![Sample our Built Environment journals, sign in here to start your access, Latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5926/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Built-Environment.jpg"})
Abstract
The UK Labour government's planning reform (2001–2010) intended to create a more proactive, creative and flexible planning culture. However, as the reforms progressed, public-sector planners increasingly lacked confidence. This article explores texts and contemporaneous interview material through an analysis of uncertainty and risk to present the tensions within the reform narratives, the continually changing context and the provision of contradictory advice from multiple outlets. We demonstrate how the proactive flexible planning message came to be read through a message of performance targets and consider how the various factors coalesced to produce an uncertain practice environment which many public-sector planners interpreted as ‘risky’.
Acknowledgements
The author acknowledges the assistance of Newcastle University's Strategic Development Fund in providing the resources for this research.
Notes
1 Regional Government Offices predated 1997. Regional Development Agencies and Regional Assemblies were set up in 1997. Other regional bodies also emerged: Regional Transport Boards, Regional Housing Boards, etc. These were subsequently subsumed first into the Regional Assemblies (2006), and then along with the Regional Assemblies themselves into the Regional Development Agencies (2007). The Conservative–Liberal Democrat coalition government abolished the regional tier in 2011.
2 These targets linked to strategies and service agreements evolved over the period from best value (2001) through local public service agreements (2004–2005) and local area agreements (2007) to multi-area agreements (2009–2010; Figure , middle tier) – changing focus as they did so.
3 Characterized by reactive planning, restricted to land-use matter, seeking to minimize harm of new development as determined through the applications process in relation to the local plan.
4 Characterised by proactive planning to enhance place qualities and service provision to maximize benefits and partnership working through managed development.
5 The departments responsible for planning during this period were (in sequence): Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR; Citation1997–2001), DTLR (Citation2001–2002), Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM; Citation2002–2006) and Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG; Citation2006–present).
6 See Douglas and Wildavsky (Citation1983).
7 The coalition government has removed central government targets.
8 The Planning Delivery Grant was introduced in 2003–2004; the housing element was added in 2007 to encourage planners to focus on achieving the national housing targets in relation to delivering more housebuilding.
9 Interviewed in relation to how service delivery influenced professional practice.
10 This interview was conducted as part of the work on professional discretionary space.
11 This was in relation to the discussion on the production of the core strategy and reasons for delays. While clearly not a party to the reasons for the senior officer being absent, the officer was of the view that the stress was related to the core strategy production.
12 One planning officer reported that his boss thought that the new system was the same as the old, just the names had changed (strategic planning officer, interview, 2009, discussing the reforms).
13 Strategic planning officer in a small rural authority discussing the reforms.
14 In the UK, development decisions are more open to contestation where local authorities do not have an up-to-date plan. This is costly for all involved.
15 The Department for Culture, Media and Sport ceased to fund CABE in 2011–2012. CABE has now merged with the Design Council (http://www.communities.gov.uk/news/housing/1841458).
16 The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs retained Natural England, but Cabinet Office is seeking considerable organisational change (http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/sites/default/files/resources/public-bodies-proposals-for-change.pdf).
17 Much of this was reviewed as part of the coalition's ‘getting rid of red tape’ agenda (http://www.communities.gov.uk/localgovernment/about/helpcutredtape/).