Spatial capacity-building? Greg Lloyd and Deborah Peel look at the National Planning Framework...

IN APRIL 2004, hot on the heels of the Welsh Assembly Government and the publication of its Wales Spatial Plan, (1) the Scottish Executive published its long-awaited National Planning Framework. The idea of a National Planning Framework (NPF) for Scotland was first mooted in 2001, and its subsequent

As in Wales, devolution sets the immediate context to the introduction of the NPF. In Scotland, the devolved administrative and institutional arrangements have facilitated an arena in which considerable attention has focused on what is perceived as a distinctively Scottish agenda. Interestingly, this agenda concerns a number of different issues associated with the broader land question--its use, ownership, development, and stewardship--in Scotland. Measures have included land reform and the associated provisions for responsible access to the countryside, the designation of national parks in the Cairngorms and Loch Lomond and the Trossachs, and the introduction of land use planning controls over the rollout of telecommunications infrastructure, and offshore aquaculture developments. There are clear differences here with the remainder of the UK.

The NPF forms part of this agenda, and is bound up also with the broader modernisation of the land use planning system. This is reflected in the simultaneous publication of the Framework (2) alongside two consultation papers--one addressing third-party rights of appeal, (3) and the other dealing with the reform of development plans. (4) This article examines the nature of the NPF and considers its implications in a modern Scotland.

Modernising the planning system

Modernisation of land use planning--making it 'fit for purpose'--sits fair and square within the prevailing political agenda in Scotland. The Scottish Executive's Partnership Agreement published in April 2003, for example, articulated the legislative and policy ambitions of the coalition government in office. This is composed of the Scottish Labour Party and the Scottish Liberal Democrats, and its Partnership Agreement asserts a Scotland 'where enterprise can flourish, where opportunity does exist for all and our people and our country have confidence to face the challenges of a global society'.

The Agreement seeks to promote the long-term growth of the Scottish economy, private sector investment and business activity, support for productivity growth, and an enterprise culture. It integrates these strategic intentions with the perceived necessary development of skills, and places a considerable emphasis on higher education. To achieve this ambitious vision requires assertive leadership in policy execution.

Land use planning has a clear role to play in the context of facilitating this economic growth and competitiveness-led national development strategy. (5) Indeed the Partnership Agreement makes a clear commitment to improving the land use planning system to strengthen the involvement of communities, speed up decisions, better reflect local views, and allow for quicker investment decisions. The Agreement articulates a role for an NPF to promote a spatial vision for the management of economic growth and the promotion of social justice.

The NPF has been prepared alongside other initiatives such as the Cities Review, and the subsequent portfolio of associated city visions. On the one hand, these were produced as the strategic conduits for realising the overarching political vision of the Agreement. Although the contribution of the Cities Review process has been contested, (6) the idea of city-regions located within a national development framework is central to this approach. Certainly the NPF presents the city-regions as the principal drivers of economic growth and development in Scotland. Complementing these interventions is the process of community planning which is now establishing itself as the means of promoting 'a collective vision of well-being' and the co-ordinated delivery of local services. Clearly then, the NPF is part and parcel of a much broader and fundamental modernisation of the existing planning and governance process with a spatial twist.

The publication of the NPF alongside two consultation papers suggests a commitment to engage with the modernisation of planning in a very tangible way. Both consultation papers deal with associated and very significant issues for planning practice and the way in which land use planning is perceived by different interest groups as working in the modern world. The first addresses proposals to modernise the arrangements for development plans. The 'emphasis is not on legislative or procedural change, though both will be required. The proposals are aimed at promoting more urgency and confidence in the process with a greater focus on content and outcomes.' Attention is drawn to the proposed arrangements for local development plans and the processes of strategic planning in the four main city-regions. The stated intentions are to speed up the preparation and approval process, secure more effective engagement with individuals and agencies, make plans shorter and targeted on key spatial issues, and focus on delivery.

The second consultation paper addresses the controversial arena of third-party rights of appeal and considers the arguments around the possible introduction of new rights of appeal, although 'maintaining the status quo remains a serious option for the long term'. Vigilance is necessary to ensure that the debates associated with these matters do not overshadow the critical appreciation of the NPF and the potential it has in contributing to the new culture of planning practice.

The review of arrangements for strategic planning in Scotland

The starting place for the idea of an NPF was the Annual Conference of the Scottish Branch of the Royal Town Planning Institute in 2001. The (then) Planning Minister asserted the need for a review of strategic planning and outlined three possible options for future arrangements, which were predicated on a contextual overhaul of planning practice.

The options were a revision of the current structure plan areas, the creation of larger-scale planning areas, or the preparation of an NPF. At present, there are 17 structure plan areas in Scotland. Of these, 11 correspond to a single local authority, while six are defined on a joint working basis. The stated intention of the strategic review was the creation of a planning system that provided clarity of strategic direction and brought with it a commitment to act. In parallel, there was a strong advocacy for a national planning agenda to be considered, such as the case put forward by the Scottish Branch of the Royal Town Planning Institute.

The subsequent consultation paper addressing the revision of the arrangements for strategic planning in Scotland proposed, inter alia, the preparation of a national planning framework. (7) The different responses to the idea of an NPF were overwhelmingly in favour. The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, for example, suggested that such a national 'overview should express social, economic and environmental policy and provide a spatial framework for the sustainable development of Scotland'. Further, it asserted that the 'purpose, content and process for preparation of this national framework would provide the necessary national counterpart to the local partnership working on strategic visions for social, economic and environmental wellbeing which is being developed through community planning'. (8)

In general, local authorities were in support of the idea of an NPF, but there were a number of different nuances and interpretations evident across the board. Thus, Angus Council, for example, stated that while there was a need for a coherent strategic national planning perspective, it should support subsidiarity in the tiers of plan-making where decision-making is retained at the most appropriate level.

The Ayrshire Joint Structure Plan and Transportation Committee suggested that the document should be somewhere between a vision and a framework, and should seek to reposition planning back at the heart of an integrated government agenda. It argued that it should not be prescriptive--more a setting of context--and that it should establish strong and clear links with the main implementing agencies. There was concern about further centralisation of planning policy and plan-making.

Elsewhere, the non-departmental public bodies in Scotland were fully in support. Scottish Enterprise, for example, stressed the importance of establishing 'cross-policy' links to economic development and community planning. Indeed, the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency considered that there would be considerable merit in a stronger, more comprehensive approach that provides an effective lead for spatial planning across Scotland.

The development industry was also in support. The Scottish Housebuilders Association, for example, argued that a national overview document would enable local authorities to take account of wider national considerations. There was an acknowledgement of the benefits of a spatial perspective and a context statement to guide the preparation of local plans. Indeed, the Association argued that it expected the NPF to be both explicit and binding on planning authorities.

Subsequently, the Scottish Executive embarked on a process of devising an appropriate NPF. This process has involved regional seminars being held across Scotland so as to identify the issues considered appropriate for inclusion in the framework.

A National Planning Framework

In the foreword to the NPF, the Minister for Communities asserts that its publication 'marks an important first step in recognising the challenges we face in Scotland's long-term territorial development. But it is a perspective, not a prescriptive master-plan or blueprint. It is a planning document that analyses the underlying trends in Scotland's territorial development, the key drivers of change and the challenges we face. Describing an issue in spatial or territorial terms does not remove the dilemmas we face in policy or spending decisions. The framework is, however, one of the factors we will take into account in coming to difficult decisions on policy and spending priorities us well as providing a context for development plans and development decisions.'

The NPF is clear about its context. It draws attention to the issues and implications for Scotland arising from the enlargement of the European Union (EU), the importance of taking on board the ideas associated with the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP), and the requirement for a spatial planning framework to be the basis of future EU funding regimes.

The NPF is based on evidence of Scotland in 2004, presents a vision to 2025, and identifies priorities and opportunities for different spatial perspectives--the Central Belt, the East Coast, Ayrshire and the South West, and rural Scotland. Its central themes are quality and connectivity, and these are threaded through the text and supporting visual material. An extensive description is provided of the main components of Scotland in terms of population, households and settlements, the economy, and infrastructure. The spatial dimensions are recorded, with respect to social inclusion partnerships, yet there is not a graphic demonstration of Scotland's spatial realities.

The NPF sets out the key issues and the perceived drivers of change, and these are discussed in detail. Essentially this brings together consideration of sustainable development and the importance of place in the lurking shadow of infrastructure. This particular agenda is both comprehensive and awesome, and addresses the challenges of transport, energy, waste management, water and drainage, affordable housing, and new technology in Scotland's vision. The importance of place is asserted within the broad spatial canvas, and this leads to the pivotal role to be played by transport infrastructure in promoting quality and connectivity.

The key aims for Scotland's spatial development to 2025 are based on a familiar mantra--to increase economic growth and competitiveness; to promote social and environmental justice; and to promote sustainable development, and protect and enhance the quality of natural and built environments. This triad of intent is complemented by a catalogue of the key elements of the development strategy. This rests on the development of the cities as the main economic drivers; the promotion of environmental quality and connectivity; economic diversification and environmental stewardship; and investment in water and sewerage infrastructure to support development. The key elements of the NPF spatial strategy to 2025 are stated as follows:

* to support the development of Scotland's cities as the main drivers of the economy;

* to spread the benefits of economic activity by promoting environmental quality and connectivity;

* to enable the most disadvantaged communities to benefit from growth and opportunity;

* to strengthen external links;

* to promote economic diversification and environmental stewardship;

* to highlight long-term transport options and promote more sustainable patterns of transport and land use;

* to invest in water and drainage infrastructure to support development;

* to realise the potential of Scotland's renewable energy resources;

* to provide the facilities to meet waste recycling targets; and

* to extend broadband coverage in every area of Scotland.

The final section of the Framework addresses 'making it happen'. Here the critical issue of capacity appears as a matter of pressing concern. There are references to institutional capacity ('The Executive and its agencies are not in control of all the factors driving change'), policy capacity ('Some changes must be seen in the context of European enlargement and globalisation. Others reflect the cumulative effects of decisions made by individuals and businesses'), spatial capacity ('Striking the balance in policy, expenditure and Executive action can involve difficult choice'), and infrastructure capacity ('a more systematic approach is required to decision making on strategic infrastructure provision').

This is the reality of the spatial strategy for Scotland. It is in effect a clarion call to arms. Infrastructure remains the enigma of contemporary planning practice. Spatial planning and land use planning need teeth--the ability to deliver, to engineer change in desired areas, to lever in appropriate development--and this can only be achieved with the appropriate institutional, policy, and leadership support.

While the NPF remains essentially a descriptive document, and although it is intended to be reviewed in four years' time, it must trigger a critical debate about the sharp division between policy and the arrangements for development infrastructure. That, in this iteration of the NPF, is the principal contribution to understanding the emerging patterns of development, the expected directions of change, and the means of enabling the optimal outcomes in line with the national strategic vision.

The beginning of the beginning

The NPF is important as it represents the beginning of the beginning. It asserts the need for a spatial dimension to policy, something that has been assiduously avoided for a long time. it is an acknowledgement that public policy in Scotland tends to be instinctively aspatial, and tends to be articulated in pan-Scotland terms. Now, at last, that spatial deficit is out in the open. The National Planning Framework does not address the wicked issues involved, but it has promoted space and place as matters of national concern. It may yet take until 2025 for that mindset to be an instinctive concern for politicians and policy-makers.

Notes

(1) N. Harris and A. Hooper. 'A dragon in sheep's clothing?' Town & Country Planning, 2003, 72, Nov., pp.317-320

(2) National Planning Framework: Quality and Connectivity. Scottish Executive, Edinburgh, Apr. 2004

(3) Rights of Appeal in Planning. Consultation Paper. Scottish Executive, Edinburgh, Apr. 2004

(4) Making Development Plans Deliver. Consultation Paper. Scottish Executive, Edinburgh, Apr. 2004

(5) G. Lloyd and D. Peel: 'Planning for a Better Scotland--carpe diem'. Town & Country Planning, 2003, 72, Jun., pp.196-IBC

(6) D. Adams, P. Allmendinger, S. Tiesdell, C. Watkins, and M. White: 'The Scottish Cities Review--a missed opportunity?' Town & Country Planning, 2003, 72, Feb., pp.40-41

(7) Review of the Arrangements for Strategic Planning in Scotland. Scottish Executive, Edinburgh, Apr. 2004

(8) Review of Strategic Planning: Digest of Responses to Consultation. Geoff Peart Consulting for Scottish Executive Central Research Unit, Edinburgh, 2002

Professor M.G. Lloyd and Deborah Peel are with The Geddes Institute in the School of Town and Regional Planning at the University of Dundee.