This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Ian Harvey Senior Fellow and Head of the Institute of Place Management, Manchester Metropolitan University

Walk along Manchester’s Oxford Road on a weekday morning and it is difficult not to notice the northern English city’s confidence.

Home to two universities, major NHS hospitals and world-leading research institutions, the Oxford Road Corridor is underpinned by a partnership that brings together universities, public services, businesses and local government around a shared vision for place.

Yet only a few miles away, many neighbourhoods continue to experience some of England’s deepest health, economic and social inequalities. Modern Manchester is both one of Britain’s great urban success stories and a reminder that growth alone does not guarantee prosperity for everyone.

See Also: Who Is Andy Burnham? 5 Things to Know About the ‘King of the North’ Likely to Succeed Keir Starmer

Since Andy Burnham became the first elected Mayor of Greater Manchester in 2017, the UK has had five prime ministers: Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer. Burnham remained in post throughout.

While national governments have changed direction, priorities and ministers, Greater Manchester has benefited from something increasingly rare in British politics: stable leadership.

Manchesterism

During the pandemic, Burnham became a national figure as he challenged the government over financial support for Greater Manchester. He earned the nickname “King of the North” for speaking up for places that felt they were once again being overlooked. At a time when many people felt disconnected from Westminster, he gave Greater Manchester a visible and recognisable voice.

So over the past nine years Burnham has become the most recognisable and public face of what has become known as “Manchesterism”.

But Manchesterism is bigger than any one politician. It is the product of decades of collaboration between institutions, communities, leaders, councils, businesses, universities, the NHS and public services.

The foundations laid by city leaders such as Sir Richard Leese and Sir Howard Bernstein, and the devolution settlement agreed with George Osborne, created a platform that Burnham inherited, strengthened and took onto the national stage.

It is less an ideology than a way of governing. It combines long-term leadership with devolved decision-making and a belief that many of society’s biggest challenges are best addressed at the level of place rather than directed from Whitehall.

What is ‘place-based’ policy?

Perhaps Burnham’s most significant contribution has been championing a place-based approach to policy. Rather than treating transport, housing, health, education, skills and economic development as separate issues, he has consistently argued that they should be addressed together because people experience them together in the places where they live.

Someone struggling to access employment because of poor transport may also face housing pressures, limited skills opportunities and poorer health. Solving these problems in isolation rarely tackles the underlying causes. Bringing policy together around places, rather than government departments, has become one of the defining characteristics of Greater Manchester’s approach.

This way of thinking has also reshaped the role of local institutions. The Greater Manchester Civic University Agreement, launched with Burnham in 2021, reflects his view of universities as civic and economic partners, not simply providers of higher education.

Alongside local authorities, businesses, NHS organisations and the voluntary sector, they have become important anchor institutions, contributing to innovation, skills, research, public health, regeneration and economic growth.

The question is not whether Manchester has discovered a formula that can simply be copied elsewhere, but whether the principles underpinning its success could help shape how Britain is governed.

But Burnham’s record is not without criticism.

Despite economic growth and investment, significant inequalities remain between and within Greater Manchester’s boroughs.

Housing affordability continues to be a challenge for many residents, while some communities still feel disconnected from the prosperity associated with Manchester city centre.

These challenges serve as a reminder that devolved leadership is not a cure-all. Place-based governance can create better conditions for change, but it cannot eliminate decades of structural inequality overnight.

Will PM Burnham hand his power away?

Now, after years spent asking Westminster to hand power away, Burnham will soon find himself in a position to decide whether it does.

See Also: The Mistakes that Sealed Keir Starmer’s Fate

Many of the themes that have defined his leadership in Greater Manchester – integrated transport, joined-up skills and education, preventative health, stronger local institutions and greater local control over economic development – could move from being regional experiments to national priorities.

The real test, however, is not whether Britain can be governed as though it were Greater Manchester. Every place is different, with its own history, economy and challenges. Places succeed not because every policy is perfect, but because institutions develop the capacity to solve problems together over the long term.

Instead, the question is whether a UK government led by Burnham will trust cities, towns and neighbourhoods across England in the same way that he has argued Greater Manchester should be trusted.

It is tempting to see Manchesterism as the story of Burnham. But that misses the bigger picture.

It is really the story of institutions, relationships and years of working together around a shared vision – a reminder that successful places are built over decades, not electoral cycles.

Manchester doesn’t have all the answers. But if Manchesterism means anything, it is that lasting national renewal depends on ensuring places have the power, strong institutions, effective leadership and trusted partnerships they need to shape their own futures.

Perhaps the strongest evidence of Manchesterism’s success is that it should be capable of outlasting any one leader.

[VS]

Suggested Reading: