ClusterOS Regional Diagnostic
Tees Valley Combined Authority
Tees Valley Combined Authority's innovation footprint draws £3.40bn of UKRI lead-led funding across 758 grants spanning 4 active clusters, with Tees Valley Life Sciences (83%) the largest single cluster and Centre For Process Innovation (78%) the dominant regional anchor by UKRI £.
The region shows high-confidence "Validation–Coordination" stabilisation stacks at ecosystem grain — validation activity recurs through programmes and partnerships without the testing-and-narrowing motion that converts capability into market position.
Tap diagram to enlarge
Same data examined through five diagnostic lenses — Pipeline, Leverage, Triple Helix, Throughput, Collaboration. The interactive diagnostic is currently in private preview.
Sources: UKRI Gateway to Research (grants, outcomes); OpenAlex (publications); Companies House (spin-out lifecycle); DSIT (cluster mapping); Public investment data. Snapshot May 2026.
| Cluster | Regime | Dominant stalls | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tees Valley Net Zero | Permission-Validation | Stabilising Around Incumbents, Re-proving Instead of Narrowing, Extracting Without Reinvesting | 86 |
| Tees Valley Manufacturing | Permission-Validation | Coordinating Instead of Deciding, Extracting Without Reinvesting, Stabilising Around Incumbents | 88 |
| Tees Valley Digital | Permission-Validation | Coordinating Instead of Deciding, Stabilising Around Incumbents, Waiting for Permission | 82 |
| Tees Valley Life Sciences | Permission-Validation | Coordinating Instead of Deciding, Extracting Without Reinvesting, Stabilising Around Incumbents | 75 |
Dominant stacks · Most common stabilisation patterns in the region
Re-proving requires coordination to appear credible; coordination requires permission to proceed; waiting extends the re-proving cycle; all three signals absorbed by the validation-permission loop.
Coordination and mediation together constitute a permission architecture; waiting sustains both processes; all three opportunity-absorbing mechanisms reinforce each other.
Incumbents extract value while functioning as permission gatekeepers; waiting for permission delays autonomous actor formation; incumbent centrality reinforces the permission architecture that sustains extraction.
Coordination routes through incumbents as primary nodes; waiting for incumbent-sanctioned decisions sustains the coordination requirement; incumbent authority reinforced by being the node through which coordination and permission flow.
Coordination delays structural response to extraction by converting it into a process task; waiting delays autonomous actor formation; extraction continues while coordination and permission-seeking absorb both response capacity and opportunity signals.
Top leverage hypotheses
"If one actor (e.g. Teesside University via National Horizons Centre or Launchpad) were to validate a capability claim by deploying it commercially without prior TVCA coordination or external policy designation, it might reduce the system's ability to absorb demand signals through re-proving cycles."
"If one actor (e.g., anchor institution, large manufacturer, or new entrant) launched a testable initiative (e.g., direct manufacturer-to-manufacturer collaboration, autonomous investment outside designated zones, or programme with pre-committed exit criteria) without prior coordination or permission-seeking, it might reduce the system's ability to absorb opportunity via re-proving and waiting loops, exposing whether validation-by-doing is viable."
"If one business support programme were launched without prior coordination across all 5 local authorities (using mayoral investment powers under devolution deal), it might reduce the system's ability to absorb opportunity signals through validation-permission cycles without requiring structural redesign."