Disintegrated development in the rural-urban fringe

1. Disintegrated development in the rural urban fringe Alister Scott BA PhD MRTPI Claudia Carter, Richard Coles, David Collier, Chris Crean, Rachel Curzon, Bob Forster, Nick Grayson, Andrew Hearle, David Jarvis, relu Miriam Kennet, Peter Larkham, Karen Leach, Mark Middleton, Nick Morton, Mark Reed, Rural Economy and Hayley Pankhurst, Nicki Schiessel, Ben relu Use Programme Land Stonyer, Ruth Waters and Keith Budden Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

2. Plan 1. Rediscovering the rural urban fringe 2. Interdisciplinary Investigations 3. Narratives: disintegrated development 4. Narratives: opportunity spaces 5. Reflections relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

3. Rediscovering the rural urban fringe. • Research team perspectives • (1.04-3.23 ) relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

4. Rediscovering the rural-urban fringe relu Building interdisciplinarity across the Rural Economy and rural domain Land Use Programme

5. Gallent et al 2006 • a multi-functional environment, but often characterised by essential service functions; • a dynamic environment, characterised by adaptation and conversion between uses; • low-density economic activity including retail, industry, distribution and warehousing; • an untidy landscape, potentially rich in wildlife. relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

6. Defining the rural-urban fringe  It is the ‘fuzzy’ and dynamic space where town (built environment) and countryside (natural environment) intersect  Beyond urban centric  Beyond land uses  Includes values and interests OECD (2011) relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

7. Different Faces of the Fringe  Innovative  Ad-hoc  Edge  Diverse  Transition  Dynamic  Fuzzy  Neglected  Messy  Valued  Reactionary  Contested relu Rural Economy and Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain Land Use Programme

8. relu Building interdisciplinarity across the Rural Economy and rural domain Land Use Programme

9. Differing perceptions from URF to RUF (Collier and Scott 2012) relu Building interdisciplinarity across the Rural Economy and rural domain Land Use Programme

10. Academic commentary  Dominant space of 20C (Mckenzie 1996; OECD 2011)  Collection of dynamic and productive environments (Spedding 2004)  Misunderstood space (Gallent et al. 2006)  Fringe as a ‘weed’ (Cresswell 1997)  Battleground for urban and rural uses (Hough 1990)  Landscape out of order (Qvistrom 2007) relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

11. Interdisciplinary Investigations relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

12. Crossing academic, policy, practice and scalar divides  Forest Research  Birmingham City University -  National Farmers Union Birmingham School of the  David Jarvis Associates Built Environment  Natural England  University of Aberdeen -  Localise West Midlands Aberdeen Centre for  Green Economics Institute Environmental Sustainability  Birmingham Environment Partnership  West Midlands Rural Affairs Forum  Worcestershire County Council  West Midlands Regional Assembly relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

13. Developing Interdisciplinarity • Team produced their own reflective ‘pieces’ on • Spatial Planning • Ecosystem Approach • Rural Urban Fringe relu Building interdisciplinarity across the Rural Economy and rural domain Land Use Programme

14. Developing Interdisciplinarity • Papers acted as boundaries • PI Assembled individual pieces into 2 working papers • (1) Critical explorations of SP and EA to define common principles. • (2) RUF review relu Building interdisciplinarity across the Rural Economy and rural domain Land Use Programme

15. Developing Interdisciplinarity • Synergies of SP and EA • Selection of key concepts • Shaped the subsequent methodological lens to view the rural urban fringe. relu Building interdisciplinarity across the Rural Economy and rural domain Land Use Programme

16. Interdisciplinary Investigations relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

17. Seeking out new evidence • Visioning exercises • Workshops (Team led) • Hampton Peterborough and N Worcestershire relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

18. Narratives of disintegrated development • Exposing the built and natural environment divide • Whose Authority are you? • Building sustainable communities? relu Building interdisciplinarity across the Rural Economy and rural domain Land Use Programme

19. ‘Disintegrated’ development. relu Building interdisciplinarity across the Rural Economy and rural domain Land Use Programme

20. Natural Environment lens Built Environment lens 1. Incentives 1. Control 2. Natural Environment White Paper 2. National Planning Policy Framework 3. Habitat and Landscape 3. Local 4. DEFRA 4. DCLG 5. Ecosystem Approach 5. Spatial Planning 6. Classifying and Valuing 6. Zoning and Ordering 7. National Ecosystem Assessment 7. Sustainability Assessments 8. Integrated Biodiversity Development Areas 8. Development/Neighbourhood Plans 9. Nature Improvement Areas 9. Enterprise Zones / Green Belts 10. Local Nature Partnerships 10. Local Enterprise Partnerships relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

27. Natural Environment lens Built Environment lens 1. Incentives 1. Control 2. Natural Environment White Paper 2. National Planning Policy Framework 3. Habitat and Landscape 3. Local 4. DEFRA 5. Ecosystem Approach 4. DCLG 6. Classifying and Valuing 5. Spatial Planning 7. National Ecosystem Assessment 6. Zoning and Ordering 8. National Character 7. Sustainability Assessments Areas/Catchment Management 8. Development/Neighbourhood Plans Plans 9. Enterprise Zones / Green Belts 9. Nature Improvement Areas 10. Local Nature Partnerships 10. Local Enterprise Partnerships relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

28. Natural Environment lens Built Environment lens 1. Incentives 1. Control 2. Natural Environment White Paper 2. National Planning Policy Framework 3. Habitat and Landscape 3. Local 4. DEFRA 5. Ecosystem Approach 4. DCLG 6. Classifying and Valuing 5. Spatial Planning 7. National Ecosystem Assessment 6. Zoning and Ordering 8. National Character 7. Sustainability Assessments Areas/Catchment management 8. Development/Neighbourhood Plans Plans 9. Enterprise Zones / Green Belts 9. Nature Improvement Areas 10. Local Nature Partnerships 10. Local Enterprise Partnerships relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

29. Natural Environment lens Built Environment lens 1. Incentives 1. Control 2. Natural Environment White Paper 2. National Planning Policy Framework 3. Habitat and Landscape 3. Local 4. DEFRA 5. Ecosystem Approach 4. DCLG 6. Classifying and Valuing 5. Spatial Planning 7. National Ecosystem Assessment 6. Zoning and Ordering 8. National Character 7. Sustainability Assessments Areas/Catchment management 8. Development/Neighbourhood Plans Plans 9. Enterprise Zones / Green Belts 9. Nature Improvement Areas 10. Local Nature Partnerships 10. Local Enterprise Partnerships relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

30. relu Building interdisciplinarity across the Rural Economy and rural domain Land Use Programme

31. Narrative 2: Whose Authority? relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

32. Narrative 3: building sustainable communities? relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

33. Opportunity Narratives • Learning and applying lessons • Securing multifunctionality • Maximising public engagement. relu Building interdisciplinarity across the Rural Economy and rural domain Land Use Programme

34. Narrative 1 : Learning and Applying Lessons • “Path to excellence is paved with failures” • More critical examination of things that go wrong • Legacy – rural-urban fringe work by Countryside Agency – Regional Planning relu Building interdisciplinarity across the Rural Economy and rural domain Land Use Programme

35. Applying lessons Concept Plans via Worcestershire GIP relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

36. 9 piece Jigsaw Birmingham City Council The 9 piece jigsaw – Key Partners GIA Partnership Climate Risk Contingency Water Risk Mapping Planning Green Infrastructure Health & Well Being Biodiversity The LEP Future Proofing Community Resilience Transport & Infrastructure relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

37. Narrative 2: Securing multifunctionality relu Building interdisciplinarity across the Rural Economy and rural domain Land Use Programme

38. Hampton relu Building interdisciplinarity across the Rural Economy and rural domain Land Use Programme

39. Narrative 3: Maximising public engagement in the fringe relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

40. Reflections • Rethink urban and rural polarisation • Rural urban fringe as the key battleground for development • Disintegrated development inhibits full realisation of its potential as a rural urban fringe • Start dialogue of key role the RURAL –urban fringe can play • Imposition of order may remove the very essence that makes the fringe unique relu Building interdisciplinarity across the Rural Economy and rural domain Land Use Programme

41. Conclusions • Start of a research, policy and practice journey • Disciplinary silos can inhibit progress in the fringe • We need to experiment and take risks • We need better engagement with publics over kind of fringe they want relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme

42. Questions? http://www.bcu.ac.uk/research/- centres-of-excellence/centre-for-environment-and-society/projects/re relu Building interdisciplinarity across the Rural Economy and rural domain Land Use Programme

Disintegrated development in the rural-urban fringe

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

En vedette

En vedette (20)

Similaire à Disintegrated development in the rural-urban fringe

Similaire à Disintegrated development in the rural-urban fringe (20)

Plus de Countryside and Community Research Institute

Plus de Countryside and Community Research Institute (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Disintegrated development in the rural-urban fringe

Notes de l'éditeur