delivering the european spatial development perspective

8/7/2019 Delivering the European Spatial Development Perspective

1/81

Delivering the European Spatial Development

Perspective

Dr. David ShawOlivier Sykes

Department of Civic DesignUniversity of Liverpool

October 2001


2/81

Planning Officers Society Delivering the ESDP

Delivering the ESDPTable of Contents

List of figures 2List of Maps 2List of Acronyms and Abbreviations 3Executive Summary 5

Chapter 1: Applying the ESDP to RPG 81.1 The context for the development of a European spatial

development policy1.2 The development of the European Spatial Development

Perspective1.3 The European context and regional planning policy context for

England1.4 Applying the ESDP to other spatial strategies

1.5 Aims and Objectives of the current research1.6 Research Approach1.7 Structure of the Report

Chapter 2: The RPG Review 182.1 Introduction2.2 Placing RPG within its European context.2.3 Vertical and horizontal co-operation in spatial policy

making2.4 Spatial Development Policy Principles2.5 Spatial representations2.6 Key issues

Chapter 3: Regional player survey 343.1 Introduction3.2 Views of the ESDP and its implications for RPG3.3 The role of the ESDP in informing policy debate3.4 Treatment of Cross-border issues in RPG3.5 Other key points and Issues

Chapter 4: Case studies 394.1 Introduction4.2 West Midlands4.3 North West England4.4 East Midlands4.5 Conclusion

Chapter 5: Delivering the ESDP: Towards Best Practice 595.1 Introduction5.2 Towards Best Practice5.3 Concluding Remarks

Sources 66

Appendices 71

1


3/81


List of Figures

Fig. 1 ESDP Key Spatial Development Principles

Fig. 2 Key Stages and timetable for the RPG review processFig. 3 Progress of RPG reviews in EnglandFig. 4 Relationship between functional maps and the spatial structure of

the region, West Midlands Polycentric Framework.Fig. 5 Final list of matters for the EIP into Draft RPG for the North WestFig. 6 Matters linked to the European spatial planning agenda North WestFig. 7 Matters linked to the European spatial planning agenda East

Midlands

List of Maps

Map 1: Regional Context Diagram Draft RPG for the North WestMap 2: Regional Context Diagram Draft RPG for the North EastMap 3: Key Diagram Draft RPG for the North WestMap 4: Key Diagram Draft RPG Proposed Changes, East Midlands

2


4/81


List of acronyms and abbreviations

ANEC Association of North East CouncilsCAP Common Agricultural Policy

CEC Commission of the European Communities or European CommissionCSD Committee on Spatial DevelopmentDETR Department of the Environment, Transport and the RegionsEEDA East of England Development AgencyEMRLGA East Midlands Regional Local Government AssociationESDP European Spatial Development PerspectiveEU European UnionGOEE Government Office for the East of EnglandGOEM Government Office for the East MidlandsGONE Government Office for the North EastGONW Government Office for the North WestGOSE Government Office for the South EastGOSW Government Office for the South WestGOWM Government Office for the West MidlandsGOYH Government Office for Yorkshire and the HumberINTERREG EU initiative for the promotion of co-operation in the field of spatial

planningIRS Integrated Regional StrategyNETA North European Trade AxisNSR North Sea RegionNWDA North West Development Agency

NWMA North West Metropolitan AreaNWRA North West Regional AssemblyPC Programme ComplementPPG Planning Policy Guidance NoteRDA Regional Development AgencyRES Regional Economic StrategyRPG Regional Planning Guidance NoteRSDF Regional Sustainable Development FrameworkSPD Single Programming DocumentSSDA Strategic Spatial Development AreasSWRDA South West Regional Development Agency

TETN Trans-European Transport NetworksWMLGA West Midlands Local Government Association

3


5/81


4


6/81


Executive Summary

1. This report examines the extent to which the European context for planning ingeneral, and more particularly the European Spatial Development Perspective,is being used to inform and shape the development of regional planning

guidance for the nine English regions. The work was commissioned by thePlanning Officers Society and carried out by a team from the Department ofCivic Design at Liverpool University.

2. PPG 11 - Regional Planning (DETR, 2000) makes it very clear that theEuropean context and the ESDP are critical elements that need to be takeninto account when considering the factors which will affect the future wellbeingof a regions spatial development. Such perspectives should be taken intoaccount explicitly when developing the spatial strategy for the region and,where appropriate, in relation to any relevant policies. In approving an RPGthe Secretary of State needs to be satisfied that the spatial strategy for theregion has had sufficient regard to these European considerations.

4. The evaluation of the most recent RPG documents revealed that there wasconsiderable variation in the way that different regions appear to haveconsidered the European agenda and the ESDP as factors that provide animportant context for regional well being and which, can be used to inform thedevelopment of respective strategies and policies. The research suggestedthat there were four key elements that can be used to judge whether therequirements of PPG11 have been satisfied.

Placing RPG within its European context: All the RPG documents reviewedconsidered aspects of the European context for the region. Most also included

maps showing the location of the region in UK and European space, althoughthe effectiveness of these in conveying a sense of the functional linkagesbetween the region and other parts of the UK and Europe was limited. Interms of the European contexts identified by the ESDP the extent to whichthese are discussed varied. A number of the documents included a discussionof the ESDP and relevant EU programmes in sections on the regional context,but did not make clear if, or how, these had informed the spatial strategy forthe region or the development of policy. Some regions presented a fullerconsideration of European contexts and made a clear attempt to link these tothe strategies and policies of RPG. In general it seems that links are madewhere there are clear and sectoral linkages such as in relation to Structural

Funds, the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, Trans-EuropeanTransport networks, and other EU legislation and programmes. Broadlyspeaking there appeared to be consistency between the priorities establishedfor spatial development, including regeneration priority areas, in the RPGdocuments, and the availability of EU funding.

The process of RPG preparation: In terms of horizontal linkages within theregion, all the RPG documents refer to the relevant RDA for the region andmade links to the RES, discussing, or re-stating its aims and objectives. Itseems therefore, based on a reading of the RPG documentation, thathorizontal collaboration between RPBs, RDAs and GOs, has occurred across

the regions during the preparation of RPGs. However, whilst the linksbetween RPGs and RESs are much in evidence, the links to Regional

5


7/81


Sustainable Development Strategies were (with some exceptions) generallyless clear in the documentation reviewed. In terms of evidence of intra-regional collaboration, beyond the RPB, RDA and GO, the RPGdocumentation also contains references to a wide range of other sectoralagencies, that have been consulted, and will need to play a role in delivering

RPG objectives. A number of RPGs linked policies to the agencies that wouldbe required for their implementation. In terms of cross-boundary horizontallinkages, all the documents contained some reference to cross-border issuesin national and transnational space, usually in the sections that set out theregional context. Cross-border issues identified in RPGs included: transport,waste management, water strategies, minerals planning, functional sub-regions with a cross-boundary dimension, and in some cases transnationalrelationships. However, there was great variety in the extent to which theseissues were considered and carried forward in the rest of the document. Avariety of mechanisms to address cross-border issues were outlined includinginter-regional studies, cross-border sub-regional studies, and participation in

INTERREG projects. A number of the documents included commitments totake forward cross-boundary working in their sections on implementation.

Spatial development policy principles: The majority of the documentsreferred to one or more of the ESDP policy guidelines as having relevance forthe region, but the extent to which the implications of this were developed andused to inform the strategies and policies of RPG varied. In general thereseems to be a high level of consistency between the spatial developmentprinciples of the ESDP and the strategies and policies of the RPGs. Many ofthe individual topic policies in the RPG documents can be seen to have aclose affinity with the spatial principles and policy aims of the ESDP eventhough this consistency is rarely made explicit by a direct reference to theESDP. Interestingly, it is perhaps at the higher strategic level in some regionsthat the influence of the ESDP has been most marked. The three guidingprinciples appear to have informed approaches to developing RPG in anumber of regions. Whilst in most of the documents there was littledevelopment of these themes beyond the initial acknowledgement ofrelevance, there was evidence in certain regions that concepts such as poly-centricity and rural-urban partnership have exerted a more profound influenceon the direction, development and structure of RPG.

Spatial representations: Most maps showing the position of the region inrelation to other UK regions and in European space are geography maps,which show location but fail to highlight functional relationships and linkages.A number of RPGs include maps showing the relevant INTERREG IIIB regionsto which the region belongs. In terms of linkages to other regions, these aregenerally shown but rarely weighted, and in some regions the key diagramdoes not represent cross border linkages at all or just represents fixedfeatures such as roads or railways. There is a good deal of variation in theappearance of the Key Diagrams with some being OS map based and othersbeing more schematic. The schematic diagrams tend to be more dynamic andarguably convey a better idea of the pattern of future development, the

importance of different intra- and inter-regional linkages and relationships, andfunctional sub-regions. However, even in the schematic diagrams the cross-

6


8/81


border linkages are not weighted in terms of their significance. The moretraditional OS style diagrams have a more static feel and tend to onlyrepresent fixed cross-border infrastructure such as roads or railways.

5. The research suggests that the European agenda is beginning to be recognised

more explicitly in the development of spatial planning strategies at the regionalscale. Four factors may account for variations in approach:

i) Timing. More recent RPGs would appear to be taking muchgreater cognisance of the European agenda. This is not really verysurprising, as the nature of guidance issued by central government hasbecome clearer, more explicit and formalised over time.

ii) Stage in the Process. It seems that the process of testing theDraft RPG through a process of public consultation followed by anExamination in Public, and subsequent Panel Report enables theEuropean dimension (or the lack of it) to be highlighted and consideredmore explicitly through the redrafting of RPG.

iii) The role of key individuals. Where there are a number ofinfluential actors in the process who have a keen interest in, andconcern for, European spatial planning, this will help to shape thenature of the RPG. Given that the RPG preparation is a multi-agencyprocess key individuals do not necessary have to be part of theRegional Planning Body, but could be from the Government Office orthe Planning Inspectorate, or other interested parties.

iv) The empirical reality of the region. For some regions theirconnections to Europe, relationships with other UK regions and internalstructure were reflected in the way that RPG was produced. In someinstances this led to a fuller consideration of the European agenda as awhole, and the ESDP in particular. It seems that in some regions, themore distinctly spatial ESDP principles provided a new lens throughwhich to view the region and facilitated a new analysis of key spatialand thematic planning issues. In other regions, whilst the ESDP wasperhaps less influential in shaping the analytical and policy approachesadopted, it nevertheless served to reinforce certain indigenouslyderived conclusions and policy choices.

6. In conclusion, therefore it would appear that the European context and theESDP are beginning to be accepted as an important frame of reference in theproduction of Regional Planning Guidance. Given the emerging policy context

it would be nave, to expect the RPGs across the country to have embracedthe principles in similar ways. Regional distinctiveness, for example, meansthat the European context may need to be given greater or lesser emphasis.The checks and balances involved in the process of RPG preparation doappear to highlight where the European dimension has not adequately beentaken into account. In embracing the European agenda those involved indeveloping regional planning policy need to embrace a shift in outlook andculture which requires a much more explicit consideration of a regions links toother regions, both adjacent, but also in terms of cross border andtransnational relationships. The findings of this study suggest that this isbeginning to happen.

7


9/81


Chapter 1: Applying the ESDP to RPG

1.1 The context for the development of a European spatial

development policy

The forces that influence the location of economic activities operate increasingly atEuropean or global levels, while traditionally spatial development policies have beendeveloped at national or regional levels (DETR, 1998). There has been a growingrecognition of this at the European level since the late 1980s and this hasaccompanied by the realisation that planning issues (like environmental issues) crosspolitical and administrative boundaries (see CEC, 1994; Williams, 1996; DETR, 1998;CEC, 1999).

Within the EU the influence of globalisation on patterns of spatial development hasbeen accentuated by the effects of continuing European integration and the creation

of a single market. In the future EMU will tend to increase integration, bringing moreinter-dependencies and competition between cities, regions and member stateswithin the EU. Although competition is seen as driving development, it may lead toincreasing spatial disparities, which are perceived to be a threat to Europeaneconomic and social cohesion.

Recognition of the influence of EU sectoral policies with a territorial significance hasalso progressively increased in the member states and the EU. The ESDP highlightsthe areas of European Commission competence which are the most significant interms of their implications for spatial development:

Competition PolicyTrans-European Networks (TENs)

Structural FundsCommon Agricultural Policy (CAP)

Environmental PolicyResearch, Technology and Development

Loan activities of the European Investment Bank(CEC 1999, p.13).

As such policies effect national and regional spatial planning policies they, byextension, influence the pattern of spatial development in the EU. Importance is

attached to the diversity of the EU and this has led to adesire to see that the threefundamental goalsof EU policy - economic and social cohesion; conservation andmanagement of natural resources and the cultural heritage, and, a more balancedcompetitiveness of the European territory(CEC 1999)are achieved equally in allregions through balanced and sustainable development of the territory. Byunderstanding the spatial effects of integration and the EU sectoral policies, co-ordinated attempts can be made to achieve these three key objectives throughspatial planning. It was the recognition of this by Member states of the EU and theEuropean Commission, which provided the rationale for the development of theEuropean Spatial Development Perspective.

8


10/81


1.2 The development of the European Spatial DevelopmentPerspective

In the early 1990s, especially at the European scale, there were signs that there was

a growing interest in spatial planning as a potential policy arena and integrative toolin its own right (Nadin and Shaw, 1997). For example, Europe 2000 (CEC, 1991)opened with a statement that planning in isolation at a regional, or national scale wasreally no longer possible. Europe 2000+ (CEC, 1994) saw further debate promotingthe merits of a more integrated spatial development framework for the whole of theEuropean territory. There was sufficient consensus among the member states thatthey should work together on an informal and voluntary basis to develop a EuropeanSpatial Development Perspective (ESDP). As the Territoryis a new dimension ofEuropean policy over which the Commission has no competence in the Treatiesestablishing the EU, the task of preparing the ESDP was given to the Committee on

Spatial Development an informal group of Ministers with responsibility for spatialplanning. At the Leipzig meeting of 1994 its status was established as a non-bindingand indicative, rather than prescriptive, document.

The ESDP has therefore been progressed through intergovernmental working whichoperates outside the formal competencies of the EU and to certain degree reflectsthe importance that each member state gives to this collaborative process (Wilkinsonet al, 1998 and Bishop et al, 2000). A first draft was presented at Noordwijk in 1997,followed in June 1998 by a complete draft at Glasgow, and the final document wasapproved at Potsdam in May 1999. In order to achieve a balanced and sustainabledevelopment of the territory of the EU, the ESDP emphasises three key spatial

development policy objectives (Fig. 1).

Figure 1: ESDP Key Spatial Development Principles

the development of a balanced and polycentric urban pattern ofdevelopment and a new urban rural relationship which recognises inter-dependence and fosters partnership;

securing parity access to infrastructure and knowledge; and

sustainable development, prudent management and protection of natureand cultural heritage.

(CEC, 1999)

Whilst the ESDP is, not a master plan for the development of Europe as a whole(Healy 1999), there is nevertheless a commitment to taking it forward from the spatialplanning ministers of the member states. Part A S.4 of the ESDP sets out the waythat it is to be applied and makes clear that this is through voluntary co-operationbased on the principle of subsidiarity. Integrated application of the ESDP policyoptions is to be achieved by a reorientation of national policies and communitysectoral policies at three levels of spatial co-operation - the Community Level; thetransnational/national level; and the regional/local level. The ESDP calls forhorizontal co-operation between the authorities responsible for sectoral and spatial

9


11/81


policies at each administrative level as well as vertical co-operation between thedifferent levels, for example, between the national and local level. The memberstates should also, take into account the policy aims and options of the ESDP in theirnational planning systems in the way they see fit, and; also take into considerationthe European dimensionin adjusting national spatial development policies, plans

and reports (CEC, 1999, para. 184).

In order to carry forward the application of the ESDP, EU Spatial Planning Ministersagreed on an Action Plan at Tampere in October 1999. One of the key aims of thiswas the promotion of a spatial dimension in Community and national policies. ThePlan also identified 12 activities to be undertaken in order to achieve the key aims ofthe ESDP including the integration of ESDP policy orientations into national spatialplanning. Such calls for a Europeanisation of state, regional and urban planning(CEC, 1999, p. 45) can be seen as echoing Bruce Milans statement in the forewordto Europe 2000 that planning in isolation is no longer possible. The ESDP clearlyreflects this sentiment in its statement that:

In their spatially relevant planning, local and regional government andadministrative authorities should, overcome any insular way of looking attheir territory and take into consideration European aspects andinterdependencies right from the outset.

(CEC, 1999, p. 45)

It is the application of the principles of Europeanisation and spatialisation toRegional Planning Guidance documents in the UK context, which forms the focus ofthe current research.

1.3 The European context and regional planning policy context forEngland

Prior to 1997, Conservative governments largely ignored, or at least kept at armslength, the EU implications for statutory land use and policy making functions ofgovernment. Nevertheless many government policies were modified to accommodateEuropean influences, for example, revised Planning Policy Guidance Notesincreasingly confirmed the need for local authorities to ensure that their decisionscomplied with European directives, and planning procedures were sometimes altered

to meet the needs of EU Directives (e.g. EIA directives). At the level of localauthorities, statutory development plans and other strategic planning documentswere clearly shaped by European influences in three main ways:

(i) providing the context within which the plan is prepared (e.g. KentStructure Plan Third Review);(ii) influencing the formulation of individual policies (e.g. GwyneddCounty Council)(iii) requiring the identification of critical areas (e.g. Special Areas ofConservation and Special protection Areas)

(Wilkinson et al, 1998 and Bishop et al, 2000)

10


12/81


With the election of a New Labour government in 1997 the apparent ambivalence toEuropean influences on planning was about to change. In 1998 Richard Caborn, thethen Minister for the Regions, Regeneration and Planning, issued a statement thatthe European context for planning had largely been missing from the planning systemin the UK and that there needs to be a significant European dimension to our

planning system(DETR, 1998, p 6). Significantly, Modernising Planning also notedthat spatial development issues do not respect national boundaries, and that, fortoo long, there has been a tendency to ignore cross-border and transnationalplanning issues. A modern planning system cannot afford to do this.(DETR, 1998,p.6). Such statements can be seen as recognising the idea articulated in Europe2000 and the ESDP that an insular approach to planning at regional or national scaleis no longer possible.

Perhaps one of the most obvious ways that the Government has sought to enhancethe European dimension of the UK planning system is in relation to the advice it hasgiven to regional planning bodies on the way that they should prepare new Regional

Planning Guidance (RPG). This is significant as the ESDP makes it clear thatRegional and local authorities are key players in European spatial developmentpolicy.(CEC 1999,p.42). Draft Planning Policy Guidance Note (PPG) 11: RegionalPlanning published in 1999 made clear that intergovernmental and Communitybased European activities, policies and programmes and funding regimes that impacton the region, provide one of the key contexts that should shape the scope andformat of RPG, and that before issuing an RPG the Secretary of State, will need tobe satisfied that the spatial strategy for the region has had sufficient regard to theseEuropean considerations(DETR 1999a, para. 3.3).

The final version of PPG 11 published in October 2000 (DETR, 2000) furtheremphasises the importance of full cognisance of the European agenda in thepreparation of revised RPGs. Paragraph 3.1 of PPG 11 states that:

Widening the spatial planning scope of RPG is in keeping with trendselsewhere in Europe. Moreover, both the European Spatial DevelopmentPerspective and the Community Initiative on Transnational Co-operation onSpatial Planning - INTERREG IIC and IIIB - programmes will provide aEuropean context for the preparation of RPG.

(DETR 2000, Para. 3.1)

PPG 11 para. 3.2 repeats the three key policy principles which underpin the ESDP(see Fig. 1 above) and emphasises their relevance to RPG, whilst para. 3.3 statesthat, Implementation of the ESDP requires co-operation across national, regionaland local boundaries. The importance of horizontal consistency between RDAstrategies, RPG and any relevant Single Programming Documents is also stressed,as is the need for RPBs and other regional stakeholders to take account of inter-governmental and EU legislation, polices, programmes and funding regimes thatimpact on the region.(DETR, 2000, para. 3.5). The potential need for RPBs to liasewith neighbouring regions and regional bodies in other member states asappropriateis also acknowledged.

11


13/81


PPG 11 para. 3.9 discusses the appropriateness of sub-regional strategies as ameans of resolving certain spatial development issues and relationships andindicates that there may be instances where sub-regional solutions need to bedeveloped for issues that cross regional boundaries.

In conclusion, recent years have seen a steady strengthening of Government advicein relation to the need to develop the European dimension in regional planningdocuments. In particular the final version of PPG 11 makes clear that a RPG shouldbe set within a framework which acknowledges a regions links to other regions andEuropean and global contexts. It also places emphasis on the key policy principles ofthe ESDP, the importance of horizontal consistency between RPG and other regionalstrategies (with the long-term objective of RPGs developing into comprehensiveregional spatial strategies - para. 3.7), and the need in some instances to developcross-boundary solutions.

The overriding theme that has emerged from this review is the acceptance, and

transposition into policy documents of the notion that planning in isolation is nolonger possible. Whilst the UK may be an island in the strict geographical sense, thetwin realities of Europeanisation and globalisation mean that policy makers mustovercome any insular way of considering the territories they plan for if they wish todevelop plans and policies which are well adapted to securing the future sustainabledevelopment of their areas and regions.

1.4 Applying the ESDP to other spatial strategies

Whilst the main focus of the research is the current RPG review process in the

English regions, because other countries are free to adopt different approaches inapplying the ESDP, it is worth commenting briefly on how it is being applied to certainother spatial strategies in the UK and Europe.

For some member states most notably the Netherlands, but also Denmark, theEuropean agenda, especially at the national scale was already informing the way thatnational planning reports and policy frameworks were being developed, and theapplication of the ESDP has had little impact in practice. Elsewhere, for example, inWales and Catalonia, the ESDP is being used to inform debates concerning the needfor more coherent strategic spatial strategies at the national, regional or metropolitanscale. In Wales the ESDP has provided both an inspiration, a reference point and

methodological opportunity in the development of a National Spatial PlanningFramework. In Catalonia, the ESDP is seen as a document, which can help tosupport arguments for the development of new institutions and mechanisms topromote the notion of strategic spatial thinking at the regional and sub-regional scale.Elsewhere, at the transnational scale, not unsurprisingly given the links of theINTERREG IIC/IIIB programmes to the ESDP, visioning statements such as theVision for North West Europe, are using the ESDP as a reference point and areseeking to explore, elaborate, and apply its concepts to particular mega-regions.

Therefore in some countries it seems that the principles of the ESDP were felt to bealready implicit in national Planning Reports and policy prior to the final publication of

the ESDP. In other countries, the ESDP is being used as a reference point for policydevelopment and in some cases as a source of debate about innovations in spatial

12


14/81


planning policy instruments and systems. It is only in England, however, that there isan explicit requirement to use the ESDP as a reference point to inform strategicspatial thinking. In England, as described in Section 1.3 above, the ESDP has beenembodied in the new PPG 11 Regional Planning (DETR, 2000), as one of the keycontextual documents which regional planning bodies must have regard to in

developing RPG. Thus it would appear from this brief overview of how the ESDP isbeing used in other spatial strategies, that it is being applied more explicitly inEngland than elsewhere in Europe.

1.5 Aims of the current research

Informed by the context described above, this report details the findings of researchdesigned to ascertain the extent to which the European contexts in general and theESDP in particular have influenced the current round of RPG reviews. The specificobjectives of the research were:

1. To conduct a review of emerging RPG documentation in order to ascertainthe extent to which they have had regard to European considerations ingeneral, and the European Spatial Development Perspective in particular.

2. To conduct a regional player survey of those involved in current RPGreviews to highlight issues that may not be revealed by the desk-basedreview.

3. To consider selected regions in more detail in order to highlight RPG reviewprocess issues.

The evolving policy background to regional planning in England is something that

ought to be remembered in the context of the current research. Figure 2 belowpresents the new key stages and timetable for the development of RPGs, which intheory should take about 2.5 years. Figure 3 identifies the stages that differentregions had reached in the process when the research was undertaken. It istherefore to be expected that the degree of advancement of different RPGs throughthe revision process and the nature of the guidance in place at the time will have abearing on the degree to which European considerations have informed the process.The research thus represents a snapshot of a rapidly changing and evolving situationand is therefore intended to be indicative in character.

13


15/81


Figure 2: Key Stages and timetable for the RPG (comprehensive review)process

Stage Regional Planning Guidance Prepared byregional planning body (RPB), in co-

operation with Government Office (GO)and other stakeholders, and issued by theSecretary of State

1. Identifying the brief/issues RPB in consultation with GO draw up theproject brief for RPG review, including therelevant regional objectives and likely issues,and hold a one day public conference to seekagreement: 3.5 months.

2. Developing the draft strategy RPB in co-operation with GO and otherstakeholders, carries out technical/surveywork, commences an independentsustainability appraisal of the impacts of theinitial proposals for development etc. and

then develops and refines options into draftRPG: 12 months.

3. Consultation on draft RPG RPB submits draft RPG and appraisal to theSoS. Draft strategy is then published forconsultation with a RPB letter invitingrepresentations and a press notice issuedannouncing timing of the public examination.Written responses to Panel Secretary (whichare copied to GO/RPB): 3.5 months.

4. Testing Following receipt of responses, Panel inconsultation with the RPB and GO agree alist of matters and invite participants to publicexamination. Draft RPG tested at

examination in front of independent Panelappointed by the Secretary of State: 4months.

5. Publication of Panel report Panel reports to the SoS (which GO copies toRPB and other public examinationparticipants) and report is published: 2months.

6. Proposed Changes to RPG Following Panels report, SoS publishesproposed changes to draft RPG withstatement of reasons. 8 week consultationperiod on these changes before final RPG isissued: 6 months.

7. Issue of final RPG RPG approved and issued by SoS.

Total time from start of process: approx. 2.5years.

8. Development and local transport planconformity

SoS (GO) with support of RPB, to ensure thatdevelopment and local transport plans areconsistent with RPG.

9. Monitoring and review RPB, in liaison with GO and otherstakeholders, to establish monitoringmachinery to check on achievement of RPGtargets and review it either in whole or in part,as appropriate.

(DETR, 2000).

14


16/81


Figure 3: Progress of RPG reviews at time of research

Region RPG Reviewed & Progress

North East RPG Proposed Changes Draft (April 2001)(consultation until 19/07/01)

London Initial Proposals for SDS (May 2001)(consultation until 31/07/01)

East Anglia RPG Final RPG (November 2000)

East Midlands RPG Proposed Changes (March 2001)

South East RPG Final RPG (January 2001)

South West RPG Proposed Changes (December 2000)

West Midlands RPG Consultation Draft Policy Options(May 2001)

Consultation until 20/07/01

Yorkshire and the HumberRPG

Proposed Changes Draft (March 2001)(consultation until 01/06/01)

North West RPG Draft RPG (July 2000)(EIP 02/01 - panel report 07/01)

1.6 Research Approach

The research design responded to the objectives set out above and was made up oftwo key components:

(1) The development of an evaluative framework for RPG, which would beundertaken by trained evaluators who were, retired members of the POS.

(2) Structured interviews with key regional players.

In order to evaluate the most recently published version of Regional PlanningGuidance in a systematic, comprehensive, and comparative manner, to help ensureconsistency of approach and provide a comparable format, it was necessary todevelop an Evaluative Framework. This framework identified the issues andestablished a method (using check-lists, criteria and tables), to evaluate the extent to

which the most recent RPG documents had explicitly considered the implications ofEurope and the ESDP in shaping the context and strategic development needs oftheir particular region. In devising the Evaluative Framework reference was made tothe methodology adopted by the lead researcher in appraising the extent to whichDraft RPG for North West England had addressed the European agenda (Shaw,2000).

15


17/81


More specifically, an evaluative framework to be applied to RPG documentationshould seek:

To consider the extent to which emerging RPG documents adequatelyacknowledge the European context for their regions.

To identify if emerging RPGs provide evidence that the ESDP has been used asa framework for the development both of the spatial strategy and of individualpolicies.

To evaluate the extent to which there is horizontal and vertical integration ofinstitutions and policies. Do RPGs provide a consistent frame of reference forother regional and sub-regional policy documents, especially those associatedwith European structural funds? This not only relates to institutions internal tothe region but also to the way the region relates to adjacent regions and alsotransnational collaboration. In particular, does RPG adequately considersignificant cross border issues of relevance to the region?

The final version of the framework (Appendix 1) is organised around four key themes,which reflect the issues discussed above:

(1) the European contextin which RPG has been prepared,(2) theprocess of RPG preparation,(3) the extent to which the policyprinciples of the ESDP are reflected in RPG,

both in the spatial strategy and the detailed policies; and,(4) the use ofspatial representations and images to illustrate spatial

development contexts and policies.

A final section (5) asks the evaluator to give an overall qualitative assessment of howeffectively they feel that the RPG responds to the call in PPG 11 that RPGs ought tohave regard to European considerations. The evaluation focused on a review of themost current RPG documentation available, using the Evaluative Framework. Figure3 indicates the version of RPG that was reviewed for each region. Thereview tookplace with the documents that were available at the end of April 2001. It is importantto note that the evaluation was snapshot at a particular moment in time within apolicy context that is rapidly changing and evolving. The evaluation for each RPGwas undertaken by two evaluators. Three former planning officers were engaged to

act as evaluators of the RPG documents (see Appendix 2) and the University teamalso produced a standard evaluation to ensure consistency of approach. Theevaluators were sent a copy of the Evaluative Framework in advance of a trainingday held in Liverpool, at which the method and approach to be adopted in reviewingeach policy document were explained. Part of this seminar involved a workshopwhere various elements of the Evaluative Framework were tested in relation to theDraft RPG for the North West, which had previously been subject to such a rigorousappraisal (Shaw, 2000). This was to ensure that there was a common understandingof the issues to be examined and the approach to be adopted. Once completed theevaluative frameworks were reviewed to assess the extent to which there werecommon themes and general issues of concern common to a number of RPGs.

16


18/81


Recognising that a desk based evaluation of written documents might not adequatelyreflect the wider RPG process, a Regional Player Survey was conducted. Structuredinterviews took place during May and June with representatives of the RegionalPlanning Bodies and the regional Government Offices.

In light of some of the issues, which emerged from the desk based review of RPGs itwas also decided to conduct in-depth case studies of selected regions that were atdifferent stages in the RPG review process. This was to enable a more thoroughevaluation of the extent to which the ESDP had been a factor shaping emergingRPGs. The case studies were based on a wide range of documentation and soughtto identify factors that had influenced the way that the European agenda hadinformed the RPG process. The selected regions were: the West Midlands an RPGprocess which is still in the early stages and where the concept of polycentricity iscentral to the thinking of the RPB, the North West where the examination in publichighlighted the need to address European issues more explicitly, and the EastMidlands where modifications to the RPG have reflected the need to address the

European agenda.

1.7 Structure of the Report

Chapters 2 presents the review of RPG documentation and Chapter 3 outlines thefindings of the regional player survey. Chapter 4 presents the case studies of theRPG process in the West Midlands, North West and East Midlands. Chapter 5 drawsthe different strands of the research together to give a picture of the current processof Delivering the ESDP in the English regions and identifies best practiceapproaches.

17


19/81


Chapter 2: Review of RPG Documents

2.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the desk-based evaluation of RPG documents. Thepresentation of findings follows the structure of the Evaluative Framework discussedin Section 1.6 above. The discussion is not intended to evaluate the way that eachRPG has responded to the European agenda, but rather to provide a broad overviewusing examples to illustrate particular points. The concluding section highlights keyissues emerging from this evaluation.

2.2 Placing RPG within its European context

PPG 11 indicates that before issuing RPG the Secretary of State will need to besatisfied that PPG has had sufficient regard to the European considerations, set out

in paragraphs 3.01-3.05 of PPG 11, including the main policy themes of the ESDPwhich are presented in PPG 11 para. 3.02 (DETR, 2000). This section considers ifthe background discussion, which underpins the RPG strategies, fully and adequatelyacknowledges the European context.

All the RPG documents reviewed considered aspects of the European context for theregion. Most also included maps showing the location of the region in UK andEuropean space, although the effectiveness of these in conveying a sense of thefunctional linkages between the region and other parts of the UK and Europe waslimited. Most of the maps were geography maps which simply indicated the positionof the region, although some RPGs, such as, the Proposed Changes drafts for

Yorkshire and the Humber and the East Midlands, also included maps showing theINTERREG programme areas (the North West Metropolitan Area and the North SeaRegion) of relevance to their regions. Other RPGs make some contextual referencesto INTERREG in the text these include, the draft South West RPG, RPG 9 for theSouth East and the RPG for the North East Proposed Changes document.

In terms of the European contexts identified by the ESDP the extent to which theseare discussed varied. A number of the documents included a discussion of theESDP and relevant EU programmes in sections on the regional context, but did notmake clear if, or how, these had informed the spatial strategy for the region or thedevelopment of policy. Often such discussion amounted to little more thanacknowledging the existence of the ESDP and listing some of the key policyprinciples.

However, some regions including the South East, East Midlands and Yorkshire andthe Humber, presented a fuller consideration of European contexts. In the ProposedChanges Draft for Yorkshire and the Humber, the impact of EU policies andprogrammes with a spatial impact is discussed and direct reference is made to thepolicy implications of Objective 1 and 2 areaswith the policies affected beingindicated. The links with other European and English regions were also morecomprehensively considered in this RPG than in the majority of documents. In RPG

9 for the South East (DETR, 2001) the European spatial and policy contexts areoutlined in the discussion of regional context, as are global and international

18


20/81


21/81


2.3 Vertical and horizontal co-operation in spatial developmentpolicy-making

2.3.1 Introduction

Section 4 of the ESDP calls for effective horizontal and vertical integration of policy toensure a consistent approach to spatial development. The evaluative frameworksought to explore the extent to which there is evidence in the RPG documentation ofhorizontal and vertical co-operation within the region and with agencies and areasthat are outside it, particularly where there are significant cross-boundary issues.Aspects of vertical integration in European space have already been consideredabove in terms of the consideration given in RPG to certain EU programmes anddesignations. Vertical integration in terms of the relationship of the RPGs strategiesand policies to the spatial development policy principles and aims of the ESDP isconsidered in Section 2.3.4 below.

2.3.2 Horizontal integration within the region

In terms of horizontal integration within regions, the Evaluative Framework sought toidentify evidence of inter-agency collaboration, and of consistency between RPG andthe other key regional strategies. All the RPG documents refer to the relevant RDAfor the region and make links to the RES, discussing, or re-stating its aims andobjectives. For example, RPG 6 for East Anglia indicates that EEDAs RES, MovingForward, complements and sits beside this regional planning guidance(DETR,2000, p.19, Para. 4.12), and then re-states its aims and objectives. In the chapter onimplementation, the role of EEDA is highlighted, as is the need to ensure that the

maximum advantage is taken of the current national and European designations inthe region(DETR, 2000b, p.71). In the indicative policy options draft of RPG for theWest Midlands mention is made of the close working relationships that have beenestablished between the West Midlands Local Government Association (WMLGA),the RDA (Advantage West Midlands), and the GO for the region (WMLGA, 2001).Similarly, in RPG for the South West the shared objectives of and two-wayrelationship between RPG and the SWRDAs regional strategy are emphasised. Itseems therefore that, based on a reading of the RPG documentation, that horizontalcollaboration between RPBs, RDAs and GOs, has occurred across the regionsduring the preparation of RPGs.

Whilst the links between RPGs and RESs are much in evidence, the links to RegionalSustainable Development Frameworks (RSDF) were generally, with someexceptions, less clear in the documentation reviewed. In Draft RPG ProposedChanges for Yorkshire and the Humber, chapter 3 takes as its starting point for thedevelopment of a vision and objectives for RPG, the objectives of the RSDF. In theEast Midlands, the Integrated Regional Strategy (IRS) developed by the RegionalAssembly constitutes the RSDF for the region. The IRSs fourth objective is tomanage the distribution and location of activities and the provision of infrastructure inorder to encourage sustainable patterns of development and to supportregeneration. It is the role of RPG to respond to this spatial dimension of the IRS,and four further sub-objectives for RPG are defined. In other regions the RSDF has

yet to be endorsed such as in the South West and the North East, whilst in someregions where an RSDF is in place, such as the North West, it is unclear from the

20


22/81


references to it in the text, what its objectives are and how exactly it has informedRPG.

In terms of evidence of regional collaboration beyond the RPB, RDA and GO, theRPG documentation also contains references to a wide range of other sectoral

agencies, that have been consulted, and will need to play a role in delivering RPGobjectives. These included: the Environment Agency, the Countryside Agency,Health Authorities, regional tourist boards, English Heritage, the Highways Agency,the Strategic Rail Authority, NHS Executives, the Housing Corporation, SportEngland, and British Waterways. In Draft RPG for the North West the agencieswhich it is felt should be involved in implementing different policies are indicated inthe margins. In Yorkshire and the Humber, implementation tables at the end of eachchapter indicate the delivery mechanisms such as, development plans and LTPs, andidentify the lead and supporting partners, that will carry forward each policy. In theProposed Changes Draft for the South West the chapter on implementation andmonitoring clearly identifies the agencies and sectors that will be essential to the

implementation of RPG. The private sector, central government and local authoritiesare identified as the key players, with other agencies such as the SWDA, CountrysideAgency, Environment Agency, and Health Authorities also being mentioned.

2.3.3 Treatment of cross-border issues in RPG

The documentary review considered whether the RPGs acknowledged issues thathad a cross-border, dimension, either in national or transnational space. The ESDPemphasises the importance of co-operation beyond administrative boundaries both atthe inter-regional and intra-regional levels. The Evaluative Framework alsoconsidered if mechanisms such as, cross-border discussions, inter-institutionalarrangements or studies existed to respond to cross-border issues.

All the documents reviewed contained some reference to cross-border issues innational and or transnational space, usually in the sections that set out the regionalcontext. However, there was variety in the extent to which these issues wereconsidered and carried forward in the rest of the document. There was evidence ina number of RPGs that the issue of cross-boundary relationships has been aconsideration in the process of developing RPG. For example, the final GuidingPrinciples of the West Midlands Draft Spatial Strategy include a commitment to havefull regard to the linkages and relationships that exist between the West Midlands and

adjacent areas(WMLGA, 2001, p.80). In the East Midlands the IRS indicates thatRPG must have full regard to the importance of linkages between different parts ofthe region and with adjacent regions(EMRLGA, 2001, p.5).

The examples of cross-border issues identified in RPGs included: transport (includingTETNs), waste management, water strategies, minerals planning, functional sub-regions with a cross-boundary dimension, and in some limited cases transnationalrelationships. For example, RPG 9 for the South East makes reference to the factthat the South East is the main gateway between the UK and neighbouringEuropean countries for business, trade and many other aspects of national life, andsuggests that greater attention be paid to the relationships between London, Paris,

Brussels and Amsterdam (DETR, 2000b, p.13). In Yorkshire and the Humber andthe North West, there is some recognition that the inter-regional transpennine

21


23/81


corridor, the East-West Northern European Trade Axis, has important transnationaldimensions.

The documents make reference to a variety of mechanisms to address cross-borderissues notably cross border sub-regional studies. In many cases proposals for such

studies recognise the potential importance of cross border issues, but such issues donot at present directly inform strategy and policy. The proposed inter-regional studyfor the London-Stansted-Cambridge sub-region in RPG for the South East RPG 9(Chapter 12) is an example of a mechanism by which cross border issues can beaddressed. Inter-regional multi-modal studies such as, the West Midlands to NorthWest Conurbation study, are another mechanism identified in the documentation forthe consideration of cross-border issues. In the Proposed Changes Draft forYorkshire and the Humber, the strategies and studies related to cross-border issuesare identified as part of the discussion of the relationships with other English andEuropean regions. These include INTERREG (NETA, Norvision, and the Vision forNorth West Europe), the South Pennine Integrated Transport Study, and cross-

boundary environmental designations. In most cases the findings of studies intendedto investigate cross-border issues were not available when the RPG documentationwas prepared and will inform future strategy development.

A number of RPG documents go beyond mentioning cross border studies, andinclude commitments to take forward cross-boundary working in their sections onimplementation. The South East and South West documents include sections onintra- and inter-regional co-operation, and place emphasis on the fact that theimplementation of the objectives of RPG will require co-operation with neighbouringregions and between authorities within the region. Mechanisms by which localauthorities within the region can co-operate in implementing sub-regional strategiesare identified. These include joint development plans and local transport plans, thepreparation of studies and strategies covering more than one local authority area,and participation in transnational spatial planning projects.

A number of the RPGs adopt sub-regional packaging within their strategies. In theEast Midlands five sub-regions have been identified as a means of allowing a sub-regional interpretation of the guidance. The regions are seen to have an internalcoherence in terms of their assets, opportunities and problems, and their boundariesare indicative and do not strictly conform to administrative boundaries. Therelationships between the sub-regions are also considered, as are the links with

adjoining regions. In the Southern sub-area the close functional relationships withlarge urban areas in adjoining regions, such as, Coventry and Milton Keynes isrecognised, as is the general pressure from the South East, the West Midlands andEast Anglia. In the Eastern sub-area the role of Peterborough in the south of thesub-area is recognised, and the policy aims to minimise further increases in car-borne commuting across the regional border. In the South West the spatial strategyhas been developed around sub-regions and their principal urban areas (PUAs), andthe text recognises that not all planning issues will tidily match the boundaries of theadministrative areas of local authorities or other agencies either within orneighbouring the South West region(SWRPC, 2000, p.11, para. 3.1).

The discussion above has highlighted the way in which cross-border issues aretreated in the RPG documents and discussed the responses that have been adopted

22


24/81


in a number of regions. Overall the picture is mixed, and in certain RPGs there islittle evidence to indicate how cross-boundary issues have been considered inpreparing RPG and how they will be addressed in terms of implementing aspects ofthe strategy. It is not to say that dialogue has not occurred or that mechanisms donot exist to address the issues, rather that there is little evidence of this in the

document. Some RPGs seem to have an almost parochial perspective in terms ofthe extent to which they acknowledge and respond to issues that have a cross-boundary dimension. However, in other regions the importance of cross-boundary co-operation for the delivery of the RPG strategy was clearly recognised including co-operation at the intra-regional level in the case of functional sub-regions. This wasreflected by references in the chapters on implementation to the need to secureeffective cross-boundary working.

2.3.4 Vertical Linkages

The Evaluative Framework also sought to consider the vertical integration of policy in

national and regional space. In the case of RPGs this can be seen to relate to therelationship between RPG and national policy guidance and the policies andstrategies of regional and sub-regional stakeholders.

All the RPGs contained evidence of links to a variety national policy guidance andstrategies including:

Planning Policy Guidance Notes, Mineral Planning Guidance Notes, Circular6/98 on Affordable Housing, Circular 1/97 Planning Obligations, Rural,Urban, and Transport White Papers, the ten year transport plan Transport2010, the report of the Urban Task Force, the Health White paper SavingLives: Our Healthier Nation July 1999, the England Rural DevelopmentProgramme, the DTI Competitiveness White Paper, the Crime and DisorderAct 1998, The National Waste Strategy 2000, Environment Agencystrategies, the SUSTRANS National Cycle Route, Countryside Agencystrategies, National Forest strategy, AONB designations, Railtrack networkmanagement programme.

In terms of vertical integration in regional space all the documents clearly addresstheir policies to the development plan and local transport plan authorities and in manycases to other agencies responsible for regional or local level plans. Links and

references are made to a wide variety of strategies from the regional to the local levelincluding:

Single Programming Documents, sub-regional strategies (for example theEast Lancashire Partnerships Strategy in the North West), Local Bio-DiversityAction Plans, Local Agenda 21 strategies, Local Environment Agency Plans,Travelwise campaigns, quality bus partnerships, urban design frameworks,Integrated Development Plans (Objective 1 and 2 areas), and Health ActionZones.

Therefore it would appear from the documents that there is good vertical integration

in national space and that the RPGs have been prepared with regard to variety ofnational, regional and local legislation, guidance and strategies. Most RPGs include

23


25/81


a full list of PPGs and MPGs in their Appendices, whilst the glossaries in a number ofthe documents include references to a number of other agencies, strategies, andpolicy documents enabling the reader to form a picture of the different documentsand agencies that inform and deliver policies. In the Draft RPG for the North Westreferences to other relevant documents are included at the bottom of each page.

2.4 Spatial development policy principles

The evaluation also aimed to explore the extent to which the spatial policy principlesand aims of the ESDP have been applied to the RPG documents and have informedthe specific policies of RPG. In ESDP terms this can be described as verticalintegration of policy in European space.

The majority of the documents referred to one or more of the ESDP policy guidelinesas having relevance for the region, but the extent to which the implications of thiswere developed and used to inform the strategies and policies of RPG varied.

In general, the review suggested that there is a high level of consistency between thespatial development principles of the ESDP and the strategies and policies of theRPGs. This appeared to be the case even where the consistency with the ESDPwas not made explicit by a direct reference to the ESDP. This confirmed the findingsof earlier research conducted in North West England, which found that in the case ofDraft RPG for the North West, it would be relatively easy in re-editing to link policieswith the ESDP in the explanation/justification for the policies(Shaw, 2000, p.23). Itwas clear from the review that many of the individual topic policies in the RPGdocuments can be seen to have a close affinity with the spatial principles of the

ESDP. In essence it was possible to infer consistency between the objectives of thedocuments and the principles of the ESDP even where this was not made explicit.

This finding is not that surprising. The principles and policies of the ESDP can to alarge extent be seen to represent the current orthodoxy in terms of spatial planningfor sustainable development. The ESDP has been developed as an iterative processby the CSD with input from an emerging European spatial planning community ofacademics and practitioners. The resulting principles and policy options canperhaps be characterised as essentially consensus based and broad brush.

Most of the RPGs make at least some reference to the three guiding principles of the

ESDP, usually in their sections on regional context, however the extent to which theyare used to inform the development of the guidance varies greatly. In the NorthWest, the principles of the ESDP are stated, and in the chapter on regional contextthe region is described as being poly-centric. The guidance contains policies thatseek to concentrate development on the conurbations of Greater Manchester andMerseyside, whilst considering the needs of other settlements both within and outsidethe Merseybelt. In the North East, Newcastle upon Tyne is recognised as theregional capital and Gateway city to the region and as a city of European importance.In the South West RPG the ESDPs principle of co-operation between cities andsurrounding rural hinterlands is identified as being of particular relevance to RPG(SWRPC, p.4). In the Proposed Changes Draft RPG for Yorkshire and the Humber,

the ESDP principles are described as providing a highly relevant context for RPG andthere is a section explaining how the core vision and objectives, and spatial strategy

24


26/81


of RPG are consistent with these. In essence most regions appear to have pickedout the elements of the ESDP, which were felt to be most relevant to their region andsought to demonstrate how the approach that has been adopted reflects these. Thiscan be seen as using the ESDP as an indicative framework of options and ideas forspatial development. However, it is not clear from the documents whether the ESDP

has actually actively informed the development of the strategies, or if it there hasbeen a process of post-rationalisation, mapping the RPG objectives back onto theESDP principles.

By contrast there are a number of regions where it seems that the ESDP may havehad a more profound effect on the overall approach adopted. In the South West,East Midlands and the West Midlands it seems that the ESDP ideas are perhapsbeing more imaginatively used in structuring the approach to developing RPG. TheSouth West RPG has adopted a polycentric approach based on the functions ofdifferent settlements, rather than on a demographic hierarchy. Particular attention ispaid to the relationships between the Principal Urban Areas (PUAs) and Significant

Settlements and their sub-regional hinterlands. A key principle for the futuredevelopment of the region is the development of an integrated approach to urbanand rural areas. The approach recognises the need to secure effective cross-boundary co-operation at the intra-regional level, particularly in view of the fact thatthe planning issues associated with a number of the PUAs increasingly extend intoadjoining districts. Thus Policy SS 3 advocates a co-ordinated approach, whichallows for a selective review of Green Belt boundaries in the region, which shouldprevent growth leaping into commuter towns leading to less sustainable patterns ofdevelopment.

In the text of the Proposed Changes Draft of RPG for the East Midlands, the sub-areas approach is justified in terms of the ESDPs emphasis on the need for policy totake full account of urban-rural relationships and interdependencies. An explicit link tothe ESDP is made in Chapter 7, which presents the policies for five sub-areas. Thejustification stresses the importance of an understanding of how the urban and ruralnetwork of the East Midlands functions and how it could be improved. The sub-areaboundaries do not align with existing largely artificialadministrative boundaries, butare based on an assessment of functional relationships.

In the process of developing new RPG 11 for the West Midlands a consensus isstarting to emerge that a fundamental change of policy direction is required,

particularly regarding the relationship between the Major Urban Areas and the rest ofthe region. The Draft Spatial Strategy and Indicative Policies document MovingForward indicates that consideration has been given to the ESDPs three keyprinciples in the development of the West Midlands strategy. Research has beencommissioned into a methodology for mapping the functions of different parts of theregion and developing a Polycentric Framework for the West Midlands. The DraftSpatial Strategy outlines key policy principles and 11 supporting objectives, includingObjective 11 which aims to, Create a joined up multi-centred regional structurewhere all areas have distinct roles to play(WMLGA, 2001, p.22).

Overall, the evaluation suggests that the strategies and policies of the RPG

documents reviewed are broadly consistent with those of the ESDP although linksare generally not made explicit. The majority of the documents referred to one or

25


27/81


more of the three overarching ESDP policy guidelines as having relevance for theregion. In most of the documents there was little development of these themesbeyond the initial acknowledgement of their relevance, however, there was evidencein certain regions that concepts such as polycentricity and rural-urban partnershiphave exerted a more profound influence on the direction, development and structure

of RPG.

2.5 Spatial representations

2.5.1 Introduction

The Evaluative Framework also considered whether the European spatial context inwhich the RPG had been developed, was acknowledged, and represented throughappropriate maps and diagrams and whether the key spatial diagram effectivelyrepresented the regions links with rest of the UK, EU and world.

2.5.2 Representation of the European spatial context for the region and RPG

The spatial representations used in the RPG documents are of variable quality interms of their effectiveness in illustrating strategies and functional linkages.

As already noted in Section 2.2 all the RPG documents reviewed considered aspectsof the European context for the region and as part of this most also included mapsshowing the location of the region in UK and European space. However, theeffectiveness of the maps in conveying a sense of the functional linkages betweenthe region and other parts of the UK and Europe was generally limited. Most of the

maps were locational geography maps, which simply indicated the position of theregion. In the North West (see Map 1) the contextual map accompanies theparagraph which discusses the regional context, including the East-West links thatwill become increasingly important as part of a North European Trade Axis extendingfrom Ireland to the Baltic(NWRA, 2000, p.3). However, the map is not used as anaid to the understanding of such concepts.

In the North East a rather interesting approach was adopted with a West-East verticalaxis instead of a North-South axis (see Map 2). This unusual approach had thevirtue of challenging the way one thinks about the regions position in Europe, andthis was reinforced by inclusion of 500km radii added to the diagram which showed,

for example, that Newcastle is closer to the Hague than it is to Penzance. However,the map did not give an indication of the linkages within European space.

Perhaps surprisingly, given the geographical location of the region and the relativelycomprehensive treatment given in the text to issues relating to its European context,the South East Region in Context diagram does not convey any sense of the flowsthat make the region the main gateway between the UK and neighbouring Europeancountries for business, trade and many other aspects of national life.(DETR, 2001,p.13).

26


28/81


Map 1: The North West in Context

source: NWRA (2000), People Places and Prosperity: Draft Regional PlanningGuidance for the North West, p. 3.

27


29/81


Map 2: The North East in Context

source: ANEC (2001), Draft Regional Guidance for the North East ProposedChanges Draft, Appendices.

28


30/81


So overall there would appear to be scope for improvement in the visualrepresentation of the European spatial context in which RPGs have been developed.The Panel in the East Midlands suggested that it was useful to have a family ofmaps showing other policy contexts including the INTERREG areas. Thus suchmaps were retained in the East Midlands, though not highlighting the region itself on

these maps limited their effectiveness in conveying a sense of the regions Europeancontext. In the Proposed Changes for Yorkshire and Humberside maps showing theNorth West Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Region have been introduced.

The Key Diagrams were also evaluated in terms of the representation of links withthe rest of the UK, EU and the world, and the degree to which they provided adynamic representation of the spatial development of their regions.

In terms of linkages to other regions, these are generally shown but rarely weighted,and in some regions the key diagram does not represent cross border linkages at all(RPG 6 East Anglia) or just represents fixed features such as roads or railways

(North East, Yorkshire and the Humber). In other regions where the diagrams aremore schematic such as, the North West (see Map 3) the key cross-boundarytransport corridors are shown with arrows, but not weighted in relation to their relativesignificance. For example it is not clear if the M62 corridor is more significant than thecorridor from the M6 into the Yorkshire Dales National Park, or if the M6 southwardslink to the West Midlands is more important than the M6 to Workington link. In theirrepresentations to the EIP of Draft RPG for the North West, the North West RegionalAssembly noted that further additions to the Key Diagramin RPG would cause it tolose its purpose and impact. This is perhaps a valid point in view of the differentfunctions that a Key Diagram has to fulfil, notably setting the context for lower tierplans. The problem of overcrowding the Key Diagram could perhaps be remedied byrepresenting the higher level functional linkages in European space on the Europeancontext diagram as already discussed.

There is a good deal of variation in the appearance of the Key Diagrams with someappearing to be OS map based and others being more schematic. The schematicdiagrams tend to be more dynamic than the others and arguably convey a better ideaof the pattern of future development, the importance of different intra- and inter-regional linkages and relationships, and functional sub-regions. For example, theEast Midlands Key Diagram (Map 4) has a dynamic feel with a simple key system. Italso shows three cross-border multi-modal studies and the area to be included in the

inter-regional study of the Milton Keynes sub-region. The South West RPG KeyDiagram has a similar dynamic feel and is easily related to the strategy and policiesin the text by means of a simple key, which includes references to the relevantChapters and policies. The more traditional OS style diagrams have a more staticfeel and tend to only represent fixed cross-border infrastructure such as roads orrailways.

29


31/81


Map 3: Key Diagram - Draft Regional Planning Guidance for NorthWest England

source: NWRA (2000), People, Places and ProsperityDraft RPG, p. 8.

30


32/81


Map 4: Key Diagram - East Midlands RPG Proposed Changes Draft

source: EMRLGA, Draft Regional Planning Guidance for the East Midlands Proposed Changes, p. 9.

31


33/81


It is perhaps a matter of opinion as to how effective one feels that differentapproaches are in representing the spatial strategy and contexts for RPG. However,in general the more schematic diagrams seem to give a better idea of the importanceof intra- and inter-regional linkages. It also perhaps interesting to ask if the variety inapproaches adopted suggests some variation in the conception of the role of the key

diagram between different regions.

2.6 Key issues

From the review of RPG documents a number of key issues emerged:

In general, whilst the European context is acknowledged in the documents, theway that it has informed the strategy and particular policies is poorlyarticulated and explained. Similarly, in general whilst reference is made to theESDP document there is little discussion of how it has informed strategy andpolicy. In a number of regions where Proposed Changes have been publishedfollowing the EIP and Panel Reports, there is a more comprehensive treatmentof the European context and issues raised by the ESDP, for example theProposed Changes Drafts of RPG for Yorkshire and the Humber, and the EastMidlands.

Most maps showing the position of the region in relation to other UK regionsand European space are simple geography maps, which show location but failto highlight functional relationships and linkages. However, the Proposedchanges to Draft RPG for the East Midlands (March 2001), and Yorkshire andthe Humber (March 2001), include maps, which show the two INTERREG IIIB

regions to which the regions belong.

In terms of the spatial planning approach advocated by the ESDP, from thedocumentation there appears be good verticalintegration at least in nationalspace. However, links to the European level and the ESDP are poorly dealtwith even where there is broad consistency between the RPG strategy andpolicies and the policy orientations of the ESDP.

In terms ofhorizontalco-ordination there is evidence in the documents ofconsensus building within regions with references to regional partners andother regional strategies and agencies. For example, in Yorkshire and

Humberside the responsibilities for the implementation of each policy are setout at the end of each chapter. In terms of horizontal co-ordination that iscross border in nature, there is generally little documentary evidence of theexistence of cross-boundary mechanisms, although in a number of RPGs,reference is made to cross border multi-modal studies, for example, the NorthWest in the context of the Regional Transport Strategy. This is not to say thatdialogue has not occurred, but the outlook of many RPGs appears fairlyparochial. Similarly regional and national gateways and spillover effects intoadjacent regions are not comprehensively picked up. Despite this generalperspective, a number of RPGs display a commitment to taking the inter-regional dimension forward. In the South East the proposed Milton Keynesarea sub-regional study is intended to be jointly led by the respective regionalplanning bodies(South East, East Midlands, and East of England), and there

32


34/81


is discussion of the need for inter- and intra-regional co-operation, both innational and transnational space, in the chapter on implementation. TheSouth West RPG also recognises that Implementation of this guidance willalso require close co-operation with neighbouring regionsand states that,The new regional planning body will need to ensure that the co-ordination

work is progressed effectively(SWRPC, 2000, pp.57-58).

The spatial development policy principles contained in the ESDP are so wideranging that every RPG reviewed contains policies that can be mapped ontothese. However, links to the ESDP are rarely if ever made explicit at the levelof individual policies.

The spatial representations used in the RPG documents are of variable qualityin terms of their effectiveness in illustrating strategies and functional linkages.Linkages to other regions are generally shown but rarely weighted, and insome regions the key diagram does not represent cross border linkages (see

for example, the key diagram in RPG for East Anglia). Some schematic keydiagrams are more dynamic than others and convey the pattern of futuredevelopment, the importance of different intra and inter-regional linkages andrelationships, and functional sub-regions (e.g. the East Midlands and SouthWest). Other key diagrams are more static in the way they representstrategies (e.g. Yorkshire and the Humber). This perhaps suggests somevariation in the perceived role of the key diagram.

Thus overall the extent to which the ESDP has informed the development of RPGseems to vary considerably between the regions. A number of factors seem to beimportant in explaining the differences. Perhaps one of the most significant factors istiming. This seems to have two dimensions. First those RPGs that are more recentin origin tend to pay more attention to European considerations. Secondly, the stageof RPG in the preparation process also seems to be an important factor. In a numberof regions following the EIP, Panel Report and subsequent re-drafting of RPG, someof the European considerations seem to be more explicitly articulated. A finaldimension which the RPG review seemed to suggest was significant, was theempirical reality of the region. For some regions, connections to Europe, relationshipswith other UK regions and internal structure impacted upon the way that RPG wasproduced and contributed to a greater cognisance of the European agenda.

33


35/81


Chapter 3: Regional Player Survey

3.1 Introduction

In order to supplement the desk based evaluation and to gain a better insight into thewider RPG process, a Regional Player Survey was conducted. Structured interviewstook place during May and June with representatives of the Regional PlanningBodies and the regional Government Offices. The survey was undertaken to verifythe conclusions reached from the evaluation of the RPG documents, and to gain anup-to-date perspective on the evolving RPG process.

3.2 Views of the ESDP and its implications for RPG

The ESDP is generally seen as a document embodying spatial development

principles rather than as a document promoting a particular kind of planning process.The ESDP was described as coming up with a set of norms or values for spatialplanning or as containing sound principles.

In terms of the spatial policy principles and aims of ESDP, there was a feeling thateven though the consistency between RPG strategies and policies and the ESDPwas not made explicit, there was nevertheless general consistency. A number ofinterviewees noted that the values of the ESDP were in many respects similar tothose of the British planning system, for example, the commitment to containingurban sprawl and securing urban regeneration. Another example of sharedobjectives was in relation to the integration of land use and transport planning which

is promoted by the ESDP and also an objective of UK Government policy.Consequently it was broadly possible to map the objectives of the strategies andpolicies of the RPGs onto the ESDP principles, and in some regions consideration ofthe ESDP seems to have consisted of little more than a checklist or badging exercisein order to satisfy the requirements of PPG 11. The degree of concurrence betweenthe values and objectives of the ESDP and the UK planning system reflects the waythat the ESDP has been developed as a dialogue between European planners, andessentially reflects the current orthodoxy in terms of policy thinking on sustainablespatial development.

In terms of the spatial planning process advocated by the ESDP, one intervieweenoted that in some respects the ESDPs approach is more spatial than traditionaltown and country planning which reflects the dichotomy between land use andeconomic planning in the UK. In another region it was acknowledged that the RPGbeing developed was not yet truly spatial despite the broadening of its scope duringthe current review. Another interviewee suggested that pragmatism was the realmotivation for pursuing a more spatial/sectoral co-ordination approach, in terms ofgetting other agencies on-side in order to deliver the RPG strategy.

A useful role of the ESDP, mentioned in three regions, was that of highlighting thespatial implications of EU programmes. In one case the view was expressed that the

structural funds were a more important factor than the ESDP in shaping regionalpolicy.

34


36/81


So overall the survey revealed a general feeling that the principles of the ESDP werealready largely being applied in the English planning system. This was reflected inthe national guidance that has appeared in recent years and in the emergingstrategies and policies of the current round of RPG reviews.

3.3 The role of the ESDP in informing policy debate

The interviews confirmed the findings of the documentary review, suggesting thatthere is wide variety in the extent to which the ESDP has informed the developmentof different RPGs.

In some regions although the RPG was broadly consistent with the policy principlesof the ESDP, the ESDP had not really played a key role in informing the debate. Insuch regions, the ESDP was seen as an important contextual document, but muchless significant than other policy documents such as PPGs, or regional documentssuch as the RES. In a number of cases the ESDP was described as another pegonwhich to hang the justification for policy responses already suggested by regionalanalysis and national policy guidance. However, in other regions, the ESDP is beingmore actively employed as a justification for policies and strategies.

It was suggested in one interview that the ESDPs role in informing policy debate waslimited, as few stakeholders beyond the GO and the RPB had even heard of thedocument let alone read it. In two regions the relative lack of representationssubmitted to the EIP on the European dimension and the ESDP was noted. In atleast three regions, the role of the regional Government Offices in getting theEuropean context and the ESDP onto the agenda for the EIPs was seen as critical.

In addition the attitude of the EIP panel could also prove significant and again thereappear to have been a variety of experiences. In one region the Panel did not seemto have an interest in the ESDP and did not respond to a background paper on thesubject submitted by the RPB. In other regions it seemed that the Panel took greatercognisance of the European agenda and the ESDP. This in turn led to astrengthening of these dimensions in the Proposed Changes and Final versions ofRPG. In one region the Panel Report relied on a polycentricity based justification inproposing changes to the Draft RPG (see Chapter 4).

An interesting point, which seemed to confirm an idea suggested through the deskbased review, was that the indigenous characteristics and realities of certain regions

were key factors in determining both the degree of consistency with the ESDP and itsrole in informing policy development. In one region the strategy for RPG had evolvedfrom the principles that were felt to be important in the region at the time, and thesewere coincident with central ESDP principles. After the publication of the ESDP, achecklist appraisal had been undertaken to assess the consistency of the RPGthemes with the ESDP, but the origin of the approach and strategy was firmly rootedin the region itself. In other regions the ESDP appears to have been actively used toinform policy debates rather than simply being viewed in terms of a policy checklist.In one region it was noted that the diverse mosaic of sub-regions fits ESDP thinkingwhilst in another it was suggested that the RPG was very much informedby theESDP in terms of the polycentricity issue. In three regions the relevance of the

ESDPs policy principle of a new urban-rural partnership and rural-urban networkswas highlighted. There was a feeling in two regions that RPG did not yet have a

35


37/81


handleon this issue and that it was linked to the problem of how to take account ofthe different characteristics of deep and suburban rural areas. In another case, acloser consideration ofcross-boundary issues was noted as something that had beenencouraged by the ESDP

Overall, the survey suggested that in three cases the ESDP had been one of numberof key factors, which had helped to stimulate a radical re-consideration of the spatialstructure of the region and the approach to developing RPG. The concept ofpolycentricity seems to be the most relevant element of the ESDP principles, and insome regions it had clearly caught the imagination of key players in the RPG processas a new lens through which to view functional linkages within the region.

3.4 Treatment of cross-border issues

In terms of cross-border linkages, there was an acknowledgement in number ofregions that the ideas in the ESDP had occasioned a re-appraisal of RPGs approach

to such issues. In two regions the ESDPs emphasis on cross border dimensions wasspecifically described as useful. Again the empirical reality of individual regionsplayed a role, for example, in one region it was felt that there were no significantcross-border issues, which were not already being dealt with by mechanisms at thestructure plan and local authority level. By contrast, in another region the ESDPspromotion of horizontal co-operation at the intra- and inter-regional scales was seenas useful hookon which to hang a justification of intervention on the basis of sub-regional issues, when addressing the structure plan level. However, it wasacknowledged that there might be problems between levels of governance in pursinga sub-regional approach.

The role of the EIP Panel was again identified as being significant and there was agreat contrast in the approach adopted to the consideration of cross-border issues.In one region the Panel was felt to be not looking outside the re