Chapter 1 emphasised the difficulties of obtaining a clear picture of the contribution of small firms to regional and local economic development. It was stressed that this was partly due to differences in definitions of the term ‘small firm’, partly due to differences in the levels of prosperity in the areas studied and partly due to differences in approach adopted by the researchers. Whilst in no way wishing to underestimate the extent of these differences, there also appears to be a high degree of consistency in certain research findings. In this chapter both differences and similarities are highlighted and a personal view is offered by the editor of the implications of these findings for public policy.

The impact which policies designed to create employment and wealth in small firms can have, within a time scale such as ten years, is discussed by virtually all authors. It is clear from these papers that the impact of such policies is very long term. For example Gould and Keeble show that in East Anglia 8,478 jobs were created in a decade. In Table 3.3 they compare employment in new firms in three counties of East Anglia (Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire) with employment in new firms in Northern England (Durham, Cleveland and Tyne and Wear). They show that although on balance employment creation rates in new firms are higher in East Anglia than in Northern England, this is almost exclusively due to the ‘Cambridge/Cleveland Effect’.