In 2004 the English planning system was subject to extensive reforms which introduced a ‘spatial planning’ approach that goes beyond traditional land-use planning in integrating policies for the development and use of land with other policies and programmes which influence the nature of places. At the regional level, regional planning guidance was replaced by regional spatial strategies (RSSs) and, at the local level, existing local land-use planning documents were replaced with a portfolio of documents that make up the new local development framework (LDF). Together, the LDF and RSS make up the statutory development plan for an area. At the heart of the new spatial planning reforms is a heightened emphasis on stakeholder and community involvement. This paper brings together research at two different spatial scales. The ‘Spatial Plans in Practice’ study examined stakeholder involvement in LDF preparation across England. Parallel research examined the experience of stakeholders in the formation of the North West RSS. Drawing on this empirical base, we examine experiences of stakeholder involvement in the reformed spatial planning system and discuss the implications for the future.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmosG, 2004, “Putting planning first”, paper presented at the Town and Country Planning Summer School, 8 September, London; copy available from the Town and Country Planning Association, London.
2.
ArnsteinS, 1969, “A ladder of citizen participation in the USA”Journal of the American Institute of Planners35216–224.
3.
BakerMHincksS, 2009, “Delivering spatial planning: Implementation and infrastructure delivery in the English local development frameworks”Town Planning Review80173–199.
4.
BakerMSherriffG, 2009Stakeholder Involvement in the North West Regional Spatial StrategyCentre for Urban Policy Studies, University of Manchester.
5.
BakerMRobertsPShawR, 2003Stakeholder Involvement in Regional Planning (Town and Country Planning Association, London).
6.
BakerMCoaffeeJSherriffG, 2005Achieving Successful Participation: Literature ReviewCommunities and Local Government, London.
7.
BakerMCoaffeeJSherriffG, 2007, “Achieving successful participation in the new UK spatial planning system”Planning Practice and Research2279–93.
8.
BaileyNPeelD, 2002, “Building sustainable networks: A study of public participation and social capital”, in Planning in the UK Eds RydinYThornleyA, (Ashgate, Aldershot, Hants) pp 157–182.
9.
BeebeejaunY, 2004, “What's in a nation? Constructing ethnicity in the British planning system”Planning Theory and Practice5437–451.
BoadenNGoldsmithMHamptonWStringerP, 1980Planning and Participation in Practice: A Study of Planning Permission in Structure Planning (Pergamon Press, Oxford).
12.
BrandRGaffkinF, 2007, “Collaborative planning in an uncollaborative world”Planning Theory6282–313.
13.
BrewerKAlexanderD, 2007, “Accessing the emerging SCIs”Town and Country Planning7547–54.
14.
BrownillSCarpenterJ, 2007, “Increasing participation in planning: Emergent experiences of the reformed planning system in England”Planning Practice and Research22619–634.
CarrollA B, 1993Business and Society: Ethics and Stakeholder Management2nd edition (Southwestern, Cincinnati, OH).
17.
CLG, Communities and Local Government, London2008aStakeholder Involvement: Spatial Plans in Practice: Supporting the Reform of Local Planning.
18.
CLG, Communities and Local Government, London2008bSpatial Plans in Practice: Final Report.
19.
CLG, Communities and Local Government, London2008cPlanning Policy Statement 12: Local Spatial Planning.
20.
CLG and BERR, 2009Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill: Policy Document on Regional StrategiesCommunities and Local Government and Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, London.
21.
CoaffeeJHealeyP, 2003, “My voice my place: Tracking transformations in urban governance”Urban Studies401960–1978.
22.
DiamondJLiddleJ, 2005Management of Regeneration (Routledge, London).
23.
DoakJParkerG, 2005, “Networked space? The challenge of meaningful participation and the new spatial planning in England”Planning Practice and Research2023–40.
24.
DTLR, 2001Planning: Delivering a Fundamental Change Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions (The Stationery Office, London).
25.
FlyvbergB, 1998Rationality and Power: Democracy in Practice (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL).
26.
FlyvbergBRichardsonT, 2002, “Planning and Foucault: In search of the dark side of planning theory”, in Planning Futures: New Directions for Planning Theory Eds AllmendingerPTewdwr-JonesM, (Routledge, London) pp 44–62.
FrankK I, 2006, “The potential of youth participation in planning”Journal of Planning Literature20351–371.
29.
GlassonJMarshallT, 2007Regional Planning (Taylor and Francis, London).
30.
HarrisN, 2002, “Collaborative planning: From theoretical foundations to practice forms”, in Planning Futures: New Directions for Planning Theory Eds AllmendingerPTewdwr-JonesM, (Routledge, London) pp 21–43.
HealeyP, 1998, “Collaborative planning in a stakeholder society”Town Planning Review691–21.
33.
HM Treasury, 2007Review of Sub-national Economic Development and Regeneration (HM Treasury, London).
34.
InnesJ, 1995, “Planning theory's emergent paradigm: Communicative action and interactive practice”Journal of Planning Education and Research14183–198.
35.
Involve, 2005People and Participation: How to Put Citizens at the Heart of Decision-making (Involve, London).
36.
KitchenTWhitneyD, 2004, “Achieving more effective public engagement with the English planning system”Planning Practice and Research19393–413.
37.
LeachSWingfieldM, 1999, “Public participation and the democratic renewal agenda: Prioritisation or marginalisation?”Local Government Studies2546–59.
38.
LeachSLowndesVCowellRDowneJ, 2005Stakeholder Engagement—A Progress Summary from Meta-evaluation of the Local Government Modernisation Agenda (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London).
39.
LucasKFullerS, 2005, “Putting the E into LSP: Representing the environment within Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) in the UK”Local Environment10461–475.
40.
Manchester City Council, 2005The Manchester Community Engagement Toolkit (Manchester City Council, Manchester).
41.
MorphetJ, 2005, “A meta-narrative of planning reform”Town Planning Review76iv–x.
42.
MouffeC, 1999, “Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism”Social Research66745–758.
43.
MurrayM, 2009, “Building consensus in contested spaces and places? The regional development strategy for Northern Ireland”, in Conceptions of Space and Place in Strategic Spatial Planning Eds DavoudiSStrangeI, (Routledge, New York) pp 125–146.
44.
NWDA and 4NW, 2009Regional Strategy (RS2010): Project Plan and Statement of Policy on Community Involvement (North West Regional Development Agency, Warrington).
45.
ODPM, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London2004aCommunity Involvement in Planning: The Government's Objectives.
46.
ODPM, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London 2004bPlanning Policy Statement 11: Regional Planning (The Stationery Office, London).
47.
ODPM, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London 2005aPlanning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development (The Stationery Office, London).
48.
ODPM, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London2005bNew Localism—Citizen Engagement, Neighbourhoods and Public Services: Evidence from Local Government.
49.
OECD, 2003Promise and Problems of e-Democracy: Challenges of Online Citizen Engagement (OECD, Paris).
50.
ParekhB, 2000Rethinking Multiculturalism: Cultural Diversity and Political Theory (Macmillan, Basingstoke, Hants).
51.
PearceGAyresS, 2006, “New patterns of governance in the English region: Assessing their implications for spatial planning”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy24909–927.
52.
PearceGAyresS, 2007, “Institutional change and the challenge of policy coordination in the English regions”Town Planning Review78573–596.
53.
PettsJLeachB, 2001, “Evaluating methods for public participation: Literature review”, R&D Technical Report E2-030, University of Birmingham, Birmingham.
54.
PINS, 2005A Framework for Assessing the Soundness of Local Development Plans (Planning Inspectorate, Bristol).
55.
Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, 2004Public General Acts—Elizabeth II chapter 5 (The Stationery Office, London).
56.
RTPI, 2005Guidelines on Effective Community Involvement and Consultation (Royal Town Planning Institute, London).
57.
RydinY, 2000The Public and Local Environmental Policy: Strategies for Promoting Public Participation (Town and Country Planning Association, London).
58.
ShawDLordA, 2007, “The cultural turn? Culture change and what it means for spatial planning in England”Planning Practice and Research2263–78.
59.
SkeffingtonA, 1969Report of the Committee on Public Participation in Planning (HMSO, London).
60.
SykesR, 2003Planning Reform: A Survey of Local Authorities (Local Government Association, London).
61.
TaitMSwainC, 2007, “The crisis of trust and planning”Planning Theory and Practice8227–245.
62.
Tewdwr-JonesMMorphetJAllmendingerP, 2006, “The contested strategies of local governance: Community strategies, development plans, and local government modernisation”Environment and Planning A38533–551.
63.
ThomasH, 1996, “Public participation in planning”, in British Planning Policy in Transition Ed. Tewdwr-JonesM, (UCL Press, London) pp 168–188.
64.
TownsendATullyJ, 2004Public Participation in the Revised Planning System (International Centre for Regional Regeneration and Development Studies, University of Durham, Durham).
