Seattlefinal
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Seattlefinal

on

  • 443 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
443
Views on SlideShare
443
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • From policy and practice
  • •       Geographical identity - RUF as spaces crossing boundaries [geographical; in relation to existing ‘town and country’ identities] •       Professional identity (micro-institutional)- RUF as  the space of management or planning [space for planning and managing services and provisions – will vary with different professionals’ ideas - micro-institutional dimension] •       Stakeholder identities - RUF as imagined and contested space(s) by different  stakeholders [including everyone, citizens, bottom-up perspective as well as dominant voices] •       Policy identity (macro-institutional) - RUF as a process shaped by a range of policy drives/drivers [macro visions for the RUF as serving specific overarching purposes; similar to point 2 but different level/scale and about longer-term drivers that are likely to imprint a strong/different identity onto the RUF; identities and functions put onto the RUF by policy drivers such as climate change – e.g. buffer for temperature extremes/flood management/pollution & carbon sponge] In all cases, each kind of identity in reality includes a multiplicity of identities; so different identities exist across and within each category.  
  • So with its contradictions and complexity how can we identify a set of principles that allow for improved management of this space
  • Soup Bowl versus salad bowl

Seattlefinal Presentation Transcript

  • 1. relu Rural Economy and Land Use Programme Whose fringe is it anyway: prospects and opportunities for integrated management of the rural-urban fringe (RUF). Alister Scott Claudia Carter, Mark Reed, Peter Larkham, Nicki Schiessel, Karen Leach, Nick Morton, Rachel Curzon David Jarvis, Andrew Hearle, Mark Middleton, Bob Forster, Keith Budden, Ruth Waters, David Collier, Chris Crean, Miriam Kennet, Richard Coles and Ben Stonyer
  • 2. Plan
    • The fringe context
    • Conceptualising the RUF research problem
    • Emerging narratives from 6 workshops
    • Discussion: Realising the opportunity space for RUF
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 3. Faces of the Fringe
    • Innovative
    • Edgelands
    • Transitional
    • Fuzzy
    • Messy
    • Reactionary
    • Ad-hoc
    • Diverse
    • Dynamic
    • Neglected
    • Valued
    • Contested
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 4. Academic Commentary
    • Dominant space of 20C
    • (Mckenzie, 1996)
    • Misunderstood space (Gallent et al 2006)
    • A transition phase/edge ‘placeless’ (Qvistrom, 2005)
    • Fringe as a ‘weed’ (Cresswell 1997)
    • Battleground for urban and rural uses (Hough, 1990)
    • “ Landscape out of order” (Qvistrom 2007)
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 5. Multiple Identities
      • RUF as geographical identity; crossing boundaries
      • RUF as professional identity ; spaces for management/planning goods and services
      • RUF as stakeholder identity; imagined and contested space(s)
      • RUF as policy identity; a dynamic process shaped by macro drivers (climate change, recession)
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 6. The RUF problem
    • “ I find the idea of [the RUF as an area of] transition really useful. I don’t think I have come across a spatial definition [of the RUF].” A
    • “ You find it useful, but I am sure for a planner it is a complete headache.” B
    • “ Yeah, but I mean the planners have nice straight administrative boundaries” A
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 7. An interdisciplinary approach to the built environment
    • Improve theoretical lens through which we can view both the processes, drivers and dynamics of change in the RUF
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 8. Marriage of Spatial Planning and Ecosystem Services
    • Cross boundaries between planners and natural resource managers
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 9. Converging literatures
    • Individual team member reflective policy and practice contributions
    • Prioritise key problem areas
      • Addressing pro-activity and long termism
      • Increasing connectivity through Green-Grey- Blue Infrastructure planning
      • Assessing Values and Effective Decision making
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 10. Workshops
    • West Midlands Rural Affairs Forum Improving decision making for the sustainable management of the RUF; 25 participants
    • Green Economics Institute Long Termism and Valuation in the Built Environment: the RUF and Land Use; 65 participants
    • Birmingham Environmental Partnership Bridging the rural urban divide; 88 participants
    • Localise West Midlands Meeting L ocal needs with local resources in the rural urban fringe; 15 participants
    • BCU Learning the lessons from Strategic planning: resurrecting institutional memories; 14 participants
    • Forest Research Values and Decision making; 8 participants
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 11. “ Emergent” storylines from RUF workshops
    • Challenging institutionalised values and practices
    • Integrating and connecting across traditional sectors and different scales
    • Building effective stakeholder involvement
    • Taking a proactive, long term approach
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 12. 1 Challenging Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 13.
    • “ Evidence is seen too much in the quantitative and economic sense.....[For decisions]. numbers are more attractive than a complicated line of argument and debate ”. FR
    Challenging Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 14. Challenging
    • “ How can we bring about a cultural shift to get away from taking it for granted that population and consumption per capita will continue to grow” BEP
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 15. Challenging
    • “ ..... Green Belt just protects now very affluent commuter belt settlements ........ This culture of negativity and restriction restricts freedom of manoeuvre for planners and the development industry”. WMRAF
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 16. Challenging
    • “ Flexibility is [currently] a one-way street: reducing open land and increasing development; but fringe is the chance to shape rural from urban within new patterns of viability”.  LWM
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 17. Challenging
    • “ Land value is the main barrier to RUF being used for local food production and other innovative things ......” LWM
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 18. Key Messages
    • Economic System(s) is/are flawed - and main barrier to change
    • We value what we measure; as opposed to measure what we value
    • Green Belt is part of the RUF problem, not the answer
    • Where are the alternative visions?
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 19. 2 Effective Stakeholder Participation Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 20. Effective Stakeholder Participation
    • “ You need to involve the public at the outset ....so building on their traditional knowledge as part of solutions rather than just asking them to endorse a professional solution” GE
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 21. Effective Stakeholder Participation
    • “ Rather than ....so-called experts we need more creative ideas from school children...public .... mavericks .” GE
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 22. Effective Stakeholder Participation
    • “ I was recently consulted on the local plan the council asked for views on “your plan”. I wrote back and said it was surely “our” plan.” GE
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 23. Effective Stakeholder Participation
    • “ Important to .. develop tools ..... that enable people to realise and understand what the changes and actions might really mean” BCU
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 24. Effective Stakeholder Participation
    • “ Often people might agree a concept but don't deal with the detail and the interlocking pieces .... Then they oppose what they originally supported. ......” BCU
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 25. Effective Stakeholder Participation
    • “ How will [local communities] be heard and find ears in the existing power landscape [designations and institutional processes]....... We need to create new institutional arrangements” FR
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 26. Key Messages
    • Broadening of expertise
    • Role of local knowledge and ideas
    • Improve tools for iterative + participative strategies
    • Build collaborative approaches through institutional change
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 27. 3 Long Termism Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 28. Long Termism
    • “ The importance of ...agriculture and forestry in the ruf is really important. With the current recession there is a very real risk of short termism via the selling off of farm land near urban edges” BCU
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 29. Long Termism
    • “ A lot of good information can be got from looking at the past and using that; we tend to overlook this. Learning from our historical knowledge and experience is important ....yet we tend to make the same mistakes”. BCU
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 30. Long Termism
    • “ How do we value what we don't know exists?”.....”You don’t get people investing when you don’t know what is going to happen”. GE
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 31. Long Termism
    • “ What about Ebenezer Howard and his visions these were long term; we don't have this kind of thinking anymore ... Why ?” BCU
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 32. Long Termism
    • “ There is a need for better skills training and capacity building amongst policy and decision makers at all levels....not just the public”. WMRAF
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 33. Key Messages
    • Visions are key tools
    • Adaptive management via demo projects
    • Markets rarely value the long term approach
    • We ignore past lessons at our peril
    • Move beyond spatial solutions to invest in social capital/skills
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 34. 4. Integration Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 35. Integration
    • “ The RUF is ...... individual reflecting different needs and priorities according to local circumstances. ..... across all sectors from which a suitable model is developed”. BCU
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 36. Integration
    • “ Value of food growing in cities and green belts as a means of sustainable development ... Achievement of health ideals.... Education for school children .. Building the cultural links between rural and urban across divides” WMRAF
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 37. Integration
    • “ Green infrastructure planning across landscape scale areas crossing administrative boundaries.... The role of infrastructure planning is crucial but needs to be at the right scale”. BEP
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 38. Integration
    • “ Many agencies did not have a particular view on the fringe space except when it was part of an actual project.... Although  some pieces of work and evidence were commissioned, they only addressed particular features of the fringe landscape” BCU
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 39. Integration
    • “ Interdependencies are very important and we should see to make the chain of connections more visible and more apparent” LWM
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 40. Key messages
    • The holy grail of integration
    • No one size fits all
    • Identify needs and priorities of the RUF
    • Identify connections and dependencies across boundaries and scales
    • Improve transparency and evidence in addressing ‘needs’ and ‘priorities’
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain
  • 41. Opportunity Spaces in RUF
    • CHAMPION : to articulate the RUF as a place in its own right
    • ADAPT : highlight different thinking and ideas to change institutional values and planning processes eg urban agriculture
    • SCALE : Work on the problem and opportunity at/across the right scale(s)
    • RECONSTRUCT: improve lens to view, tell and change the RUF story.
    Building interdisciplinarity across the rural domain