De‐municipalisation? Legacies of austerity for England's urban parks

Abstract

Parks are important urban infrastructures that contribute a broad range of health, environmental, social, and economic benefits. Despite this, UK parks' status as non‐statutory services makes them particularly vulnerable to local authority budget cuts. This paper focuses on parks in English cities as these were particularly affected by severe cuts to local government budgets 2010–2019. This period of austerity affected parks provision in various ways, including service reductions, increased reliance on volunteer labour, and pressure to generate commercial revenue. Combined with a series of other factors, including ongoing neoliberalisation, austerity‐driven changes left a range of physical, social, and institutional legacies. This paper explores these using the notion of de‐municipalisation to frame the discussion. The paper is based on an innovative synthesis of research conducted by the authors 2016–2022 and presented at the RGS‐IBG Annual Conference in 2021. The paper identifies that austerity‐driven changes included an experimental ‘shaking up’ of park governance, away from local authorities and with greater involvement from national‐level NGOs. Changes also involved a ‘breaking down’ of municipal management, with responsibility delegated to dedicated parks trusts but also to community groups and volunteers. Ultimately, austerity 2010–2019 altered parks governance, transforming the stewardship and condition of parks, reducing accountability and accessibility, and exacerbating inequities in parks provision. Rather than representing new directions, these changes perpetuate those instigated in previous austerity eras. The noted trend towards de‐municipalisation also reduces parks' capacity to serve as integrated infrastructures – something that may hinder efforts to make cities more sustainable and resilient.

Evolution Pattern and Spatial Mismatch of Urban Greenspace and Its Impact Mechanism: Evidence from Parkland of Hunan Province

“…Scholars have discussed the factors influencing changes in urban parks. For example, Cheng [94], Nam [95], and Smith [96] argued that government funding plays a key role in the management of urban parks in China and the United Kingdom. Luo [97], Feng [98], and Kim [99] argued that both population density and size have significant spatial correlations with the level of service of urban parks.…”

Uneven decommodification geographies: Exploring variation across the centre and periphery

“…Indeed, public health rules, which prohibited large gatherings, unwittingly deepened the decommodification of public parks as concerts and festivals were banned, temporarily limiting the partial commodification of public spaces (Goodwin, 2022). The relaxation of public health restrictions, however, triggered a surge of events in 2022 as cash-strapped local governments rented out sections of parks to the highest bidders, indicating how austerity has reconfigured (de) commodification dynamics (The Guardian, 24/08/22; see also Smith et al, 2023).…”

Examining Spatial Inequalities in Public Green Space Accessibility: A Focus on Disadvantaged Groups in England

“…Scholars have identified the phenomenon of "green gentrification", whereby the emphasis on green spaces leads to the appreciation of surrounding properties and commercial transformations, thereby excluding disadvantaged communities and exacerbating their housing predicaments [88]. Furthermore, existing literature examining housing planning has indicated a positive correlation between green space and housing values, suggesting that proximity to desirable green spaces may demand higher housing costs, which can be unattainable for disadvantaged groups with limited financial resources [89]. The findings of a property value study in England indicate that green spaces in the region command a significant price premium, resulting in indirect inflation of environmental amenities' prices [90].…”