Obstacles and solutions to maximising urban biodiversity throughout the lifecycles of major developments in England

Thus far, achieving net biodiversity gains through major urban developments has been neither common nor straightforward - despite the presence of incentives, regulatory contexts, and ubiquitous practical guidance tools. A diverse set of obstructions, occurring within different spatial, temporal and actor hierarchies, are experienced by practitioners and render the realisation of maximised biodiversity, a rarity. This research aims to illuminate why this is so, and what needs to be changed to rectify the situation. To determine meaningful findings and conclusions, capable of assisting applied contexts and accommodating a diverse range of influences, a ‘systems approach’ was adopted. This approach led to the use of a multi-strategy research methodology, to identify the key obstructions and solutions to protecting and enhancing biodiversity - incorporating the following methods: action research, a questionnaire to local government ecologists, interviews and personal communications with leading players, and literature reviews. Nevertheless, ‘case studies’ are the predominant research method, the focus being a ‘nested’ case study looking at strategic issues of the largest regeneration area in Europe ‘the Thames Gateway’, and the largest individual mixeduse mega-development in the UK (at the time of planning consent) ‘Eastern Quarry 2’ - set within the Gateway. A further key case study, focussing on the Central Riverside development in Sheffield, identifies the merits of competition and partnership. The nested cases, theories and findings show that the strategic scale - generally relating to governance and prioritisation - impacts heavily upon individual development sites. It also enables the identification of various processes, mechanisms and issues at play on the individual development sites, which primarily relate to project management, planning processes, skills and transdisciplinary working, innovative urban biodiversity design capabilities, incentives, organisational cultures, and socio-ecological resilience. From these findings a way forward is mapped, spanning aspects from strategic governance to detailed project management.

Obstacles and solutions to maximising biodiversity in major urban development schemes

The current rate of global biodiversity loss led many governments to sign the international agreement ‘Halting Biodiversity Loss by 2010 and beyond’ in 2001. The UK government was one of these and has a number of methods to tackle this, such as: commissioning specific technical guidance and supporting the UK Biodiversity Acton Plan (BAP) targets. However, by far the most effective influence the government has upon current biodiversity levels is through the town planning system. This is due to the control it has over all phases of a new development scheme’s lifecycle.There is an increasing myriad of regulations, policies and legislation, which deal with biodiversity protection and enhancement across the hierarchical spectrum: from the global and European level, down to regional and local levels. With these drivers in place, coupled with the promotion of benefits and incentives, increasing biodiversity value ought to be an achievable goal on most, if not all development sites. However, in the professional world, this is not the case due to a number of obstructions. Many of these tend to be ‘process’ barriers, which are particularly prevalent with ‘urban’ and ‘major’ development schemes, and is where the focus of this research paper lies.The paper summarises and discusses the results of a questionnaire survey, regarding obstacles to maximising biodiversity enhancements on major urban development schemes. The questionnaire was completed by Local Government Ecologists in England. The paper additionally refers to insights from previous action research, specialist interviews, and case studies, to reveal the key process obstacles.Solutions to these obstacles are then alluded to and recommendations are made within the discussion.