The Evolution of Urban Regeneration Policy - Essay Example

November 2007 A critical essay on the evolution of urban regeneration policy from 1977 to the present day Introduction Urban landscape has been undergoing rapid transformation in the UK. Industrialization and commercialization of businesses accompanied by new construction techniques and materials have changed the way our buildings were built and the way they formed an implicit part of our urbanization. Rural and suburban migrations have implied an implicit pressure on the land available for urbanization .As a result of which urban extents of main cities are expanding fast into suburbs and rural areas causing more dislocation and accompanied problems. Thus the quest for more urban space itself is responsible for disturbing the social, economic and cultural fabrics of many suburban area and Greenfield areas. Population decentralization has seen a significant decline in the city population and urban migration to suburban rural areas. In Britain rigid conservation bodies protect rural heritage and limit development in Greenfield areas. Recent policy changes have restricted Greenfield development, planning new pressures upon regional and local planning authorities to create planning solutions to this growing problem and ensure there is an adequate supply of Brownfield land for development. This paper examines the evolution of the urban regeneration policy in Britain since the year 1977 through an in-depth literature review and concludes on its important aspects so as to arrive at clearer understanding of the overall situation. For illustrative purposes the paper explores the policy formation in he most important debate in urban regeneration i.e. Brownfield development. Literature Review With new restrictions on Greenfield development, government has now turned to the urban regeneration of Brownfield sites as the solution to satisfying growing demand due to changes in household and outer migration. For regeneration to be successful in the long term, the economic and social well being of the community must also be considered. ‘Without regard for economic, social and culture aspects, property development may not meet the needs of the community and be unsustainable in the long run, not withstanding any short term profitability that might be achieved’ (Syms, 2002) The restriction of Greenfield development has meant planning authorities and developers now look to sustainable urban regeneration, by increasing housing density to cater for housing demand and need. Successful sustainable regeneration demands the economic, social and environmental revitalization of urban regions to attract business investment back into inner urban areas. As the good practice examples in this document show [deleted] neighbourhoods renewal starts from a proper understanding of the needs of communities. Communities need to be consulted and listened to, and the most effective interventions are often those where communities are actively involved in their design and delivery, and where possible in the driving seat. Often, this applies as much to ‘communities of interest’ – like black and minority ethnic groups, faith communities, older or younger people, or a disabled person – as it does to geographical communities. The report on the Stephen Lawrence inquiry points to some important lessons for all service providers in how institutions need to do better for black and minority ethnic groups. (Social, 2001) “[The Government] Strategy represents a huge change in the pace and scale of the Government’s attack on deprivation. It combines action and resources to tackle individual problems such as unemployment, crime and poor services, as well as new mechanisms to empower residents, and join up action on the ground and in Whitehall. It offers a major shift in approach, away from regeneration programmes shoring up poor public services in only a few areas, towards ensuring high quality public services in all neighbourhoods”. (Social, 2001) To achieve the government’s new objectives, planning authorities and developers have equally sought to change their working practice. Strong growth in household formation rates, a strongly protectionist countryside and environment lobby and powerful interests in private development industry have generated a great deal of controversy around public policy impacting on the provision of new land for new housing development. In particular, heated debate has grown up around national and regional estimates of housing demand, targets for the reuse of previously developed land and what this means for development on Brownfield and Greenfield sites. “The debate has spilled over onto disputes about sprawl and countryside protection, the role of the green belt, and the establishment of new towns and settlements.” (Adams and Watkins, 2002) Using appropriate literature references Lawless (1993) throws more insights into the government policy making into urban regeneration in following words, “One aspect of urban governance during the 1980s was the degree to which central government accentuated its control over local administration (Goodwin, 1992). This occurred in a number of ways. Local financial autonomy was reduced; legal impediments designed to restrict local government action were implemented; an entire tier of metropolitan local government was removed; and new non-elected agencies such as Training and Enterprise Councils and Urban Development Corporations were created. This centralization was not perhaps as all encompassing as is often assumed. Observers have pointed out that relations between central and local government in England were characterised by trends other than centralization-such as ambiguity, negotiation and confusion (Rhodes, 1992)”. Globally not many nations have distinct and identifiable Brownfield strategies or policies, even though there is a distinct move to consolidate disparate policy prescriptions into one enforceable and enveloping Brownfield policy. This essentially is taking the shape of picking up policy enactments that address Brownfield identification and development. It is observed that the focus in this respect is on the competition policy and planning policy aspects of Brownfield identification and development.(The Economist,2005) Even the definition of Brownfield is not distinct and clear. However some definitions clearly state as to what comes under the ambit of the term Brwonfield.One such definition is as follows:” Brownfield land is the common term for Previously Developed Land (PDL). PDL is defined in Planning Policy Guidance Document 3 (PPG3) "Housing" (2000) as land which is or was occupied by a permanent structure (excluding agricultural or forestry buildings), and associated fixed surface infrastructure. PDL may occur in both built-up and rural settings. The definition includes defence buildings and land used for mineral extraction and waste disposal where provision for restoration has not been made through development control procedures. The five individual components which may constitute Brownfield land can be identified as follows: PDL which is now vacant; vacant buildings; derelict land and buildings; other previously developed land or buildings, currently in use, allocated for development in the adopted plan or having planning permission for housing and other previously developed land or buildings where it is known there is potential for redevelopment. The definition excludes land and buildings that are currently in use for agricultural or forestry purposes, and land in built-up areas which has not been developed previously (e.g. parks, recreation grounds, and allotments - even though these areas may contain certain urban features such as paths, pavilions and other buildings). Also excluded is land that was previously developed but where the remains of any structure or activity have blended into the landscape in the process of time (to the extent that it can reasonably be considered as part of the natural surroundings), and where there is a clear reason that could outweigh the re-use of the site - such as its contribution to nature conservation - or it has subsequently been put to an amenity use and cannot be regarded as requiring redevelopment”. (Brownfield, 2006) In the UK Government’s effort at regeneration or urban areas have assumed the shape of various programmes and initiatives. For instance government has a Sustainable Communities Plan, with the chief object of the promotion and development of policies leading to the emergence and/or the reinforcement of “sustainable communities” in urban areas. With such initiatives, a National Brownfield Strategy forms a core portion leading to overall sustainable development.(Office,2003) Such initiatives normally address the entire of UK, which in fact, comprises of four nations. However the focus of National Brownfield Strategy is on England due to the fact that England has a distinct and emergent need for such a policy. However core motivation for urban regeneration policy making arrives from movements that originate locally. As Lawless (1993) states, “Coalitions of interests dedicated to growth tend to emerge from key local activists, among whom local property owners usually play a crucial mediating role. Local governments and local media on the whole accept and in turn promote a pro-business ethos because of the assumed benefits attendant upon growth, notably jobs, but also rising retail and whole- sale sales, more intensive land development and increased levels of financial activity.” Lawless (1999) very succinctly explains the urban regeneration policy from 1977 in following words, “There has been a formal urban policy in Britain since the publication in 1977 of the White Paper, Policy for the Inner Cities (Department of the Environment, 1977). From that time both the Labour government towards the end of the 1970s and Conservative governments elected in 1979, 1983, 1987 and 1992 instigated a series of urban regeneration initiatives. During the 1980s, priority was placed on the reclamation of derelict land and property through urban development corporations, enterprise zones, and urban development grants. During the 1990s, the emphasis has moved somewhat. Partly in response to the results and recommendations of a major evaluation of the impact of urban policy as a whole (Department of the Environment, 1994), the then Conservative government introduced area-based programmes integrating the powers and resources available to a number of relevant partners. This was most obviously evident in the City Challenge initiative and the Single Regeneration Budget (SRB)”. For instance, the policy need for Brownfield development in England is revealed by some compelling data which is presented as under. As recently as in the year 2002 English Partnerships, the national regeneration agency, had put the figure of Brownfield land in England at a massive 66,000 hectares (163,000 acres);of which nearly one fourth was comprised in more than 2000 sites, which had been derelict or vacant for a period exceeding one decade. Figure 2, included at Appendix A, reveals the area wise statistics of such derelict or vacant lands in UK as identified by English Partnership, the national regeneration agency, in the National Land Use Database (NLUD). A post facto analysis of the main reasons coming in way of regeneration of such a vast land revealed that issues in environmental contamination, coupled with cost and planning obstacles formed the main reasons for hampering the regeneration of these sites. (English, 2003). These main reasons, in turn were occasioned by structural changes in the UK economy with decline and closure of manufacturing facilities being the prime factor. Government policy has thrown up a great deal of urban regeneration opportunities in many areas such as the housing.” Planning restrictions, strong growth in household formation and fragmented supply due to the traditional ‘house-builder’ focus of most operators have all contributed to the long-term undersupply of new accommodation,” “In 2004 there were approximately 190,000 new home starts in the UK with a population of approximately 60 million people, compared to around 170,000 new home starts in Australia which has a population of 20 million. This suggests tremendous scope for opportunities in the UK market in light of changes to public policy”. (Media, 2005) Another dimension of this demand and supply mismatches of homes is the dichotomy between the mismatch in rural versus urban England. This is brought about clearly by the following report from BBC News:” Homelessness in rural areas of the South East of England is soaring three times as fast as in urban areas, according to housing charity Shelter. It says that 5,982 households in rural areas of the South East were homeless in 2003, compared with 4,885 in 1999 - an increase of 22%. This compares with an increase of 7% in urban areas. Shelter’s report Priced Out, launched on Tuesday, calls on the government to build more affordable rural homes. The report also reveals that last year more council houses were sold under Right to Buy scheme than were provided to replace them. Shelter says many local people in the South East cannot afford to live in the towns they grew up in, with potentially devastating impact on rural businesses, schools and communities. (BBC News, 2004) The same BBC News report quotes Shelter director Adam Sampson “There is something wrong when levels of homelessness are soaring, whilst only a fraction of sold-off council houses are being replaced,”, and "The failure to build new homes has forced families who have lived in a town or village for generations to move away." Shelter uses the Countryside Agencys definition, which categorizes 31% of districts in the South East as rural. The charity says second-home ownership is also contributing to the rise in rural homelessness. It is calling for owners of second homes to be charged double the normal rate of council tax. Second homes in England currently qualify for a council tax discount of between 10% and 50%, depending on the discretion of the local council. Conclusion The urban regeneration policy in the UK seems to be focused to deriving several benefits for the local population ,which include economic creation and retention of employment opportunities; increased competitiveness for cities; increased export potential for clean –up technologies ;increased tax base; improved quality of life in neighbourhoods;removal of threats to human health and safety ;access to affordable housing ;reduced urban sprawl pressures on Greenfield sites; restoration of environmental quality; improved air quality and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. A most forward looking and innovative attempt have been to get these benefits through, say, adequate Brownfield development. Despite government’s policy prescriptions on Brownfield regeneration and despite having area wise figures of PDL the Brownfield regeneration has not caught on to expected pace-which goes on to illustrate the tardy implementation of the policy. However as Lawless (1999) states using literature support, “In a sense, underpinning these issues of content and objectives, is the question of integration. In the UK context, the argument that there has been a `balkanization’ in governance has been well developed (see, for example, Stoker and Young, 1993). In brief, whereas 20 years ago there could be little doubt that local authorities were the key players in local governance, by the mid 1990s a wide range of other organizations such as TECs, FE colleges, health authorities and development corporations had created a far more diffuse and varied policy context. Authorities have increasingly adopted an `enabling’ function regulating or coordinating a range of providers of services which were once the remit of the elected local council. Works Cited Syms, P. (2002). Land, Development and Design. Blackwell Science, Oxford Social Exclusion Unit.(2001). A New Commitment to Neighbourhoods Renewal. National Strategy Action Plan. Adams, D and Watkins, C. (2002) .Greenfields, Brownfields and Housing Development. Blackwell Science, Oxford Lawless, Paul (1993).Partnership in Urban Regeneration in the UK: The Sheffield Central Area Study. Urban Studies, 31:8, 1303 - 1324 Goodwin, M. (1992) .The changing local state, in: P. CLOKE (Ed .) Policy and Change in Thatchers Britain . Oxford : Pergamon . Rhodes, R.A.W. (1992) .Changing intergovernmental relations, in : P . CLOKE (Ed .) Policy and Change in Thatchers Britain . Oxford : Pergamon The Economist. (2005).Blooms on Brownfields. Special report on urban regeneration. 2 April 2005, pp 67-69. Brownfield Land. (2006).Definition of Brownfield Land. Retrieved on December 01, 2006 from http://www.grc.cf.ac.uk. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. (2003).Sustainable Communities: Building for the Future. ODPM, London. Lawless, Paul (1999) .Urban Regeneration and Transport Investment: A Case Study of Sheffield 1992-96. Urban Studies, 36:3, 527 – 545. Department of the Environment. (1977). Policy for the Inner Cities. Cmnd 6845. London: HMSO. Department of the Environment. (1994). Assessing the Impact of Urban Policy. London:HMSO. English Partnerships. (2003). Towards a National Brownfield Strategy. Research Findings for the Deputy Prime Minister, September. Media Release. (2005). Lend Lease to Acquire Leading UK Urban Regeneration Specialist. 23 June 2005. BBC News.(2004).England: Housing prices out rural people. Tuesday, 16 November, 2004, .Retrieved on December 01, 2006 from http://news.bbc.co.uk. Stoker, G. And Young, S. (1993). Cities in the 1990s . London: Longman. Read More