8/8 Project supported by @britishacademy.bsky.social and also linked to the earlier article "Capital cities in multi-level settings: Assessing Scottish and Welsh residents’ perceptions of London, Edinburgh and Cardiff", published in @bjpir.bsky.social

Open access: doi.org/10.1177/1369...

7/8

📄 Open access link:
doi.org/10.1080/2162...

6/8 The takeaway:
If devolution is to retain legitimacy, its local reach matters as much as its national narrative.

Strengthening devolution requires ensuring that benefits are felt beyond capitals and urban cores.

5/8 By contrast, those who believe devolution helps “only the capital” (or “not at all”) are far less supportive of both devolved leaders and constitutional reform (i.e. strengthening devolved institutions).

4/8 These perceptions also matter politically.

Seeing devolution as delivering local benefits is strongly associated with:
✔️ in Scotland, greater support for devolved incumbents
✔️ in Scotland & Wales, stronger backing for further devolved powers
✔️ in Scotland, higher support for independence

3/8 This suggests that devolved institutions may have reduced state-wide inequalities, but have not necessarily addressed internal imbalances within Scotland and Wales.

Many communities feel “doubly peripheral”: distant from Westminster and from Edinburgh/Cardiff or urban areas.

2/8 The findings show clear intra-regional patterns in perceptions of who gains from devolution:

In Scotland: an urban–rural divide 🌆🌾
Residents in rural areas are much less likely to feel local benefits.

In Wales: a centre–periphery gap 🏙️↔️🏞️
Perceptions of benefit are concentrated around Cardiff.

1/8 Debates on devolution often focus on Scotland vs Westminster, or Wales vs Westminster.
But where, within devolved nations, are the benefits of devolved power actually felt?

This article uses new survey data to explore these internal territorial divides.