Nick Gallent

Housing in the European countryside : rural pressure and policy in Western Europe

1. Introduction 2. Theories and Levels of Comparative Analysis Part 1: Cohesive, Cultures, Regulatory Regimes 3. Norway 4. Sweden 5. The Netherlands 6. France Part 2: Atomistic Cultures, Laissez-Faire Regimes 7. Italy 8. Spain 9. Ireland Part 3: Divisive Cultures, Unstable Regimes 10. England 11. Scotland 12. Wales 13. Housing Pressure in the European Countryside: A Power Regime Perspective 14. Conclusions

An Anatomy of Spatial Planning: Coming to Terms with the Spatial Element in UK Planning

“Spatial planning” is a phrase that now resonates throughout many planning systems across the globe. It is being used as a label to describe pan-national, regional, strategic and even aspects of local planning processes. Within the UK, spatial planning is being utilized alongside, or even in place of, more traditional phraseology associated with planning, such as “town and country planning”. It is being used by a range of institutions of the State, professional groups and academic commentators to describe the processes of planning reform, modernization, policy integration, and strategic governance that politically are now required to make planning fit for purpose in the 21st century. The precise meaning and definition of spatial planning remains difficult to pin down, as does its origins within the UK. This paper attempts to dissect the various components of the spatial planning phrase and set out the meaning and origins of the term in the UK context. It covers re-territorialization, Europeanization and integration origins of spatial planning thinking and provides a conceptual, rather than practical, debate on the anatomy of spatial planning, situated within ongoing processes of institutional transformation, through the lens of governance and distinctiveness in state policy development.

Spatial planning, area action plans and the rural-urban fringe

Abstract The rural-urban fringe has been called ‘plannings last frontier’, and it is a frontier that is now receiving greater attention from policy makers. This is partly a result of ongoing reforms of the planning system—through the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, and potentially through further legislation in 2007 or 2008—and the apparent opportunities that have been created to manage the inherent complexities of these near-urban interstitial landscapes through ‘spatial planning’. This may include landscape enhancement and the provision of green infrastructure to meet community needs, which past green belt policy has tended to overlook according to the recent Barker Review of Land-Use Planning. This paper examines how spatial planning delivered at the local level, through area action plans (AAP), provides the potential to carry forward a new set of objectives at the rural-urban fringe, essentially, to reflect the ‘multi-functional’ nature of the fringe to a greater extent than past land-use planning with its emphasis on policy control. Existing green belt policy has been, for the past 50 years, an expression of this policy control focus. But what potential now exists to do more than merely control and respond to development pressure? Do AAP offer a means of enhancing the rural-urban fringe for the benefit of nearby communities and the wider environment? Can they ‘bridge the gap’ between the ideas of spatial planning and the need for transformative and integrative projects on the ground? These questions are asked in the context of a recent project at St Helens, in the north of England, which has aimed to carry forward a more holistic approach to the planning and management of the rural-urban fringe through area action planning rolled out by a local strategic partnership of public and private bodies.

Introduction to rural planning.

Part 1: Ruruality, Planning and Governance 1. Introduction 2. Rural Governance and Spatial Planning Part 2: The Rural Economy 3. Economic Change 4. The Farming Economy 5. New Economies Part 3: The Needs of Rural Communities 6. Community Change 7. Rural Housing: Demand, Supply, Affordability and the Market 8. Living in the Countryside Part 4: Environmental Change and Planning 9. A Changing Environment 10. A Differentiated Environment Part 5: Governance, Coordination and Integration 11. (Re) Positioning Rural Areas 12. Conclusions: Integrating Agendas, Coordinating Responses

New East Manchester: Urban Renaissance or Urban Opportunism?

Abstract In this paper we ask how a shrinking city responds when faced with a perforated urban fabric. Drawing on Manchesters response to its perforated eastern flank —and informed by a parallel study of Leipzig—we use the citys current approach to critique urban regeneration policy in England. Urban renaissance holds out the promise of delivering more sustainable—that is more compact, more inclusive and more equitable—cities. However, the Manchester study demonstrated that the attempt to stem population loss from the city is at best fragile, despite a raft of policies now in place to support urban renaissance in England. It is argued here that Manchester like Leipzig is likely to face an ongoing battle to attract residents back from their suburban hinterlands. This is especially true of the family market that we identify as being an important element for long-term sustainable population growth in both cities. We use the case of New East Manchester to consider how discourses linked to urban renaissance—particularly those that link urbanism with greater densities—rule out some of the options available to Leipzig, namely, managing the long-term perforation of the city. We demonstrate that while Manchester is inevitably committed to the urban renaissance agenda, in practice New East Manchester demonstrates a far more pragmatic—but equally unavoidable—approach. This we attribute to the gap between renaissance and regeneration described by Amin et al. (Cities for the Many Not for the Few. Bristol: Policy Press, 2000) who define the former as urbanism for the middle class and the latter as urbanism for the working class. While this opportunistic approach may ultimately succeed in producing development on the ground, it will not address the fundamental, and chronic, problem; the combination of push and pull that sees families relocating to suburban areas. Thus, if existing communities in East Manchester are to have their area buoyed up—or sustained—by incomers, and especially families, with greater levels of social capital and higher incomes urban policy in England will have to be challenged.

Land zoning and local discretion in the Korean planning system

Abstract Zonal planning systems are not noted for their promotion of land-use diversification or variety; rather, the rigidity with which they regulate changes in land-use has been a focus of concern in many countries. Zones frequently cut across areas of diverse social, cultural and economic need; they cause sharp divisions in both physical structure and social equity. In some countries, the creation of “buffer” or “mixed use” zones has been viewed as one possible solution; these can blunt the edges of otherwise sharp spatial divisions and promote diversity. Elsewhere, there have been calls for greater local discretion in the planning process and a shift in power away from the strategic level towards the local state. This paper explores the possibility of introducing such a system in Korea. It considers some of the problems that have stemmed from rigid zoning using the example of recent moves to amend “restricted development zone” boundaries. It then offers two paths for change: the extension of existing powers to give local authorities greater discretion in planning decisions, or the introduction of discretionary planning zones as a standard and widely available regulatory tool.

Representing England's rural-urban fringe

Abstract This paper is concerned with the rural-urban fringe, with the ‘physicality’ of ‘edge landscapes’ (drawing on England as an example), and the way they are sometimes depicted or represented. Distancing itself from current pressure to ‘manage’ and re-plan the fringe, the paper examines the balance between the need for possible physical intervention at the fringe and the possibility of rethinking the fringe and the relationship between the aesthetics and functionality of landscape.

The Rural–Urban fringe: A new priority for planning policy?

In the United Kingdom, there is increasing concern over the future of the rural–urban fringe– areas of low-density development punctuated by rough open space and essential service functions enveloping towns and cities. A resurgent concern for the fringe is part of a wider debate surrounding urban growth and possible development encroachment onto the countryside immediately abutting built-up areas. As cities grow, there is a fear that the countryside will be swallowed up by urban development and that previously open areas will be buried beneath a concrete sprawl. In this context, the fringe becomes a juncture between developmental and environmental agendas – where town meets country or the urban competes with the rural. Across the developed world, debate is focusing on the fringe, on the increasingly diffuse nature of some cities and on the problem of managing growth and potential sprawl (see Foot, 2000; Sieverts, 2003). In the UK, this debate is conflated with ongoing discussions over the future of the Green Belt: the country’s principal urban containment tool since the 1950s. Revisions to planning guidance on Green Belt are eagerly awaited, but it seems likely that within a framework of regional spatial strategies and subregional planning, some form of Green Belt policy will continue to check the unrestricted sprawl of built-up areas, prevent neighbouring towns from merging into one another, assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment, preserve the setting and special character of historic towns and assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. But Green Belts have, in the past, been viewed as generic intervention, designed to achieve wider objectives (within and beyond the ‘green girdle’) without providing any planning strategy for the area of designation itself. For this reason, and because it is too early to comment on the future role of Green Belt, this article focuses more generally on the rural–urban fringe, which may or may not be subject to containment policy. The article draws on recent debates in the UK to illustrate the types of questions that occupy policy-makers across the world: in particular, how should we plan or manage urban hinterlands in the future?

Affordable Housing in ‘Village England’: Towards a More Systematic Approach

Abstract Rural housing policies in England tend to focus on the generality of ‘rural areas’ or ‘rural regions’, leading to broad policy responses, or a concentration of effort (in dealing with the issue of rural housing affordability) in larger centres. Whilst there have been some attempts to focus on the needs of villages (notably through the planning exceptions approach), government has been accused of ‘lacking conviction’ in its response to recent dramatic changes in the ‘social composition of rural areas’, driven largely by concentrated gentrification in smaller village locations. This paper examines the means by which government seeks to provide affordable housing, and increase general affordability, in rural areas. It argues that a strategic approach to achieving housing affordability (triggering additional land allocations) that gave villages their a ‘fair share’ of development, coupled with continuing support for ‘planning and affordable housing’ polices and greater emphasis on working through community groups (particularly land trusts), may provide the bones of a more systematic programme of intervention in villages, which has been hitherto lacking in rural housing policy.

Planning for housing: Unravelling the frictions in local practice

The Planning Green Paper (Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions (DTLR), 2001) and subsequent Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill (HM Government, 2002)—becoming a Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act in 2004—promise the most radical overhaul of the British planning system for more than half a century. Besides dealing with specific matters—such as the future form of development plans—the government’s approach is to address what it sees as endemic weaknesses in the present planning system. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) has committed itself to a programme of reform that aims to combat the charge that the current planning system is slow, uncertain, lacks transparency and is generally uncreative. Such charges have been regularly levelled at the planning service for a number of years. The Nolan Committee on standards in public life (Committee on Standards in Public Life, 1997), for example, painted a picture of a system unable to win the trust of local voters, largely because policy gives the impression that planning permissions can be bought and sold (see also Campbell et al., 2001). In 2000, the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI)—together with the Housing Corporation, the DTLR, the National Housing Federation and the House Builders Federation—pre-empted the current concerns and commissioned its own research into how these problems impact on local house building in England. This research sought: