Planning, Growth and Regeneration in England

Planning in England, and particularly in Southern England (an area stretching from the South East to Cheshire, albeit that some places in between are excluded !) is particularly problematic at the present time. This Government labours under some fallacious assumptions about the relationship between planning, growth and competitiveness which have proved remarkably resilient thus far to reality check. These assumptions have, by and large, been imported from the United States, and are based on the belief that the domestic economy can be continually grown through increased access to mortgage and other forms of consumer credit. The current crisis in the world's financial markets, itself largely brought about by the implosion of the US sub-prime home loans sector, is evidence that this is not a prudent fiscal strategy. However, our government's plans to increase housebuilding in the South of England are substantially founded on it. Another assumption imported from the US is that economic competitiveness is the beneficiary of a planning system which accommodates high vacancy levels, especially in the commercial property sector. Although again, over-supply of commercial, and residential, property in this country and the United States were important contributors to the previous global recession of the early 1990s.

In the above context, the current predicament of the West Midlands Regionals Spatial Strategy (WMRSS) Revision Preferred Option, which has in fact been hi-jacked by Central Government, provides an interesting point of reference. The Government believes that the West Midlands Regional Assembly's (incidentally WMRA is due to be abolished) plans for house-building in the period 2006-2026 are too low. Although, WMRA's risk assessment for its own proposals suggest that over-supply is more likely to be a problem than under provision. Moreover, the Government's intervention is not restricted to housing. The WMRSS Revision also covers employment land, transport and distribution and waste provision, all of which will have to reflect the increased numbers of housing proposed for the region. The outcome of all this is that the WMRSS Revision Preferred Option is unlikely to be sustainable in either economic or environmental terms. Furthermore, the WMRSS core strategy of "Urban Renaissance" (ie the regeneration of the 2 major conurbations in the West Midlands) is likely to undermined through excessive release of greenfield sites in counties such as Worcestershire, and even here greenfield sites may increasingly be developed before brownfield. In this scenario, the region would revert to the dispersal of economic activity and people away from the older urban areas. Isn't this also happening in the United States by a not-so-funny co-incidence ? So much for evidence-based policy making.

Please see also my blogs @

• http://limits-2-growth.blogspot.com (subtitled : Deconstructing the New Labout Project)
• http://smartlimits2growth.wordpress.com