Opportunity knocks – what prospects for the ‘new breed’ of Enterprise Zones? Author: Dr Paul Greenhalgh, Reader in Property Economics, School of the Built and Natural Environment, Northumbria University. (a shortened version of this article is being published in Planning dated 20 th May 2011) Introduction Enterprise Zones were first introduced in the U.K. in 1980 and their influence, and the distortion they create in local property markets, is well recognised and long‐lived. There is a wealth of literature both from the U.K. and U.S.A. about their strengths (encouraging capital investment in locations that might otherwise receive little attention) and weaknesses (occupier displacement and poor value for money to name a couple). Scrutinising the Enterprise Zone Prospectus (CLG 2011) published shortly after the Chancellor announced the Government’s intention to introduce up to 21 new EZs in England, it is evident that there is some cognisance amongst policy makers of the flaws and side‐effects of the old model. This article reviews the new proposals and offers comparison with the ‘old style’ EZs. The Government announced its intention to a ‘new breed’ EZs, with a first ‘vanguard’ phase of 11 LEP‐led zones to be designated in selected urban areas/city regions. Remaining LEPs are invited to submit expressions of interest in a second phase, of up to 10 zones, by the end of this month. The driver for their reintroduction is the Government’s desire to be seen to be reducing barriers and burdens for business, including planning reform, and the pro‐growth agenda being promoted by the Chancellor. The Government claims to be interested in ‘creating growth conditions’ by backing areas with ‘real potential’ and ‘genuine economic opportunity’. Clearly there is significant potential for optimism bias in the resulting bids for EZ status. Designation and Selection of sites New breed EZs are to be designated only in England, whereas old style EZs were one of the few urban initiatives that were rolled out across the whole of the U.K.. Local Enterprise Partnerships are to take the lead role in the selection and designation of new EZs, with a notional allocation of one per LEP. It is unclear what will happen where there are overlapping LEPs. The distribution of zones based on natural/functional economic areas is a potential improvement on old style EZs which often bore little relation to local economies. An interesting question is who will have the final say in determining designation. Will it be the business‐led LEP, its Local Authority partners or Central Government? The EZ prospectus indicates that there must be unanimity between all LAs making up the LEP for designation, thus it only needs one authority in a LEP area to oppose designation for it not to happen. This will add an interesting dynamic to the horse trading that will inevitably take place over where zones should be located, and increase the prospect of parochialism and vested interests coming to the fore, as areas compete for a zone in their area. Managing this process could be the sternest test faced by the fledgling LEPs to date.