Search

This paper analyses the localism agenda pursued in the UK since 2010 through the lens of governmentality. It examines how the state has deployed spatially based technologies of government predicated on particular political rationalities of localism that seek to orchestrate the ‘conduct of conduct’. The paper combats two oversights within the governmentality literature: first, the tendency to focus on the abstract, neglecting the messiness of actual attempts to govern; and second, the paucity of empirical studies of governmental technologies that fall short of realigning subjects’ agency towards governmental goals – despite a long-standing recognition of the incomplete and often contradictory nature of governmental rationalities. Through an empirical exploration of local actors’ experiences of Neighbourhood Planning – a community-led, land-use-planning initiative – this paper addresses these shortcomings by demonstrating how fundamental misconceptions contained within contemporary political rationalities have undermined efforts to realign community agency toward housing delivery. In concluding, it is argued that the tensions and fault-lines found within these rationalities go some way to explaining the emergence of ‘interstitial spaces of hope’ for genuine community agency within the confines of gradually tightening governmentalities.

The COVID-19 pandemic has restricted the movements of millions of people around the world, causing our social and physical worlds to shrink. This enforced time spent in vicinity of our own homes offers us the opportunity to reflect on what we cherish and what we might wish to change about our own neighbourhoods. In this Viewpoint, we consider the effects of the pandemic on urban planning and design, and argue for an active commitment to creating better neighbourhoods

Neighbourhood planning is arguably the most radical innovation in UK local governance in a\ud generation, with over 2,200 communities in England now involved in statutory development\ud planning at the neighbourhood level. Following incremental policy reforms, we argue that neighbourhood\ud planning has reached a critical juncture where the future of the initiative is at stake. In\ud this paper we reflect on existing research to assess the policy to date before imagining what an\ud optimised version of the policy might look like. Despite being a state-led initiative, central government\ud has failed to provide an image of success for neighbourhood planning which we argue\ud has held back widespread innovation and progressive participation. We therefore outline a normative\ud guide against which future iterations of neighbourhood planning might be assessed, and\ud employ this in order to imagine a more comprehensive form of neighbourhood governance.

Neighbourhood planning was formally enabled as a statutory part of the English planning system under the Localism Act 2011. This element of formal planning has generated significant interest as it actively requires local communities to lead on producing a Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) and is widely recognised as formalising co-produced planning. The paper reflects on research undertaken with a sample of neighbourhoods active in producing a neighbourhood plan, and develops a critical discussion about the experience of those participants. The findings highlight that existing power relations, national priorities, the framing of neighbourhood planning regulations, local political tensions and local resource constraints affect the emerging practices of neighbourhood planners in England. Many groups have adopted conservative positions or are finding their NDPs are being limited by consultants, local authorities or examiners, often concerned with how the NDPs will fare in the contested environment of planning and development in neo-liberal times. While some have contended that neighbourhood planning can form part of a progressive localism and there is some hope for such participatory spaces, our view is that innovation is being constrained if not entirely suppressed. We conclude that reform to neighbourhood planning is needed if it is to realise the ambitions of inclusive, empowered and responsible planning at the very local scale.

The Future of the Planning Profession: Planning With Many Changes, and for Many Challenges Gavin Parker University of Reading, Reading, UK This Interface emerged from a symposium on the future of t...

Neighbourhood planning is participatory initiative designed to increase community control over local land-use planning policy, thereby hopefully reducing local opposition to proposed housing develo...

Despite intermittent recognition of the input of private planning consultants in the UK planning system, there remains a paucity of empirical studies into their roles and influence in contemporary practice. Drawing on interviews with both public and private planners in England, this paper explores the nature of the public-private entanglements that increasingly define local planning practice. These in-clude the heterogeneity of the consultant market, the rationales employed to justify consultant use, the nature of the expertise being deployed, and the asymmetrical nature of public/private relationships. The paper argues that the demands made on the public planning system and the planners that operate it are driving teleological explanations of the use of private expertise, displaying an ambivalence to the fact that Local Planning Authorities are in a position of critical dependency with private sector consultants. In concluding, it is argued that the knowledges that underpin planning practices are increasingly shaped by the market, with the potential to un-dermine planning’s public interest purpose.

Over the past 30 years, the English planning system has undergone a series of reforms designed to increase efficiency, promote growth and, since 2010, achieve cost savings under the auspices of austerity. These reforms can be understood as part of a broader reorganisation of public services and functions in many Western democracies which have seen private sector providers move in to service new markets and take on functions previously delivered by public servants. Drawing on findings from research with key actors from both public and private sectors, this paper argues that the English planning system is increasingly fragmented, and task-oriented, and requiring of knowledge and skills-sets which local planning authorities typically do not possess. A relational shift regarding the (in)capacity of public planners and private sector actors drawn from a range of\ud disciplinary backgrounds has occurred, with the latter now providing a wide range of inputs to the planning system, typically in the guise of consultants. While planning has long been an exercise in co-production, involving a number of different actors, there has been limited discussion of the role private sector actors play in servicing and reproducing the planning system. The paper therefore describes how ‘fragmentary planning’ has emerged in England, and reflects on the knowledges, skills and capacities the system now requires. In concluding, we outline the questions of governance that these dynamics raise, and suggest avenues of further research.

Efforts to engage with communities in spatial planning have been criticised as being tokenistic, vehicles for co-option or designed to promote neo-liberal agendas. The introduction of neighbourhood planning (NP) in England under the Localism Act (2011) is claimed by proponents to be a step change in the way that local communities are involved in planning their own areas. However, little empirical evidence has yet emerged to substantiate such claims, or provide details about the practices and experiences of NP. The paper highlights that there are numerous parties involved in the co-production of Neighbourhood Development Plans and there are numerous instances where ideas, policies and priorities that emerge from within neighbourhoods are being ‘rescripted’ to ensure conformity to a bounded form of collaboration.

Until recently there has been little critical consideration of the privatization of urban planning expertise. In this paper we draw on archival research in England to present an historical analysis of the role of private sector planners over the post-war period. In so doing, the paper provides one of the first considerations of changing historical perceptions of the roles of private sector professionals in the delivery of public planning, assessing the claims through which markets in urban planning expertise have been both problematized and justified over time. Tracing the reorganization of planning expertise allows us to view public and private sector roles not as fixed and immutable categories but instead as historically contingent outcomes of struggles over how the contested public interest purposes of planning have been defined and realized.