This chapter considers how to leverage strong local pride and community attachment to support endogenous (locally rooted) development processes. It focuses on examples of local entrepreneurship and community-led regeneration, and considers how policymakers can foster enabling conditions for the emergence, sustainability and scaling of locally driven initiatives. The chapter also explores the role of belonging and local attachments in young people’s decisions to stay in, return to, and invest in the future of a place.
Local Identity, Pride and Branding in Place Transformation
Stories that Shape Places
Abstract
Pride in place and local belonging can serve as powerful resources, motivating diverse actors to invest their time, capabilities and care into the development of a place and its community (Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]; Tomaney et al., 2023[2]). Such actors can include entrepreneurs and business leaders, teachers, religious leaders, invested residents and parents, and institutions such as local businesses, co-operatives and social enterprises, schools, higher education institutions and community trusts. Their actions have the potential to catalyse or contribute to a process of transformation that not only responds to economic and social needs but, where this is not prevalent throughout the community, renews a wider sense of pride in place. These actions tend to express themselves through endogenous development processes, such as local entrepreneurship or community-led initiatives and regeneration. Some illustrative examples suggest that, under the right conditions, they have the potential to catalyse economic development that communities can own and benefit from; to generate sustainable local sources of prosperity; and to strengthen community cohesion and well-being. Governments at all levels can benefit from better understanding these less-studied drivers of local initiatives and, importantly, the role that policy can play to enable, support and help sustain them.
The chapter first considers how pride in place and strong local attachments can be harnessed to foster a local culture of entrepreneurship, including social entrepreneurship. Recent studies into places facing economic decline have suggested that place belonging can be leveraged as a resource to foster entrepreneurship that contributes to long-term social and economic transformation (McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]; Redhead and Bika, 2022[4]; Redhead and Bika, 2024[5]; Tomaney et al., 2023[2]). While such initiatives are often sparked by visionary, committed leaders, they have potential to reshape a culture of entrepreneurship among a community (McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]). Although strong place attachments and belonging are often experienced among those who have grown up in a specific place, in-migrants can also cultivate a sense of “elective belonging”, which can serve as a source of motivation to contribute to the advancement of their adopted home through business and community enterprises (Redhead and Bika, 2022[4]). This chapter explores the kinds of enabling environments that can contribute to channelling pride and belonging in these ways, and how policymakers can support this.
The second theme is community-led regeneration, and the role that policy can play to protect and support these collective initiatives. Examples at varying spatial scales show how local attachments, alongside social capital and cohesion, can be translated into collective action and community stewardship of a place, to promote both economic and social progress (Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]; Tomaney et al., 2023[2]). Often, social economy organisations play a leading role (OECD, 2020[6]).
Finally, the chapter considers how policymakers can better understand the role of place identity in the range of drivers that shape young people’s decisions to stay in, return to, or leave a place. This includes the role that youth themselves can play in shaping the policies and investments made in the places to which they are connected, as well as the role of place-sensitive curricula and training in empowering and encouraging young people to contribute to local development. Given the broad scope of each of these themes, this chapter introduces only a few key ideas illustrating potential avenues for tapping into pride in place and strong attachments for local development, and concrete steps in support of this.
As the case studies and examples in this chapter show, these efforts are not without challenges nor without barriers – and in some cases, barriers can stem from well-intentioned policies. Care also needs to be taken not to romanticise community capability to translate its aspirations into tangible actions that improve the economic and social life of the places they live and invest in, particularly when decline has been prolonged, visions are divided, and opportunities are scarce. However, the examples this chapter explores, that span a small former mining village in the north of England, a once crime-ridden district in the south of Italy, a rural coastal community in Canada, and a rural region in Ireland – among others – demonstrate that the potential resourcefulness and capacity for hope of people in such places should not be underestimated. Better understanding how policy can not only support these efforts, but enable more places to follow their lead, has the potential to help this reach a greater scale. Lessons about how local governments can enable social innovation are particularly relevant (OECD, 2025[7]) (Box 4.6), whether that’s stepping back and making space for innovation and experimentation or offering active support to encourage and sustain endogenous, catalytic initiatives.
The grassroots, bottom-up action explored in this chapter should be seen as complementary to policy-led, or top-down measures, both of which can help a place turnaround. The balance between each approach, how they interact and reinforce one another, and what they look like in practice, will naturally vary from place to place in light of national, regional and local contexts and policy frameworks, and the agency exercised by local institutions, communities and individuals.
Understanding pride in place, local attachments and belonging
Pride in place has increasingly been included as an objective of policy-led, place-based initiatives and programmes (Shaw, 2022[8]). While such policies do not always precisely define what is meant by this term, it tends to be used to signal a community’s positive feelings about a place, its identity, and people’s connection and sense of belonging to it (Ibid). Sometimes, local pride can be asserted in response to negative external stigma (Ibid). Increasingly, there is an emphasis on going beyond superficial notions of pride in place as a condition that can be repaired solely through cosmetic, short-term investments in the physical environment (Shaw, 2022[8]; McNulty, 2023[9]). This calls for a deeper and more holistic engagement with people’s lived and felt experiences, and for communities to play a leading role in wider transformative processes (McNulty, 2023[9]). Recent policies, for instance, have associated pride in place with a sense of identity, patriotism and feelings of belonging (Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, 2025[10]).
Place belonging and attachments can be understood as an affective bond that people form with the social and physical characteristics of a place and its community, that contributes to well-being (MacKinnon et al., 2021[11]). This can be expressed individually or collectively. While a sense of belonging can be shaped by a place’s identity and local narratives, it can also be cultivated through practical commitments and investments in a place (Tomaney, 2014[12]).
While difficult to measure, there is growing interest in understanding how people’s attachment and sense of belonging to place impacts their response to social and economic change (MacKinnon et al., 2021[11]; Tomaney et al., 2023[2]). This is particularly the case in so-called “left behind places.” Some researchers describe these attachments as resources that can inspire responsibility and action because people are motivated to stay in, preserve and improve places that they care about – even in the face of population decline, dwindling quality jobs, and mounting social challenges (Tomaney et al., 2023[2]; Manzo and Perkins, 2006[13]; McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]).
Recent research highlights how collective values, such as fairness, mutual support and social responsibility, can produce strong attachments that motivate local actors to initiate community projects (Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]; Tomaney et al., 2023[2]). This has taken place both with and without significant public support – though it is not a given that these initiatives can emerge, let alone be sustained, without it (Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]; McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]). The long shadow of decline, mass unemployment and disenfranchisement can take a toll on whether and how communities perceive their own capacity for change, and initiatives that rely on one or two charismatic and committed leaders can prove fragile (Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]).
However, though much of the research into place belonging focuses on those who have grown up in a place, some studies also consider how in-migrants acquire and express a form of “elective belonging” (Savage et al., 2010[14]; Redhead and Bika, 2022[4]). These examples of people who move to a new place and elect to set down roots challenge assumptions that place belonging and mobility are incompatible. This suggests the value of learning about the conditions that can encourage would-be entrepreneurs and community actors to elect to belong to such places and to arise as change agents.
Across various contexts, local actors have described an attachment to place and the desire to take pride in its development as a source of motivation for their entrepreneurial actions (McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]; Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]; Tomaney et al., 2023[2]; La Paranza, 2025[15]). This can not only shape decisions to stay or return to hometowns, but to invest in local businesses, create local jobs, and revive an entrepreneurial culture (McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]). This has been expressed, for example, through entrepreneurial efforts aimed at creating new training and employment opportunities for youth in Donegal (Ireland) and Derry (Northern Ireland, United Kingdom) in the wake of the closure of a major employer and mass layoffs (Ibid). Local entrepreneurs reported that a conviction of “all being in this together” generated a concern for the well-being of the community, and a sense of ownership for their shared place’s future (Ibid).
The social capital held by local entrepreneurs and change agents can enhance the effectiveness of their actions. This capital makes them well-placed to understand and address local barriers to change – especially when these are cultural – but also to mobilise diverse stakeholders to support and amplify their actions (Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]; McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]) For example, in Donegal and Derry, entrepreneurs described, on the one hand, being embedded within the community, through relationships of reciprocity, mutuality and common purpose (McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]). This community capital afforded them insight into local needs and helped to shape a locally owned vision for change. At the same time, for numerous entrepreneurs, this social capital extended to key local leaders, such as the mayor, bishops and clergyman. In addition to lending legitimacy to their actions, these social ties helped unlock resources and diverse forms of support, including by demonstrating to political actors that social opportunities were “lucrative, sustainable and worthwhile” (Ibid).
Returnee residents can bring needed experience, fresh perspectives and a will to mobilise the community (McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]; Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]). For example, in former mining town Treorchy, Wales (United Kingdom), a local entrepreneur who returned after gaining business experience in London’s hospitality sector led to a collective effort among high street businesses to renew the town’s image, utilising social media and a website to attract visitors (Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]). While initially confronted with scepticism, the return entrepreneur was able to earn community trust as a result of his local roots and his visible commitment to the town’s improvement (Ibid). Partnering with other key actors and business-led initiatives, these efforts contributed to tangible economic revitalisation, with the town’s high street winning the Great British High Street of the Year Award in 2019 (Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]; UK Government, 2020[16]). The award recognised the high street’s role in offering community-led cultural events that also increased footfall, including an arts festival, Christmas parade and outdoor cinema, as well as providing digital training and support for local businesses (UK Government, 2020[16]). Fellow businessowners highlighted the value of receiving “a bit of a push” and “some inspiration” for the street’s turnaround (Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]).
From individual enterprise to fostering a collective entrepreneurial culture
When entrepreneurs with a strong sense of belonging go beyond opening a few businesses in a place, to foster a collective entrepreneurial culture, their efforts can be especially catalytic (McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]; Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]). Bringing the community along – as apprentices, employees, mentees or suppliers – can strengthen the entrepreneurial culture within a community, generating greater value while contributing to durable transformation (McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]). This can increase community support for new businesses and the trajectory of economic and social development, but even more significantly, it can encourage people to contribute to it, for instance as invested and loyal employees, or as budding entrepreneurs themselves (Ibid). Furthermore, when the community is mobilised in this way, their collective action has the potential to renew place identity and local narratives, as well as improving quality of life and community well-being (Ibid).
Locally-rooted entrepreneurs can be particularly well-placed to contribute to reshaping entrepreneurial culture because they are immersed in – and understand – local values, norms and social dynamics (Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]). Not only can this help them to identity and act upon barriers, but they can be more apt at designing culturally sensitive approaches that resonate with the community (Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]; McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]).
As various local actors take action to invest in their places through a first few ambitious steps, this can open a community’s eyes to what is possible. When a sense of being left behind is internalised, it can become more challenging to recognise local assets. For example, after a T-shirt factory that had employed around 3 000 people closed down in Donegal (Ireland), steps taken to valorise the town’s natural beauty and cultural history enabled locals to revalue and find beauty and opportunity in places they had previously overlooked (McKeever, 2025[17]) (Box 4.1). Reappraising the symbolic and economic value of these features of the village led locals to undertake small-scale but strategic interventions: building walking paths next to the coastline or transforming a long-abandoned military fort into a community hub, featuring a coffee shop, art installations and water sports (Ibid). Similarly, in Rione Sanità (Italy), a newly arrived local priest encouraged the community to see value in the district’s rich but underexploited cultural heritage (La Paranza, 2025[15]). Their restoration of the area’s beauty and heritage led to over 250 000 visitors coming to see it (Ibid).
A discernible shift at the level of culture is raised confidence among more and more people to invest in a place’s future. When a community feels that it no longer has control over its economic destiny, confidence in its own capacity to change things can be depleted, reinforcing a downward spiral (McKeever, 2025[17]; McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]). Thus, efforts to renew a community’s aspirations and confidence in itself, and in the future of a place, can be particularly powerful. For example, in Donegal, revenue reinvested into the village – even through modest upgrades such as fresh coats of paint on buildings, or the installation of lighting – has helped to build confidence in local entrepreneurs (McKeever, 2025[17]) (Box 4.1). A local corner shop was transformed into a small supermarket, new hotels opened their doors, and a famine museum was established (Ibid). As momentum built and culture shifted, employees used their break times to conceive of new business plans (Ibid). Similarly, the success of the restoration of the Catacombs and other heritage sites in Rione Sanità created confidence that translated into new local businesses to serve the district’s visitors, providing additional employment opportunities (La Paranza, 2025[15]; La Paranza, 2022[18]).
Practical support can also be fundamental to raising confidence. For example, as detailed further in examples from Derry and Donegal, entrepreneurs assisted locals who wanted to start their own business by identifying and connecting them to available grants, and providing mentoring and training (McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]) (Box 4.1). This support was eventually formalised through the establishment of a chamber of commerce (Ibid).
Using entrepreneurship to respond to both economic and social needs
When driven by a sense of purpose and mission that extends beyond economic profit, the value local entrepreneurs create tends to benefit the local community (e.g. “social entrepreneurship”) (OECD/European Commission, 2013[19]). In addition to the flourishing local economy and growing workforce to which Donegal and Derry’s strengthened entrepreneurial culture has given rise, financial value has been passed on to the community itself through the creation of the Inner City property trust, which holds up to 30 million pounds of community assets on its books (approximately EUR 35 million) (McKeever, 2025[17]) (Box 4.1).
Economic and social entrepreneurs can be seen as crossing boundaries between business, community and politics, drawing on social capital to create new possibilities (McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]). Local attachments have the potential to serve as a force for empowering communities to solve their economic and social challenges, and to generate wealth that is reinvested in the community, rather than extracted from it.
The closure of a T-shirt manufacturing company, a major employer in two communities straddling the Counties of Derry (Northern Ireland, United Kingdom) and Donegal (Ireland), contributed to a broader economic downturn in the area, marked by the loss of 6 000 semi-skilled jobs. This economic shock contributed to a loss of identity and a spiral of economic and social decline.
Despite these challenges, various local entrepreneurs, considered pillars of the community, invested in both places to help revive the economy, rebuild confidence in local people, and strengthen pride in place. Though they hailed from diverse careers and experiences, they chose to stay in, or return to, Donegal and Derry, owing to strong connections to family, community and the place itself.
Motivated by these local attachments, several entrepreneurs harnessed their business ventures to build capacity and reinvest wealth within the community. This included, for instance, sourcing goods and services locally; employing and training local people; developing programmes for employees to upskill and gain accredited certificates; and establishing and building up a community trust with approximately 30 million pounds of community assets (approximately EUR 35 million), including a museum, a daycare, a shopping centre and a golf club. For example, after receiving a one-million-pound public grant to cover the capital costs of developing the new golf club (approximately EUR 1.2 million), one entrepreneur hired 10 people from the local employability programme to undertake the construction work. After the course opened, it employed 17 local people as staff on an ongoing basis. Membership fees and clubhouse sales cover the golf course’s operating costs.
Entrepreneurs used their social capital to help translate community aspirations and needs into concrete proposals for government programmes and funding, and to draw on government support. For example, in Donegal, local entrepreneurs devised a system of building laybys next to roads, to allow buses to pull into the town and create opportunities for sightseeing. To realise this vision, which held potential to generate income for the town, a “bricolage” of resources was pooled together: the local authority provided in-kind materials and supervised the work; local contractors and community members donated their time and labour; and a local hotel paid for fuel.
Entrepreneurs’ commitment to these places was also manifest through their involvement in a wide range of non-business activities that contributed to community life. This ranged from organising dances, participating in trade activities, as well as sponsoring and running community and church events.
Entrepreneurs interviewed cited multiple motivations for their investment. This included helping people gain qualifications; creating more jobs; giving qualified and talented people a reason and means to stay; increasing the range of essential services locally; restoring pride and improving quality of life; giving something back to the community; and practising mutual support, which over the course of their lives had extended to the personal as well as professional realm.
Outcomes of these efforts highlight the catalytic role that networks of entrepreneurs embedded in a community can play. From the ten entrepreneurs interviewed in the academic research conducted by McKeever et al. (2015), 170 jobs were created. Many who were hired in these roles came up through the training initiatives run by these entrepreneurs. New businesses also opened, in sectors as far ranging as transport and video content. Finally, the report raised confidence, local pride and community aspirations can be considered outcomes in their own right.
Elective belonging among in-migrant entrepreneurs
A focus on place belonging carries the risk of reinforcing an exclusive sense of identity and community, which may be unwelcoming or even discriminatory towards newcomers (Watt, 2021[20]). Inward-looking communities may be resistant to newcomers, external interventions or new ideas (Robertson, McIntosh and Smyth, 2010[21]). This highlights the importance of a place’s identity being defined expansively enough to be able to foster and harness place belonging in contexts of growing diversity, including the arrival of new residents.
There has been growing interest in understanding how “elective” belonging among people who choose to move to and settle in a place shapes entrepreneurial action to promote endogenous development (McManus et al., 2012[22]; Redhead and Bika, 2022[4]; Savage et al., 2010[14]; Stockdale, 2006[23]). While growing up in a place and having family and friends close by is a common basis for belonging, many people who are motivated to contribute to a place’s prosperity and well-being have elected to set down roots. A case study in Great Yarmouth, East Anglia (England, United Kingdom) a place that saw a decline in both its tourist and fishing industries in recent decades, examines how “elective” belonging among in-migrants with entrepreneurial experience spurred them to contribute to the development of the town and its community (Redhead and Bika, 2022[4]) (Box 4.2). In one example, an in-migrant female entrepreneur focused on creating jobs and encouraging women to enter traditionally masculine sectors (Ibid).
In some cases, because in-migrant residents are not weighed down by what can be heavy histories of economic decline in places, they can inject a spirit of openness to changing the status quo (Savage et al., 2010[14]; Redhead and Bika, 2022[4]). Taking concrete action towards this end can in turn reinforce a sense of belonging to a place and of being part of a community (Redhead and Bika, 2022[4]).
This suggests the value of learning about the conditions that can encourage would-be entrepreneurs to elect to belong to such places and to act as change agents. Place branding efforts, explored throughout Chapters two and three, can be leveraged to attract newcomers to places facing economic and social decline, accompanied by investments to improve liveability and to support integration.
It is important to remain attentive to questions of social cohesion between newcomers and longstanding residents. Some researchers caution against the risk of “selective belonging,” whereby newcomers separate themselves or do not identify with certain areas within a place and, in some cases, their inhabitants (Watt, 2021[20]; Redhead and Bika, 2022[4]). An example of a rural area in the United States cited in chapter 1 illustrates some of the challenges that can arise when newcomers are motivated to contribute to the development of a place, but their actions reinforce inequalities and introduce divisions into its social fabric (Sherman, 2017[24]).
Research with in-migrant entrepreneurs in Great Yarmouth, East Anglia (United Kingdom) finds that they are motivated by an elective sense of belonging to engage in actions to improve the economic and social development of the area. Their decision to move to the seaside town and put down roots, and to take action to improve it, was found to contribute to feeling part of the place and its local community.
Great Yarmouth was once a popular seaside resort in the east of England but has seen its tourism and fishing industries decline. In addition to high levels of worklessness, and decreasing rates of education and training, this loss of industry has been associated with weakened identity and negative narratives, where locals – among them entrepreneurs – struggle to remain optimistic about Great Yarmouth’s future. However, there are new economic opportunities emerging in the town. As a major base for North Sea gas, oil and renewable energy ventures, in recent years, its offshore energy sector has attracted new businesses.
In-migrant entrepreneurs interviewed tended to feel more positive about the town’s future. Despite not coming from the town, many report a sense of commitment towards creating new opportunities for their children and the broader community of which they now feel a part. This has instilled in their businesses a community purpose that goes beyond economic gains. It includes, for instance, supporting fellow businesses by buying local rather than online; encouraging women to enter traditionally male-dominated industries; or providing free services to the community, such as photocopying CVs.
Source: (Redhead and Bika, 2022[4])
Designing policies to tap into pride in place and belonging to foster entrepreneurship
Local governments in particular can take various steps to tap into pride in place and strong attachments, to enable latent entrepreneurial capacity that can deliver on both economic and social fronts. This requires moving away from a one-size-fits-all approach, and leaving room for local needs to be identified and addressed from the ground up, in genuine partnership with communities (McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]). While some active support is required, removing obstacles that stand in the way of entrepreneurs and other local actors taking impactful action to address economic and social challenges in non-conventional ways can in itself represent a significant contribution.
The nature of the support a local authority can provide will vary according to the initiative and context. For example, in Donegal (Ireland), when entrepreneurs took initiative to build road infrastructure to create bus routes that could boost local tourism, after some initial resistance, the local authority adopted a constructive role supervising the work and providing materials in-kind (McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]). This approach allowed the community to take ownership and to innovate, while also ensuring that the construction was compliant with industry standards and public accountability requirements. Government-funded community work placement initiatives were also harnessed to support the volunteer labour of farmers and fishermen, an example of how public policies can compensate volunteering and community participation to drive economic development (Ibid).
The provision of capital funding can assist good ideas to see the light of day, with the established businesses then able to draw on revenues to cover operating costs. In Donegal and Derry, businesses supported by such grants span a daycare, a golf club, a local museum and a medical practice, which contribute to economic development and job creation, while meeting essential social needs (McKeever, 2025[17]). In addition to providing such grants, governments can invest in raising awareness about their availability, and in supporting budding entrepreneurs to develop a solid business plan and to apply for funding. In this way, a wider range of stakeholders can spearhead such initiatives, beyond the area’s highly experienced entrepreneurs.
Another effective investment can be to build local entrepreneurial capacity, and local leadership capacity more broadly (OECD, 2025[25]). An enabling environment can also be strengthened by investing in platforms for peer learning among entrepreneurs, as well as property readiness and digital infrastructure that can help actors scale their activities more effectively (Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]).
Local business leaders who have positive relationships with local authorities and the community can help bridge divides and restore trust. Sentiments that top-down initiatives are done to, rather than with communities, are often widespread across places that have experienced decline, and sustained engagement is needed to foster conditions under which trust can be repaired and genuine partnership flourish (Huggins et al., 2021[26]; Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]; McNulty, 2023[9]). For example, in Donegal and Derry, business leaders brought problems encountered to the council and then took a solution back to the community (McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]). A further step could be bringing more community members around the table.
Places that have developed a place brand narrative can support entrepreneurs and local businesses to harness it to add value to their enterprises. For example, as outlined in Chapter 3, both Brand Tasmania (Australia) and Brand Scotland (United Kingdom) developed tools to assist individuals and organisations to tell the place brand story in their own words. Brand Tasmania understands it has a responsibility to enable its stakeholders to leverage the brand in their own work in a way that adds value. The Story Workbook references brand values of “grit and determination” to demonstrate how Tasmanians have achieved success in a variety of enterprises, from setting up farmgate markets, to developing wave-piercing catamarans, to sharing Aboriginal culture through tourism (Brand Tasmania, 2019[27]). Tool kit resources, such as videography, how-to-guides and workshops can support a wide variety of businesses and entrepreneurs to build the brand into their own marketing and communications. Brand Scotland’s storybook fulfils a similar aim, providing practical tools for entrepreneurs and inspirational examples of environmental innovators, aligned with its wider brand story of being pioneering, protective of its natural environment and a global citizen (Brand Scotland, n.d.[28]).
Communities motivated by strong attachments can collectively mobilise to drive regeneration. In these cases, the initial aim might be to respond to social needs within the community, however this often goes hand in hand with economic outcomes, in line with the principles of social entrepreneurship (OECD/European Commission, 2013[19]). Community-led regeneration can harness positive place narratives; strengthen community fabric; and enhance local agency, ownership and pride (Tomaney et al., 2023[2]; Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]; McNulty, 2023[9]).
Often, community-led regeneration is stewarded by social economy organisations, such as co-operatives or social enterprises (OECD/European Union, 2025[29]). This can encompass, for instance, physical regeneration and adaptive reuse; provision of local services and social infrastructure; creation of local jobs and training; and contributions to the local economy. If such efforts reach a large enough scale, they have potential to improve external perceptions of a place. For example, the efforts of grassroots co-operative La Paranza to restore its historical catacombs and baroque churches in the once heavily stigmatised Rione Sanità (Italy) has attracted more than 250 000 visitors from Italy and abroad and helped revive the district’s image (La Paranza, 2025[15]) (Box 4.3).
Such actions can mobilise and amplify a positive place identity that has proved resilient despite economic decline. For example, a place identity grounded in historical values of solidarity and equality in former mining area Rhondda and Cynon Valleys in Wales (United Kingdom) is credited with giving rise to a culture of social responsibility and voluntarism (Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]). In one example, a group of volunteers led by a retired headteacher secured local funding to reopen and run a local swimming pool (Ibid). This has been complemented by numerous other projects, such as community meals, sewing groups, and a local food pantry, supported by over a hundred local volunteers (Lee Gradens Pool, n.d.[30]; Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]). In Rione Sanità (Italy), a shared identity based on collective values such as caring for the community and its heritage mobilised young people to regenerate their neighbourhood, which kickstarted a new tourism-based economy and created new employment opportunities (La Paranza, 2025[15]) (Box 4.3). While most of the employees of La Paranza, the co-operative behind the district’s regeneration, come from within the district, 35%come from outside the district and share responsibility for its care. Their identification with the neighbourhood and its community suggests that belonging is something that can be cultivated.
In Rione Sanità, a district within Naples (Italy), the social co-operative La Paranza mobilised the local community to regenerate the area, drawing on a place identity grounded in its cultural heritage and a shared sense of belonging. Young people – most of whom were not in employment or training at the time – identified with collective values such as solidarity, reciprocity and caring for the community and its heritage, and came to see themselves as active contributors to their district’s revival.
Once an opulent area, Rione Sanità fell into two centuries of decline following the construction of a major bridge that physically cut it off from the economy of Naples urban centre. Over this time, high unemployment rates and entrenched criminality came to define the district’s social fabric and identity. This was compounded by high youth out-migration and school dropout rates, creating a profound sense of loss.
In 2001, the arrival of a new parish priest searching for ways to create opportunities for local youth saw potential in the district’s rich but neglected cultural assets. This heritage included Southern Italy’s two largest catacombs of early Christianity, and a number of historical churches and buildings. In 2006, La Paranza was founded by six young people to guide the district’s regeneration. After successfully applying for grant funding from an Italian foundation, La Paranza created new employment opportunities for the district’s out-of-work youth, under the supervision and guidance of a team of archaeologists, restorers and art historians. Together, they returned 14 000 square metres of cultural heritage back to the community.
Their efforts transformed the Catacombs of San Gennaro into an attractive tourist destination, bringing in more than 250 000 visitors since its reopening. Beyond restoring sites for visitors, local churches were repurposed as vibrant community social infrastructure that makes the arts and sports accessible to its young community. This includes an art studio, a recording studio, a youth orchestra and a space where youth can practise theatre and sports. Other local buildings have been adapted into B&Bs, allowing the district’s many visitors to be accommodated locally.
The community’s efforts have strengthened the local economy. Beyond tourism yields, numerous small businesses have opened, from restaurants to fashion stores, as well as a network of third-sector co-operatives and artisans. This created a number of local jobs, including 74 positions directly within La Paranza, most of them for youth. In addition to the restoration work, new roles include work as visitor guides, dance and drama instructors, technicians, maintenance workers and youth mentoring at La Paranza’s educational centres.
The co-operative’s actions have helped to revive the image of the city externally and internally. Alongside the influx of national and international visitors seeking to discover the district’s artistic and cultural heritage, Rione Sanità ’s image has been renewed in the eyes of its own young people, despite the fact that the area was once avoided even by people from other parts of the city. Rather than feeling a sense of shame in coming from a neighbourhood whose inhabitants were seen as the “discarded stones” of society, local youth could say with pride, “I am one of the people who has transformed my district”, and regain hope for their futures there.
Furthermore, while locals growing up in Rione Sanità have a strong, place-based identity rooted in the district and its heritage, this is not reserved for those born there. La Paranza promotes a notion of “home” not as the place where one is born, but where one feels at home. While 65%of the co-operative’s 74 employees come from the district, 35%come from outside, including 9%who have chosen to move there. Young people who migrated from within Italy, or from other parts of the world, have described identifying with the neighbourhood and feeling a shared responsibility for its care. This suggests that belonging can be cultivated, challenging assumptions that in-migration inevitable weakens community identity.
The initiative was able to thrive in large part because the cultural heritage sites were in the hands of the local parish – its priest handed the keys to the youth-led co-operative, while providing oversight and training. Youth from the co-operative describe how the trust placed in them gave them the confidence to act to transform their neighbourhood. This example illustrates the importance of leaving room for regeneration capacity that exists at the grassroots, and consulting with communities to see what government support could be helpful.
While many community-led actions can generate modest revenue, they tend to rely on external resources to get off the ground, and to sustain. Governments can support by providing secure funding to entities that have a proven track record of positive impact. These organisations can play a crucial intermediary role, helping to align public investment with local needs, legitimising this funding within communities, and lending sustainability to regeneration efforts (McNulty, 2023[9]). As highlighted in the 2022 OECD Recommendation of the Council on the Social and Solidarity Economy and Social Innovation, scaling the impact of the social economy requires supporting access to finance and funding, including through developing and pursuing, where possible, a comprehensive public funding strategy for the social economy (OECD, 2022[31]) (Box 4.6).
Community-led regeneration has potential to be particularly transformative when it contributes to the redevelopment of social infrastructure, revitalising leftover spaces and adding economic and social value. When sites hold historical and symbolic value, their reuse not only contributes material benefits in the form of physical space for social and economic activity, but can strengthen local identity and pride. For example, La Paranza’s efforts in Rione Sanità repurposed numerous churches and buildings, symbolic of the district’s rich cultural heritage, to create community hubs where art and sport could be practised (La Paranza, 2025[15]; La Paranza, 2022[18]) (Box 4.3). In Sacriston, a village in County Durham (United Kingdom), a collective of social enterprises and community organisations renovated and repurposed the village’s historical Co-op building, which had been the hub of community life and solidarity in the village’s mining heyday, before standing empty for 15 years (Tomaney et al., 2023[2]) (Box 4.4). The Co-op now hosts various activities that serve its young people, among others, including a woodworking workshop that provides a space where youth not in training or employment can learn new skills, benefit from social and moral support, and sell the products of their work through a public-facing shop (Ibid).
Strong local attachments and a hopeful narrative rooted in a history of collective action, solidarity and care inspired community members in the village of Sacriston (United Kingdom) to remake social infrastructure to host core community activities. Today a village of 5 000 people, Sacriston was, at the height of its mining industry, a community that funded and co-operated to build its own social infrastructure. However, from the 1960s onwards, as the mining industry began to wind down, so too did the village’s community hubs.
While the decline of industry and the resulting loss of jobs brought on longer-term economic and social challenges, recently a small but committed group of local people have been able to draw constructively on the legacy of mining and the sense of community to which it gave rise to rebuild social infrastructure. Describing their motivation as a love for the village and a sense of belonging to it, in 2019, they acquired and restored the village’s old Co-op building. Once the village hub of social and economic interaction, it had stood empty for 15 years. After a struggle to gain the rights to renovate and occupy the building, it has now been repurposed for diverse community uses.
Deep knowledge of the community has enabled these local actors to identify and address unmet needs. The revitalised Co-op building houses four organisations that co-operate with one another. These include a woodshed social enterprise, which provides woodworking training to young men who have fallen out of the school system and are not working. They fabricate furniture and other products using reclaimed, recycled, reused and ethically, locally sourced wood. While youth learn valuable new skills and sell the fruits of their labour through a public-facing shopfront, the workshop’s particular value is that it provides a safe and nurturing space for young men at risk of ending up in the criminal justice system. Its founder, who comes from the Sacriston area himself, provides moral accompaniment as well as career orientation, and the social enterprise has contributed to rekindling their hope and aspirations for the future.
The Co-op building now functions as a community hub that people drop into when passing by. Other organisations include a youth project that offers out-of-school activities for children and young people and a live well centre that provides a range of health-related activities and runs a boxing gym. Together, they have brought some life back to the small village centre. This example shows how social infrastructure is particularly strong when it is built from the bottom up and expresses local values. It also captures how affection for place can serve as a powerful motivator for community-led action and stewardship.
However, the development relies on external resources, which come from the local as well as national level. The long-term and highly social nature of this work can make it challenging to show measurable results to secure finance from larger funders. This lack of long-term resources can undermine the viability of their services. For example, the founder of the woodshop social enterprise describes the enterprise as being “in constant threat of closure.” Organisations have also struggled to secure funding to cover their running costs – most funding received has been capital in nature. Thus, while strong local commitment has been able to see the village begin to rekindle some of the collective spirit of its past, the long-term sustainability of these efforts, and their capacity to grow, remain uncertain without more secure support.
Source: (Tomaney et al., 2023[2])
Communities can often struggle to gain access to disused sites, indicating a potential role for policy in granting and protecting their use of such spaces. Complex bureaucratic processes can hinder community initiative, and risk sapping the limited energy of largely volunteer community actors. In Sacriston (United Kingdom), a lengthy process to establish who owned the Co-op building meant that motivated local actors had to struggle to gain access to it and were able to do so only after continued persistence (Tomaney et al., 2023[2]) (Box 4.4). This stands in contrast to the experience in Rione Sanità (Italy), where the local church’s control of local cultural assets meant that they could more easily be handed over to newly formed youth co-operative La Paranza (Box 4.3). Tailored policies can help to legitimise and protect community access to such sites. For example, the City of Amsterdam (the Netherlands) created a Free Space Policy to enable community control of an unused former sewage processing site in Amsterdam North (City of Amsterdam, 2025[32]) (Box 4.5).
The City of Amsterdam (the Netherlands) introduced its Free Space Policy to enable community control of unused public sites. The municipality defines “free space” as collectively initiated, self-managed, open and inclusive, non-commercial and multi-functional. One of the first applications of the policy was in response to residents in Amsterdam North petitioning for several years to access an unused, overgrown greenfield site, that had long ago served as a sewage processing site. The establishment of the policy granted residents access to the site for three years. It has since been completely revitalised through community efforts, including the restoration of buildings, creation of gardens, a greenhouse, and the development of diverse public programmes. Moreover, the resident group rents small workshops for a nominal fee to local artists, entrepreneurs and social economy organisations, who have been priced out of Amsterdam’s real estate and for whom access to this space makes their activities viable.
There can be a need to defend community access to such space over the long-term. Revitalisation of the greenfield site generated new demands on the site. As the three-year “free space” access period drew to a close, there were competing claims for use of the now redeveloped land, from a sports field to energy facilities. The Urban Planning department found itself having to defend the public value of free space for a vibrant and inclusive city, given this approach sat outside conventional zoning and commercial logic, while meeting growing needs of the area. Ultimately, the site will be developed as mixed-use catering to all three functions.
The municipality has also played an active role facilitating dialogue within the community, including to address tensions that arose about how the space was used and by whom. Throughout this process, the municipality was required to establish new ways of working, notably to learn how to support, rather than steer these efforts, and to protect community access without prescribing precisely how it would be used.
Designing policies that support existing coalitions to translate local pride and belonging into community-led regeneration
There are numerous proactive measures governments can take to support, protect and propel community-led regeneration. At its heart, this recognises the value of local experimentation among locally invested actors, including via social innovation (OECD, 2025[7]). It can be facilitated by an approach of genuine partnership between public, community and oftentimes private actors which recognises community knowledge of its own aspirations and needs; helps to fill capacity and financial gaps; and pays heed to who is included – or excluded – from grassroots initiatives. Time and care can also be devoted to defining a shared mission, and to working through the parameters of public funding to anticipate and address potential tensions (McNulty, 2023[9]). The OECD ‘3S’ Framework for Social Innovation (as described in Box 4.6) provides useful indications for how policymakers can better leverage the full potential of social innovation at different stages of development. The needs of such initiatives vary significantly depending on whether they are in a starting, scaling or sustaining phase (OECD/European Union, 2025[29]).
Building on a study of 20 programmes for 11 EU countries during the 2014-2020 European Social Fund Programming period, the OECD has developed the ‘3S’ Framework that countries, regions or local areas can adopt to leverage social innovation based on their stage of development.
Source: (OECD, 2025[7])
Governments can benefit from identifying and investing in trustworthy local organisations that can function as a safe pair of hands, while representing diverse needs and community aspirations. Being on the lookout for potential or existing community anchor individuals or coalitions, and engaging in dialogue with them early, can help governments remain sensitive and responsive, and support promising but fledgling initiatives in becoming more sustainable. Governments can use their convening powers to bring others along if existing initiatives only reach a limited network of people.
Secure funding is vital to such initiatives being able to sustain and scale. Funding that stops and starts can inhibit the formalisation of impactful community initiatives and risks overburdening the voluntary sector – a sense of pride and belonging can only go so far without reliable support to translate this into action for the public good. Furthermore, while capital funding can support regeneration, or help to get a new initiative off the ground, community-led approaches tend to view physical regeneration not as an end point, but as a means of providing activities and spaces that respond to social and economic needs. Funding for operating costs and salaries, in the form of flexible grants, core funding or subsidies, can provide stability for the associative fabric and social dimensions of this work. Longer-term funding horizons can also provide the security needed to retain staff and raise the ambition of projects.
Community-led entities often have less capacity to cut through red tape. Governments can support by simplifying processes as much as possible, while meeting public accountability requirements. Different levels and sectors of governments can co-ordinate in order to streamline funding and reduce the burden of multiple pots and application processes. Where appropriate, devolving allocation decisions as close to the ground as possible, where communities are taking action, can help local governments to be flexible and responsive to local needs (McNulty, 2023[9]). This is especially relevant for social infrastructure, which can be more fit for purpose, and more likely to be used, when it is spearheaded and stewarded by local people (Tomaney et al., 2023[2]). Relatedly, it can be helpful that cost-benefit analyses used to assess funding applications go beyond traditional metrics to include, for example, the loss of social ties and increased loneliness and isolation – both in terms of their social cost to well-being, as well as their potential economic costs to the health system.
Governments can weigh the pros and cons of competitive bidding processes for community-led initiatives, including how they impact local co-operation. Such processes may place undue pressure on the precious time, energy and resources that many community members are giving voluntarily, and grassroots organisations often lack the capacity needed to navigate these processes. Furthermore, competitive funding calls can pit local organisations against one another, potentially weakening the co-operation and community fabric that often underpins positive outcomes in community-led initiatives. Constructive co-operation can be further supported through the creation of knowledge-sharing networks that enable diverse community actors and groups within and across localities to learn from one another’s experiences (Huggins and Thompson, 2025[34]).
Public action can also bolster these initiatives by granting access to public sites. This can be provided in-kind or with nominal fees. Physical sites can be transferred through community right-to-buy schemes, contributing to the building of community assets, as part of a broader community wealth-building approach. Proactive policies, such as Amsterdam’s Free Space Policy (the Netherlands), can secure community access to sites and protect them from competing claims, and help establish effective systems for managing shared use.
Where needed, governments can support the creation of inclusive decision making structures, so that the broader community has equal opportunities to contribute to and benefit from community initiatives. Local leaders can also play an important mediating role, to step in and help foster a resolution if tensions arise between various local actors or community groups.
Finally, while community initiatives may emerge organically from the grassroots, governments can also proactively harness pride in place by fostering the conditions in which such initiatives can flourish. For example, this could involve creating community grants to encourage local initiatives; investing in social infrastructure; developing free space policies; introducing community buy-back schemes; and building organisational and leadership capacity.
Most of the initiatives explored in this chapter have included a focus on creating training, employment and entrepreneurial opportunities for young people in places where these have been lacking. This can be viewed as a response to the generally high rates of youth outmigration from places that have experienced economic downturn, while simultaneously pointing to the significant potential that local populations see in younger generations to reshape their communities, and the trust placed in them to do so (Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]). Indeed, across these examples, local commitments have tended to be particularly enduring when expressed through actions that seek to foster hope alongside tangible opportunities for young people, in contexts where both are in short supply. While mobility will continue to be a natural part of this stage of a young person’s life, this chapter considers insights into the conditions in a place that enable youth to feel they have a real choice to stay or return.
A sense of belonging to a place can be one of various factors that shape young people’s choices about whether to stay or return to invest in their homeplace, or to out-migrate in search of opportunity (Dahlström, 1996[35]; KLOEP et al., 2003[36]; Tomaney et al., 2023[2]; Anger-Kraavi, 2023[37]; Jonsson, 2025[38]). When these decisions are made in contexts of diminishing opportunities and physical decline, staying, just like leaving, can be viewed as an active choice (Tomaney, 2014[12]). Many of these studies have focused on rural settings, where economic opportunity can be scarce and youth outmigration rates high. Across these studies, youth attribute local attachments to familial and friendship bonds; feeling part of a local community; a sense of identity and pride connected to their homeplace; and emotional attachments to landscapes or the rhythm of life (Ibid). In another example, a survey of 1 800 tertiary education students in Lodzkie (Poland), a region with both urban and rural settings that is experiencing accelerating decline in its working age population, found that only 34% planned to stay in the region after their studies (European Commission, 2025[39]; European Commission, 2025[40]). This is despite 68% being from the region (Ibid). Among those who had decided to stay, 79% cited proximity to friends and family as one of their top three reasons. Economic factors, such as affordability, professional development and jobs, were found to be important but secondary (Ibid). This supports the idea that a sense of place belonging carries weight in these choices, especially in smaller towns where there tends to be a stronger community fabric and where surveyed youth studying in the Lodzkie Region were more likely to have decided to stay (Ibid).
This is particularly significant for places experiencing high levels of youth out-migration, and that face challenges retaining and nurturing local talent and skills. Heavy flows of youth out-migration contribute to an aging population which can, in turn, accelerate youth departures (Nacke, 2022[41]; McNulty, 2023[9]). This can reinforce a vicious cycle, that makes it more difficult for places to retain and attract well-paid jobs (McNulty, 2023[9]).
Place sensitive curriculum and training
While a lack of viable education and employment opportunities can be a decisive factor in out-migration decisions for youth, in parallel, the decision to stay can be accompanied by low educational aspirations and attainment (Dahlström, 1996[35]; Glendinning, 2003[42]; Pedersen and Gram, 2017[43]; Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]). In rural settings in particular, long-term deprivation, limited opportunities to apply what one has learnt in formal education to their local realities and the lack of an intentional rural education policy can make it difficult for youth to see value in education for rural life (Corbett, 2007[44]; Halford, Huggins and Gale, 2025[1]). One study found that two-thirds of youth who attended a local school in a Canadian coastal community remained within 50 km of where they were born (Corbett, 2007[44]). However, compared to those youth who left, this group of youth experienced higher rates of early school leaving and lower rates of tertiary education (Ibid). Research on schooling in rural Canada has found a strong link between educational achievement and outmigration, where well-performing students tended to see their success as lying in more urban settings (Ibid). In this way, schools were facilitating a young person’s transition towards urban life and struggling to build capacity in strong students to pursue the kinds of livelihoods that could flourish in rural places and contribute to their development. At the same time, rural schools represent a significant opportunity for community engagement, as they tend to play a central role at the heart of community and social cohesion and benefit from higher levels of parental participation (OECD, 2024[45]).
Education that is place-sensitive and responsive to local needs and opportunities can potentially play a role in supporting young people to develop the capabilities needed to build a future there (Corbett, 2013[46]; Corbett, 2007[44]; Corbett and Forsey, 2017[47]; Dahlström, 1996[35]; Rönnlund, 2019[48]; Thissen et al., 2010[49]). It can also shape their aspirations to commit to places. This raises the question of how education and training can be valorised in places where this has not been the case, and how place-sensitive pedagogy and curriculum can support young people to develop and apply their talents and capabilities locally as active contributors to a place’s endogenous development. Investing in job creation initiatives can provide more opportunities for youth to use such capabilities to meet the needs and aspirations of their communities.
Much can be learned from innovative, place-sensitive approaches to education at different levels. For example, Berea College in Appalachia Kentucky (United States) is a higher education institution that serves low-income students predominantly from the region, offering free tuition (Berea College, n.d.[50]; Kaplan, S., 2023[51]) (Box 4.7). A core part of Berea’s mission is to instil in its students a sense of regional pride and belonging, and to provide an education that is attuned to rural challenges and regarded as a means to address them, in large part to encourage and enable graduates to stay and contribute to the region (Ibid).
Educational institutions can be responsive to the local assets inherent to the places of the young people they serve. Both formal and non-formal education can play a key role in this regard, to foster learning that helps young people develop capabilities as entrepreneurs, artisans, educators, innovators and actors in the foundational economy. Other fundamental capabilities can include becoming more apt at perceiving possibilities and responding to the needs of their localities (Huggins and Thompson, 2025[34]). In this way, education can better equip youth to develop their talents and capacities to contribute to and have a voice in the economic and social development not just of their places, but their societies. For example, in an urban context, La Paranza runs and supports educational centres in the Rione Sanità district (Italy), which encourage children to see themselves as meaningful actors in their community (Box 4.3) (La Paranza, 2025[15]; La Paranza, 2022[18]). Today, half of the co-operative’s 74 employees have come through the educational centres, showing how education that seeks to foster a social consciousness within a place – alongside the creation of viable work opportunities – can encourage youth to invest in its future. Some of the formerly unemployed youth from the district have now been trained as experts in cultural heritage maintenance and offer their services across the Campania region. Others are formerly accredited and employed as local guides (Ibid). Furthermore, 42% of La Paranza’s employees have improved their formal education qualifications (Ibid). This training, combined with a growing tourist economy and the tangible employment opportunities to which this gives rise, has been able to restore hope and enable youth to imagine and pursue their futures in Rione Sanità.
Appalachian Kentucky is located in the Appalachian Mountains (United States), and is a predominantly rural region comprising 54 counties with a population of 1.2 million people. Like the wider Appalachian region of which it is a part, Appalachian Kentucky faces significant economic, institutional and educational challenges and is home to a disproportionately high number of economically deprived counties. Decline has been accelerated by the contraction of its coal industry and mounting social problems, including lower educational attainment vis-à-vis more prosperous parts of the country, and high rates of “deaths of despair.” The region also suffers from large out-migration flows.
Within this context, educational initiatives have been offering place-sensitive approaches to education that seek to cultivate a sense of pride and belonging in the region that aims to transcend, and even help address, some of these challenges and empower graduates to stay and contribute to the region.
A notable example is Berea College, a higher education institution founded in 1855. The College serves low-income students, most of whom come from the region itself and offers them free tuition. A core part of Berea’s mission is to instil in its students a sense of pride and belonging in the Appalachian Region, and to provide an education that is attuned to rural challenges and is regarded as a means to address them. This approach aims to encourage and enable students to return and seek employment in the region. Importantly, free tuition means that graduates can finish their studies without amassing large amounts of debt, lowering the pressure to leave the region in search of higher salaries to repay loans. Many alumni do make the choice to stay in the region following graduation.
Berea’s curriculum and place-sensitive learning include themes such as entrepreneurial leadership in rural communities; local and regional leadership for the development of Appalachian communities; and learning to create healthy, resilient and economically viable food systems in the context of a food-insecure region. Of particular note is its service-learning program, through which students take part in real world, collaborative projects that address community issues, in partnership with local and community organisations. Furthermore, a centre dedicated to preserving and celebrating regional culture, history and traditions through the teaching of heritage crafts such as weaving and woodworking contributes to strengthening place identity and local pride, while actively striving to renew the narrative of the region.
One sustainable outcome of Berea College is an impactful rural education initiative founded and led by one of its local graduates, entitled Partners for Education (PFE). Established in 1995, the founding purpose of PFE was “to ensure the undeveloped talent of youth of the region is properly recognized, challenged and channelled.” In partnership with the local community, schools, and other local partners, PFE invests in local cultural education, alongside traditional curricula. Cultural education includes learning about Appalachian art, music and literature. Rather than proposing this as extra-curricular subjects, it is weaved into the teaching of core subjects too, allowing for more applied learning. For example, the task of cutting fabric during classes on traditional crafts like quilting is combined with maths lessons, helping students to connect academic learning to real world experience and illustrating its relevance to rural life. This is enhanced through the remunerated employment of professional local artists through regular residency stays, during which they teach students traditional arts as varied as folk dance, pottery, storytelling and quilting.
PFE has contributed to academic results, including an increase in high school graduate rates from 74% to 94% among participants of its six-year college access program, which focuses on college readiness and entry, to facilitate young people’s access to higher education. Its programmes have also been found to strengthen the reciprocal connections between youth, the community and place, deepening a sense of belonging while raising aspirations and confidence.
Today, PFE employs 420 personnel – many of them native to the region – and has expanded to cover 21 counties. As such, it has become a significant employer in the region, while raising up the next generations of engaged community members. Furthermore, the initiative has expanded its programmes beyond high school students, and now supports people from cradle to career, working alongside families and communities as well as youth (and has been renamed Partners for Rural Impact to reflect this broader scope).
Both Berea and Partners for Rural Impact help young people to rewrite their story of the region, through revaluing the culture of their place, while gaining purpose, hope and confidence in the role they can play in it. At the same time, students develop practical and locally relevant capabilities and skills. Both institutions illustrate the potential of place-sensitive education to strengthen local belonging and attachments, while fostering expanding ecosystems of support and opportunity, that can enable young people to convert their deepening commitment to a place into viable opportunities for their own livelihoods, and for the futures of their communities.
Entrepreneurial activity motivated by a sense of commitment to a place and its community can be harnessed to invest in young people’s untapped potential through training. In Derry, Northern Ireland (United Kingdom) and Donegal (Ireland), the actions of different entrepreneurs supported the training and hiring of jobless youth (McKeever, Jack and Anderson, 2015[3]). In Derry, the community trust’s large property portfolio was principally acquired to develop skills in young people. The return entrepreneur who established the trust stated, You see a hotel, I see stone, glass, painting, roofing, plumbing – I see chances for people to learn how to do things (Ibid). The youth were able to become trained craftsmen, gaining expertise in stonemasonry and stained glass which, like in Rione Sanità, has been drawn on to meet demand beyond the local area. Their efforts also increased the value of the community trust’s property portfolio. Fostering and harnessing narratives and conditions that enable youth to imagine that this is possible in these places has potential to contribute to overcoming a sense of left-behindness and providing youth with a hopeful reason to stay.
Community investment in a place can be as much about reclaiming its identity and worth in the eyes of younger generations as it is about creating training and employment opportunities. In Donegal, local volunteers helping to build road laybys described their hopes that their children would return to the town: We’re trying to build a place for our kids to come home to (McKeever, 2025[17]). From young people’s perspectives, in Lodzkie (Poland), the “unattractive image” of the region was among the more prevalent reasons cited as influencing their decision to leave (European Commission, 2025[39]; European Commission, 2025[40]). Similarly, in a recent survey, rural youth across Europe expressed aspirations to stay in their hometowns without sacrificing dignity or ambition or being viewed as failures (Jonsson, 2025[38]). This highlights the importance of developing and communicating positive place narratives that uphold the dignity of inhabitants and convey the potential within a place, alongside investing in its liveability alongside traditional levers such as training and job creation.
Policy implications to support youth agency in staying, leaving, returning
The various examples suggest that an ecosystem of support can assist youth in feeling able to choose to stay and invest in a place, in which governments can invest. For example, by connecting youth to entrepreneurial mentorship, or facilitating entrepreneurs' access to community work placement schemes to create job opportunities for young people.
It is important to give youth a seat at the table, so that they are not passive recipients of policies shaping their opportunities and life choices, but can contribute to defining needs and investments (Jonsson, 2025[38]). This can also ensure that policies are more fit-for-purpose. This can be achieved, for instance, through youth councils or advisory boards, that ensure youth voices are an integral part of decision making processes (OECD, 2024[52]; Jonsson, 2025[38]).
Collecting more data on the drivers of youth out-migration can better inform policies to help foster conditions that make it possible for youth who wish to stay, return or move to these places to do so. In the example from Lodzkie (Poland), a survey identified a broader set of reasons young people cited on why they planned to leave, or stay in, the region (European Commission, 2025[40]). Its findings suggest that expanding internship programs, investing in physical infrastructure and vibrant public spaces, and impactful place branding could assist the region’s perceived attractiveness to catch up to its development (Ibid). In another example, the European Rural Youth Observatory conducted participatory workshops with young people from rural settings across Europe to gain insight into their needs, perspectives and priorities (Jonsson, 2025[38]). Local organisations partnered with universities to recruit youth and to animate the future-oriented workshops. A core finding was that young people did not necessarily see the prospects of leaving as definitive – many envisaged leaving rural areas for education or work and then returning (Ibid). If leaving and returning is conceived as a continuum, there is scope for further learning on how young people can be supported along this process. This might include support to leave for study and work, but also practical support to return and resettle (Ibid).
Another area of learning is the development of place-sensitive curriculum and pedagogy at different levels of schooling, and in different kinds of educational institutions. This can range, for example, from informal grassroots initiatives that cultivate social consciousness in deprived urban settings – like La Paranza’s hands-on education centres in Rione Sanità (Italy) – to rural-focused tertiary institutions that purposefully generate knowledge for rural life, like Berea College in the Appalachian Mountains (United States). Funding impactful nonformal education entities rooted in the community and capable of reaching youth could form part of this support. In addition, targeted support for rural-focused higher education institutions, including measures to assist graduates who desire to stay in or return to their hometowns, and systems that enable knowledge sharing between institutions across regions, could further contribute to these aims.
Finally, as explored elsewhere, place branding has potential to increase the attractiveness of places that have faced economic decline, when complemented with targeted investments. In rural contexts, this can challenge negative stereotypes and valorise rural life, so that choosing to stay is not equated with failure but is instead seen as a dignified and fulfilling path (Jonsson, 2025[38]). Furthermore, place branding has potential to contribute to economic development, for instance, through attracting tourism or investment, which can in turn lead to local work opportunities.
This chapter has examined examples of how pride in place and strong local attachments can be harnessed as resources to foster positive change in places experiencing economic and social decline. It has shown ways that policymakers can enable, support and amplify grassroots, community-led actions to complement top-down approaches. Through encouraging local entrepreneurship, supporting community-led regeneration and fostering conditions that promote youth agency in deciding where to live, the chapter proposes concrete policy actions to tap into strong place attachments.
Enabling environments can harness under-tapped entrepreneurial capacity rooted in local pride and attachments, collective values, and knowledge of local needs. This can take the shape of investments to build local entrepreneurial and leadership capacity, efforts to cultivate trusted intermediaries who can bridge community and policy action and connecting local place-brand narratives to the work of budding entrepreneurs to add value to their enterprises. In the featured examples, local entrepreneurs motivated by such attachments, and committed to the well-being of their communities, pursued both economic and social outcomes, and supported others, in ways that helped to foster a broader entrepreneurial culture in a place. Local business and community leaders who are well embedded in both spheres can play a valuable role in this process, helping to repair trust with public entities and open space for dialogue and collaboration – particularly in places where top-down initiatives have historically been experienced as interventions done to communities rather than with them.
Strong place attachments can catalyse community-led regeneration with social goals and economic outcomes pursued in tandem, in line with social entrepreneurship principles. In many cases, this happens through social economy organisations like co-operatives, social enterprises and community anchor institutions. They deserve recognition and support as legitimate partners in place-based development.
Community-led physical regeneration tends to be seen as a means rather than an end, where revitalised sites serve as platforms for activities and services that respond to social and economic needs. As such, secure, flexible and long-term funding can give impactful initiatives the stability they need to retain personnel, offer impactful community programmes, and grow – funding that stops and starts risks overburdening what can often be fledgling enterprises, at least in their initial stages. It may be worthwhile to weigh the pros and cons of competitive bidding processes, including how they impact local collaboration.
Governments have a range of practical levers to support community-led regeneration beyond funding alone. Where appropriate, they can devolve decisions closer to the ground; facilitate access to local sites by making public spaces available and introducing community buy-back schemes for unused sites; support local organisational and leadership capacity-building; and invest in social infrastructure.
Belonging is one of several factors shaping young people's choices to stay, return to, or leave a place, and it can actively be cultivated through education and community life. Many places face a situation where youth out-migration accelerates demographic decline. Education can play a key role in shaping young people’s attachments, sense of pride and hope, and the futures they believe are possible – or impossible – in a given place. When complemented by broader structural measures, place-sensitive education and training can contribute to valorising local assets, building capabilities that align with the potential of the local economy, and strengthening young people's social consciousness and identities as active contributors to their place's future.
Community investment in a place can be as much about reclaiming its identity and worth in the eyes of younger generations as it is about creating jobs and training, and each can strengthen the other. To support young people’s agency in staying and returning, better data on the drivers of youth out-migration is needed to inform tailor-made responses. These policies can be more effective and fit for purpose if young people are given a seat at the table and included in decisions made that shape their lives. Dedicated mentorship programs, entrepreneurial pathways, community work placements, youth councils and advisory boards can be seen as an ecosystem of support in which governments can choose to invest.
The mutually reinforcing dynamic between community pride, belonging and local agency cannot be manufactured from the top down, but governments can create the conditions in which it is more likely to emerge and flourish. This can be approached through measures such as in-kind investment, sustainable funding, working in genuine partnership and a willingness to let communities lead where they are best placed to do so. With these conditions supported through policy, the examples in this chapter suggest that places with stronger positive identities can generate more community initiative, which in turn strengthens local identity, creating a virtuous cycle.
References
[37] Anger-Kraavi, A. (2023), Comparative Analysis of Socio-Demographic Dynamics in Carbon-Intensive Regions in Transition.
[50] Berea College (n.d.), Berea College, https://www.berea.edu/ (accessed on 12 April 2026).
[28] Brand Scotland (n.d.), Scotland’s brand story.
[27] Brand Tasmania (2019), Brand Tasmania Strategic Plan 2019-2024.
[32] City of Amsterdam (2025), How a former sewage site became ‘The Green Field’, a community space in Amsterdam North. Presentation at 8 April 2025 OECD seminar “Place Tranformation from Whom?”..
[46] Corbett, M. (2013), “I’m going to make sure I’m ready before I leave: The complexity of educational and mobility decision-making in a Canadian coastal community”, Journal of Rural Studies, Vol. 32, pp. 275-282, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2013.07.006.
[44] Corbett, M. (2007), Learning to leave: The irony of schooling in a coastal community, Fernwood Pub.
[47] Corbett, M. and M. Forsey (2017), “Rural youth out-migration and education: challenges to aspirations discourse in mobile modernity”, Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, Vol. 38/3, pp. 429-444, https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2017.1308456.
[35] Dahlström, M. (1996), ““Young women in a male periphery—Experiences from the Scandinavian north””, Journal of rural studies, Vol. 12/3, pp. 259-271.
[39] European Commission (2025), Technical Assistance: Helping regions facing a ’talent development trap’ to harness talent: Lodzkie, Poland: Diagnostic Report, https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/policy/communities-and-networks/harnessing-talent-platform/support-on-the-ground/pillar-1-pilot-project-11-regions-harness-talent_en.
[40] European Commission (2025), Technical Assistance: Helping regions facing a ’talent development trap’ to harness talent: Lodzkie, Poland: Implementation Report, https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/policy/communities-and-networks/harnessing-talent-platform/support-on-the-ground/pillar-1-pilot-project-11-regions-harness-talent_en.
[42] Glendinning, A. (2003), “Rural communities and well‐being: a good place to grow up?.”, The sociological review, Vol. 51/1, pp. 129-156.
[1] Halford, E., R. Huggins and R. Gale (2025), “Community culture and development challenges in left behind places: the impact of historical legacies in the South Wales Valleys”, Geoforum, Vol. 164, p. 104353, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2025.104353.
[26] Huggins, R. et al. (2021), “Historical industrialisation, path dependence and contemporary culture: the lasting imprint of economic heritage on local communities”, Journal of Economic Geography, Vol. 21/6, pp. 841-867, https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbab010.
[34] Huggins, R. and P. Thompson (2025), “Behavioural theory and regional development: nurturing cultures of possibility”, Spatial Economic Analysis, Vol. 20/3, pp. 368-395, https://doi.org/10.1080/17421772.2025.2474769.
[38] Jonsson, F. (2025), The right to stay, the right to move: young people’s views on the future of im/mobility in rural areas. European Rural Youth Observatory, https://www.euryo.org/web/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/Policy-Brief-WG1-2025-09.pdf.
[51] Kaplan, S. (2023), Fragile Neighbourhoods: Repairing American Society, One Zip Code at a Time, Little, Brown Spark.
[36] KLOEP, M. et al. (2003), “Peripheral Visions? A Cross-cultural Study of Rural Youths’ Views on Migration”, Children’s Geographies, Vol. 1/1, pp. 91-109, https://doi.org/10.1080/14733280302189.
[15] La Paranza (2025), Caring for Culture is Caring for People: Presentation at 13 May 2025 OECD seminar.
[18] La Paranza (2022), Catacombe di Napoli, https://catacombedinapoli.it/en/about/.
[30] Lee Gradens Pool (n.d.), About Us, https://www.leegardenspool.co.uk/about-us (accessed on 12 April 2026).
[11] MacKinnon, D. et al. (2021), “Reframing urban and regional ‘development’ for ‘left behind’ places”, Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Vol. 15/1, pp. 39-56, https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsab034.
[13] Manzo, L. and D. Perkins (2006), “Finding Common Ground: The Importance of Place Attachment to Community Participation and Planning”, Journal of Planning Literature, Vol. 20/4, pp. 335-350, https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412205286160.
[17] McKeever, E. (2025), Embedded entrepreneurship in the creative re-construction of place: Insights from two depleted communities in the Northwest of Ireland: Presentation at 13 May 2025 OECD seminar.
[3] McKeever, E., S. Jack and A. Anderson (2015), “Embedded entrepreneurship in the creative re- construction of place”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 30/1, pp. 50-65, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2014.07.002.
[22] McManus, P. et al. (2012), “Rural Community and Rural Resilience: What is important to farmers in keeping their country towns alive?”, Journal of Rural Studies, Vol. 28/1, pp. 20-29, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2011.09.003.
[9] McNulty, D. (2023), Universities, Pride in Place and Levelling Up: Forum Policy Briefing, https://pure-oai.bham.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/231904229/Universities_Pride_in_Place_and_Levelling_Up.pdf.
[10] Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (2025), Pride in Place Strategy: Policy Paper, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/pride-in-place-strategy/pride-in-place-strategy.
[41] Nacke, L. (2022), Integrated research framework: Transitions in carbon intensive regions: CINTRAN project.
[25] OECD (2025), “Leading local change: The role of individuals and institutions in driving place transformation”, OECD Local Economic and Employment Development (LEED) Papers, No. 2025/05, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/4fe11f94-en.
[7] OECD (2025), Starting, Scaling and Sustaining Social Innovation: Evidence and Impact of the European Social Fund, Local Economic and Employment Development (LEED), OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ec1dfb67-en.
[52] OECD (2024), OECD Youth Policy Toolkit, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/74b6f8f3-en.
[45] OECD (2024), “Rural discontent: Social unease and quality of life in the rural countryside”, OECD Regional Development Papers, No. 99, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a7164b54-en.
[31] OECD (2022), 2022 OECD Recommendation of the Council on the Social and Solidarity Economy and Social Innovation.
[6] OECD (2020), “Regional Strategies for the Social Economy: Examples from France, Spain, Sweden and Poland”, OECD Local Economic and Employment Development (LEED) Papers, No. 2020/03, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/76995b39-en.
[33] OECD (Forthcoming), Rethinking Space in Cities: Unlocking the potential of Adaptive Communal Space (ACS) to connect People, Places, Firms.
[19] OECD/European Commission (2013), “Policy brief on social entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial activities in Europe”, OECD Local Economic and Employment Development (LEED) Papers, No. 2013/16, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/13d53589-en.
[29] OECD/European Union (2025), Social Economy in Europe: Contributing to Competitiveness and Prosperity, Local Economic and Employment Development (LEED), OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3432de93-en.
[43] Pedersen, H. and M. Gram (2017), “‘The brainy ones are leaving’: the subtlety of (un)cool places through the eyes of rural youth”, Journal of Youth Studies, Vol. 21/5, pp. 620-635, https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2017.1406071.
[5] Redhead, G. and Z. Bika (2024), “Is home where the heart is? Investigating the relationship between hometown and entrepreneurship”, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Vol. 37/3-4, pp. 433-459, https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2024.2413966.
[4] Redhead, G. and Z. Bika (2022), “‘Adopting place’: how an entrepreneurial sense of belonging can help revitalise communities”, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Vol. 34/3-4, pp. 222-246, https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2022.2049375.
[21] Robertson, D., I. McIntosh and J. Smyth (2010), “Neighbourhood Identity: The Path Dependency of Class and Place”, Housing, Theory and Society, Vol. 27/3, pp. 258-273, https://doi.org/10.1080/14036090903326429.
[48] Rönnlund, M. (2019), “‘I Love this Place, but I Won’t Stay’: Identification with Place and Imagined Spatial Futures Among Youth Living in Rural Areas in Sweden”, YOUNG, Vol. 28/2, pp. 123-137, https://doi.org/10.1177/1103308818823818.
[14] Savage, M. et al. (2010), “Focus Article”, Housing, Theory and Society, Vol. 27/2, pp. 115-161, https://doi.org/10.1080/14036090903434975.
[8] Shaw, J. (2022), Townscapes: Pride in place..
[24] Sherman, J. (2017), ““Not Allowed to Inherit My Kingdom”: Amenity Development and Social Inequality in the Rural West”, Rural Sociology, Vol. 83/1, pp. 174-207, https://doi.org/10.1111/ruso.12168.
[23] Stockdale, A. (2006), “Migration: Pre-requisite for rural economic regeneration?”, Journal of Rural Studies, Vol. 22/3, pp. 354-366, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2005.11.001.
[49] Thissen, F. et al. (2010), “Migration intentions of rural youth in the Westhoek, Flanders, Belgium and the Veenkoloniën, The Netherlands”, Journal of Rural Studies, Vol. 26/4, pp. 428-436, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2010.05.001.
[12] Tomaney, J. (2014), “Region and place II”, Progress in Human Geography, Vol. 39/4, pp. 507-516, https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132514539210.
[2] Tomaney, J. et al. (2023), Social infrastructure and left behind places, Routledge, London, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781032710051.
[16] UK Government (2020), Treorchy crowned “UK’s best” in the Great British High Street Awards, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/treorchy-crowned-uk-s-best-in-the-great-british-high-street-awards#:~:text=Press%20release-,Treorchy%20crowned%20%22UK%27s%20best%22%20in%20the%20Great%20British%20High%20Street,15%2C000%20for%20the%20local%20community. (accessed on 12 April 2026).
[20] Watt, P. (2021), Estate regeneration and its discontents: Public housing, place and inequality in London, Policy Press.