Carnegie UK (CUK) and National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) INVOLVE held a meeting on the co-production of research, how we work together on equal terms. We brought together public contributors and individuals from organisations focused on research. We wanted to discuss how co-production could work in research, how it could be seen as business as usual, and to think through the barriers that stop us from working together, as well as the things that can help us move forward. While we agreed that the idea of working together is important, we recognised there are still many challenges to co-production being seen as a normal activity in research and the development of a ‘business case’ to persuade others is still needed. We also considered the wider civic roles that Universities are adopting as important in helping co-production become normal practice. Discussion focused on issues such as power and how it works in research. We recognised that we also need to create the right conditions for co-production, changing research culture so it becomes kinder, with a focus on the development of relationships. We also recognised the need for enough time for honest, high quality conversations between patients, public contributors and researchers that take account of how power works in research. Co-production was seen as a societal ‘good,’ helping us live well by undertaking research together that benefits the health of the public. We also identified a range of ways we could move co-production forward, recognising we are on a journey and that current societal changes brought about by Covid-19 may result in us being more radical in how we rethink the ways we want to work in research.

In this concluding section, Wallace brings together the evidence and analysis to argue that the devolved legislatures are engaged in a complex process of policy diffusion and policy learning, among themselves and as part of the global movements on wellbeing and sustainable development. She argues that wellbeing frameworks are an example of the non-rational, non-linear nature of policy development. That these initiatives developed during the first phase of devolution for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is not a coincidence, they are best understood as a mechanism for codifying what the governments stand for (their values) and their role in relation to the UK state. With economic wellbeing largely remaining within the competency of the UK government, the devolved legislatures have chosen to implement frameworks that highlight areas that they have direct powers over. In communicating their values to the people, these new governments are also communicating their value to the people.

Wallace provides an overview of the responsibilities of the devolved legislatures of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and how these have developed over the past 20 years. Key facts on each jurisdiction are set out as are the trends in wellbeing. Wellbeing in each devolved jurisdiction is compared to the rest of the UK and the OECD regions to provide insight into the issues facing each jurisdiction. Wallace concludes with a discussion of mechanisms for assessing policy impact, noting in particular the importance of viewing governments impact on wellbeing as contribution not attribution.

Northern Ireland introduced its wellbeing framework through the draft Programme for Government in 2016. The approach aimed to create a shared vision for a post-conflict society and assist the power-sharing Executive in working together for shared outcomes. Continuing political instability, and the suspension of the Northern Ireland Executive, has limited the implementation of the approach. Despite this, progress has been made in communicating the approach of aligning programme, population and societal outcomes. The wellbeing duty on local government, established in 2014, has been vital in taking forward the approach through Community Plans and all evidence points to a continuation of the wellbeing approach in the revised Programme for Government once the Executive is re-established.

Scotland was the first of the three devolved legislatures to embark on a wellbeing framework. The framework applies to all government departments and public bodies and aligns their activities by seeking improvements in 11 National Outcomes. With over 10 years of experience, it tells a strong story of how a focus on wellbeing can reorientate government by creating a shared language for public services and a sense of unity of purpose. The process also reframed the relationship between the Scottish Government and local government, with differing views on the success of this process. There are clear policy outcomes in relation to early intervention and joined-up working, however question marks remain over the extent to which the Scottish Government has reframed its role, particularly in the relationship between citizens and the state where participatory measures remain in their infancy.

This chapter explores the key components and characteristics of the wellbeing approaches taken by Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Despite different origins, there are remarkable similarities between the approaches taken by the devolved legislatures. Each framework blends objective and subjective data and all three prioritise quality of life indicators over environmental and economic indicators. Wallace goes on to argue that the impact of wellbeing frameworks on approaches to government can be seen as setting wellbeing as an overarching goal for government, wellbeing as a conversation to discuss social progress, wellbeing as a framework for public services and wellbeing as an approach to delivering public services.

Wales is at the global forefront on legislation on sustainable development, with the origins of this dating back to the original legislation on devolution in 1998. The most recent legislation, the Well-being of Future Generations Act 2015 clearly links duties on sustainable development to public sector reform and concepts of prevention, collaboration, integration, involvement and long-term thinking. The Act places equal weight on all aspects of wellbeing, directly challenging the economic dominance in policy-making. In implementation, a strong culture of performance management for public services has arisen which some commentators argue detracts from its original aim of sustainable development. Early indicators of impact can be seen, particularly in relation to the development of thinking and practice on adverse childhood experiences.

ABSTRACT Between 1996–1998, England, Scotland and Sweden moved responsibility for all early childhood education and care (ECEC) and school-age childcare (SACC) services from welfare into education. Following an earlier study researching these reforms up to 2003, this article examines and compares subsequent developments and consequences of the initial reform, from 2003–2017. These differed widely. Sweden succeeded in achieving further integration and better access to services, while services in England and Scotland remained divided and fragmented. England’s attempt at major reform did not survive political change; while Scotland’s more ambitious universalist approach was constrained by lack of appropriate devolved powers and a clear vision of how ECEC and SACC might fit into the education agenda. Undue dominance of the school and the teaching profession posed risks in all three countries. The article considers possible reasons for the differing responses to a common policy change, including the different histories of ECEC and SACC prior to transfer, processes of subsequent policy development, and the effects of differing welfare regimes and path dependency.

Abstract Good-quality local journalism, which investigates and reports on politics, business, planning, crime and social issues, is a long-established, critical function of a healthy and thriving local democracy. Reports on local events, stories, achievements and personalities are vital to citizens’ sense of their community and place. However, the UK market for local news has changed beyond recognition in recent years. Four in ten adults in the United Kingdom now use online sources for local news, while half of local news consumers rely on the Internet even more frequently today than they did only two years ago. Traditional business models have been under extreme pressure in this new digital age. Local newspapers are now adapting to these new circumstances and have adapted a variety of different approaches to try and build viable business models in this new age. Clearly the local newspaper industry will continue to play a vital role in the ecosystem of local news. At the same time, however, a new ‘hyperlocal’ news sector is emerging, helping to fill gaps in local media provision and adding significantly to local media plurality. This article discusses the opportunities and challenges facing hyperlocal news in the United Kingdom. and explores the potential for the growth of the new media form of microlocal journalism. This article is written by Douglas White and Lauren Pennycook at the Carnegie UK Trust, a charitable trust that developed a £50,000 competition to improve local news reporting, and William Perrin and Sarah Harley from Talk About Local, who evaluated the project. The article is based on the final report of the Neighbourhood News project, ‘The Future’s Bright, the Future’s Local’, published by the Carnegie UK Trust in December 2014.