Tag: Planning

Beyond the Pavement: Learning the Cumulative Power of Everyday Green Spaces

Author Centre for Sustainable Planning and Environments | Posted on

Joseph Harbourd

As part of my MSc in Sustainable Development in Practice, I am undertaking an internship, and I have been fortunate to join the GP4Streets project, working alongside Danielle Sinnett, Owen Cranshaw and Issy Bray. This opportunity has allowed me to explore my passion for sustainability and deepen my interest in green infrastructure through hands-on experience and real-world impact. 

The project. GP4Streets is a ground breaking UKRI-funded initiative led by the University of Surrey’s GCARE and its partners; the University of Bath, UWE Bristol, the University of Sheffield, and Imperial College. It aims to rewrite the rules of urban resilience by showing that the frontline of climate adaptation is not always sprawling parks or greenfield sites. It can be right outside our front doors. Over the next 30 months, this project is turning overlooked streets into living experiments in sustainability and wellbeing. We are working with existing, planned and co-designed urban green infrastructure from rain gardens to green walls, with the help of local residents. All empowered by low-cost sensors and real-time monitoring. The aim? To coordinate climate action in densely built-up spaces in easily implemented DIY methods. These small-scale interventions can be practical, participatory, and deeply personal, not just for the environment but for the people who live and breathe these streets every day.

Auditing. One of the most eye-opening aspects of my internship with the GP4Streets project was conducting street-level audits to assess and record private green infrastructure across selected neighbourhoods. These audits were part of a broader effort to understand how residents’ front gardens will contribute to street-level climate resilience and wellbeing.

At first glance, these features may seem too small or inconsistent to matter, but when viewed collectively, they form a vital green network. My job was to walk the streets, systematically recording this often invisible but essential environmental infrastructure. Through the audits, I began to notice how even modest interventions, such as a planter box, a patch of permeable paving, or a hedge boundary, could serve as mini-climate solutions. These features help slow water runoff, reduce surface temperatures, and trap air pollutants while also promoting physical and mental wellness. Yet, they are rarely accounted for in formal urban planning or GI datasets. Teaching me that mapping what is not officially recognised is a powerful form of knowledge generation.

Left: Bedminster Green flower blossoming; Right: Planters Dean Lane, Southville

Auditing allowed me to develop a sharper observational eye and a better appreciation of the subjectivity involved in field data collection. Would a single window box count? What about artificial grass with permeable backing? These decisions sparked thoughtful discussions and made me consider how data is framed by human judgment. While no single green feature we audited could revolutionise a street, the cumulative effect was profound. We began to see patterns across socioeconomic and geographic lines: streets with older housing often had larger front gardens, while newer developments had just enough greenery to be considered aesthetically pleasing. This, along with 49% of private front gardens being sealed with concrete and asphalt, raised questions about equity and access in urban greening. Conducting street audits of private green spaces taught me to look at everyday urban landscapes in a different way. It was not just about gathering data; it was about understanding the quiet contributions that residents make to environmental sustainability and the systems that support or limit those efforts. This fieldwork deepened my appreciation for the hidden ecology of streets and the importance of integrating private space into public sustainability planning.

EURA 2025. I also attended the annual conference of the European Urban Research Association (EURA) held in Bristol on the 10th-13th of June 2025 during the internship. EURA 2025 brought together over 300 urban scholars from more than 30 countries to address the challenges of climate change, health inequities, digital transitions and inclusive governance in urban environments.

Bristol City Hall EURA 2025 reception. Civic Reception EURA 2025 (Photo: Stephen Hall)

The conference itself featured interdisciplinary session themes, ranging from Creating Healthy and Liveable Places to Smart City Governance. There were also mobile workshops that showcased real-world urban regeneration in Bristol, sparking engaging discussions about the sustainability of urban life.

Bristol harborside regeneration project mobile workshop

During the EURA 2025 conference, I supported the smooth running of presentations and helped guide attendees to their venues, small but essential tasks that gave me a unique behind-the-scenes perspective on how such a significant event operates. In addition to my duties, I had the opportunity to attend several thought-provoking sessions, including one on Mobility and Transport Justice. This seminar examined the challenges of creating truly inclusive cities where all residents can move freely and safely, not just for work but also for leisure and everyday life. It highlighted how mobility is deeply connected to equity, accessibility, and well-being.

Bristol City Hall EURA 2025 Queen Elizabeth II Conference Hall. Photo/Stephen Hall left. Photo/Elena Marco right

Another session on Smart Cities raised critical questions about safety, surveillance, and urban design. Discussions focused on the impact of hostile architecture, design elements intended to deter rough sleeping, and how such features often exclude vulnerable groups. The session challenged us to think about how we can design urban spaces that are both secure and welcoming, striking a balance between safety and dignity, inclusivity and peace.

Going forward. My internship with the GP4Streets project has been an eye-opening journey into urban sustainability’s complex, often overlooked dynamics. From auditing front gardens to participating in an international urban conference, I have gained practical research skills and a deeper understanding of how climate resilience, equity and everyday spaces intersect.

Whether it is a green roof on a residential street or a policy discussion on mobility justice, this experience has shown me that real change often begins at the local level, with people, places and conversations that challenge how we see and shape our cities.

As I continue my journey in sustainable development to write my dissertation on urban greenery’s impact on active travel and beyond, I carry forward a renewed sense of purpose: that even the smallest interventions can ripple outward, creating greener fairer urban futures.

Joseph Harbourd is a Master’s student studying on the MSc Sustainable Development in Practice.

Featured image at the start of the blog: to the left: Lockleaze regeneration project and to the right: Elderberry Walk Residential Project

Reflection on a summer internship at UWE to explore the intersection of urban planning and sustainability

Author Centre for Sustainable Planning and Environments | Posted on

by Lydia Mahan

After completing my BSc in Urban Planning at the University of the West of England (UWE) earlier this year, I had the opportunity to dive deeper into the world of research through a summer internship with the university. This was an exciting and insightful experience, offering me a unique chance to explore the intersection of urban planning and sustainability—two topics I am passionate about.

The focus of the internship was exploring how to evaluate the transition from what is granted in a planning permission to the later development stages in housing projects, specifically looking at the incorporation of social and sustainability features. These features included essential elements like affordable housing, play spaces, Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SuDS), wildflower planting, and the installation of bird and bat boxes.

This internship was my first experience of research at this scale, and I was eager to develop my research skills. The project’s broad scope presented both challenges and opportunities, I quickly realised how crucial it was to define the project boundaries and expectations. To do this, I engaged with the project leads and conducted an initial review of the source materials. This allowed me to understand the types of housing developments I needed to focus on and how to effectively use tools like the RAG (Red, Amber, Green) assessment tool to evaluate the sites.

One of the sites reviewed during the internship (Alexandra Gardens, Crewe)

One piece of advice I would give to anyone embarking on a similar project is to make sure you are actively engaging with your supervisors and taking detailed notes throughout the process. The feedback and ongoing conversations I had were instrumental in guiding my research, and having a comprehensive record allowed me to track my progress and double-check information from weeks prior.

One of the things I enjoyed about this internship was its independent nature. It gave me the freedom to explore the research process whilst getting a firsthand look at some of the challenges the planning world faces. For example, one of the hurdles I encountered was the difficulty in accessing planning application documents. One council’s planning portal did not allow me to search using postcodes, so I had to rely on identifying planning reference numbers to find the necessary documents which was far more time-consuming.

This challenge made me reflect on the importance of accessibility when it comes to planning documents as it is important for local communities to be able to easily access these resources for effective public engagement.

Completing this internship at UWE was more than just a valuable learning experience—it solidified my passion for research and equipped me with the skills I need to pursue my PhD at the University of Sheffield. The opportunity to work on such a real-world project has given me a deeper understanding of the complexities of urban planning, and I am excited to continue building on this foundation in the years ahead.

This internship not only helped me hone my research skills but also reinforced my belief that sustainability must remain at the core of urban planning. I look forward to exploring more opportunities to contribute to this field and tackle challenges that lie ahead.

Bio: Lydia Mahan graduated from BSc Urban Planning in July 2024 with a first-class honours degree.  She is now undertaking a funded PhD studentship at the University of Sheffield entitled “Measuring the environmental benefits and social impacts of large scale Sustainable Drainage Systems”.

The internship project was lead by Katie McClymont, with Hannah Hickman and Nick Croft on the team too, building on their report for the West of England Combined authority entitled ‘The whittling away of wonderful ideas: post-consent and the diminution of design quality’ https://www.rtpi.org.uk/policy-and-research/research-and-practice/planning-research-matters/planning-and-design/the-whittling-away-of-wonderful-ideas-post-consent-and-the-diminution-of-design-quality/‘

Some reflections on learning on the job …

Author Centre for Sustainable Planning and Environments | Posted on

by Hannah Hickman

I teach a module on our postgraduate distance learning course – Planning and Urban Leadership – called “Managing Strategic Growth”.  It is framed around encouraging students to think at scale, and critically evaluate the role of planners and planning in growth management, with a focus on population, household and economic growth and the resultant demand for more homes. At its heart it’s about just that, growth.

I inherited this module from an excellent former colleague, and over time I have re-oriented and shaped the module in response to some of the more recent developments in policy and practice.  However, full disclosure, over the Summer I reflected that I hadn’t previously encouraged students to do enough critical engagement with the concept of growth. I’m not saying we didn’t do any but perhaps an acceptance of the growth orthodoxy in planning was subliminal, somehow inadvertently built-in to the module’s design.

What prompted this reflection? I’m not sure I can pinpoint a precise moment, but I was immediately irked by the repeated statements that emerged very quickly from the incoming Labour Government, that put planning and growth facilitation, particularly economic growth, front and centre of its reform agenda. This is just one example of many:

“The Government has made clear that sustained economic growth is the only route to improving the prosperity of our country and the living standards of working people … Nowhere is decisive reform needed more urgently than in our planning system”[1].

Ascribing this role to planning is of course, neither new, nor a surprise. Many planning scholars have written engagingly about the growth fixation “inscribed in planning instruments” and “the often‐unquestioned growth bias in spatial planning that is institutionalized at all scales of land‐use planning”[2].

However, the disappointment I felt at the lack of wider narratives emerging from the new Government about both planning and growth, led me to both re-engage with some of the important existing scholarship in this area, but also to read some recent literature for the first time. In short, in preparing for this module, I went down an utterly engaging rabbit hole. Amongst other things:

  • I read the excellent piece by Jin Zue on de-growth, challenging ‘smart-growth’ (the apparently false win-win scenario to support growth), and encouraging “subversion of planning’s commitment to growth … and resuscitation of utopianism” [3], anddipped into Savini’s volume on Cities beyond the market economy [4];
  • I looked beyond planning, to see what scholars in politics and public policy have been saying. In short, questioning the economic growth paradigm is happening across disciplines[5];
  • I listened to the economist, Kate Raworth, talk engagingly about her book ‘doughnut economics’, in which she questions whether governments “are right to think that the solution to their economic problems lies in more growth” [6]; and 
  • I explored the many and various ways of measuring growth that go beyond GDP, and here I would give a massive shout out to UCL’s citizen prosperity index [7].

I also did a very cursory piece of research to look at the national planning policy statements of the UK’s devolved nations, and I was surprised at what I found. Scotland’s National Planning Framework 4, makes 104 references to growth, although in many and varied ways, including  ‘compact growth’,‘green growth, ‘greener growth’, and ‘inclusive growth’.  Future Wales: The National Plan 2040, containsa whopping 296 references to growth, including ‘sustainable growth’, ‘inclusive growth’, ‘nationally important growth’, ‘clean growth’, ‘green growth’, and ‘inclusive growth’. The Strategic Planning Policy Statement for Northern Irelandhas 42 references to growth, but with an overwhelming focus on economic growth. The idea of growth – in all sorts of guises – is the undoubtedly orthodoxy in these statements, paralleling the English narrative.

So, what did I do when I climbed back out of the rabbit hole? Well, initially at least I’ve shared a few observations (for what they are worth!) with the Planning and Urban Leadership students and asked them to think about where they sit on the pro-growth, de-growth axis, and to reflect upon what role they think planning (and planners) should take in this.

But why have I decided to write about this here, albeit very briefly? There were two motivators. The first, was to highlight the value of ‘learning on the job’ (as well as the privilege of being able to do so) and the fundamental importance of ensuring that as educators we are striving, as far as is possible, to keep up-to-date (accepting – by the way – that this is almost impossible in such a fast moving area of policy and practice!). Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, is the need to continue to encourage critical thinking in our students. In sharing my insights, I have not said that they should be anti-growth, or that there isn’t an inter-relationship between planning and growth that needs to be understood, but I have encouraged them not to accept things just as they are. This now feels like an omission in my previous teaching on this module.

Finally, and another shout-out, this time to the international student who spontaneously shared (today!) that their favourite part of the Managing Strategic Growth module so far had been the lecture and wider reading on ‘challenging the growth orthodoxy in planning’. That was enough to post-hoc justify the rabbit hole down which I went!

Featured image credit: https://www.growthforce.com/blog/5-stages-business-growth

[1] Ministry for Housing Communities and Local Government (2024). Proposed reforms to the National Planning Policy Framework and other changes to the planning system https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/proposed-reforms-to-the-national-planning-policy-framework-and-other-changes-to-the-planning-system

[2] Lamker, C. and Terfrüchte, T., (2024). Post-growth ambitions and growth-based realities in sustainable land-use planning. Urban Planning, 9, 1-16.

[3] Xue, J (2022). Urban planning and degrowth: a missing dialogue, Local Environment, 27 (4), 404-422.

[4] Savini, F., Ferreira, A. and von Schönfeld, K. eds., (2022). Post-growth planning: Cities beyond the market economy. Routledge.

[5] Warner, S., Newman, J., Diamond, P. and Richards, D., (2024). The challenge of devolved English governance and the rise of political spatial inequality. Parliamentary affairs, 77 (4) 735-764.

[6] Raworth, T. (2018). A healthy economy should be designed to thrive, not grow. https://www.ted.com/talks/kate_raworth_a_healthy_economy_should_be_designed_to_thrive_not_grow/transcript?subtitle=en

[7] UCL Institute for Global Prosperity. (2024). The Citizen Prosperity Index. https://www.ucl.ac.uk/bartlett/igp/research/citizen-prosperity-index

End of life of wind infrastructure: what factors influence decision making?

Author Centre for Sustainable Planning and Environments | Posted on

by Carla De Laurentis

On the 29th May 2024, I was invited to Cork to present a recently published research paper at the Second Wind Value Conference on End of Life Issues for Wind Farms, that took place in the Environmental Research Institute, University College Cork (Ireland). This research funded by the RGS-IBG investigated the question of what to do with ageing onshore wind infrastructure in Italy. In particular the project explored how end of life decisions for onshore wind farms in Italy are being made and what influences them.

The conference represented an incredible opportunity to reflect on the many issues that are affecting end of life of wind infrastructure, such as financial and planning issues that are influencing decommissioning, repowering or life extension decisions and to explore opportunities for blade repurposing.

The footbridge constructed from re-purposing wind turbine blades in Cork.

The need for conferences such as this is clear. Attention on renewable energy infrastructure has predominantly focussed on the planning, design and construction of projects. This is often driven by the need to decarbonise the energy sector; yet we are overlooking the processes required for the management of end of life of the current portfolio of wind capacity that might be retiring around the world. The standard design lifetime of a wind turbine is predicted to be around 20 years according to the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC-2005) standard. At the end of this predicted lifetime, it is expected that this infrastructure will require decommissioning resulting in a serious waste disposal issue. However, during the conference I argued that the timescale under which wind turbines approach the end of their operational lifetime is not uniform and depends on a number of other factors other than their projected life. Indeed, with the right conditions it is possible to repower wind turbines and extend their life.

A snapshot from my presentation.

The timing of end of life decisions and the consequent decisions regarding the future of existing turbine materials, and waste management, involves technical as well as analytical, financial and political questions. The ‘age’ of a wind turbine- and its degrading performance- is determined by a number of factors, with end-of-life decisions becoming an increasingly ad-hoc strategy for wind assets. These factors include:

  • technical: a good level of maintenance and site conditions are key in determining the performance and age of wind turbines;
  • economic and business models: operation costs, electricity markets, subsidy schemes and power purchase agreements will influence the economic evaluation of a wind site and its performance accelerating decision on life-extension and repowering;
  • legislative and regulatory: changes in government policy might facilitate end of life decision making to take advantage of technological advancement as repowered sites could support the achievement of government renewable energy targets;
  • planning and land use: simplifications to the planning and authorisation processes can positively influence repowering of some sites; operating licences and planning consents might be time-limited and there might be changes in the land designation making decommissioning the only option.
  • business environment: supportive governance and a drive towards the adoption of a circular economy in the wind sector plays an important role providing, for instance, potential responses to the challenge of wind turbine waste materials – in particular the question of what to do with the blades that currently cannot be recycled.

Some of these represented recurrent issues in the contributions at the conference and the discussion that followed. One of the main takeaways is that managing end of life of wind infrastructure projects represents many cross-sectoral challenges that require the sharing of best practice and active engagement from the main players from the renewable energy sector and beyond.

During the presentation, I shared an illustration that set out the different afterlife options for wind installations and had the opportunity to visit the footbridge constructed from re-purposing wind turbine blades in Cork.

Graphic Harvesting by Maia Thomas

A recording of my presentation can be accessed via the Conference link: Second Conference – Cork 2024 – Wind Value

Further information on the project can be accessed here: Is there an afterlife for wind installations in Italy? – Projects | UWE Bristol and here is a link to the paper: De Laurentis C and Windemer R (2024) When the turbines stop: Unveiling the factors shaping end-of-life decisions of ageing wind infrastructure in Italy. Energy Research and Social Science 113: 103536.

Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects – the value in understanding implementation

Author Centre for Sustainable Planning and Environments | Posted on

by Hannah Hickman

‘There is very little pre-existing research on project implementation and the impact that a planning consent has on this stage. Our research fills an important knowledge gap and is not only of significance to the planning profession, but to those in Government currently focused on the infrastructure planning reform process, and to project promoters and their consenting and delivery teams’.1

Described as ‘the most far-reaching legislation of its kind since 1947’2, the 2008 Planning Act in England introduced a new system for the consenting of infrastructure projects deemed in the national interest – nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPS). At the time of its inception, this legislation was seen as a ‘genuine revolution’3 in the handling of consents for large scale infrastructure developments.

The so called ‘revolutionary’ aspects of the new system included: the removal of infrastructure projects over a certain threshold from local authority decision making, with decisions taken following prescribed timescales by ministers of central government following the advice of independent inspectors; the combination of most – although not all – consents, including planning permission and compulsory purchase acquisition powers into one document to enable development to proceed, known as a Development Consent Order (DCO); and, critically, the expression of need for development in sector specific National Policy Statements, such that debate about the need for infrastructure takes place during parliamentary scrutiny of NPS preparation rather than on a project basis at examination.

Certainty and speed of decision were the defining logics of the new system and there is evidence to suggest that speed of decision making has been a positive outcome of the new system for many projects. However, speed and certainty of decision making, do not necessarily result in a faster or easier delivery process (presumably the ultimate intent of the new system …) or do they?

In 2023, the National Infrastructure Planning Association published research commissioned from UWE and the University of Sheffield to explore the relationship between consent and delivery – the journey from consent, construction and through to ongoing operation – framed by the question, ‘how can the Development Consent Order process be strengthened to better support the delivery of Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects‘?

This research specifically focused on practitioner’s experiences of this post-consent delivery phase and involved detailed survey work, six in-depth case studies, and discussion with a wide range of bodies engaged in the NSIP process, including statutory environmental bodies and local authorities.

Hornsea II Wind Farm (Courtesy of Ørsted)

As a research team, it was fantastic to have the opportunity to talk to such a wide- range of professionals involved in the delivery of major infrastructure projects, from those in construction project management and contracting, to lawyers, environmental specialists, and of planners across both the public and private sectors. This experience left two lasting impressions on the team. Firstly, and maybe self-evident to those in the industry, the delivery of major infrastructure projects is a truly cross-sectoral endeavour. Those projects with a relatively smooth delivery phase demonstrated a clear commitment by all those involved, to understand the remit, constraints, and perspective of all the disciplines involved. Secondly, understanding the effectiveness of planning (a consent as granted) demands the insights derived from delivery: it materially effects not just the ultimate design of projects, but the delivery phase as well.

Key recommendations from the project included:

i. The importance of continuing to extend the opportunities for disseminating, sharing and reflecting on the experience of project delivery and implementation – this has been an overlooked area of practice;

ii. The need to ensure that any further reforms to the DCO process that focus on speed of decision making do not pass on problems to the delivery and implementation stage – speed of consent does not necessarily result in a smoother delivery phase;

iii. The need for a review of the further consents and licences required post consent – most infrastructure projects still require a number of additional consents before delivery can commence, causing uncertainty and delay;

iv. to consider a more supportive approach to post consent change management – the DCO post-consent change process is highly constrained and is both time-consuming and expensive;

v. The need for significant ongoing support for local authority and statutory body engagement in delivery and operation as well as examination – these organisations play significant roles at delivery yet face considerable resources constraints in doing so effectively;

vi. The need for greater consistency at project examination stage in how flexibility within consents can be justified and achieved – lack of flexibility to vary a scheme’s design, or deploy alternative construction methods, post-consent can cause delivery challenges; and

vii. The value in capacity building – across professions – to support delivery.

The project report, and detailed case studies, are available from:

https://nipa-uk.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/NIPA_Hindsights_Final_Report.05.07.2023.pdf

NIPA Insights III Supplementary Report (Case Studies) (05.07.23) (nipa-uk.org)

  1. https://www.rtpi.org.uk/policy-and-research/research/planning-research-matters/infrastructure-planning/practitioner-s-experiences-of-development-consent-order-implementation/ ↩︎
  2. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2009/jul/15/quango-fast-tracks-controversial-projects ↩︎
  3. https://www.jplc.org/files/pdf/attaining%20the%20age%20of%20consents.pdf ↩︎

Feature image: Tilbury2 in construction (Courtesy of Tilbury Port)

Designing for Health: Healthy Streetlife

Author Centre for Sustainable Planning and Environments | Posted on

by Mark Drane (LinkedIn; Instagram)

Reflections on a part-time PhD undertaken alongside healthy urbanism practice and during a global pandemic.

…the street remains a social space like no other.  Even in the context of divided and segregated cities, gated communities and ‘privatopias’, streets continue to provide spaces for public congregation, encounter and community making (Hubbard and Lyon, 2018).

Two things you should know about me when reading this are that since childhood I somehow knew that I wanted to be an architect and the second thing is that my parents told me I always told the truth even when it would get me into trouble as a child.

Twenty years after becoming an architect a difficult truth I have learned about architecture is that when it comes to health we are often causing harm and failing to create the conditions to support good health.

I didn’t get into architecture to contribute to such harm.  Yet, as I stood in front of the burned structure of Grenfell Tower I found myself reflecting on my role in a wider system where this tragedy could be a terrible but logical outcome.

It is sometimes claimed that designers and built environment practitioners are creating healthy places or that designers need a Hippocratic oath.  What I came to realise was that my own training and understanding of human health (intrinsically linked to planetary health) was severely lacking.  Despite two degrees, a professional diploma, and 20 years’ experience in professional practice I lacked the skills and knowledge to address this topic.  I don’t think I’m unusual: it’s a systemic problem.

This raised the question: if I couldn’t evidence I was contributing to health how could I know that the opposite – creating harm – wasn’t true?  Maybe it was jumping in at the deep end but in 2016 the answer seemed like a self-funded, part-time PhD, alongside practice was a way to address this question.

 Legall Street, Architectural drawings

So why streets?  Well streets are identified by UN Habitat as the most prevalent public space globally.  In many places they have become viewed as means to get from A to B, in fact they are vital social and public spaces right outside our front door and potentially – was my interest – a resource for health and wellbeing.

Nearly everyone in the world lives on a street.  People have always lived on streets.  They have been the places where children first learned about the world, where neighbors met, the social centers of towns and cities, the rallying points for revolts, the scenes of repression (Donald Appleyard, 1981).

Streets are designed and created by many different actors so are immediately interdisciplinary.  They are the smallest scale of public space outside of the more private space of the home.  They are arguably an easier scale for local authorities, designers, and others who control them to make changes.  What is less known is whether this is actually an effective scale at which to make changes and which ones we should be making.

Through undertaking a systematic review of the evidence I was able to demonstrate that yes the street scale does appear to have an impact on health independent of scales like the neighbourhood but the evidence base is quite small for example very focused on physical activity outcomes not things like mental health and social wellbeing.  First there was a need to know more about what matters to residents and how they use their streets so that’s where the study turned to next.

Within weeks of receiving my ethics approval in spring 2020 Welsh Government introduced national lockdowns in response to Covid-19 but a mixture timing and a flexible approach meant research was able to proceed.  I invested a lot of time in meeting people not like me – a white man with multifaceted privilege – and time spent doing this resulted in profoundly meaningful conversations with participants. 

Hester Street, Materiality photomontage

A key finding and argument of the research is that the street environment should be addressed as a health promoting setting.  I won’t recite the thesis findings here and it will be available online in due course.  Another key aspect is that what people do in their street – their health practices – really matter for health and wellbeing and unsurprisingly they are far more diverse (street bingo with prizes anyone?) than design guidance currently provides for.

“Lowly, unpurposeful, and random as they may appear, sidewalk contacts are the small change from which a city’s wealth of public life may grow” (Jane Jacobs, 1962).

Holford Street, Field sketch

A significant aim of undertaking a PhD was to influence policy, practice, and future research – not least the closer integration of these three.  Three headline recommendations are:

Closer integration of policy, practice, and research.

Policy, practice, and research should be integrated far more closely.  Yes they are different yet divisions between them these get in the way of actually shifting the dial on the problems we might hope to address.  The last eight years for me have been a test bed of precisely this: PhD research in the morning and working in my practice, Urban Habitats, in the afternoon.

Street smarts for practitioners.

Codes of practice and ethical codes for design practitioners increasingly incorporate duties for public benefit.  Engineers in the UK have one of the clearest: “Engineering professionals work to enhance the

wellbeing of society.”  What is needed is the guidance and definition that operationalises this intent.  Public health practitioners in the UK for example must work to reduce inequalities and also have a duty to “…protect and improve the health of populations… based on the best available evidence…”.  Crucially this includes a position toward evidence and its ethical use, something arguably lacking in design practice.

Inclusive streets:

Creating inclusive street environments is a priority for practice and policy.  My research identifies many groups who can be excluded from the street environment – and worryingly this is often just accepted as an immovable norm.  The street physical and social environment contributes to these norms.  Improving population health implicitly implies reducing health inequalities.  In this sense, streets either work for everyone or not at all.  A start would be to address inclusion, more meaningful would be supporting residents to create and change their streets, as they already do, through their everyday practices.

For me doing a PhD has enabled a change of career path and a way to address my personal and professional values in practice in a meaningful way.  The Centre for Sustainable Planning and Environments, my supervisory team, and UWE Bristol more widely has been an incredibly supportive and productive place for me to be based at for my PhD.

Clearly not every practitioner can have a PhD spanning health and urbanism.  There seems a need for integrative practice and practitioners which is where I see my own future.  I have ideas about new forms of practic/se that bring together research and practice in one dimension; different disciplines in another; and redefine the relationship between people with specific expertise and expert residents in local places.

What we must avoid the trap of making claims to create health and wellbeing without being able to reasonably justify such claims.  Supporting residents to create health in their streets is a good place to start.

References listed in this blog:

Appleyard, D. (1981) Livable Streets. Berkley: University of California Press. [Accessed 3 July 2018].

Hubbard, P. and Lyon, D. (2018) Introduction: Streetlife – the shifting sociologies of the street. The Sociological Review [online]. 66 (5), pp. 937–951. [Accessed 21 June 2022].

Jacobs, J. (1962) The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Reprint. London: The Bodley Head, 2020.

Designing for Children & Young People: A Toolkit for practitioners

Author Centre for Sustainable Planning and Environments | Posted on

by Rachel Alcock-Hodgson

I am an active travel professional who has worked for Sustrans since 2015. I now work for Sustrans Scotland as a grant funder in the Places for Everyone team and I am also completing an Urban Planning Masters at UWE. Places for Everyone is Sustrans’ permanent active travel infrastructure fund for Scotland. Supported by Transport Scotland, we provide funding and expertise to help deliver walking, wheeling and cycling improvements across the country.

We currently have more than 250 projects at various stages of development, ranging from multi-million pound transformations in Scotland’s cities to new walking routes between some of Scotland’s smallest communities.

Two axis of child-friendly planning. Adapted from the work of Marketta Kyttä by Tim Gill (2021)

In 2022, we published a toolkit for practitioners to support the design of walking, cycling and wheeling* specifically for children and young people. The toolkit contains an overview of the policy context in Scotland. It sets out two foundations and twelve dimensions for designing for children and young people.

The toolkit then presents several case studies of projects that speak to the foundations and dimensions. The foundations are: 1. Improved access for walking, wheeling, and cycling and 2. Create space to pause, stay, and play. The dimensions fall under these headings.

Dimensions for designing for children and young people, from Designing for Children & Young People.

This is something I am passionate about. As we say in the toolkit: “Since the 1970s, there has been a steady decline in the reported distances children are allowed to travel without parental supervision in the UK. We have also observed several instances where teenagers have been specifically excluded and discouraged from using public spaces.

At a time when private car use has been prioritised over the needs of people walking, wheeling and cycling for everyday journeys, this has only served to make neighbourhoods across the UK increasingly unsafe, inaccessible and unpleasant for play and socialising.

Planning and transport policies are now focused on reducing traffic volumes in many areas, including residential neighbourhoods, and providing spaces for young people to enjoy. This is in response to the climate emergency and the need to reduce emissions, to improve population health through encouraging greater mobility, and increasing community resilience as a response to the Covid pandemic.

Strategically, this is an important step in increasing children and young people’s independent mobility and will play an important part in improving their active travel opportunities.

Children and young people have a right to use public space. Those of us involved in planning, design, and sustainable travel can enable this right by providing quality environments that are safe to access, reflect children and young people’s needs and encourage them to thrive.”

In April 2023, Places for Everyone held its first in person event for partners since the pandemic: Designing with Children and Young People. It included sessions led by councils showcasing their projects and outlining what they have learned, as well as sessions going into engagement techniques to use as part of the design process. The sessions from the day can be viewed here and the live illustration of the event captured by Jenny Capon is shown above.

The event was a success. A wide range of partners attended. 54 delegates from 18 organisations including community groups and variety of local authority teams, from engineering to those specialising in behaviour change. 87% felt that their knowledge of designing with children and young people improved as a result of attending.

Overall, Jenny Capon’s illustration, featured above, sums it up well. Designing with Children and Young people is complex and multi-faceted, just like the built environment itself, but we have a shared responsibility as planners and designers, and we need to work together to achieve transformative change.

*getting around with for example, a wheelchair, buggy or scooter.

Key Links:

Link to the event page: https://www.showcase-sustrans.org.uk/engage-inspire-learn/dcyp-event-page/?cn-reloaded=1

Link to the Designing for Children & Young People toolkit: https://www.showcase-sustrans.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Children-and-YP-tools-and-approach-v.18_DIGITAL.pdf

References:

Gill, Tim (2021) Urban Playground: How Child-Friendly Planning and Design can Save Cities. RIBA Publishing: London.

CELEBRATING HABIBA EID (The Egyptian Jane Jacobs)

Author Centre for Sustainable Planning and Environments | Posted on

by Amir Gohar

Background

As a specialized urbanist, I have had a long career of working professionally in participatory design and planning. I directed projects scaled from detailed design interventions to master planning; these included coastal urban planning in the Red Sea; urban design in Senegal; design agro-farms with local community in arid areas in Saudi Arabia; work with community in cross-province river trail in Norway; oasis design for tribes in East Libya; urban guidelines for historic Cairo, the design for Cradle of Humankind National Park in South Africa; site planning for ecolodges in the Kalahari Desert; waterfront development in Doha, Qatar; and urban design in Portoviejo, Ecuador. Throughout my career, I have been fortunate to select working on projects that comply with the social values and even more fortunate to have most of them implemented and built with the local communities.

Placemaking in the Global South

This is not to undermine the wonderful efforts done by colleagues and friends in democratic countries in the North, but rather to shed the light on challenges of placemaking in the Global South. My projects have engaged a full range of interdisciplinary professional skills in highly diverse international settings, and always involved a complexity of constituents, ecologies, and cultures. In my professional career, I completed projects that required me to work closely with local residents within the parameters of government and private institutions to comply with social standards. Without much generalisation, In the Global South, the responsible practice of civic engagement and participatory design require extensive field-based investigations of cultural and social contexts. Little professional or scholarly literature engages these real-world practice scenarios in the these regions, and this motivates my interest to encourage young planners and designers to dig deeper to learn about their own community leaders and those who took the responsibility and cared about their people.

I write this today because I figured out if I didn’t do so, then who else will? I want to share it with a new generation of students and fresh graduates who are currently involved in projects or research that has to do with placemaking, tactical urbanism, civic engagement, participatory design, and all kinds of urban interventions. In several discussions and forums, I find a new generation who takes things for granted is celebrating Jan Jacobs without having full understanding of her challenges, the difficulties she has been through, the threats she encounters and the sacrifices she made to succeed.

Habiba Eid (26 April 1941 – 15 January 2015)

In Ismailia, a small city on the Suez Canal of Egypt, born woman who at a young age got involved in several community initiatives starting from witnessing major relocations because of the war around the Suez Canal cities and throughout the years of peace.

Habiba earned a BA in Arts from Cairo University, a diploma in regional planning from National planning Institute, a MSc in statistics from Cairo University and a diploma in political Science from Suez Canal University. While having all the right qualifications to have an ordinary desk job, she strived to change people’s lives in the field and venture in a world dominated by men in authority. 

During her career she worked closely with almost all governors, local teams, and international expats. Her compass was clear and cantered around serving her people. Throughout her journey she spent more time in the field, in the informal areas, engaging and negotiating and empowering the local people. This has put her in numerous confrontations with authority and higher powers. Her persistence, endurance and clear people-oriented agenda coupled with diplomacy and social intelligence allowed her to implement several projects and initiatives. She gained the respect and appreciation of her local people, the government, as well as the international community. Endless world experts have learned from her projects through their involvement in Hayy El-Salam, El-Bahtini, El-Hallous,… and many other development projects that are only implemented because of her persistence.

A poster I did with Habiba Eid about the mapping of Ismailia Slum Areas with UNDP and UN-Habitat.

Habiba played a vital role for the people of Ismailia. She even saved them of several involuntary relocations and demolitions that they are unaware of. Working closely with her, I witnessed her active engagement on all levels and across many scales. She managed to lead and guide international experts, gain confidence of international donors, convince government officials, and most importantly loved and appreciated by the informal settlement dwellers. I walked with her through alleys in extreme poverty to guide locally-installed water pipes, I observed her humble attitude with the needy and the unlimited support she offered to the local community even from her personal resources.

Women making fishing nets and men making fishing boats in Ismailia 

To celebrate her birthday on the 26th of April, I would encourage friends and colleagues to honour her contribution and also celebrate their own community leaders in the Global South who were influential and dedicated their life to serving the marginalized and under privileged.

Habiba had a purpose for her life till her last day. She was a dedicated woman to her cause to serve her people well.

Celebrate your Jane Jacobs – Celebrate your Habiba Eid

The challenge of delivering affordable housing in the South West

Author Centre for Sustainable Planning and Environments | Posted on

by Dannielle Sinnett, Hannah Hickman, Katie McClymont, Stephen Hall, Cat Loveday, Jessica Lamond and Rebecca Windemer

We were commissioned by Homes for the South West, a consortium of housing associations, to examine the factors affecting housing affordability in the region and provide an estimate of future housing needs. To do this, we drew on Government data, a survey of local authorities, interviews with housing associations, local authorities and private developers, and a review of planning policies in the region.

Mulberry Park, a new development by Curo in Bath (credit Andrew Sykes and Curo)

How affordable is housing in the South West?

The South West faces acute problems of housing affordability. The region is conspicuously less affordable than England as a whole, and the North and Midlands in particular. In 2021, median house prices were approximately ten times greater than the median earnings. These inter-regional disparities are also becoming progressively more pronounced; in 1997 house prices were around four times greater than earnings.

Three quarters of local authority areas have affordability ratios (the ratio between house price and individual earnings) higher than that for England as a whole, and all have affordability ratios higher than those for the North of England. There is also substantial diversity in affordability ratios within local authority areas in the South West. The ten least affordable neighbourhoods in the region have median house prices more than 28 times median earnings. Even in the most affordable neighbourhoods median house prices are still more than three times median earnings.

Which factors impact housing affordability?

Property prices in the South West are markedly higher than England as a whole, and have risen nearly fourfold – faster than the national average rate of increase – in the past 25 years. However, the region has lower than average earnings, which have failed to keep up with house price increases. This has significant implications for local people, especially younger households or first-time buyers.

House prices are often higher in places with a high environmental quality and good access to local amenities and services. We found that, within a local authority area, neighbourhoods closer to the coastline are less affordable, as are those in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. In general, more rural places are less affordable than towns and cities, but within these rural areas, those with better transport and broadband connectivity were even less affordable. Stakeholder reported that the high land values in the region undermine the viability of affordable housing.

Furthermore, these locations are also popular retirement and tourist destinations. It appears that local authorities in the South West with a greater proportion of second homes are less affordable and in-migration is dominated by arrivals from elsewhere in the UK (as opposed to international migration). This suggests, perhaps, the existence of a distinctive residential ‘offer’ in the region, one that attracts retirees, people working from home and those commuting to London and the South East, further increasing demand for new homes.

Finally, we looked at the supply of new homes compared with projected household formation since 1997. Over this period, the supply of new homes in the South West has not kept pace with demand, with an estimated deficit of 99,978 homes. This shortfall does not account for holiday lets or second homes, so is likely to be much greater. Most local authorities’ assessments of housing need will not address this shortfall by 2032.

Planned affordable eco-homes by Bromford Housing Association in Moreton-in-Marsh

What is the impact of Right to Buy?

Housing providers in the South West report that Right to Buy has had a detrimental impact on housing affordability in the region, particularly in respect of its role in the depletion of the overall stock of affordable housing. Since 1997, some 33,220 local authority-owned homes were sold through Right to Buy, whereas local authorities in the South West delivered only 2,320 new homes. The impact of Right to Buy appears to be particularly acute in small rural communities where a handful of sales locally might equate to a high proportion of total stock and may be difficult to replace given the higher unit costs of construction on small rural sites. In addition, development viability and funding challenges make it difficult for local authorities to replace social housing on a one-to-one basis.

What is the impact of national and local policy?

Regional stakeholders were critical of the complexity created by multiple definitions of affordable housing observed in planning policies. More importantly, they argued that these definitions do not equate to genuinely affordable housing.

The under-resourcing of planning was identified as a significant impediment to timely decision-making and on-site delivery.

Assessing future affordable housing need

To assess future housing need we estimated the number of new homes needed for each local authority in the South West from 2022 to 2039, and the proportion of new households that would need to spend more than 40% of their monthly income on mortgage repayments (i.e. unaffordable housing).

We estimated that around 28,337 homes need to be delivered in the region each year between 2022 and 2039, of which 17,282 would need to be affordable for those on median incomes – around 60%. These proportions are far greater than the thresholds in many planning policies.

Despite these challenges, stakeholders detailed how collaboration and partnership working between housing associations, local authorities and SME housebuilders was able to deliver affordable homes. They also highlighted that the delivery of affordable homes was intrinsic to other priorities, including ensuring high quality homes and responding to climate and ecological emergencies. Such practices provide opportunities on which to build to ensure that housing is delivered in the region which is affordable and sustainable.

The full report can be found here: https://homesforthesouthwest.co.uk/home/affordability-report/

“Where are ‘smart’ sustainable cities made?” Recognising, raising and responding to shared questions…

Author Centre for Sustainable Planning and Environments | Posted on

by Rebecca Windemer, Torik Holmes and Carla De Laurentis

The three of us met during our respective ESRC post-doctoral fellowships during the Covid pandemic. Eager to strengthen existing connections and forge new ones, during a time when researchers were grappling with learning new ways of academic working, we engaged in a number of online discussions related to our research interests. We soon realised that although from different disciplinary backgrounds (planning, innovation, and sociology), our research areas overlapped and we shared a topical concern with energy transitions and their material, spatial and temporal dimensions.

Where are ‘smart’ sustainable cities made?

We have now organised two workshops, written a book chapter and a journal article (both currently under-review) focused on the connections between infrastructures, climate change and sustainability. Under the artistic direction of Mair Perkins, we also produced the embedded animation above. It draws on insights from our independent and combined research.

The video’s title – ‘Where are ‘smart’ sustainable cities made?’ – is one of the questions we have raised and responded to in conjunction.

‘Smarter’ and more sustainable city visions hinge on the increasing generation of clean power and the electrification of everyday modes of travel, working and living arrangements.

The animation tells an important story about socially, institutionally and geographically saturated and stretched energy infrastructures and the interconnections between various sites of demand and systems of provision. Indeed, it conveys the importance of ‘following the wires’ to reveal points of tension along networks of provision where sustainable transitions are calibrated. This somewhat bucks against the norm.

‘Smart’ city research has typically involved turning to cities with smart and sustainable aspirations to address empirical questions, examining, along the way, local discourses, strategies and sited innovations. A great deal of resources, time and effort have been poured into smart city discourses and, indeed, into making cities smarter and, so the rationale goes, more sustainable.

Following the wires can help reveal points of tensions along networks of provision.

Researchers have taken a great deal of interest in these topics and things going on ‘in’ cities. Recognising this and drawing on our knowledge, we were drawn to focus instead on the wider ordering and management of key service infrastructures and the provision of renewable sources of energy, both of which have received less attention in smart city literature. This is the case even though these are critical for smart and sustainable city ambitions. In quite rudimentary terms, without an ability to connect to electricity networks and without the provision of clean energy, smart and sustainable city buildings, technologies, policies and initiatives would not (and will not) materialise.

We hope the video speaks for itself and sparks discussion and consideration of what changes are needed in and indeed beyond cities to facilitate sustainable shifts. Through doing so, we hope it also reveals the benefits of interdisciplinary collaborations in facilitating broader discussion around sustainability and net zero agendas.

We are thankful to the ESRC for funding our post-doctoral fellowships as well as the video produced.

All images and video have been commissioned (and owned) by the authors/SPE/UWE.

A short note about the authors:

Dr Rebecca Windemer is a senior lecturer in environmental planning at UWE and a member of the Centre for Sustainable Planning and Environments. Her teaching and research crosses the disciplines of environmental planning and energy geography. Her teaching and research interests involve the regulation of renewable energy infrastructure and how the planning system can help achieve net zero ambitions.

Dr Torik Holmes is a sociologist and social science researcher based in the Sustainable Consumption Institute at the University of Manchester. His research interests focus on connected systems of provision, consumption and disposal, with electricity and plastics forming central subjects.

Dr Carla De Laurentis is a lecturer in Environmental Management in UWE and a member of the Centre for Sustainable Planning and Environments. Her research interests converge around the geography of innovation and low-carbon transitions. She is particularly interested in understanding the mechanisms that lead to an effective diffusion of renewable energy technologies and how energy infrastructure networks, and their reconfiguration, might influence renewables deployment.   

Back to top