IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v35y2017i3p397-416.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Getting involved in plan-making: Participation in neighbourhood planning in England

Author

Listed:
  • Katherine Brookfield

Abstract

Neighbourhood planning, introduced through the Localism Act 2011, was intended to provide communities in England with new opportunities to plan and manage development. All communities were presented as being readily able to participate in this new regime with Ministers declaring it perfectly conceived to encourage greater involvement from a wider range of people. Set against such claims, while addressing significant gaps in the evidence, this paper provides a critical review of participation in neighbourhood planning, supported by original empirical evidence drawn from case study research. It does so at an interesting time as the community, and/or neighbourhood, appears across political parties as a preferred scalar focus for planning. Challenging Ministers’ assertions, while mirroring past experiments in community planning, participation is found to be modest and partial, concentrated amongst a few, relatively advantaged communities, and relatively advantaged interests within those communities. The paper considers the implications for future planning policy and practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Katherine Brookfield, 2017. "Getting involved in plan-making: Participation in neighbourhood planning in England," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(3), pages 397-416, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:35:y:2017:i:3:p:397-416
    DOI: 10.1177/0263774X16664518
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0263774X16664518
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0263774X16664518?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jean Hillier, 2000. "Going round the Back? Complex Networks and Informal Action in Local Planning Processes," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 32(1), pages 33-54, January.
    2. Graham Haughton & Phil Allmendinger, 2013. "Spatial Planning and the New Localism," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 1-5, February.
    3. Simin Davoudi & Paul Cowie, 2013. "Are English neighbourhood forums democratically legitimate?," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 562-566, December.
    4. Phil Allmendinger & Graham Haughton, 2013. "The Evolution and Trajectories of English Spatial Governance: 'Neoliberal' Episodes in Planning," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 6-26, February.
    5. Allen, Pauline, 2006. "New localism in the English National Health Service: What is it for?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(2-3), pages 244-252, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andy Yuille, 2020. "Performing legitimacy in neighbourhood planning: Conflicting identities and hybrid governance," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 38(7-8), pages 1367-1385, November.
    2. Carol Ludwig & Gregory Ludwig, 2014. "Empty gestures? A review of the discourses of ‘localism’ from the practitioner’s perspective," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 29(3), pages 245-256, May.
    3. Mace, Alan & Holman, Nancy & Paccoud, Antoine & Sundaresan, Jayaraj, 2015. "Coordinating density; working through conviction, suspicion and pragmatism," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 56768, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Alexander Walter & Roland Scholz, 2007. "Critical success conditions of collaborative methods: a comparative evaluation of transport planning projects," Transportation, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 195-212, March.
    5. Crystal Legacy & Ryan van den Nouwelant, 2015. "Negotiating Strategic Planning's Transitional Spaces: The Case of ‘Guerrilla Governance’ in Infrastructure Planning," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(1), pages 209-226, January.
    6. Andy Inch & Richard Dunning & Aidan While & Hannah Hickman & Sarah Payne, 2020. "‘The object is to change the heart and soul’: Financial incentives, planning and opposition to new housebuilding in England," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 38(4), pages 713-732, June.
    7. Garcia-Lacalle, Javier & Martin, Emilio, 2010. "Rural vs urban hospital performance in a 'competitive' public health service," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(6), pages 1131-1140, September.
    8. Laura E Tate, 2013. "Growth-Management Implementation in Metropolitan Vancouver: Lessons from Actor-Network Theory," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 40(5), pages 783-800, October.
    9. Geoffrey A. Battista & Kevin Manaugh, 2019. "My way or the highway? Framing transportation planners’ attitudes in negotiating professional expertise and public insight," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 1271-1290, August.
    10. John Sturzaker & Michael Gordon, 2017. "Democratic tensions in decentralised planning – Rhetoric, legislation and reality in England," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(7), pages 1324-1339, November.
    11. P M McGuirk, 2001. "Situating Communicative Planning Theory: Context, Power, and Knowledge," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 33(2), pages 195-217, February.
    12. Michal Hrivnák & Peter Moritz & Katarína Melichová & Oľga Roháčiková & Lucia Pospišová, 2021. "Designing the Participation on Local Development Planning: From Literature Review to Adaptive Framework for Practice," Societies, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-25, March.
    13. Andy Inch, 2018. "‘Opening for business’? Neoliberalism and the cultural politics of modernising planning in Scotland," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(5), pages 1076-1092, April.
    14. Kristian Olesen & Helen Carter, 2018. "Planning as a barrier for growth: Analysing storylines on the reform of the Danish Planning Act," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(4), pages 689-707, June.
    15. Niedziałkowski, Krzysztof & Beunen, Raoul, 2019. "The risky business of planning reform – The evolution of local spatial planning in Poland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 11-20.
    16. Graham Haughton & Phil Allmendinger, 2016. "Think tanks and the pressures for planning reform in England," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(8), pages 1676-1692, December.
    17. Phil Allmendinger & Graham Haughton & Edward Shepherd, 2016. "Where is planning to be found? Material practices and the multiple spaces of planning," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(1), pages 38-51, February.
    18. Exworthy, Mark & Frosini, Francesca, 2008. "Room for manoeuvre?: Explaining local autonomy in the English National Health Service," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(2-3), pages 204-212, May.
    19. Savis Gohari & Tor Medalen & Rolee Aranya, 2019. "Exploring the Impact of Complex Multi-Level Governance Structures on the Societal Contribution of Universities to Knowledge-Based Urban Development," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-25, October.
    20. Tianke Zhu & Jian Jin & Xigang Zhu, 2021. "China’s “Embedded Neoliberal” Home-Based Elderly Care? A State-Organised System of Neighbourhood Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-24, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:35:y:2017:i:3:p:397-416. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.