Controversial Planning Decisions - Case Study Example

Controversial Planning Decisions Introduction Over the last few decades, environmental policies and planning all over the world has moved away from a principally government controlled ‘top-down’ venture into a multi-level structure of governance where authorities and responsibilities are distributed among various stakeholders and policymakers such as the government, specific businesses, sector-based organizations, and the civil society. The stakeholders and policymakers can either be locally, nationally or internationally based. Hajer and Kesselring (1999, p. 18) explicates this shift from state-led to multiple-based authority as the era of hierarchical, sectorialised and departmentalised governance. This shift has created tremendous ramifications for governance of environmental matters. In this new philosophy, governance of environmental matters is reconceptualised in terms of ‘networks’ and ‘associations’ with which the government has to parley, so as to be effective and gain the favour and support of the citizens and the related stakeholders. As a result, planning decisions made by the government without consulting the relevant stakeholders and policymakers are considered controversial regardless of their intended objectives (Newig and Fritsch, 2009). This system of governance is usually very problematic because even though the government is required by law to make the public and the relevant stakeholders and policy makers aware of its objectives to review their development plans and consult using conferences and documented avenue, citizen and stakeholder involvement in planning decisions pertaining to the environment remains negligible (Callanan, 2005; Flynn, 2003) Contemporary Controversial Environmental Planning Decisions In The UK In the contemporary world, planning decisions pertaining to the environment are accompanied by a myriad of controversial issues. Controversial issues pertaining to environmental planning decisions usually revolve around fairness, ethics, and the manner in which evidence is used in coming up with environmental decisions and regulations. In the UK, current controversial environmental planning decisions manifest themselves in two events which are going to be critically examined in this paper. The first event is the decision, which was made by the UK’s Secretary of State, declared that a thirty two hectares of an ancient woodland be wiped out to enable the expansion of an existing rag-stone mine. The second thing is the revelations that were identified in a meeting that was held by representatives from the UK Business Council for Sustainable Development to deliberate on issues pertaining to environmentally sustainable development. Cost-Benefit Justification For Environmental Destruction In Oaken Wood, Kent In the controversial Oaken Wood planning decision, the government argued that the commercial benefits of expanding the Hermitage Quarry into the Oaken Woodlands outweighed the worth of the 400-year old Oaken Woodlands. This planning decision by the government was based on the premise the expansion of the Hermitage Quarry corresponded to the Development Plan policy of the UK (Bawden 2013). Undeniably, the National Planning Policy Framework, which was instituted in 2012 stipulates that ‘planning authorization should be repudiated for expansion projects that lead to the loss or deterioration of inimitable environments, such as ancient woodland except if the need for, and merits of, the expansion in that environment evidently prevails over the loss’ (DCLG 2012, p 28, section 118). Pessimism, suspicion and controversy over such regulations arise from the manner in which the government uses evaluative tools and statutory references in a tick-box method and evidence produced to support a policy that has detrimental effects to the country. In relation to this, Bawden (2013) reckons that the ancient woodlands of Oaken contain one of the most bio-diverse environment in the UK, but they have been devastated and fragmented, and in a period of 80 years 50% of its coverage has been decimated. The ramifications of the controversial Oaken Wood planning decision according to Bawden (2013), will serve an example for any future expansion projects that will be proposed on other ancient woodland sites, The premise of Bawden’s, (2013) argument is that the Oaken Wood planning decision only considers the contemporary emphasis on (short-term) economic development and disregards the future economic and environmental ramifications. When the government argues that the commercial benefits of expanding the Hermitage Quarry into the Oaken Woodlands outweighs the worth of the 400-year old Oaken Woodlands, the only thing taken into consideration is the fact that the quarry will industrial resources for several years. This, according to the government is more beneficial to the country than the outcomes of preservation and improvement of ecological ‘assets’ such as air quality and biodiversity. What the government fails to recognise according to Bawden (2013), is that the benefits of the Hermitage Quarry are short-term while those of the woodland are long-term and once the Oaken Woodlands is decimated, it is lost forever and its ecological ‘assets’ cannot be re-instated The controversial Oaken Wood planning decision, like many other environmental planning decisions, brings out the maintenance of a flawed dichotomy in the planning decisions pertaining to industrial development and the environmental preservation. Bawden (2013) reveals that the premise that industrial development leads to a win-win situation is deeply flawed. In fact, the society and its economic systems are contingent to the environmental systems and the industrial development cannot be viewed as independent or more important at the expense of ecological ‘assets’ of the environment Discussion of the factors that influenced the controversial Oaken Wood planning decision There are many factors that can influence the process of environmental planning and decision-making. These factors can influence any of six stages of the process of environmental planning and decision-making. These six stages of the process of environmental planning and decision-making include conducting a situational analysis, identifying alternative objectives and plans, evaluation of the identified alternative objectives and plans, selection of the most appropriate objectives and plans, implementation of the objectives and plans, and finally monitoring and controlling the implementation process One of the things that mostly that influenced the controversial Oaken Wood planning decision is the supremacy of the government over other related stakeholders and policymakers. The law and existing regulations seem to provide an advantage to the government than the related stakeholders and policymakers and so any effort to oppose the government is usually trounced upon. This is usually unfair because the regulations put in place to help the related stakeholders and policy makers to influence environmental planning decisions are put in place by institutions that do not have the environment’s best interests at heart. One such institution is the UK Business Council for Sustainable Development, and the meeting it held to deliberate on sustainable development tells it all UK Business Council for Sustainable Development sustainable development meeting During this meeting, two things became evident. First, it became clear that for any message or information to be considered the Board of big conglomerate firms, it has to be presented in plain English and documented an A4 paper with a lucid yes/no approach recommendation. This means that, while massive amounts of time and capital gets pumped into research projects and acquiring a meticulous evidence base, ultimately the decision depends on ones ability to compile the findings in simple language and the ability to be persuasive. This extremely condensed method of presentation of findings and arguments appears to favour the planning decisions presented by big business and the government. Secondly, it became evident that without an authoritarian influence and client demand, ecological preservation initiatives will always be viewed as exceptions rather than statutory regulations. In comparison with other European countries like Germany, Sweden, or Austria UK’s environmental regulations and principles (for example, enhancing energy efficacy of existing constructions) is weak. The is because unlike other European countries, focus on UK’s environmental regulations and principles is usually on making as much a profit as possible in the preliminary stages of development, chain of sales and redevelopment. On the other hand, other European countries put more emphasis on how the designing, construction, and maintenance of projects coincides with measures put in place to preserve the ecological ‘assets’ of the projects’ surroundings (Lane and Corbett, 2005) Equity, Ethics and Evidence in Environmental Planning Decisions Every planning proposal is assessed on the basis of its merits and demerits. As a result, all stakeholders involved in the planning of environmental projects should come to the table and evaluate all alternatives. Recognising the significance of connectivity in spatial planning of projects is the key to coming up with the best possible decision (Allmendinger and Haughton 2007; Low 2002). In the controversial Oaken Wood planning decision, however, the themes that dominate the whole planning and decision-making process are discriminatory perceptions and evidence, lack of connectivity, and lack consultation among stakeholders. In other words, every stakeholder does his or her activities in isolation. In accordance with the themes of isolation, ethics, equity, and administration, Stevenson (2013 p. 572) reckons that the politicisation and democratisation of issues pertaining to climatic change alleviation lead to international deliberative responsibility of the environment. Responsibility and reflexive decision-making are recognized as core considerations in matters of climate change. Drawing reference from Stevenson’s in an assertion, the problem with the controversial Oaken Wood planning decision is a lack of formal structures through which the idea the public spheres and the geopolitical factors can be presented, for efficient decision-making and planning. According to Maltais, (2013) the factors that influence environmental planning decisions revolve climatic change, which in the contemporary world focuses on politics, moral accountability, and equity. Maltais, (2013) agrees with Booth, (2012) when he asserts that reducing unilateral personal emissions will have insignificant effects in reducing climatic change (p. 595). Maltais continues to accentuate that climatic change as a political and societal issue is the only most significant way of reducing climatic change and concludes that much more attention should consequently be directed to climate politics and cooperation than other economic priorities. Drawing reference from Maltais’ assertion, the problem in the controversial Oaken Wood planning decision is the misplaced priorities of the government. The planning decision by the government was based on the premise the benefits of expansion of the Hermitage Quarry greatly outweigh the worth of the 400-year old Oaken Woodlands. This, according to Maltais’ assertions is a misplaced priority because the plan does not focus on the most important issue i.e. reducing climatic change James (2013) puts more emphasis on part-whole relations between the stakeholders in environmental initiatives, detrimental anthropocentrism, bigotry, and myopia. On the issue of myopia, James (2013) stipulates that stakeholders in environmental initiatives have restricted perspectives on how they should perceive environmental planning and decision-making (p. 619). James, (2013) agrees with Godlovitch (2004) that the stakeholders involved in environmental initiatives should try to get a better perception on the environmental planning and decision-making processes instead of focusing on self-centred feelings. Drawing reference from James’ assertion the problem in the controversial Oaken Wood planning decision is prejudice and myopia. Prejudice and myopia are big vices, in the Oaken Wood planning decision. In terms of myopia and prejudice, Oaken Wood planning decision only considers the contemporary emphasis on (short-term) economic development and disregards the future economic and environmental ramifications. What the government fails to acknowledge is that the benefits of the Hermitage Quarry are short-term while those of the woodland are long-term and once the Oaken Woodlands is decimated, it is lost forever and its ecological ‘assets’ cannot be restored. The government displays prejudice when it only considers its need to acquire cost-benefit and fails to consider the fact that the decision will lead to the destruction of one of the most ancient and bio-diverse environments in the country. Conclusion In the controversial Oaken Wood planning decision, the UK government was indeed justified. This is because the National Planning Policy Framework states that, ‘planning authorization should be repudiated for expansion projects that lead to the loss or deterioration of inimitable environments, such as ancient woodland except if the need for, and merits of, the expansion in that environment evidently prevails over the loss’. However, on matters pertaining to ethics equity and evidence the planning decision seems deeply flawed (Samuelsson, 2013) With reference to pinch-points identified between the industrial development and good environmental planning decisions, there seems to be a tug of war between the state economy and long-term environmental policies. Warning signs of an impending massive catastrophic climatic change are obscured in these debates on the issues of environmental planning, with desultory responses of supporting environmental preservation (e.g. the anthropocentric ecosystems services framework). References Allmendinger, P. and Haughton, G. (2007) ‘The fluid scales and scope of UK spatial planning’. Environment and Planning A 39: 1478–1495. Bawden, T. (2013) ‘Ancient wood to be felled for quarry’. The Independent 12 July; http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/ancient-wood-to-befelled-for-quarry-8706546.html# (accessed 24 April 2014) Booth, C. (2012) ‘Bystanding and climate change’. Environmental Values 21: 397–416. Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) 2012. National Planning Policy Framework, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/2116950.pdf (accessed 24 April 2014) Callanan, M. (2005) Institutionalizing participation and governance? New participative structures in local government in Ireland, Public Administration, 83(4): 909–929. Flynn, B. (2003) Much talk but little action? ‘New’ environmental policy instruments in Ireland, Environmental Politics: Special Issue on New Environmental Policy Instruments, 12(1): 136–156. Godlovitch, S. (2004) ‘Icebreakers: Environmentalism and natural aesthetics’. In A. Carlson and A. Berleant (eds.), The Aesthetics of Natural Environments, pp. 108–26. Toronto: Broadview. Hajer,M. & Kesselring, S. (1999) Democracy in the risk society? Learning fromthe new politics of mobility in Munich, Environmental Politics, 8(3):1–23. James, S.P. (2013) ‘Finding – and failing to find – meaning in nature’. Environmental Values 22: 609–625. Lane, M. B. & Corbett, T. (2005) The tyranny of localism: Indigenous participation in community-based environmental management, Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 7(2): 141–159. Low, N. (2002) ‘Eco-socialisation and environmental planning: a Polanyian approach’. Environment and Planning A 34: 43–60. Maltais, A. (2013) ‘Radically non-ideal climate politics and the obligation to at least vote green’. Environmental Values 22: 589–608. Newig, J. & Fritsch, O. (2009) Environmental governance: Participatory, multi-level and effective? Environmental Policy and Governance, 19(3): 197–214. Robinson, L.W. and Sasu, K.A. (2013) ‘The role of values in a community-based conservation initiative in Northern Ghana’. Environmental Values 22: 647–664. Samuelsson, L. (2013) ‘At the centre of what? A critical note on the centrism-terminology in environmental ethics’. Environmental Values 22: 627–645. Stevenson, H. (2013) ‘Governing climate technologies: Is there room for democracy?’ Environmental Values 22: 567–587. Read More