In this blog, Dr Kostas Kollydas and Dr Gerardo Javier Arriaga Garcia reflect on the main themes and lessons from a cross-LPIP discussion on innovation, good work and skills.
Introduction
Local Policy Innovation Partnerships (LPIPs) bring together universities, policymakers, businesses, communities and other local organisations around shared challenges. While each partnership works in a different place and has its own specific priorities, local partnerships also face similar questions: How do we improve access to good work? How do we respond to changing skills needs? How do we support local innovation in ways that benefit communities? Most importantly, how do we turn research into action?
These questions formed the basis of a cross-LPIP online discussion held on 30 June 2026. The session brought together colleagues working across different parts of the UK to exchange experiences on innovation, employment and skills. The discussion provided space for useful conversations about what has worked, what has proved difficult and where partnerships may have more to learn from one another.
One message appeared early and stayed throughout the discussion. The themes that LPIPs are organised around rarely exist in isolation. Questions about innovation often become questions about skills. Employment cannot be separated from communities. Place matters throughout. Participants also reflected on the value of bringing together colleagues who might not normally meet.
Different places, shared questions
The projects discussed during the meeting covered different settings. For example, the LPIP for rural Wales explored food systems, construction and the future of local economies. Yorkshire examined job quality, inclusive recruitment and adult social care. Scotland focused on water, business and local economic opportunities across the River Forth basin. The LPIP Hub reflected on work covering skills, innovation, employment and local partnership working across the UK.
Despite these differences, many conversations returned to similar issues. Skills shortages and recruitment difficulties appeared across several sectors. Questions about business engagement also surfaced repeatedly. Whether the discussion focused on horticulture, construction, social care or environmental sustainability, participants described the need to understand local labour markets in much greater detail than national evidence often allows.
Several examples also challenged common assumptions. In rural Wales, work on construction highlighted how the sector is often viewed narrowly despite its importance for local economies and future housing needs. Discussions with schools, colleges and local partners challenged traditional views of who might pursue a career in construction. Design, sustainability, technology and engineering were all discussed as part of the construction sector. The conversation also covered the horticulture sector. Specifically, attention was given to new business relationships that could help smaller producers remain economically viable while supporting local food systems.
In Yorkshire, attention centred on improving the quality of work and thinking beyond simply increasing the number of jobs. Work with employers focused on inclusive recruitment and the changes organisations often need to make after recruiting a more diverse workforce. Community workshops added the views of people who experience barriers to entering the labour market. These discussions brought employers and community members together, but building these relationships takes time and trust.
Another discussion focused on social care. Here, improving job quality meant looking beyond pay alone. Issues around progression, working conditions and retention suggest that better employment outcomes depend on many connected factors rather than one single intervention.
Partnerships take time, but they matter
A recurring lesson concerns partnership working. Strong local relationships developed through regular contact, shared interests and a willingness to adapt as projects evolved. Examples from rural Wales illustrated this clearly. Work with universities, local authorities and education teams grew around a shared interest in future skills and local economic needs. There, partners asked what would be needed over the next ten or twenty years and worked backwards from that point.
Participants reflected on the value of looking beyond the most obvious stakeholders. In several projects, important actors were not always those who first came to mind. Small organisations, specialist businesses and local intermediaries often played an important part in connecting people, sharing knowledge and opening new opportunities. In some cases, their importance only became clear as projects progressed.
There was also a discussion about challenges. Business engagement proved difficult for some projects; despite considerable effort, community panels required patience and trust. For example, one partnership described how an initial network of many organisations gradually became a smaller group of committed partners. There, participants suggested that smaller but active partnerships may sometimes provide a stronger basis for long-term work than much larger networks with limited involvement.
From local evidence to policy action
One issue that ran throughout the discussion was that research has the greatest value when it reaches the people who can use it. Across the LPIPs, this has meant working with local authorities, combined authorities, businesses, education providers and community organisations from the beginning, rather than waiting until the end of a project to share findings.
The examples shared were varied. In rural Wales, work on construction developed through close links with local government, education teams and specialist partners. These relationships helped shape thinking around future skills and the type of education that local young people need. The discussion asked what sort of economy communities want in ten or twenty years, and what steps are needed now to support that ambition.
In Yorkshire, work on good employment has relied on close relationships with employers, local authorities and community groups. Participants reflected on the practical realities of this work. Some organisations become less involved as projects move forward, while others remain engaged throughout. Discussants felt that a smaller group of committed partners can sometimes achieve more than a much larger network with limited participation.
Several projects found that local intermediaries, specialist organisations and businesses operating behind the scenes often played a key part in opening doors, linking different groups and helping ideas move into practice. Although they often receive little public attention, they can sit at the centre of local networks.
Looking ahead: skills, good work and the role of AI
The discussion finished by looking ahead. Artificial intelligence (AI) formed an important part of this conversation, although participants approached it from different angles.
It was highlighted that AI should be viewed from a critical standpoint. History shows that technological change often alters the nature of work. Attention needs to focus on the new skills people will need throughout their working lives and on how workers can move between changing occupations. Lifelong learning, retraining and new forms of skills provision are likely to become even more important.
Participants also noted that the effects of AI will not be the same everywhere. Some occupations are much more exposed than others. Meanwhile, sectors that rely on practical work and direct human interaction may become more attractive than they have been in recent decades.
The conversation returned to the meaning of good work. Better employment should be measured beyond wages alone and focus on progression, workplace support, opportunities to develop skills and the quality of working conditions; all influence whether people can build sustainable careers. These factors should therefore be considered together when developing policy.
Looking at AI through an environmental lens, it is important to note that new technologies require physical infrastructure, energy and water. This creates fresh questions about business practices, natural resources and the skills needed to support emerging industries. The discussion suggested that AI should also be considered in relation to sustainability, local economic development and future investment.
Building a shared learning community
Although each LPIP works in a different place and addresses local priorities, this discussion showed how much they have in common. Across different places, similar questions continue to arise around good work, skills, innovation and local development.
One of the strongest messages was the value of learning across partnerships. Ideas developed in one place may not transfer directly to another. However, the experiences, successes and setbacks shared during this discussion provide useful lessons for others facing similar challenges. They also create opportunities for future collaboration across the LPIP network.
This blog was written by Gerardo J. Arriaga-Garcia, Research Fellow and Dr Kostas Kollydas, Research Fellow, City-REDI, University of Birmingham.
Find out more about the Local Policy Innovation Partnership Hub.
Disclaimer:
The views expressed in this analysis post are those of the author and not necessarily those of City-REDI or the University of Birmingham.