摘要：This paper provides commentary on Bailey et al.’s paper entitled ‘Plant closures and taskforce responses: an analysis of the impact of and policy response to MG Rover in Birmingham’ ([2014]. Regional Studies, Regional Science. DOI: 10.1080/21681376.2014.899477 ). The paper argues that this contribution needs to be placed alongside other works by this group of researchers (Bailey, De Ruyter, Chapain, Clarke, MacNeill) and assessed for the broader contribution this body of work makes to our understanding of new, and emerging, models of regional policy. It is argued that established conceptualizations of regional policy and programmes either tend to focus on a redistributive approach to the well-being of places that reflects the ‘spatial Keynesianism’ of the past or accept the new mercantilist perspectives that have been reflected in the work of authors such as Glaeser and Storper. This paper, and the wider body of work of which it is representative, suggests an alternative approach to the development of places that gives scope for public sector intervention while acknowledging the importance of private sector processes and the highly differentiated nature of regions.
