Impact of local economic growth interventions on minority ethnic and immigrant groups

What Works Growth aims to understand the impact of policies on local economic outcomes. Our evidence reviews and toolkits summarise the evaluation evidence on a range of policies – access to finance, apprenticeships, area-based initiatives, broadband, business advice, employment training, estate renewal, innovation, sports and culture, and transport.

This rapid evidence review looks at whether the studies in our evidence reviews and toolkits report different effects for individuals from minority ethnic and immigrant groups. As the focus in our original reports was on overall effects, we did not systematically record these differences, and we sometimes excluded studies that targeted specific groups. This was an opportunity missed, as there is a large body of evidence showing that, on average, these groups often experience poorer economic and social outcomes. Understanding differences in effectiveness could help design interventions that work better for all.

We have focused on those policies where we think ethnicity or immigration background is most likely to influence impacts – apprenticeships, employment training, business advice, and interventions designed to increase take-up.

We only considered our existing evidence reviews and toolkits. We have not conducted new systematic searches, nor looked for policies which target specific groups. These issues will be considered in our ongoing evidence review work.

Things to consider

Policy lessons

• For each of the policy areas we examined, our evaluation evidence base suggests that individuals from minority ethnic and immigrant groups tend to benefit less from interventions than those from majority ethnic or non-immigrant groups. Policymakers should carefully consider how interventions can be designed to overcome these disparities, for example, by providing additional support or adjusting how support is delivered to better reflect needs. Policymakers should monitor and evaluate interventions so that disparities can be identified and addressed.
• A few studies reveal exceptions to the overall trend, with individuals from minority ethnic or immigrant groups appearing to benefit more, on average, from interventions. One reason for this might be that these interventions successfully addressed barriers that minority ethnic or immigrant groups face. Policy design should be informed by evidence on barriers faced by minority ethnic or immigrant groups.
• Minority ethnic and immigrant groups are often under-represented among intervention participants. Few studies consider whether this reflects lower take-up by these groups, discrimination or bias in eligibility or selection processes, or other factors. Policymakers should review whether their programme participation reflects the demographic structure of the eligible populations and put in place mechanisms to address disparities. Where disparities appear to be due to differences in take-up, our take-up toolkit provides insights that may be helpful. The evidence produced by the Behavioural Insights Team on applying behavioural insights to business policy may also be useful.

Need for more evidence

• There is a need for more evidence on the impacts of local economic growth policies on minority ethnic or immigrant groups, with few existing evaluations considering differences across groups.
• None of the studies in our evidence base explore the issue of ‘what works better’ for minority ethnic or immigrant groups, either in terms of improving outcomes or increasing participation. New evaluations which investigate ‘what works better’ are essential if existing disparities in participation and outcomes are to be addressed.
• Other evidence gaps include a lack of evidence on how and why participation varies across groups, and on the transferability of findings across countries, minority ethnic groups, and context.