Enterprising the coastline

Unpacking patterns of enterprise in coastal towns

While there are a number of ongoing debates about the barriers and challenges faced by coastal towns in supporting enterprise and entrepreneurship, there are no specific overviews within the academic literature of enterprise development in coastal towns.

There are a number of policy statements, strategic overviews and action plans from local authorities and regional development agencies which provide a descriptive overview of the state of business and enterprise in the area, and sometimes its role in tackling the challenges and opportunities faced by coastal towns.

This gap in understanding and the issues with publicly available data are important for practitioners, such as the audience for this Handbook, in developing a picture of the challenges faced by smaller enterprises and the responses required to support the development of enterprise. Without access to such evidence, there is a danger that programmes are supply-led rather than demand-led.³ In part, this accounts for the similarity in approaches among the 20 LEGI areas.⁴

This diversity reflects the interplay between a set of complex local conditions and dynamics that can result in pockets of deprivation within relatively buoyant economies. These will include:

lack of an enterprise culture in a community;

historical reliance on a legacy of an employee culture and large business dependency;

a low number of enterprising role models;

low levels of mobility;

limited networking between businesses;

restricted local business markets.

Certain bundles of these conditions and factors will be present in the less well performing coastal towns. While certain commentators have challenged whether such issues are specific to coastal towns, it is the interplay of these types of factor that may account for the patterns of enterprise observed.

On closer inspection of VAT registrations data between and within regions and coastal towns, a number of specific themes emerge from changes in the business stock. First, there are differences in performance of the coastal towns within the regions.

Second, at a regional level, there is evidence of a north–south divide in changes to the business stock. Despite evidence of the gap in entrepreneurial activity closing, VAT registration data for 2003 to 2008 shows that coastal towns in the southern regions did perform slightly better than coastal towns in northern regions.

Third, there is a group of coastal towns that are performing relatively well. Within this group, rates of net change in the business stock are higher than the overall group of coastal towns and national averages. A number of these were identified by Fothergill in 2009 as towns with the strongest local economies, including Whitley Bay, Bournemouth, Brighton and Whitstable/Herne Bay.⁵ There are a number of characteristics of these towns that support enterprising activity, such as: proximity to a major town or large centre of population; good transport and communication links to these towns and population centres; access to business opportunities and markets; and an awareness of trends in the wider external environment. These are frequently identified as important elements in the development of an enterprising culture.⁶

In comparison, there is a group of coastal towns with net changes in the business stock that are somewhat lower than both the coastal group and national averages. This group includes Clacton, Great Yarmouth, Torbay and Whitby. Again, a number of these were identified by Fothergill and the Local Futures group as towns with the weakest local economies. These areas face a number of structural barriers to encouraging enterprise and entrepreneurial activity, not least reflecting their geographical peripherality and isolation. Poor connectivity and/or a lack of investment in transport and communication infrastructure hinder access to employment opportunities and other business services in towns and cities in the surrounding region. This position is summarised by Shared Intelligence, who note that:⁷

[there is] a set of shared economic, physical and demographic problems in struggling seaside towns which prevent them growing economically and create concentrations of need which local services are struggling to manage.

Such challenges provide a barrier to attracting individuals and business investment, stifling the introduction of news ideas and opportunities into the economy and the development of networks to exploit these opportunities.

There is also a need for creativity and innovation from support organisations in addressing these challenges, as traditional forms of business support – such as advice and guidance, grants and loans, and incubation facilities – have generally failed in developing enterprise in such areas.⁸

If a more creative or innovative approach is adopted, a number of these issues can be tackled. In Scarborough, for instance, investment has been targeted at addressing issues related to transport links, enhancing communication links and connectivity (e.g. providing good wireless coverage across the town), developing incubation facilities, supporting the development of businesses in the creative and cultural sector, and public realm improvements at the harbour to attract business investment. According to the Scarborough Renaissance Partnership, this focus on enterprising the economy has produced results:⁹

Over the past six years we have effectively changed from a seasonal economy to an all-year-round economy. In 2000, unemployment was 50 per cent higher in the winter months compared to the summer. By 2008, the difference was little more than 10 per cent, a dramatic change and one which is the envy of many other seaside resorts.

Over the last five years, ‘rural’ coastal towns have under-performed in comparison with more urban coastal towns. This reinforces wider trends in the performance of urban and rural areas in rates of business formation and change, as measured by VAT registrations and deregistrations.

Again, available evidence on this geography of enterprise highlights the importance of access to transport and communication links, connectivity and openness to business networks as key factors in accounting for some of the difference between urban and rural areas.¹⁰ Indeed, the group of traditional seaside ‘resorts’ have not performed better as a group than other types of coastal town. For example, the net change in the business stock in Brighton and Bournemouth (14 per cent) was double net change in Blackpool and Great Yarmouth. This difference is reflected in the recent allocation of LEGI and Working Neighbourhood Fund (WNF) monies to areas such as Blackpool, Great Yarmouth and North East Lincolnshire.

The narrative or ‘script’ within the funding applications submitted by these towns attached a primary role for enterprise development and entrepreneurship in assisting individuals and communities within the most deprived super-output areas in moving out of unemployment and worklessness into more positive outcomes and tackling the key issues related to regenerating the town. The nature of these challenges and opportunities is explored next.