Taking Stock of Neighbourhood Planning in England 2011–2016

Abstract

Neighbourhood planning (NP) as enabled by the 2011 Localism Act in England has precipitated a considerable literature discussing its potential, limitations, and likely shortcomings referenced against government rhetoric and the reporting of initial experiences of the process. This paper provides an overview of the current literature on neighbourhood planning and sets out how it has been received and practiced across England drawing on empirical evidence. The extent of take-up and the experience of those involved first five years of neighbourhood planning and to consider how community-led planning may be designed and used following operational principles of inclusivity, capacity-building and adding value.

The effect of Council decision making on the ability of Cambridgeshire communities to develop initiatives that lessen the need for formal health and social care services

“…that a localist approach assumes that communities and neighbourhoods are homogenous and equally resourced when in fact the reality is quite the opposite 76 . Consequently, localism runs the risk of exacerbating the already present inequalities that exist between places and communities.…”

“…Selen and Hendricks (2011) call upon theories of "deliberative democracy" as a way to avoid this 79 . Deliberative democracy is based on the idea that "those affected by a collective decision have the right, capacity, and opportunity to participate and deliberate in the making of those decisions" 76 . Specifically, they suggest that a focus on macro-democracy, which places an emphasis on the role that social movement networks, local associations, and the media (be that social or otherwise), can be informative 80 .…”

“…imbalances have a knock-on effect in the success of community-led planning Parker & Salter (2017). observed a vast North-South divide in terms of the number of Neighbourhood Plans produced: 41% of Neighbourhood Plans that were initiated were based within the South-East and South-West of England.…”

Performing legitimacy in neighbourhood planning: Conflicting identities and hybrid governance

“…Parker et al. (2014, 2015, 2016) have pointed to the powerful influences that external actors such as Local Authorities, consultants and independent Examiners have over the process, and the limiting effect this may have on community ownership of plans. Bradley (2015: 98) has examined the ‘unsettled accommodation’ between participatory, representative and market models of democracy which combine in the relationships between NPGs and neighbourhoods.…”

“…However, while Parish Councils retain formal ownership of a plan, they do not directly take on the powers of neighbourhood planning, which are wielded by the NPG. Even where NPGs are constituted as sub-committees of Parish Councils, bequeathing them the legitimacy of representative democracy, they may develop distinct identities and outlooks from their ‘parent’ Councils and even come to see themselves as quite separate entities, weakening this claim (Parker et al., 2018). Furthermore, the essence of neighbourhood planning is as a participatory process: a new form of governance that moves beyond representative democracy even while operating alongside it.…”