Search

This paper provides an empirical review of a widely used tool in the English planning system - pre-application discussions (‘pre-apps’) and a theoretical exposition of governmental ‘logics’ that underpin neoliberal-informed planning reforms. We present five logic frames of growth,\ud efficiency, commercialisation, participation and quality, and apply these to pre-application negotiation practice, to highlight how Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) and public sector planners are faced with the challenge of reconciling a complex of multiple and often competing aims that appear irreconcilable in practice. We highlight that whilst ‘ordinary’ planning tools such as pre-apps may appear mundane, they can provide valuable instantiations where all the logics collide. The example of pre-application negotiations highlight how neoliberal logics of growth, efficiency and commercialisation often work to overshadow a range of more traditional planning concerns (including public participation and quality of development). Such framings also assist in evaluating why ongoing planning reforms create frustration when local outcomes do not line up with attempts to align planning to ideologically inspired logics set out nationally. We contend that such reform attempts, when based on ideological parameters alone, ignore\ud the trade-offs that LPAs and planners have to make regarding such different (competing) goals, audiences and interests that operate within the planning system. Until governments\ud accept the trade-offs that their political rationalities and reforms impose on planning systems, and the subsequent deficiencies of the specific policy tools that follow from them, these logics will continue to collide in practice; with the strongest for growth dominating others and local\ud governments and public planners unable to resolve the tensions. This theory and practice framing highlights how neoliberal thought pervades the planning system and tools in England; and further research could examine and reflect on how these logics are operationalised and sustained across different policy contexts and planning spaces in order to deepen knowledge on how neoliberal planning agendas are shaped and promoted or challenged internationally.

Neighbourhood planning was the first volunteer-led statutory planning tool to be created in the UK. Whilst it has provoked debate and critique covering numerous practical and theoretical aspects (Wargent and Parker, 2018), little attention has been paid to the actual experience and motives of the volunteers who spend their leisure time by volunteering to prepare a plan. Given the range of leisure activities that have been shaped in the context of a neo-liberalised policy environment we add to longstanding debates concerning the political nature of leisure and how neo-liberal policies require, and exploit, volunteer time and input while claiming to offer forms of empowerment. Qualitative data derived from neighbourhood plan volunteers is presented here to highlight the political work of neighbourhood planning, thus responding to calls to extend the analysis of the political in and through leisure (Rose et al, 2018). It is argued that neighbourhood planning pushes the boundaries of what can be legitimately asked of volunteers and expected in terms of delivering policy outcomes.

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.

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.