New year, new… discount rate? Through the looking glass of the Green Book
Right, let’s talk about discount rates. Before you click away into something more exciting (cat memes, Wordle or bleeding the brakes on your car), hear me out. While most of us were swimming in a sea of eggnog and mince pies, His Majesty’s Treasury quietly kicked off a review of the Green Book discount rate. Exciting? Absolutely not. But if I could somehow squeeze out two blogs about land value uplift last year, this one should be a breeze. Jam today, rather than jam tomorrow When I was in Whitehall, the way I was taught to think about discounting came from Lewis Carroll and was later picked up by Keynes ‘jam today rather than jam tomorrow.’ In Treasury-speak, this captures the concept of ‘time preference’: the tendency for people to value benefits received today more highly than the same benefits received later. If you prefer jam today, you will value a benefit arriving next year less than the identical benefit arriving now. That preference is exactly what the discount rate captures. If you’re wondering whether I’m only telling this anecdote so I can sneak in sticky-end references and spread a few jam puns, shame on you, and guilty as charged. Discount rates, minus the equations Put bluntly, the discount rate converts future costs and benefits into today’s money. The higher the rate, the less weight we give to outcomes that happen far into the future. The Green Book’s standard approach uses something called a ‘social time preference rate’ (don’t go, you’ve made it halfway) which has attracted some criticism because it can make slow-burn transformational projects look underwhelming on paper. From my time as a mandarin in Whitehall, I can tell you this technical language masks political and practical consequences. Unlike Premier League football managers, the Green Book discount rate does not change every season. The last ‘boardroom vote of confidence’ was in 2003 when the headline rate was cut to 3.5 per cent. Why economic development professionals should care If your job is to make the case for patient investment in places, you will meet the discount rate early and often. Timing matters, as faster delivery brings benefits into the near term, which are worth more in present value terms (more HMT lingo), so speed can materially improve a project’s benefit-cost ratio without altering the fundamentals. For residential schemes, tenure and cashflow also matter. Adjusting housing tenure or revenue models alters grant requirements and cashflow, which changes present value calculations. Small delivery or tenure tweaks can move a business case from marginal to investable, or vice versa. There are also place-based benefits that spread through local markets, such as wider land value uplift that is sensitive to appraisal assumptions and discounting. How you value those spillovers can determine whether a project passes go or not. A modest tweak to the rate or to how it is applied can change which projects clear approval and which remain stuck. Indeed, the consultation scope asks whether the discount rate should be adjusted for place-based objectives and environmental scarcity. These are not academic issues. It is the difference between a project becoming reality, or the next Manchester United manager. Spreading the jam more evenly This review sits inside a wider effort to make the Green Book more supportive of place-based cases and less mechanically obsessed with single benefit-cost ratios, and more attentive to how the jam is actually spread over time. The discount rate is central because it literally changes how the future is counted. So yes, this is niche. It will not trend on LinkedIn (I’ve tried, twice). But like land value uplift, it is one of those quiet technicalities that decides what gets built, where and when. For economic development professionals arguing for patient, place-based investment, the Treasury’s conversation on discounting deserves a spot on your radar. Bring your spreadsheet, a mug of coffee, and remember that if the jam is always reserved for tomorrow, very little ever gets eaten. The consultation authors will provide an interim update to HM Treasury on its emerging findings in March 2026. They will then deliver their final findings by the start of June 2026 and publish their final findings by the end of June 2026. Simon Dancer is AMION’s Economics Director and a Board Member of the Institute of Economic Development (iED)
Homes England publishes AMION research on commercial-led regeneration
We’re pleased to share new national research for Homes England on the placemaking impacts of commercial-led regeneration. The study builds on earlier Homes England work on housing-led regeneration and feeds into the 2025 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) Appraisal Guide. It focuses on what commercial development means for local places, rental values and regeneration outcomes. What the research set out to do The study had two aims: first, to test whether public sector supported commercial-led development and public realm schemes with clear placemaking objectives influence nearby commercial rents over and above local trends; second, to draw out what this means for regeneration policy and economic appraisal. We used a hedonic pricing approach based on achieved rents from the CoStar database, comparing distance-based ‘rings’ around each scheme with an outer control area. This allowed us to capture positive spillovers and any local displacement where new supply might depress surrounding rents. A carefully selected set of case studies From a longlist of more than 100 schemes, we shortlisted 24 and, following data checks, modelled 11 in detail. These include major city centre projects and public realm interventions, such as MediaCity in Salford, Golden Square in Birmingham’s Jewellery Quarter, Bristol Temple Meads, Spinningfields in Manchester, and Liverpool One. In total, we ran 396 models across different ring sizes to test robustness. Headline findings Two schemes showed consistent positive spillovers with no offsetting negatives: MediaCity in Salford and Golden Square in Birmingham. MediaCity demonstrated rental uplifts of around 10% to 15% within 400 metres. Golden Square showed 8% to 16% rental gains, with signals that retail activity may be the main driver. Bristol Temple Meads displayed both patterns: positive spillovers of 12% to 26% up to 600 metres, alongside negative effects of 7% to 16% between 600 and 800 metres. This points to rebalancing within the commercial market as demand concentrates nearer the scheme. Two office-led schemes – Brindley Place in Birmingham and Spinningfields in Manchester – showed consistent negative spillovers, again over short distances. Six schemes, including Paradise (Birmingham), Snow Hill (Birmingham), Liverpool One, St Paul’s Square (Liverpool) and Newcastle Helix, showed no consistent overall spillovers, although some office or retail sub-sector models indicated partial effects. Why this matters for policy and appraisal Homes England’s mission is to support high-quality homes and thriving places, allocating public funds where they deliver the greatest social value. While commercial property is harder to analyse than housing due to data constraints, this research provides new evidence on additionality and local market effects: This matters for Green Book business cases and local growth strategies. Evidence of uplift can strengthen the case for targeted public realm and commercial investment. Evidence of localised negatives can inform mitigation, for example phasing, tenant mix, or complementary transport and public realm measures. Next steps Further work would help test cross-market effects, such as how commercial-led regeneration influences nearby house prices, and vice versa. More case studies over longer post-completion periods would also deepen the evidence base, particularly outside major urban centres. 🔗 Read the full report: Measuring Social Value Paper 8: Measuring the Placemaking Impacts of Commercial-led Regeneration – GOV.UK
One growth zone to rule them all? The logic behind Industrial Strategy Zones
If you thought the UK’s economic development toolbox already had too many acronyms, brace yourself – there’s a new one on the block: ISZs, or Industrial Strategy Zones. They’re not an entirely brand-new invention, but rather a tidy repackaging of Freeports and Investment Zones. The government’s goal? To unite their strengths, cut duplication, reduce overlap and make economic growth lingo less like a cryptic crossword. When Freeports met Investment Zones: the birth of ISZs The government’s new Industrial Strategy puts it plainly: businesses thrive in places that work. Its Plan for Change also stressed that devolution is central to this. Growth can’t be dictated from Whitehall; it must be led from the ground up. That’s why the government is working more closely with devolved administrations and metro mayors to shift decision-making closer to the people and the places it affects. Freeports and Investment Zones already play a part in that mission by helping to create jobs and drive growth in key sectors and city regions. But until now, they’ve often operated in silos, with separate funding streams, governance structures and even overlapping boundaries. That’s not exactly a recipe for joined-up delivery. Industrial Strategy Zones are the government’s answer: a single umbrella that brings Freeports and Investment Zones together. It’s a three-part plan: Liverpool City Region has already shown what this looks like in practice by bringing both together under a single framework as the Liverpool City Region Innovation Zone. In total, there will be 22 ISZs across the UK: ten with an Investment Zone, nine with a Freeport and three with both. Why the rebrand? Freeports, Investment Zones, Enterprise Zones (more on EZs shortly)… it’s fair to say the landscape had become a bit crowded. The rebrand to Industrial Strategy Zones isn’t just a fresh coat of paint, it’s about simplifying, sharpening and scaling what already works. Here are a few of the key drivers: Hang on a minute, what about Enterprise Zones? Not to be forgotten, England still has 45 EZs scattered across the country a bit like confetti from an earlier economic strategy. Some EZs overlap neatly with Freeports and Investment Zones, others less so, and their alignment with the new Industrial Strategy varies from place to place. Most of the original incentives that came with EZs have now expired, but they’re far from redundant. Many EZs still cover key industrial sites and generate valuable retained business rates that support local growth. The government plans to fold EZs into the new Industrial Strategy Zones, so that where an EZ sits inside an ISZ boundary, it can be brought under the same governance structure. A final thought Growth zones are only as powerful as the ambition behind them. Rebranding Freeports and Investment Zones as ISZs won’t, on its own, fix regional inequality or spark investment overnight. But it does give local leaders a more coherent, better aligned tool under their belt provided they’re ready to wield it. Article by Liam Cox, Senior Consultant at AMION.
Introducing our Place Economics Team
Our Team Across the UK, towns and cities are facing complex and interconnected challenges: how to attract investment, regenerate centres, unlock brownfield sites and ensure communities can thrive. Meeting these challenges requires a blend of skills and perspectives. AMION’s Place Economics team has been established to provide just that. By combining expertise in economics, property and planning, we are able to help clients build stronger cases for investment, shape regeneration strategies and demonstrate the long-term benefits of development. What we do Our team provides a full suite of services to support partners in making the case for place-based investment. This includes: Where we’re making a difference The Place Economics team is already involved in major projects across the country: Each of these projects demonstrates our ability to provide both analytical depth and practical insight, ensuring investment delivers real outcomes: new homes, quality jobs and vibrant, sustainable communities. Why it matters Good places don’t happen by accident. They are the result of careful planning, strong partnerships and evidence-led decision-making. Our Place Economics team is dedicated to ensuring that the case for investing in places is not only robust but compelling. We work with clients to show how regeneration and development projects deliver benefits that last – improving wellbeing, supporting inclusive growth and creating environments where people and businesses can flourish. Connect with us Discover our Place Economics Guide Subscribe to our newsletter to receive future updates!
AMION Shortlisted for iED Award
AMION’s independent evaluation of Historic England’s High Streets Heritage Action Zones (HSHAZ) programme has been shortlisted for an Institute of Economic Development (iED) Award. The recognition highlights the impact that heritage-led regeneration can deliver when undertaken at scale and in partnership with communities. Between 2020 and 2024, the HSHAZ programme operated across 67 historic high streets in England, combining targeted investment in buildings and shopfronts with cultural initiatives and community engagement. Key Outcomes This shortlist reflects not only the quantitative achievements but also the wider outcomes: the conservation of local heritage, empowerment of communities, and renewed purpose for historic town centres.
New Directors appointed at AMION
AMION Consulting is delighted to announce the promotion of Matt Budd and Jonathan Guest to Directors. Their appointments reflect both their individual strengths and the organisation’s commitment to building leadership capacity across research, evaluation, policy and strategy. Strengthening our leadership team As AMION continues to grow and diversify, strengthening our leadership is an important step in ensuring we remain a trusted adviser to clients across housing, regeneration, skills and infrastructure. These appointments also follow the retirement of Brenda, our former Director of Evaluation and Regeneration, who has played a central role in developing AMION’s reputation for robust analysis and evaluation. Matt Budd – Director of Research and Evaluation Matt has been central to the expansion of AMION’s research and evaluation capability, delivering high-quality work across regeneration, housing, skills and infrastructure. His thoughtful, collaborative and rigorous approach has earned him recognition both inside and outside the organisation. As Director, Matt will now shape the future of AMION’s evaluation service. His priorities include: With accountability and evidence increasingly central to public and private sector investment decisions, Matt’s leadership will ensure AMION continues to deliver evaluations that are credible, impactful and valued. Jonathan Guest – Director of Policy, Strategy and Employment Jon brings energy, creativity and innovation to his work, always encouraging clients and colleagues to think differently about complex challenges. His expertise spans policy analysis, employment and skills, and strategic planning, making him ideally placed to lead our new policy, strategy and employment department. In his role as Director, Jon will focus on: This department reflects AMION’s recognition that employment and skills are increasingly at the heart of successful regeneration and economic development. Jon’s leadership will strengthen our ability to support clients in shaping strategies that deliver both opportunity and resilience. Looking ahead The promotions of Matt and Jon come at an exciting moment for AMION Consulting. With major commissions underway across housing, regeneration and infrastructure, and growing demand for rigorous evaluation and strategic insight, their leadership will help position the organisation for the next phase of growth. Both new Directors will play a vital role not only in shaping their departments but also in contributing to AMION’s overall direction. Their promotions demonstrate our commitment to developing internal talent, responding to market needs and ensuring our clients continue to receive high-quality advice and analysis. We congratulate Matt and Jon on their well-deserved promotions and look forward to the impact they will make in their new roles. Their leadership will help ensure that AMION continues to deliver research, evaluation, policy and strategy services that support better decision-making, stronger communities and long-term public value.
Homes England Design Quality Study: Strengthening the case with Homes England
AMION Consulting has been appointed by Homes England, through its Strategic Research, Economics and Evaluation Framework, to examine how the design of homes and neighbourhoods contributes to economic, financial and social value. Why design quality matters Across government, local authorities and the housing sector, there is growing recognition that good design does more than shape how a place looks. It influences how people live, how communities interact, and how local economies grow. Well-designed homes and neighbourhoods support healthier lifestyles, foster pride of place and strengthen resilience, while poor design can create long-term social and economic costs. From the layout of streets and the integration of green space, to the variety of housing types and ease of access to services, every design decision shapes outcomes that last for generations. Yet too often, design quality has been undervalued in planning and investment decisions, particularly where short-term cost savings are prioritised over long-term benefits. This commission with Homes England seeks to address that imbalance. By building a robust evidence base, we aim to give policymakers, investors and delivery partners the confidence to back design quality as a driver of market value, wellbeing and resilience. Measuring real-world benefits AMION’s work focuses on developing approaches to quantify the real-world benefits of good housing design. This includes assessing how design can: By converting these outcomes into measurable economic and financial terms, we move beyond aspiration. We demonstrate how design decisions create tangible value and reduce long-term risks, ensuring that quality becomes central to business cases, appraisals and investment strategies. Policy alignment and design codes This work is closely aligned with the government’s National Model Design Code, which sets out clear expectations for what good design should look like and how it can be adapted to local context. The Code provides a framework for local authorities, developers and communities to embed quality in planning, ensuring that design is not overlooked as housing delivery accelerates. It also ties into Homes England’s Strategic Plan 2023–28, which emphasises the need to combine delivery at scale with sustainability, levelling up and long-term value. By evidencing how good design supports levelling up – through healthier, more inclusive communities—and contributes to net-zero ambitions, this commission strengthens the case for putting quality at the heart of housing policy. Building on a trusted partnership This latest commission extends AMION’s long-standing relationship with Homes England and reflects our track record of providing research, appraisal and advice at the intersection of place and policy. Our work has shaped national guidance including the Additionality Guide, the Employment Densities Guide and parts of HM Treasury’s Green Book. We have evaluated major regeneration and infrastructure investments, providing insight into how public spending translates into real-world outcomes. This experience places us in a strong position to explore the complex links between design, placemaking and value. We understand both the methodological challenges of measuring long-term impacts and the practical needs of policymakers, developers and investors for clear, defensible evidence. Looking ahead The outputs of this commission will provide Homes England with tools and insights that help embed design quality as a core consideration in planning, funding and delivery. Our goal is to ensure that design is recognised not as a luxury or aesthetic preference, but as a critical factor in building resilient, sustainable and valuable places. By demonstrating how design supports economic growth, social inclusion and environmental responsibility, we can make the case for housing that delivers benefits well beyond the immediate build. This strengthens the foundations for levelling up, accelerates progress towards net-zero, and helps create communities where people genuinely want to live. At AMION, we are proud to support this important agenda and look forward to continuing our collaboration with Homes England in building better homes, stronger communities and lasting public value. Contact us to see how we can help with your housing project.
Infrastructure Strategy: A Decade of Ambition Unveiled
Last week, the UK Government launched a bold new vision: a £725 billion commitment over the next 10 years to reshape the nation’s infrastructure and services. This isn’t just about new bridges and better broadband (although we love those too) – it’s about unlocking economic growth, tackling regional inequalities and making all public services fit for the future. 🚆🏥🌍 Here’s what stands out: · £725 billion minimum investment committed through to 2034-35 – a generational opportunity to modernise and future-proof the UK. · A new National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (NISTA) to ensure efficient project delivery and use of funds. · A strong regional focus, with targeted investments to unlock growth and improve connectivity nationwide. At AMION, we recognise the pivotal role this strategy plays in shaping the UK’s future. Our expertise in strategic planning and economic analysis positions us to support stakeholders in navigating and capitalising on these developments. We’re excited to help shape what comes next. You can read the full strategy here:https://lnkd.in/gg4n7BGJ Contact us at info@amion.co.uk to see how we can support your project. This post first appeared on LinkedIn #infrastructure strategy #amion #growth
Industrial Strategy? YES PLEASE! But let’s talk about the messy bits too
After years of lukewarm commitment, the emergence of a coherent plan to support long-term economic growth is genuinely good news. But as with any strategy trying to tackle everything, everywhere, all at once, there are layers. And beneath them? A few bubbling policy conundrums we need to talk about. AMION’s Jonathan Guest gives his take on the new Industrial Strategy. Context: Reindustrialising in a Chaotic World Let’s start with the big picture. We’re talking about reindustrialising Britain at a time of deep geopolitical uncertainty – a conflict-ridden Middle East, ongoing war in Ukraine and global supply chains under strain. Finance: Backing Ambition with Capital One area where the strategy makes real progress is access to finance. Talking with employers – especially in manufacturing and life sciences – the message is clear: Investment only flows when risk is manageable. This strategy rightly leans on public finance to de-risk private capital, especially in emerging technologies and regions where confidence is uneven. Whether it’s £27.8 billion from the National Wealth Fund or more flexible tools via the British Business Bank, this is exactly the kind of long-term, anchored support businesses have been calling for. Skills: Economic Infrastructure, Not a Side Note The commitment to skills is one of the strategy’s strongest points. It places skills at the core – not the periphery – of economic planning. Sectors like clean energy and AI are already facing skills shortages and this strategy treats talent as infrastructure, not an afterthought. Sector strategies can focus attention and funding, but they also risk being too neat. Take advanced manufacturing – it’s not one thing, it’s a web of technologies, capabilities, and aspirations. And let’s not forget: innovation comes in surprising places.Case in point: one analysis showed the top private R&D investor in a region (in a given year) was… a sandwich manufacturer. If that’s not a reason to broaden our lens, I don’t know what is. Data: Powerful, But Messy The strategy rightly backs data for growth, but let’s be real: this is still a work in progress. We’re dealing with inconsistent datasets, unclear classifications, and fuzzy boundaries. The Conundrum: Too Many Missions? Mission-led growth? It’s compelling—and the case has been made. But what happens when we have too many missions? Or when they become too broad to guide real decisions? That’s a lot of moving parts. We risk overwhelming delivery teams and underachieving on outcomes. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/industrial-strategy
All to play for – but the Green Book still serves from Treasury
Us economists live sheltered lives, with an abacus in one hand and a well-worn copy of the Green Book in the other. So, when a Spending Review and a Green Book consultation land on the same day, it’s basically our version of a solar eclipse. Now I’ve fully recovered from all this interplanetary excitement, I thought it only fair I attempted to unpick what the GB review findings mean for us economic development folks. Evolution, not revolution When the Chancellor announced the Green Book review back in January there was much excited chatter in certain quarters – principally north of the Watford Gap – that HMT was about to completely rewrite the rules governing public investment orthodoxy. Although I don’t profess to be prophetic – my wife holds that talent – my blogs did pour a sizeable glass of cold water on such optimism bias (see what I did there?). The main takeaway was that the review had “not found conclusive evidence that the methodology set out in the Green Book is biased towards certain regions”. These are not my words but lifted directly from the HMT findings. Whilst a simple sentence, it’s also quite telling. It’s worth remembering that the argument often disseminating from some politicians was that it was biased towards certain regions…namely London and the Southeast. With Wimbledon just around the corner, HMT have seemingly lobbed that argument back over the net. Rumours fade, land value uplift rises Avid followers of my blogging – all two of you – will recall that when politicians talk of “bias” they are really pointing their fingers to an abstract economic modelling technique called land value uplift. Hold on! Hold on! Please stay with me, this matters to getting your project approved. Very briefly – I promise – land value uplift or LVU for us Green Book fanatics, is the government’s preferred method of assessing benefit from land and property schemes. If you want to get your regeneration scheme over the line, you need to make sure there’s sufficient “LVU” or other benefits to get a good enough Benefit Cost Ratio, or BCR. However, it’s worth noting that the focus now is often more on those external benefits such as wider area impacts rather than LVU. Okay, I’ll stop now. So, what did HMT say about “LVU” – the longstanding bugbear of practitioners with depressed land values? In their findings it stated that the “government’s approach to assessing land value uplift does not skew decisions in favour of more affluent areas, at the expense of less affluent areas.” A-ha! The king is dead. Long live the king. Guidance updated, orthodoxy untouched? Whilst there was a much-welcomed discussion around the need to emphasise place-based analysis, the constant over-emphasis on BCRs, plus the long and complicated guidance (nothing to see here, constable), it is telling that after cutting through the smog, HMT have seemingly backed the core Green Book methodology (for built development schemes at least). I will reiterate that this does not diminish the recommendations – which are to be saluted – but simply to playback the HMT words. A new Green Book is pencilled in for 2026. Game, set and match for HMT orthodoxy? Simon Dancer is a Board Member of the iED, and a Director at AMION Consulting. Read Green Book Review 2025: Findings and actions.
Oxfordshire Business Awards
AMION were out in force at the Oxfordshire Business Awards last night, celebrating the excellence and innovation of Oxfordshire-based businesses. Coming hot on the heels of the Spending Review, the awards provided a timely reminder that the Oxford-Cambridge Arc remains firmly in the spotlight as a key driver of UK growth. At the stunning John Henry Brookes Building, our very own Matt Budd and Simon Dancer (he’s the one channelling Colonel Sanders) caught up with local business leaders. The message was loud and clear: delivering on the Arc’s ambitious potential will require serious government backing.
Spending Review – Beyond the Headlines
After months of tense political wrangling and a few moments worthy of Malcolm Tucker himself, the Spending Review has finally landed. In the latest version of our newsletter, AMION’s spending review veteran, Graham Russell, cuts through the noise to explain what it really means for economic development. Essential reading for anyone working in place-based growth, regeneration or regional growth. Read Graham’s take below and sign up for future newsletters: