What Future for Green Infrastructure Planning? Evaluating the Changing Environment for Green Infrastructure Planning Following the Revocation of Regional Planning Policy in England

ABSTRACT

The revocation of the regional tier of planning by the UK Coalition Government in 2010 removed the established framework of strategic planning in England. Using a case study of green infrastructure (GI), this paper examines whether revocation has negatively impacted the development of environmental, and specifically GI policies and practice. It questions if changing government policy narratives have hindered advocacy and subsequently the delivery of GI and the extent to which it has been able to position itself as a mainstream approach in planning. Using the development of the RSS in England, and the North-East and East of England sub-regional GI strategies (areas of significant policy development), as case studies, the paper presents an ex-ante evaluation prior to revocation of the evolution of GI policy at a regional scale, alongside an ex-post assessment (2011–2015) of its continued growth within sub-regional policies. The paper concludes that whilst RSSs provided a promotional forum, that revocation has not negatively impacted upon GI development, as its advocates have facilitated a supportive policy-implementation environment which has led to the development of more integrated approaches in planning praxis.

KEYWORDS:

• Regional planning policy
• planning advocacy
• green space planning
• local Government

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the reviewers for their insightful comments, the editorial team at Planning Practice and Research for their support with the paper, and Bertie Dockerill for comments on earlier drafts of the paper.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. The RSS process involved consultation with a broad range of Local Planning Authority (LPA), Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO), Environmental Non-Governmental Organisation (ENGO) and advocacy stakeholders who were required to comment on the strategic planning objectives for each region. Sub-regional policy work was undertaken through a more refined process of consultation with stakeholders but did not require the same level of input, discussion or examination. The latter also reflects on the number of sub-regional GI policy documents which have increased post-revocation, as additional responsibility for the development of GI has been placed on LPAs and advocates, rather than RDAs.

2. Government Offices for the Regions (GORs) were established in 1994 and were tasked with maximising regional prosperity and quality of life in the regions, as well as overseeing the development and presentation of regional performance statistics (Cullingworth et al., 2015).

3. The Regional Development Agencies were created in 1998 through the Regional Development Agencies Act and were the statutory bodies charged with delivering strategic economic development, promoting business/competitiveness/employment, and sustainable development. They replaced the UK government as the administrator for European Union Regional Development Funds (ERDF) (Cullingworth et al., 2015).

4. The grey/practitioner literature refers to materials published by non-academic sources. Examples would include research published by planning consultants, environmental organisations and local/central government.

5. These included: connectivity, sustainability, strategic investments, multiple benefits, access, and importantly multi-functionality.

6. One example would be the inclusion of GI in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (Department of Communities and Local Government, 2018), where the term is mentioned but only superficially, and a deeper discussion of its meanings or socio-economic or ecological benefits is not outlined or aligned to other policy mandates. Thus, the inclusion of GI within the NPPF could be considered to be somewhat tokenistic.

7. The paper acknowledges that a time lag is evident in the process of GI policy development at a sub-regional scale. A number of the policies discussed were approved for development prior to the revocation of the RSS and will therefore have been delivered after the event. However, the scope and focus of these documents can be analysed to assess the links to the RSS documents and the role played by advocacy agents in ensuring these policies were finalised and adopted.

8. These characteristics have subsequently been used by Natural England & Landuse Consultants (2009) to shape their guidance on GI investment at a sub-national scale.

9. This figure does not include the South West, as the area did not adopt a final RSS document. If this region is included the percentage of regions with a defined green infrastructure policy falls to 67%.

10. This implies that policy is focussed on delivering green infrastructure objectives as its primary target, whilst other policies may debate green infrastructure as a secondary or tertiary issue.

11. The production timeframe for such documentation is a normally a minimum of 6 months, but most frequently at least a year. Therefore, a number of documents published between 2007 and 2012 would potentially have been supported (and funded) in conjunction with the RSS process. However, this does not apply to all documentation, especially those sub-regional policies developed post-revocation in the North-East.

12. The East of England has no Community Forest Partnership to lead the process of GI development.

13. Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) are voluntary partnerships between LPAs and businesses. They were initially established in 2011 by the UK government Department of Business, Skills and Innovation (BIS) to promote local economic prosperity and conducted some of the functions formally associated with the RDAs.

14. Local Nature Partnerships are voluntary partnerships of LPAs, businesses, ENGOs, and people with an interest in promoting improvements to the natural environment.

15. Local Plans and the Core Strategies located within them are the main process of strategic development planning for LPAs in the UK. The Local Plan is a suite of policies and guidance that provides the evidence to support the Core Strategy, which sets out the development objectives of a specific location.