution activities, equipment and services for fishing vessels), maritime transportation (e.g. shipping and logistic companies, services for cargo transportation, customs clearance, warehousing and distribution), and renewable energy (e.g. installation, maintenance and operation of renewable energy systems, including wind farms, solar panels and tidal turbines). 
SMEs play a crucial role in the economies of many coastal communities. They generate and provide sources of employment. They also promote economic diversification of the local economy by introducing new industries and sectors. Coastal communities often rely on traditional industries such as fishing and agriculture, but SMEs can bring in new ventures such as tourism-related services, water sports, eco-friendly business and renewable energy projects. This diversification reduces dependence on a single industry and strengthens the resilience of the local economy. In addition, SMEs are important sources of income and/or revenue generation by providing employment and business opportunities which circulates within the local economy, leading to increased consumption, tax revenues and local government income. This in turn can be reinvested in infrastructure development, public services and community welfare. SMEs also encourage entrepreneurship and innovation in coastal communities. They provide a platform for new entrepreneurial ventures which can lead to the development of innovative products, services and business models, fostering economic growth and attracting investment to the area.
Additionally, SMEs can create a ripple effect in the local economy by establishing strong supply chains. For example, SMEs in the fishing industry can lead to the growth of fish processing plants, packaging companies, transportation services and equipment suppliers. This creates a network of interdependent businesses, or business cluster, which supports each other, generates economic activity and creates employment opportunities all along the supply chain. They can also drive growth and development, by boosting local spending and simulating the growth of ancillary businesses. Moreover, they have a close connection to the local community and contribute to its overall development by engaging in social responsibility initiatives such as supporting local schools, cultural events and social welfare programs. This strengthens the community fabric, enhances social cohesion and improves the quality of life for residents. However, SMEs in coastal communities also face specific challenges. They are vulnerable to natural disasters: coastal communities are more susceptible the impacts of extreme weather. Many SMEs are heavily dependent on tourism, which often experiences seasonal fluctuations. They also might face difficulties accessing financial resources, technology and skilled labour. 
Given the importance of SMEs to coastal communities and the challenges they face, this ‘starter for 10’ considers how their economic resilience can be strengthened in light of climate change and seasonality? How economic growth can be fostered but in ways that do not negatively impact on coastal and marine ecosystems? How issues relating to access to finance and resources can be resolved? And how more entrepreneurial activity within our coastal communities can be encouraged.  

Coastal Communities – second homes
What can a critical heritage studies approach contribute to our understanding of the socio-cultural impacts of second homes in the South-West Peninsula?
Second home ownership is a key issue for housing affordability in the South-West. For example, one in eleven houses in the South Hams is a second home. Second homes can have a devastating effect on local communities, in some cases, threatening the ongoing viability of whole villages. Displacement of local residents, gentrification, land-use planning, and mismatches in public funding are impacts that researchers have previously attributed to second homes. On the other hand, a lot of employment within our area – construction and property maintenance, retail and leisure, accommodation and food – is in industries greatly supported by second home ownership and tourism.
Some local councils are voting to impose large (e.g.100%) council tax rises on second homes, which some argue is an attack on second homeowners. The public debate over second homes is frequently presented in polarising terms, which reduces the inherent complexities to a false binary, or economics alone. More focused questions need to be asked about how second homes affect how natural and cultural heritage is valued; shape how people relate to the sea and sea-related practices (e.g. fishing, sailing, spending time at the beach etc.); and impact areas in terms of heritage sustainability, local identity, community, traditional customs, and cultural practices.
More qualitative, participatory research methods would be required to address these questions, including the collection of commentaries to explore how and what people value about the natural and cultural heritage of their area and how they engage with the local environment. For second homeowners themselves, many own homes that have been passed down through successive generations, leading to ‘outsiders’ feeling deep connection to an area through decades of family holidays. Against this, some locals have been priced out of living in towns and villages in which their families have lived for centuries. How do these connected realities impact cultural heritage, particularly understanding of the maritime environment?

Strengthening and connecting communities

Levelling up education and social mobility on the coast
Background
English coastal areas are characterised by poor educational outcomes, particularly for disadvantaged pupils who achieve about three grades lower at GCSE than disadvantaged children living in non-coastal locations. This has important consequences for coastal children’s future life trajectories, including their risks of poor health. Because education predicts employment, income and access to material resources as well as psychosocial well-being (and related stress-induced immune changes) and health behaviours, it is arguably the single most important modifiable social determinant of health inequality. The Chief Medical Officer’s 2021 annual report highlighted significantly higher levels of hospital admissions for self-harm, alcohol and substance use among children and young people living on the coast. Thus, the educational underachievement of coastal children should be concern to those charged with those responsible for well-being today and for economic growth, social mobility and health inequalities in the future.
The causes of lower educational attainment in coastal areas are complex. As elsewhere, factors such as financial and familial instability and a lack of educational capital in households play an important role. Many coastal communities have significantly higher than average proportions of working age adults with low or no qualifications. Families’ knowledge and information about the school system, their social networks, whether children come to school with a family history of educational success and recognition or with a sense that education is not something they and their families are good at can play an important role in shaping their attitudes towards their education.
Children in economically marginal coastal areas, often distant from large urban centres, also face a distinctively adverse socio-psychological environment associated with a limited range of employment opportunities. In contrast to the many visible opportunities in London, children in coastal areas are often unable to see or experience opportunities beyond the low-paid hospitality and care sectors. Indeed, the full spectrum of work opportunities may be a rather abstract concept. Low work expectations and poor social mobility can contribute to low levels of aspiration. “Nothing-to-lose” attitudes can in turn influence harmful behaviours in adolescence.
It is generally agreed that we need to stop working in silos, combining resources across health, education, local government, the VCSE and the private sectors to develop imaginative ways of addressing these complex issues. The Lancet Commission on Adolescence recommends community interventions involving local government, families, voluntary organisations and schools, that seek to promote life skills and positive attitudes including self-confidence and empowerment, social and emotional skills and good problem solving, and that adopt a multi-component strategy. 
National government has a role to play in supporting such an approach, by listening to coalitions who are advocating solutions for levelling up education on the coast. National and international corporations could also play a role by providing specialist online outreach and work experience (perhaps virtually) in sectors that are not typically found in coastal areas (e.g. commercial law, digital technology, investment banking). As a recent mapping exercise of mentoring organisations in England found that 36% undertook their work in London with all other regions poorly represented, commercial and charitable organisations could be usefully made aware of the fact that childhood deprivation and poor educational performance is not confined to the capital.
There are many projects that we could pursue under this theme. For example, do we understand enough about aspiration? Some of our stakeholders are concerned about a top-down approach to deciding what aspirations should be and linking them into existing structures, functions and job opportunities. Should we be having more creative discussions about young people’s interests and concerns and what they want to do themselves?
Another idea is to link schools into geographically focused hubs for school-to-school support, to reduce the negative effects of educational isolation, create formal connections for staff development, share of resources (including teachers) and provide opportunities to work together to submit applications for innovative external funding. See, for example, this report on educational isolation produced by one of our partners, Professor Tanya Ovendon-Hope.

Improving the mental health of children and young people on the coast
Background
The Chief Medical Officer’s 2021 annual report highlighted significantly higher levels of hospital admissions for self-harm, alcohol and substance use among children and young people (CYP) living on the coast and, locally there are concerns about high suicide rates. Some of the solutions to this worrying trend lie in addressing the wider determinants of health such as educational attainment and economic opportunities (see our ‘starter for ten’ paper on Levelling up Education and Social Mobility on the Coast). However, we also need to provide effective, joined up services for CYP experiencing mental health crises.
There are concerns that Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) operate at a high threshold for referral – prior to the backlogs exacerbated by Covid19, only 25% of CYP referred to specialist CAMHS in the UK were seen. CYP are now subject to waiting times that commonly exceed one year. There are also concerns that the COVID-19 pandemic has itself exacerbated need as CYP have been disproportionately affected by school and university closures, with disrupted routines and social connection, leading to anxiety and uncertainty fuelled by isolation and loneliness. Moreover, CYP might have experienced increased family stress and domestic abuse during the long periods of at home stay, leading to mental health problems.
There are several organisations that might respond to CYP at times of mental health crisis, including children’s mental health services, hospital EDs, pastoral or counselling staff in schools, the police and voluntary organisations through in-person, telephone-based or internet counselling. These include designated clinical services (such as CAMHS teams). However, funding and service provision decisions made in one part of the health system can have unintended consequences for other parts and it is generally agreed that we need to stop working in silos, understand how different systems interact and identify ways of combining resources to develop agile, effective and more cost-effective ways of both providing support earlier and addressing unmet needs.

Marine Citizenship and the Social and Economic Benefits of Coastal Heritage
The South West’s rich coastal heritage – the combination of natural and human heritage, marine and maritime – can be harnessed to benefit the communities that continue to live in or have family links with our historic coastal towns, villages and historic sites: our special places next to and under the sea. Today our coastal communities face a range of factors that are leading to growing social and economic challenges. These challenges are compounded by a growing disconnection between communities and their history of living with the sea. This disconnect increasingly denies coastal communities the social, economic and cultural benefits previously gained from living and working close to, in and on the sea: a strong sense of place, a coastal-community identity connected to their tangible and intangible heritage. By connecting people to their natural and human heritage they can begin to reclaim the benefits of living with the sea, their marine citizenship. 
Understanding, evidencing and quantifying the South West’s coastal heritage as an agent of positive change for our coastal communities will benefit our coastal communities and contribute to – and benefit from – emerging agendas in heritage research and policy. The Honor Frost Foundation’s 2015 report, Social and Economic Benefits of Coastal Marine and Maritime Heritage, highlighted that while the benefits of ‘in-land’ heritage have been studied for some time and are well-evidenced, “there seem to have been very few attempts to pin down the social and economic value of marine and maritime cultural heritage itself, either ‘in principle’ or quantitatively.” The report further argues, “the economic and social benefits of marine and maritime heritage encompass people on land who may be barely aware that the character of a place in which they have chosen to live, work or shop is attributable to marine or maritime cultural heritage. Conceived of in these terms, the economic and social benefits arising from the continued presence of the past relating to the sea may be pervasive.” In terms of policy, Historic England’s 2016 report, Social and Economic Value of the Marine Historic Environment, Historic England (2017), also set out a specific policy agenda and toolkit for using marine and maritime heritage to overcome barriers and bring social and economic benefits to coastal communities. This specific agenda for coastal heritage fits within Historic England’s overarching policy for health and wellbeing as outlined in A Strategy for Wellbeing and Heritage 2022 – 25 (2022) which sets out policy goals and pathways to harness heritage as a tool to tackle health and wellbeing issues more broadly. 
Historic England stresses the need for a ‘coherent offer’, coastal heritage must align human history and the historic environment with natural history and the natural environment, marine and heritage conservation. Cultural recovery through coastal heritage needs to take this approach through an integrated idea of marine citizenship. Through new transdisciplinary projects, coastal research at the University of Plymouth is moving in this direction encompassing both natural and cultural heritage, from research on the psychological benefits of the coastal environment to a Historic England-funded pilot study on the use of historic maritime structures as marine habitats. The University of Plymouth is also closely involved with the development and delivery of the Plymouth Sound National Marine Park which is founded upon the idea of ‘marine citizenship’ and the desire to achieve social and economic change through a joined-up approach to natural and cultural heritage. Spreading this learning to other coastal communities in our region could be a focus of the SW Coastal LPIP Phase 2 bid. If you have specific project ideas under this theme, please let us know.

Making the coast accessible and beneficial to all
Background
The coast and marine environment provide a number of different cultural ecosystem services to people, from recreational activities, to providing spiritual meaning. Numerous studies have shown the health and wellbeing benefits people can experience by spending time on the coast, especially compared to other environments. However, who uses and has access to this environment and these opportunities is not representative to the UK population.
Studies show that engaging with the coast is prominent with certain demographics (e.g. middle aged white residents). Thus, much of the research to-date has focused on a sub-sample of the UK population and has arguably not been inclusive. Whereas there are certain groups or even post code areas who have never seen the sea regardless of being within 10 miles of it and living in the most coastal region of the UK. More needs to be done to understand who uses the coast and how, what are the facilitating and inhibiting factors, and how to make this natural resource accessible to all groups of people.
As well as understanding who uses the coast and why (and in contrast, what are the barriers other groups face), these benefits are not always inclusively accessible to everyone who would like to use the coast over the life span. Reports show the popular trend of retirees moving to coastal towns. Whilst this may lead to some short-term benefits of experiencing the coast, it can come with disadvantages as well (e.g. when their mobility deteriorates, and/or they lose their spouse and/or social network). Thus, more work can be done to ensure the mental and physical health benefits of engaging with our coastal and marine environment are optimised for all people in all life stages in all circumstances.

Addressing disadvantage in the Early Years
The evidence base clearly identifies that events that occur in early life (indeed in fetal life) affect health and wellbeing in later life. Whether this is through changes in genetic expression, how the brain is formed or emotional development, we increasingly understand that what happens in these years lays down the building blocks for the future. This is particularly the case at times of rapid brain growth in the early years (i.e., from birth to 2 years) and adolescence.
There are lifelong consequences for children whose early years are characterised by adversity (exposure to adverse childhood experiences or ACEs). We know that children growing up with maltreatment, witnessing domestic violence or coping with parental substance abuse suffer harmful effects on their developing neurological (brain structure, neuroendocrine stress regulation) and physiological (immune functioning and metabolic health) systems that can embed vulnerability to poor health and well-being. Consistent with such effects, ACEs have been associated with delayed child development (e.g. cognitive and language skills), childhood health and behavioural conditions, the adoption of health risk behaviours (e.g. substance use), mental illness (e.g. depression), and early development of chronic health conditions (e.g. cancer).
While the risks posed by ACEs to poor health across the life course are well known, estimates of the financial burden they impose are only just starting to emerge. One recent study combined data from five cross-sectional ACE studies conducted across various geographies in England and Wales between 2012 and 2017 to develop national population attributable fractions (PAFs) for ACEs across an extended range of outcomes. This finds that violence, mental illness and drug use have the highest PAFs due to ACEs, while mental illness, cancer and smoking carry the highest ACE-attributable costs. Across all outcomes studied, the total estimated annual ACE-attributable cost across England and Wales is £42.8 billion. Most of these costs relate to multiple ACE categories. It is important to note that, while this study captures common health-harming behaviours and long-term health conditions that are associated with ACEs, it does not estimate the costs to economic productivity and the educational, social and criminal justice systems.
Effective early intervention is required to break the pathways by which early childhood disadvantage leads to lifelong disadvantage. However, it is difficult to reliably measure how effective existing individual early intervention programmes have been, in part because evidence of benefits accrues over the long-term, in part because support services for families would appear to have retrenched under austerity. There are also concerns that models (e.g. children’s centres such as Sure Start) may not attain economies of scale in coastal areas that have a 180-degree (at best) catchment area and serve populations that are geographically dispersed.
Do more locally relevant solutions exist? Cornwall’s network of community hubs, which provide a wide range of support services across many VCSE organisations provides one potential solution to creating a flexible approach to the provision of shared spaces. There is also interest in developing social capital through the training and deployment of community workers (e.g. community mothers, fathers, grandparents) to support young families facing difficulties. Is this issue of interest to SWC LPIP partners? If so, what can the partnership do to support the gathering of evidence of ‘what works’ and co-design potential solutions?

Ageing in our coastal communities
Background
Many coastal areas in the UK and Southwest England, such as Bournemouth, Eastbourne and Blackpool have historically been popular retirement destinations, attractive due to the prospect of seaside living, ambient climate, and the availability of a wide range of amenities. While such features have positive effects on physical and mental health, a recent Public Health (2019) study revealed that there is in fact contradictory evidence in terms of a whether living by the coast leads to reduced rates of mortality, and better physical and mental health. The study also identifies several drivers of inequalities in poor coastal health outcomes. Of course, these factors vary by location and context but include:
  • Socio-economic status: socio-economic disparities can lead to inequalities among older people. Coastal areas often have a mix of affluent individuals and those with lower incomes. Older adults from disadvantaged backgrounds may face many challenges in accessing healthcare, affordable housing, and other essential services.
  • Social exclusion and social isolation: despite the advantages of living by the coast, seasonal fluctuations in populations, especially in tourist-dependent areas, can result in limited year-round social opportunities. This isolation can impact the well-being of older residents, particularly if they have limited mobility or lack access to transportation.
  • Access to, and awareness of health and other community services: coastal communities with a significant aging population need adequate information and services to meet the needs of older residents. This includes healthcare facilities, transportation options, affordable housing, and community centres that offer social activities and support networks. Additionally, there are issues in relation to the delivery of services, including workforce challenges facing health and care services, differences in types of treatments and equitable outcomes. 
  • Financial difficulties including fuel poverty and housing issues: many older residents have limited financial resources which have been squeezed due to higher costs of living and energy and increasing rents and/or mortgages. 
  • Economic challenges: the concentration of older residents may strain local resources, such as healthcare services and impact the labour market. Additionally, the seasonal nature of tourism can create economic instability affecting employment opportunities for older adults and their families.  
  • A lack of transport and distance from services: many older residents do not own or lack access to a car, with those living in peripheral coastal locations also having limited public transport choices. Not only does this impact on social isolation but also impairs their ability to access health and care services. 
  • Low levels of physical activity, and mobility or existing poor health: chronic illness, life-long limiting health problems and reduced mobility, make it extremely difficult of older people to engage in physical activity, thereby exacerbating feelings of isolation and loneliness.   
Over-arching these drivers are a set of challenges that are undoubtedly impacting health inequalities among our older population. First, there is the limited assessment of the effectiveness of health and care interventions designed to reduce inequalities and promote healthy ageing in coastal areas, and thus there is little evidence of what works and what does not work. Second, many interventions focus on improving physical and mental health at the expense of neglecting social health, targeting those at risk of social isolation or exclusion as well as developing ways to engage with older men who may be less likely to participate in community activities. Third, lack of government funding is placing many health and care community assets and services under increasing threat, and there is little understanding of the costs-benefits of the removal or reduction of services on health inequalities.
It is within this context that this ‘Starter for 10’ is couched. How can the value of health and care services, particularly those that address social isolation and exclusion (e.g. volunteer and outreach programmes, home visits from health and care professionals, mentoring young people or sitting and befriending services) be better understood in terms of its cost and cost-effectiveness? How can we move toward a system that views older people as a community asset as opposed to a burden? How can technology be used in ways which foster greater resilience amongst our ageing communities? 

Living and working sustainably in a greener economy

Mitigating Climate Change: Co-Production and Place-Making in Coastal Communities
Coastal communities in the South-West face significant future challenges linked to climate change. However, a range of positive responses are also potentially available to them. Currently, 38% of UK waters are in Marine Protected Areas, covering the majority of saltmarsh and seagrass habitats. Many of England’s Marine Conservation Zones are situated in the South-West. The government is moving towards greater protection of marine environments and recognises the need to mitigate the impacts of climate change for coastal communities, such as: coastal erosion, sea level rise, water supplies, invasive species, energy, health, risk to infrastructure and flooding. These developments are within the wider context of the potential to grow the ‘blue economy’, with huge potential to benefit coastal communities. However, there is a need to embed projects within communities and recognise the importance of co-production and meaningful place-making to build resilience and achieve sustainable renewal. 
Marine and coastal habitats are important long-term carbon stores which can be damaged by human activity as well as sea-level rise. Conversely, marine habitat creation and restoration can bring socio-economic benefits for communities as well as proving beneficial for climate change mitigation and achieving net zero transition. The restoration and protection of South-West coastal habitats provides learning and wellbeing opportunities as well as enhancing natural carbon absorption from the atmosphere. Early stakeholder and community action and engagement will be key to successful innovation and adaptation in the take-up and expansion of green technologies in coastal areas of the SW, feeding into the development of the blue economy.
Fostering a sense of community and belonging, especially in many places that already feel left-behind, is key to achieving positive outcomes in the face of the disruptions and challenges brought by climate change. Projects which bring stakeholders, decision-makers and community members together to build pride in place and strengthen social and institutional capital could be an important part of the SW Coastal LPIP Phase 2 bid. If you have specific project ideas under this theme, please let us know.

Unlocking marine innovation
The economic and societal benefits of protecting, restoring and harnessing the potential of the marine natural environment are widely recognised, OECD predict that the ocean economy will double by 2030. As a coastal region, the SWC LPIP’s footprint offers a wide range of opportunities to untap this potential. For example, the once-in-a-generation opportunity of the development of Floating Offshore Wind (FLOW) in the Celtic Sea combined with the significant cluster of marine technology and offshore renewal energy innovation related businesses in the region and the deep university expertise in this area could secure lasting benefits. These include opportunities for local and regional economic growth, e.g. through skills development, job creation or retention (an estimated 19,000 new jobs will be created), increased private investment (including foreign direct investment), cluster development including through knowledge diffusion, supply chain development, small and medium-sized enterprise growth, generation and growth of spinouts, development of research, development and innovation infrastructures.
Partnership working between academia, industry, Local Economic Partnerships and public sector organisations has already resulted in a number of key projects, including Plymouth and South Devon Freeport. This will apply leading facilities and expertise to support maritime innovation in industry in key areas including Marine Autonomous Systems for advanced ocean data capture, and new Clean Maritime, alternative fuel solutions for vessels. This creates economic wealth and employment opportunities for new, rapidly growing markets including Floating Wind and Aquaculture.
Similarly, Appledore Clean Maritime Innovation Centre (due to open in 2025) will focus on clean maritime solutions for Offshore Support vessels for new Floating Wind applications, and lead on new developments in advanced seaweed aquaculture developments (Seaweed growth to capture CO2 being predicted to be an £8bn market in Europe by 2030). This centre will focus on stimulating new start-up companies for rapidly growing ocean markets and aims to reverse economic deprivation in the area. This development will also be complemented by the University of Plymouth’s engagement in the development of Aquaculture Enterprise Zones with The Crown Estate.
Such developments introduce the possibility of the SWC LPIP becoming a global centre of excellence for the testing, development and manufacturing of marine technology. This is an area in which we enjoy significant academic expertise. What opportunities might exist to further spread marine innovation across our area? What research would partners like the LPIP to prioritise to take these opportunities forward?

Sustainable food systems and communities
Growing awareness about climate change has placed the spotlight on the need for resilient agriculture and fishery practices that increase productivity and production, help maintain ecosystems, strengthen capacity for adaptation to climate change, and protect and progressively improve land, soil and water quality. However, sustainable food systems go beyond the production of food to improving its processing, distribution, consumption and reduction of waste. Thus, supporting a sustainable food system necessitates alignment and active cooperation among multiple value chain actors, including farmers and agribusinesses, the fishing industry, academia, policy makers and a range of public, private, VCSE and community organisations.
There is a vast array of projects that could contribute to greening the food value chain, many of which are already being trialled in the SWC LPIP footprint. For example, the £5m NERC-funded South West Partnership for Environment and Economic Prosperity (SWEEP) which officially concluded in January 2023 carried out research with over 300 partners, ranging from local authorities to businesses, charities and social enterprises to help them make investments and better manage or utilise the natural environment. Achievements included tackling pollinator decline through robust business cases; enabling more sustainable landscape management through the use of remote-sensing tools; and evidencing the importance of natural spaces for health and wellbeing. The €2.5million ReCon Soil project (supported by €1.8million from the European Regional Development Fund) has been exploring how sustainable soils can be reconstructed from locally-sourced construction waste, dredged sediments and agricultural by-products. Another local initiative is the ELMS-Exchange, a programme designed to kick-start collaborative, cross-sector research and innovation initiatives, specifically designed to help farmers and Defra evaluate how SFI will deliver for the environment, farm productivity and food security.
We have similarly hosted a range of projects on the sustainable marine environment, from SWEEP’s work on transforming the way the marine environment is valued and managed; and supporting the sustainable expansion of aquaculture in the South West to identifying juvenile fish habitats; stemming the invasion of ecologically harmful venomous fish; applying autonomous underwater vehicles to challenges in marine habitat mapping and predictive species distribution modelling; reducing marine litter, light pollution and underwater noise; and classifying sites to inform sustainable lives and livelihoods for fisheries.
As noted, the complexity of food systems requires a more holistic approach that goes beyond technical fixes to food production. Globally, it is estimated that transport accounts for 19% of total food system emissions. What role can e.g. large private and public sector organisations such as hospitals and academies play in purchasing local food for their staff, customers or service users to reduce food miles? How can consumers be encouraged to support local agricultural and fishing industries? How can we reduce food waste, which not only means a waste of the water and energy that go into producing and distributing food; wasted food in landfill sites is in itself a large producer of greenhouse gases. How can we ensure a more resilient supply of food to people who may be struggling in a cost-of-living crisis?
Again, there is a wealth of relevant research in this area. For example, the Food Systems Equality (FoodSEqual) Project (UKRI SPF) of which Plymouth is leading a £650K work package is exploring ‘co-production of heathy and sustainable food systems for disadvantaged communities’ putting community at the centre of the work to support innovation of supply chain, product and policy, ensuring that citizen voices are central to decision making. To date, fish and vegetables have been the food commodities chosen by communities to innovate in the next phase of the research.
Within such a potentially large breadth of potential projects, it will be important that stakeholders co-design a relevant focus, should sustainable food systems be identified as one of the research priorities we want to include in the Stage 2 LPIP bid.

Aquaculture
Aquaculture as a sustainable blue economy to benefit coastal communities
Aquaculture is essential to meet the growing global demand for sustainable food sources, including seaweed, bivalves, and crustaceans. The aquaculture sector has experienced rapid growth, with the global seaweed market projected to reach £19.8 billion by 2030 and the European bivalve market forecast to grow at a CAGR of 5.5% through 2030. 
Seaweed and bivalve aquaculture in the UK is currently small scale with numerous practical and policy constraints. With increasing demand in the Southwest (and across the UK) for ‘space’ for aquaculture there is a need for policy innovation that promotes socially just, sustainable and environmentally responsible aquaculture practices. 
Areas in the SW are being proposed for aquaculture enterprise and this provides an opportunity to test and scale up best practice for aquaculture enterprise via LPIP investment in a community researcher. Research is needed with the relevant Local Planning Authorities and stakeholders to 1) set a ‘gold standard’ for environmental sustainability, so aquaculture enterprise can contribute to fighting both the biodiversity and the climate crisis; 2) set operational standards for sustainability across the full value chain; 3) guide and evaluate how aquaculture enterprise can influence social mobility in coastal communities though education and training; economic diversification; and investment in infrastructure.

Cornwall Coastal Partnership (CCP-LPIP)
Stakeholders in Cornwall have been exploring the potential for a ‘Coastal Partnership’ for Cornwall which will provide place based, community supported coordination between the multitude of sectors (civic, public, private), strategies and plans across that intersect at the coast. Nature is at the heart of Cornwall’s economy and a business plan for a Cornwall Coastal Partnership is being established to mainstream plans for nature recovery across the region. Central to the proposal for the Cornwall Coastal Partnership are stakeholder engagement, data sharing, natural capital approaches and place-based interventions with ‘nested’ plans for complex areas. Building on the University of Plymouth expertise in natural capital approaches an LPIP community researcher will be embedded with the Cornwall Coastal Partnership to:
1) deliver natural capital research that integrates the foundational role of nature in Cornwall’s economy into evolving plans for nature recovery
2) critically evaluate equity and benefit sharing from natural resource use 
3) develop and test a framework that can be more broadly applied for integrating equity and benefit sharing into decision support tools for nature recovery.