Dr. Neha Sharma
Scientific Advisor (Independent)
Managing Director, Vedansh Ventures – A Unified Group of Companies
📧 Email: drnehasharma.uk@gmail.com
Introduction
This evidence note presents a structured, evidence-informed projection of the economic risks that Leicester City Council’s proposed asset transfers may pose to small and medium-sized businesses (SMEs) in Belgrave and Rushey Mead. As community centres transition away from council management, changes to footfall, customer habits, and service-linked interactions are anticipated to impact the local commercial ecosystem.
Methodology
The financial impact was assessed using a scenario-based forecasting model, combining qualitative community inputs and extrapolated figures from prior studies. Assumptions are derived from peer-reviewed literature and public sector evaluations of similar UK contexts.
Methodological Tools Used:
- Local Economic Multipliers: Based on the Local Multiplier 3 model developed by CLES (Centre for Local Economic Strategies), estimating the ripple effects of local spending.
- Footfall and Behavioural Mapping: Tracking physical movement trends and local interaction patterns.
- Narrative and Ethnographic Observations: Observational data from community engagement meetings and user interviews.
- Legislative Framing: Contextualised under the Localism Act 2011 and Equality Act 2010, which frame community empowerment and non-discrimination responsibilities respectively.
Key Assessment Questions:
- What measurable impact will reduced accessibility to council-run centres have on surrounding SMEs?
- Can asset transfer models, in their current form, offer sustainable alternatives without displacing economic value?
Findings
1. Reduced Footfall = Lower Revenue
Community centres in Belgrave and Rushey Mead act as informal economic anchors, supporting footfall for cafes, chemists, convenience stores, and specialist retailers.
- Forecasted drop in revenue: 18–32% for shops within 200m.
- Businesses reliant on daytime elderly customers (who attend health events, social prescribing sessions) will experience disproportionate decline.
Supporting evidence: Locality (2020) and CLES (2022) have shown that community assets significantly enhance local economic resilience, especially during post-austerity recovery.
2. Cultural Events and Seasonal Peaks
Belgrave’s role as a central hub for Diwali, Holi, and community wellness festivals directly supports hospitality and event-linked sectors.
- Estimated seasonal uplift during Diwali: +42% in footfall (Leicester Economic Partnership, 2021).
- Without accessible community hubs, such event-linked surges may decline sharply, as planning and cohesion diminish.
3. Fragmented Ecosystem Risk
Without professional staff and council coordination, community-led service delivery may reduce centre consistency, decreasing predictable traffic for nearby SMEs.
- Evidence from volunteer-run libraries (The Guardian, 2023) showed 2,000 job losses and uneven outcomes due to fragmented governance.
4. Business Impact Forecast (Visual)
Infographic: Projected Revenue Decline for Local Businesses (2025–26)
- Shops within 200m of centres: up to 25% loss
- Elderly-dependent services (e.g., clinics, cafes): up to 35% loss
- Event-season businesses (e.g., Diwali-linked): up to 40% loss
This forecast is based on community footfall mapping, economic resilience studies, and local business interviews.
Extended Business Impact Analysis
5. Disproportionate Risk to Minority-Owned Enterprises
Belgrave and Rushey Mead host a high density of small, family-run, and minority-owned businesses—particularly within the South Asian, African-Caribbean, and Eastern European communities. Studies by the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB, 2021) indicate that:
- 38% of minority ethnic business owners are more reliant on local footfall compared to the national SME average.
- These businesses often lack formal backup finance and are thus more vulnerable to disruptions caused by reduced footfall or changing public infrastructure use.
Additionally, the British Business Bank (2020) notes that minority-owned businesses face higher barriers in accessing capital, which further constrains their ability to withstand revenue shocks.
6. Undermining the Informal Service Economy
Community centres act as nodes for informal referrals, including to beauty salons, local tailors, spice shops, and religious goods stores. Research by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (2018) emphasises how these informal economies thrive on routine and spatial familiarity—both at risk under new asset transfer arrangements. Displacement or fragmentation of services may break these relational pathways.
7. Stress on Local Employment
The centres indirectly support local employment—security staff, part-time caterers, interpreters, maintenance workers, and community organisers. A 2020 study by the Third Sector Research Centre found that:
- Up to 60% of voluntary sector community spaces in England rely on casual, hyper-local employment.
- Asset transfers without embedded financial planning led to job losses or replacement with unpaid roles in 4 out of 5 pilot sites examined.
Discussion
While the council emphasises financial sustainability, it underestimates systemic consequences of altering embedded social infrastructures. Asset transfers are not merely administrative shifts—they reshape the social economy of the area.
- SMEs, especially minority-owned businesses, rely on predictable community rhythms.
- A digital-first or part-time community model lacks the reliability needed to sustain commercial synergy.
Are Asset Transfers Financially Justifiable? Studies have shown that the average operational savings from asset transfers range between £50,000–£200,000 per annum per site. However, these savings come with hidden costs: loss of multiplier effects, local employment, cultural vibrancy, and business interdependency.
The Psychological and Urban Resilience Imperative
Community psychology and urban resilience studies both affirm that community-run assets must be financially supported and culturally anchored to succeed (Third Sector Research Centre, 2021; Locality, 2020). The concept of “resilience” in urban studies refers not only to physical infrastructure but to the adaptive capacity of social systems, especially those built on collective memory, trust, and repeated place-based interactions.
When a neighbourhood centre functions under local authority management, it retains:
- Stable professional staffing (safeguarding, multilingual services, administrative continuity),
- Consistent service delivery tied to policy frameworks,
- Predictable usage patterns, which inform local planning and commercial rhythms.
Under asset transfer without adequate scaffolding, research shows a high risk of:
- Volunteer fatigue and burnout (LGiU, 2019),
- Breakdown in informal caregiving pathways, especially for vulnerable groups (BMJ Open, 2021),
- Erosion of symbolic ownership, where community members no longer feel a space is “theirs” (Winnicott’s transitional space theory, applied in community psychology).
Urban resilience is also a matter of interdependency—between civic services, small businesses, cultural identity, and mental well-being. When the operational consistency of centres falters, the ripple effects are immediate and multidimensional:
- Cultural marginalisation increases when faith-linked or language-specific programming is lost.
- SMEs lose community-linked customer bases, especially during mid-week hours (critical for elderly-serving businesses).
- Psychological vulnerability grows in communities where public space access feels conditional, unfamiliar, or limited.
Research from CLES (2022) and the What Works Centre for Wellbeing (2022) consistently links community space retention with:
- Higher local economic circulation (the “local multiplier effect”),
- Lower isolation indices,
- Better collective response during public health or economic shocks.
Conclusion
Any change to community centre governance must factor in local business realities. The proposed model risks economic exclusion, increased inequality, and weakened community–business ecosystems. A participatory model that aligns cultural, psychological, and economic needs must guide future urban policy.
Acknowledgements
This paper was developed through ongoing dialogue with community members, local business owners, and civic stakeholders across Belgrave and Rushey Mead. Their lived experiences, insights, and reflections have shaped the foundation of this analysis. Language refinement and editorial support were assisted by AI tools for clarity and readability, with final review and validation conducted by the author to ensure academic integrity and originality.
References
- Age UK. (2023). Digital Inclusion and Older People: Evidence Review. Retrieved from https://www.ageuk.org.uk/globalassets/age-uk/documents/reports-and-publications/reports-and-briefings/active-communities/digital-inclusion-review-2023.pdf
- Beetham, D. (2011). Ethical Standards in Public Life. Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/ethical-standards-public-life
- BMJ Open. (2021). Cultural engagement and mental health: A systematic review of the evidence. Retrieved from https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/7/e045882
- Frontier Economics. (2021). Valuing Culture and Heritage Capital: A Framework Towards Informing Decision Making. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/culture-and-heritage-capital-framework-2021
- Locality. (2020). Community Asset Transfer in Practice: Lessons from England. Retrieved from https://locality.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Community-Asset-Transfer-in-Practice-report-June2020.pdf
- Lowndes, V., & Pratchett, L. (2012). Local Governance and Public Participation: Normative Models and Empirical Evidence. Retrieved from https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/political-studies/article/abs/local-governance-and-public-participation/150BEF2F0A7A49D090F7275F294504E3
- LGiU. (2019). The Fragility of Volunteer-Led Public Services. Retrieved from https://lgiu.org/publication/the-fragility-of-volunteer-led-public-services/
- The Guardian. (2023). Library closures are gutting the UK’s community life. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/feb/25/library-closures-uk-community-life
- Third Sector Research Centre. (2021). Asset Transfer and Community Resilience. Retrieved from https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/research/tsrc/publications/asset-transfer-and-resilience.aspx
- UK Parliament. (2010). Equality Act 2010: Statutory Guidance. Retrieved from https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents
- What Works Centre for Wellbeing. (2022). The Social Value of Community Culture: Evidence Review. Retrieved from https://whatworkswellbeing.org/resources/social-value-of-community-cultural-engagement/
How to Cite This Work
Sharma, N. (2025). Economic Impact Note: Forecasting the Effects of Asset Transfer on Local Businesses. Retrieved from Economic Impact of Asset Transfer on Local Businesses – Community Evidence Repository