Planning at the neighbourhood scale: localism, dialogic politics and the modulation of community action

This paper builds upon literature examining the foreclosing of community interventions to show how a resident-led anti-road-noise campaign in South-Eastern England has been framed, managed and modulated by authorities. We situate the case within wider debates considering dialogical politics. For advocates, this offers the potential for empowerment through non-traditional forums (Beck, 1994; Giddens, 1994). Others view such trends, most recently expressed as part of the localism agenda, with suspicion (Haughton et al, 2013; Mouffe, 2005). The paper brings together these literatures to analyse the points at which modulation occurs in the community planning process. We describe the types of counter-tactics residents deployed to deflect the modulation of their demands, and the events that led to the outcome. We find that community planning offers a space - albeit one that is tightly circumscribed - within which (select) groups can effect change. The paper argues that the detail of neighbourhood-scale actions warrant further attention, especially as governmental enthusiasm for dialogical modes of politics shows no sign of abating.

The new localism, anti-political development machines, and the role of planning consultants: lessons from London's South Bank

This paper draws on a study of the politics of development planning in London’s South Bank to examine wider trends in the governance of contemporary cities. It assesses the impacts and outcomes of so-called new localist reforms and argues that we are witnessing two principal trends. First, governance processes are increasingly dominated by anti-democratic development machines, characterized by new assemblages of public- and private-sector experts. These machines reflect and reproduce a type of development politics in which there is a greater emphasis on a pragmatic realism and a politics of delivery. Second, the presence of these machines is having a significant impact on the politics of planning. Democratic engagement is not seen as the basis for new forms of localism and community control. Instead, it is presented as a potentially disruptive force that needs to be managed by a new breed of skilled private-sector consultant. The paper examines these wider shifts in urban politics before focusing on the connections between emerging development machines and local residential and business communities. It ends by highlighting some of the wider implications of change for democratic modes of engagement and nodes of resistance in urban politics.

Putting the S-word back into Sustainability: Can we be more social?

In an era dominated by climate change debate and environmentalism there is a real danger that the important ‘social’ pillar of sustainability drops out of our vocabulary. This can happen at a variety of scales from business level through to building and neighbourhood level regeneration and development. Social sustainability should be at the heart of all housing and mixed-use development but for a variety of reasons tends to be frequently underplayed. The recent English city riots have brought this point back sharply into focus. The relationships between people, places and the local economy all matter and this is as true today as it was in the late 19th century when Patrick Geddes, the great pioneering town planner and ecologist, wrote of ‘place-work-folk’. This paper, commissioned from Tim Dixon, explains what is meant by social sustainability (and how it is linked to concepts such as social capital and social cohesion); why the debate matters during a period when ‘localism’ is dominating political debate; and what is inhibiting its growth and its measurement. The paper reviews best practice in post-occupancy social sustainability metric systems, based on recent research undertaken by the author on Dockside Green in Vancouver, and identifi es some of the key operational issues in mainstreaming the concept within major mixed-use projects. The paper concludes by offering a framework for the key challenges faced in setting strategic corporate goals and objectives; prioritising and selecting the most appropriate investments; and measuring social sustainability performance by identifying the required data sources

Cities’ low carbon plans in an ‘age of austerity’: an analysis of UK local authority actions, attitudes and responses

Background: Cities play a significant role globally in creating carbon emissions but, as centers of major population, innovation and social practice, they also offer important opportunities to tackle climate change. The new challenges faced by cities in an ‘age of austerity’ and decentralist agendas present substantial challenges for coordinated multilevel governance. Results: Based on research carried out in 2011–2012, this paper examines the attitudes and responses of sustainability and climate change officers in UK cities that have prepared low carbon and climate change plans, in the context of these challenges. Using a conceptual framework that analyses ‘awareness’, ‘analysis’ and ‘actions’ (in the context of spending cuts and a new ‘decentralized’ policy agenda) this research suggests that progress on low-carbon futures for cities continues to be fragmented, with increased funding constraints, short-termism and lack of leadership acting as key barriers to progress. Conclusion: Recent UK national policies (including localism, austerity measures and new economic incentives) have not only created further uncertainties, but also scope for cities’ local innovation through policy leverage and self-governing actions.

Sticking to the script? The co-production of Neighbourhood Planning in England

Efforts to engage with communities in spatial planning have been criticised as being tokenistic, vehicles for co-option or designed to promote neo-liberal agendas. The introduction of neighbourhood planning (NP) in England under the Localism Act (2011) is claimed by proponents to be a step change in the way that local communities are involved in planning their own areas. However, little empirical evidence has yet emerged to substantiate such claims, or provide details about the practices and experiences of NP. The paper highlights that there are numerous parties involved in the co-production of Neighbourhood Development Plans and there are numerous instances where ideas, policies and priorities that emerge from within neighbourhoods are being ‘rescripted’ to ensure conformity to a bounded form of collaboration.

The take-up of Neighbourhood Planning in England 2011-2015

Exploration of how neighbourhoods and others have responded to the UK government’s localism agenda in England, and specifically towards Neighbourhood Planning (NP), is important given that NP is a prominent part of that policy agenda. It is also of interest as the ramifications emerge for planning practice in the formal introduction of statutory plans which are ostensibly led by communities (Parker et al, 2015; Gallent, 2013). There is a necessary task to provide critical commentary on the socio-economic impact of localist policy. The paper explores the issues arising from experience thus far and highlights the take-up of Neighbourhood Planning since 2011. This assessment shows how a vast majority of those active have been in parished areas and in less-deprived areas. This indicates that government needs to do more to ensure that NP is accessible and worthwhile for a wider range of communities.

The role of Planning Aid England in supporting communities’ engagement in planning

In considering the position of community engagement within planning in a time of neo-liberalism and a context of ‘neo-communitarian localism’ (cf. Jessop, 2002; DeFilippis, 2004), this paper reviews the role and relevance of Planning Aid in terms of its performance and aspirations in guiding and transforming planning practice (Friedmann, 1973; 1987; 2011) since its inception in 1973. In doing this we reflect on the critiques of Planning Aid performance provided by Allmendinger (2004) and bring the account up-to-date following on from past considerations (e.g. Bidwell and Edgar, 1982; Thomas, 1992; Brownill and Carpenter, 2007a,b; Carpenter and Brownill, 2008) and prompted by the 35 years since the University of Reading produced the first published work reviewing Planning Aid (Curtis and Edwards, 1980). Our paper is timely given renewed attacks on planning, the implementation of a form of localism and reductions in funding for planning in a time of austerity. Our view is that the need for forms of ‘neo-advocacy’ planning and community development are perhaps even more necessary now, given the continuing under-representation of lower income groups, minority groups and to allow for the expression of alternative planning futures. Thus further consideration of how to ensure that Planning Aid functions are sustained and understood requires the attention of policymakers and the planning profession more widely.