The document discusses the impact of UK policy changes on archaeology. It provides data showing that archaeology contributes significantly to the UK economy but that funding and student enrollment in archaeology have declined substantially since 2010 due to government cuts. It also summarizes several UK policy consultations and frameworks that have guided planning and development decisions affecting archaeology. Specifically, it outlines key provisions from PPG16, PPS5, and revisions to the National Planning Policy Framework in 2012 and 2018 that aim to balance development against preservation of historic and archaeological assets.
The document discusses objectives and developments regarding cooperation between the European Confederation of Soil Science Societies (ECSSS) and the Eurosoil 2020 congress. It aims to foster soil science, support soil scientists, facilitate policy information, and cover all parts of soil science. Specific goals include renewing the ECSSS, making the congress affordable and inclusive, organizing themes around UN Sustainable Development Goals, and calling for symposia in 2018. Next steps include ECSSS meetings in 2018 to discuss information and adopt revised statutes, and a call for Eurosoil symposia.
Mr. Arwin Jones on the ESP proposed plan of activities for Pillar 2 (Implementation Plan) at the 4th ESP Plenary Meeting, held in FAO headquarters, 10 - 12 May 2017.
The document summarizes key points from a policy paper on updating the Asian Development Bank's (ADB's) safeguard policies. It discusses the changing context of development in Asia, lessons learned from implementing current policies, and considerations for the new policy. The draft Safeguard Policy Statement aims to better articulate safeguards, balance procedural and results-based approaches, and work toward greater harmonization with other institutions' policies and country systems.
The document compares the Asian Development Bank's (ADB) safeguard policies to other institutions' policies. It provides an overview of ADB's three main safeguard policies relating to the environment, involuntary resettlement, and indigenous peoples. It also summarizes the World Bank and Japan International Cooperation Agency's environmental and social policies. ADB's policies aim to avoid harm, ensure participation, and support sustainable development. The document outlines ADB and borrowers' roles in implementing social and environmental plans.
This document discusses the CIRCASA project, which aims to coordinate international research cooperation on soil carbon sequestration in agriculture. The project has 24 partners and seeks to (1) strengthen the international research community; (2) improve understanding of soil carbon sequestration; (3) co-design a strategic research agenda; and (4) create an International Research Consortium. It will involve stocktaking research, reviewing knowledge gaps, engaging stakeholders, and establishing regional hubs to facilitate research collaboration. The goal is to advance scientific understanding and develop strategies to increase soil carbon storage through agricultural practices.
This was submitted on October 5th 2009 to the Joint Agency Review Team reviewing the Mount Nemo Quarry. I also provided the experts minutes from OMB case PL071044 to illustrate how a certain firm signed off on the fact their own data was insufficient. I have been monitoring the practices of this agency over years in different locations and have found consistencies in testing methods that result in undermined hydrogeological risks.
The document discusses objectives and developments regarding cooperation between the European Confederation of Soil Science Societies (ECSSS) and the Eurosoil 2020 congress. It aims to foster soil science, support soil scientists, facilitate policy information, and cover all parts of soil science. Specific goals include renewing the ECSSS, making the congress affordable and inclusive, organizing themes around UN Sustainable Development Goals, and calling for symposia in 2018. Next steps include ECSSS meetings in 2018 to discuss information and adopt revised statutes, and a call for Eurosoil symposia.
Mr. Arwin Jones on the ESP proposed plan of activities for Pillar 2 (Implementation Plan) at the 4th ESP Plenary Meeting, held in FAO headquarters, 10 - 12 May 2017.
The document summarizes key points from a policy paper on updating the Asian Development Bank's (ADB's) safeguard policies. It discusses the changing context of development in Asia, lessons learned from implementing current policies, and considerations for the new policy. The draft Safeguard Policy Statement aims to better articulate safeguards, balance procedural and results-based approaches, and work toward greater harmonization with other institutions' policies and country systems.
The document compares the Asian Development Bank's (ADB) safeguard policies to other institutions' policies. It provides an overview of ADB's three main safeguard policies relating to the environment, involuntary resettlement, and indigenous peoples. It also summarizes the World Bank and Japan International Cooperation Agency's environmental and social policies. ADB's policies aim to avoid harm, ensure participation, and support sustainable development. The document outlines ADB and borrowers' roles in implementing social and environmental plans.
This document discusses the CIRCASA project, which aims to coordinate international research cooperation on soil carbon sequestration in agriculture. The project has 24 partners and seeks to (1) strengthen the international research community; (2) improve understanding of soil carbon sequestration; (3) co-design a strategic research agenda; and (4) create an International Research Consortium. It will involve stocktaking research, reviewing knowledge gaps, engaging stakeholders, and establishing regional hubs to facilitate research collaboration. The goal is to advance scientific understanding and develop strategies to increase soil carbon storage through agricultural practices.
This was submitted on October 5th 2009 to the Joint Agency Review Team reviewing the Mount Nemo Quarry. I also provided the experts minutes from OMB case PL071044 to illustrate how a certain firm signed off on the fact their own data was insufficient. I have been monitoring the practices of this agency over years in different locations and have found consistencies in testing methods that result in undermined hydrogeological risks.
The document provides an overview of the EEA and Eionet model for assessing soil condition in Europe. It involves 1800 soil experts from 39 countries and over 400 institutions who are organized into National Focal Points, National Reference Centers for Soil, and the European Topic Centre on Urban, Land and Soil Systems. The assessment will involve collecting data from national experts to evaluate threats to soil functions across Europe in the 2020/2021 European Soil Condition Assessment. This will cover physical, chemical, and biological degradation of soils and provide country-specific summaries to update understanding of soil trends and challenges.
Tunisia: Combat Desertification and Land Degradation in Tunisiaelodieperrat
Tunisia has implemented programs to combat desertification and land degradation since 1998. The National Action Program addresses strategies, projects, and rural development programs. Institutions were created and over $1.5 billion invested from 1990-2011 in soil and water conservation and forestry programs. This improved forest cover and protected areas. Tunisia is aligning its National Action Program with the UNCCD's 10-year strategy and will continue reforestation, pasture improvement, and updating degradation maps from 2012-2016 as desertification affects 54% of the country.
The Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is an independent intergovernmental body established in 2012 that provides objective scientific assessments on biodiversity, ecosystems, and their contributions to people. IPBES conducts expert assessments, provides policy support, builds capacity and knowledge, and communicates its findings. Its outputs include comprehensive reports that synthesize thousands of scientific studies and indigenous knowledge. IPBES aims to inform policymaking and catalyze action to protect biodiversity and promote sustainable development.
This document outlines key opportunity areas for an EU research and innovation policy agenda on nature-based solutions. It identifies four main goals: 1) enhancing sustainable urbanization, 2) restoring degraded ecosystems, 3) developing climate change adaptation and mitigation, and 4) improving risk management and resilience. For each goal, nature-based solutions could address environmental, social, and economic challenges in sustainable ways. Specifically, for sustainable urbanization, nature-based solutions support green economic development, environmental protection, and social well-being in cities facing increasing urbanization.
The European Commission provides support to the Global Soil Partnership (GSP) and the European Soil Partnership (ESP). It has allocated €1 million in funding to the GSP from 2019-2020 and €150,000 to support various ESP activities. The Commission aims to link ESP and EU policies through initiatives related to soil protection, research, monitoring, and awareness raising. Key policy priorities include implementing soil-related UN Sustainable Development Goals, developing potential new EU soil policy initiatives, integrating soil considerations in the new Common Agricultural Policy and climate policies, and better synergies between international soil initiatives. Ongoing soil degradation challenges in the EU include loss of soil organic carbon, erosion, contamination, and sealing.
Item 6: Global Symposium on Soil Erosion - Implementation of the recommendationSoils FAO-GSP
This document summarizes the implementation of recommendations from the "Stop soil erosion, save our future" outcome document. It discusses that a concept note has been created for the Global Soil Erosion map and that 2020 mapping activities will focus on salinity and carbon sequestration while most erosion work is postponed until 2021. It also provides updates on publishing articles in peer-reviewed journals to raise awareness of soil erosion and foster research.
A Sahelian Lands Development Strategy; A Front for the Adaptation and Resilie...NAP Events
Presented by: Marcelin Sanou
7.4 Regional approaches to adaptation planning
The session will consider adaptation planning and implementation at the transboundary level, for such areas as water management, hydroenergy production and supply, trade and ecosystem management, as well as technical assessment and data issues that can be addressed jointly among neighbouring countries. It will feature best practices from the Great Green Wall of the Sahara and the Sahel as well as examples on addressing water issues in shared river basins.
The national planning policy framework; Sustainable development and heritage ...Design South East
The document summarizes key aspects of the National Planning Policy Framework regarding sustainable development and heritage conservation. It outlines that the NPPF seeks to jointly pursue economic, social and environmental improvement, including protecting the historic environment. Designated heritage assets should be given great weight in planning decisions, and any harm to them requires clear justification. Non-designated assets should also be considered and recorded if impacted by development. Local plans should establish positive strategies for conservation and take heritage impacts into account.
Presentation - Scaling up nature-based solutions to address water-related cli...OECD Environment
This document summarizes a presentation on scaling up nature-based solutions to address water-related climate risks. It finds that while there is growing international and domestic policy support for nature-based solutions, key challenges remain around governance arrangements, policies, regulatory requirements, technical capacity, and funding. The presentation recommends further mainstreaming nature-based solutions across sectors, improving tools and guidelines, building technical capacity, and enhancing access to dedicated funding streams.
Adaptation Responses to Climate Change under the UNFCCC and Kyoto ProtocolDr. William C.G. Burns
The document discusses key provisions around adaptation from the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol. It outlines that the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol establish obligations for developed countries to assist vulnerable developing countries with adaptation costs. It also summarizes various adaptation funds established, but notes that funding pledged has far exceeded amounts received and disbursed. Developed countries are argued to not have fully supported adaptation investments in developing countries as committed.
Item 6: Global Symposium on Salt-affected SoilsSoils FAO-GSP
The document discusses the upcoming Global Symposium on Salt-Affected Soils to be held in September 2021 in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. The symposium will address the threats posed by soil salinization and sodification as major soil degradation processes. It will feature themes on assessing and monitoring soil salinization, its impacts on food security and the environment, and an action agenda for preventing and remediating soil salinization. The outcome will be a document highlighting the scientific evidence on salt-affected soils and recommendations for policies and programs to encourage sustainable soil salinity management.
Introduction to Stream 4: Nature-based solutions to address the climate crisisCIFOR-ICRAF
This document provides an introduction and agenda for a session on nature-based solutions to address the climate crisis. The session will include 4 parts over 2 days:
Session 1 will discuss opportunities and constraints of nature-based solutions, which involve working with nature to address societal challenges while providing benefits for people and biodiversity.
Session 2 will focus on what is needed to scale up ecological restoration efforts.
Session 3 will examine how resilience in nature-based solutions can be measured and strengthened.
Session 4 will look at using trees and bamboo as sustainable energy providers through bioenergy.
Session 3 - Implementing SEA practice in Azerbaijan by Aysel BabayevaOECD Environment
Implementing SEA in practice: SEA of the National Strategy on the Use of Alternative and Renewable Energy Sources in Azerbaijan for the years 2015 – 2020, presentation by Aysel Babayeva, Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources, Azerbaijan
Submission made during the public process regarding the Nelson Quarry Project. Risks to natural features, endangered species, economy and ecology as well as geological risks of the project. (Project was successfully cancelled)
Panel discussion about European Agenda on Soil and Land ManagementSimon Moolenaar
The panel discussion at the SNOWMAN NETWORK Meeting focused on major scientific challenges related to soil, land use, and land management. Key points discussed included:
1) The need for a "soil-inclusive" land planning approach that considers soil heterogeneity and balances ecosystem services and stakeholders. Major challenges include finding the right scales and methods for up- and down-scaling.
2) Soil biodiversity management and governance at the landscape scale were identified as particularly challenging research objectives.
3) The Horizon 2020 framework emphasizes nature-based solutions and stakeholder involvement to develop sustainable solutions.
4) Food security, food safety, climate change, and global soil biodiversity were proposed as priority research topics in
This document introduces the National Planning Policy Framework, which aims to contribute to sustainable development through the planning system. It outlines the economic, social and environmental roles of planning in achieving sustainable development, including supporting economic growth, providing housing, and protecting the natural environment. The framework replaces over 1,000 pages of national planning policy with around 50 pages to make the system simpler and more accessible to communities.
The document is the National Planning Policy Framework published by the UK government's Department for Communities and Local Government. It sets out the government's planning policies for England and how they are expected to be applied. The framework aims to contribute to sustainable development by outlining an economic, social and environmental role for planning. It establishes a presumption in favour of sustainable development as a guiding principle for plan-making and decision-taking in the planning system.
The document provides an overview of the EEA and Eionet model for assessing soil condition in Europe. It involves 1800 soil experts from 39 countries and over 400 institutions who are organized into National Focal Points, National Reference Centers for Soil, and the European Topic Centre on Urban, Land and Soil Systems. The assessment will involve collecting data from national experts to evaluate threats to soil functions across Europe in the 2020/2021 European Soil Condition Assessment. This will cover physical, chemical, and biological degradation of soils and provide country-specific summaries to update understanding of soil trends and challenges.
Tunisia: Combat Desertification and Land Degradation in Tunisiaelodieperrat
Tunisia has implemented programs to combat desertification and land degradation since 1998. The National Action Program addresses strategies, projects, and rural development programs. Institutions were created and over $1.5 billion invested from 1990-2011 in soil and water conservation and forestry programs. This improved forest cover and protected areas. Tunisia is aligning its National Action Program with the UNCCD's 10-year strategy and will continue reforestation, pasture improvement, and updating degradation maps from 2012-2016 as desertification affects 54% of the country.
The Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is an independent intergovernmental body established in 2012 that provides objective scientific assessments on biodiversity, ecosystems, and their contributions to people. IPBES conducts expert assessments, provides policy support, builds capacity and knowledge, and communicates its findings. Its outputs include comprehensive reports that synthesize thousands of scientific studies and indigenous knowledge. IPBES aims to inform policymaking and catalyze action to protect biodiversity and promote sustainable development.
This document outlines key opportunity areas for an EU research and innovation policy agenda on nature-based solutions. It identifies four main goals: 1) enhancing sustainable urbanization, 2) restoring degraded ecosystems, 3) developing climate change adaptation and mitigation, and 4) improving risk management and resilience. For each goal, nature-based solutions could address environmental, social, and economic challenges in sustainable ways. Specifically, for sustainable urbanization, nature-based solutions support green economic development, environmental protection, and social well-being in cities facing increasing urbanization.
The European Commission provides support to the Global Soil Partnership (GSP) and the European Soil Partnership (ESP). It has allocated €1 million in funding to the GSP from 2019-2020 and €150,000 to support various ESP activities. The Commission aims to link ESP and EU policies through initiatives related to soil protection, research, monitoring, and awareness raising. Key policy priorities include implementing soil-related UN Sustainable Development Goals, developing potential new EU soil policy initiatives, integrating soil considerations in the new Common Agricultural Policy and climate policies, and better synergies between international soil initiatives. Ongoing soil degradation challenges in the EU include loss of soil organic carbon, erosion, contamination, and sealing.
Item 6: Global Symposium on Soil Erosion - Implementation of the recommendationSoils FAO-GSP
This document summarizes the implementation of recommendations from the "Stop soil erosion, save our future" outcome document. It discusses that a concept note has been created for the Global Soil Erosion map and that 2020 mapping activities will focus on salinity and carbon sequestration while most erosion work is postponed until 2021. It also provides updates on publishing articles in peer-reviewed journals to raise awareness of soil erosion and foster research.
A Sahelian Lands Development Strategy; A Front for the Adaptation and Resilie...NAP Events
Presented by: Marcelin Sanou
7.4 Regional approaches to adaptation planning
The session will consider adaptation planning and implementation at the transboundary level, for such areas as water management, hydroenergy production and supply, trade and ecosystem management, as well as technical assessment and data issues that can be addressed jointly among neighbouring countries. It will feature best practices from the Great Green Wall of the Sahara and the Sahel as well as examples on addressing water issues in shared river basins.
The national planning policy framework; Sustainable development and heritage ...Design South East
The document summarizes key aspects of the National Planning Policy Framework regarding sustainable development and heritage conservation. It outlines that the NPPF seeks to jointly pursue economic, social and environmental improvement, including protecting the historic environment. Designated heritage assets should be given great weight in planning decisions, and any harm to them requires clear justification. Non-designated assets should also be considered and recorded if impacted by development. Local plans should establish positive strategies for conservation and take heritage impacts into account.
Presentation - Scaling up nature-based solutions to address water-related cli...OECD Environment
This document summarizes a presentation on scaling up nature-based solutions to address water-related climate risks. It finds that while there is growing international and domestic policy support for nature-based solutions, key challenges remain around governance arrangements, policies, regulatory requirements, technical capacity, and funding. The presentation recommends further mainstreaming nature-based solutions across sectors, improving tools and guidelines, building technical capacity, and enhancing access to dedicated funding streams.
Adaptation Responses to Climate Change under the UNFCCC and Kyoto ProtocolDr. William C.G. Burns
The document discusses key provisions around adaptation from the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol. It outlines that the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol establish obligations for developed countries to assist vulnerable developing countries with adaptation costs. It also summarizes various adaptation funds established, but notes that funding pledged has far exceeded amounts received and disbursed. Developed countries are argued to not have fully supported adaptation investments in developing countries as committed.
Item 6: Global Symposium on Salt-affected SoilsSoils FAO-GSP
The document discusses the upcoming Global Symposium on Salt-Affected Soils to be held in September 2021 in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. The symposium will address the threats posed by soil salinization and sodification as major soil degradation processes. It will feature themes on assessing and monitoring soil salinization, its impacts on food security and the environment, and an action agenda for preventing and remediating soil salinization. The outcome will be a document highlighting the scientific evidence on salt-affected soils and recommendations for policies and programs to encourage sustainable soil salinity management.
Introduction to Stream 4: Nature-based solutions to address the climate crisisCIFOR-ICRAF
This document provides an introduction and agenda for a session on nature-based solutions to address the climate crisis. The session will include 4 parts over 2 days:
Session 1 will discuss opportunities and constraints of nature-based solutions, which involve working with nature to address societal challenges while providing benefits for people and biodiversity.
Session 2 will focus on what is needed to scale up ecological restoration efforts.
Session 3 will examine how resilience in nature-based solutions can be measured and strengthened.
Session 4 will look at using trees and bamboo as sustainable energy providers through bioenergy.
Session 3 - Implementing SEA practice in Azerbaijan by Aysel BabayevaOECD Environment
Implementing SEA in practice: SEA of the National Strategy on the Use of Alternative and Renewable Energy Sources in Azerbaijan for the years 2015 – 2020, presentation by Aysel Babayeva, Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources, Azerbaijan
Submission made during the public process regarding the Nelson Quarry Project. Risks to natural features, endangered species, economy and ecology as well as geological risks of the project. (Project was successfully cancelled)
Panel discussion about European Agenda on Soil and Land ManagementSimon Moolenaar
The panel discussion at the SNOWMAN NETWORK Meeting focused on major scientific challenges related to soil, land use, and land management. Key points discussed included:
1) The need for a "soil-inclusive" land planning approach that considers soil heterogeneity and balances ecosystem services and stakeholders. Major challenges include finding the right scales and methods for up- and down-scaling.
2) Soil biodiversity management and governance at the landscape scale were identified as particularly challenging research objectives.
3) The Horizon 2020 framework emphasizes nature-based solutions and stakeholder involvement to develop sustainable solutions.
4) Food security, food safety, climate change, and global soil biodiversity were proposed as priority research topics in
This document introduces the National Planning Policy Framework, which aims to contribute to sustainable development through the planning system. It outlines the economic, social and environmental roles of planning in achieving sustainable development, including supporting economic growth, providing housing, and protecting the natural environment. The framework replaces over 1,000 pages of national planning policy with around 50 pages to make the system simpler and more accessible to communities.
The document is the National Planning Policy Framework published by the UK government's Department for Communities and Local Government. It sets out the government's planning policies for England and how they are expected to be applied. The framework aims to contribute to sustainable development by outlining an economic, social and environmental role for planning. It establishes a presumption in favour of sustainable development as a guiding principle for plan-making and decision-taking in the planning system.
The document is the National Planning Policy Framework published by the UK government's Department for Communities and Local Government. It sets out the government's planning policies for England and how they are expected to be applied. The framework aims to contribute to sustainable development by outlining an economic, social and environmental role for planning. It establishes a presumption in favour of sustainable development as a guiding principle for plan-making and decision-taking in the planning system.
This document introduces the National Planning Policy Framework, which aims to contribute to sustainable development through the planning system. It outlines the economic, social and environmental roles of planning in achieving sustainable development, including supporting economic growth, providing housing, and protecting the natural environment. The framework replaces over 1,000 pages of national planning policy with around 50 pages to make the system simpler and more accessible to communities.
This document provides an overview of the development plan process in Ireland to promote community participation. It discusses the importance of development plans, challenges facing planning, and how to get involved by making a submission and following up. The key points are that development plans guide land use and development, community participation is important for creating an agreed vision and environmental contract, and tips are provided on effectively making a submission and ensuring views are considered in the plan.
This document provides guidance for including historic environments in neighbourhood plans. It explains that protecting local heritage can help conserve valued areas, ensure new development considers character, and identify enhancement opportunities. An evidence base of the historic environment is necessary for effective policies. The document offers a checklist for considering heritage assets and impacts. It provides examples of neighbourhood plans that successfully incorporated the historic environment.
This document discusses maximizing evidence to support biodiversity planning. It notes challenges like uncertainty, conflicting values and species decline. Less than a third of development plans have a strategic biodiversity approach. The Natural Environment White Paper and National Planning Policy Framework take different approaches. The divide between natural and built environment perspectives is exposed. Opportunities are discussed to better integrate ecosystem science into spatial planning through tools like ecosystem services valuation, ecological networks and green infrastructure. Case studies showcase how joined-up planning can recognize nature's value and better achieve biodiversity goals.
Mainstreaming the European Landscape Convention in UK PlanningBSBEtalk
This document discusses mainstreaming the European Landscape Convention (ELC) into UK planning policy and practice. It outlines how spatial planning approaches can meet the goals of the ELC by taking a holistic view of the landscape. UK planning policy shows some responsiveness to landscape concerns but does not explicitly reference the ELC. Statutory development plans rarely mention the ELC and planners often are unaware of its existence. The document proposes ways to increase awareness of the ELC through training, public engagement, strengthening landscape policies, and leveraging related EU directives and planning tools.
Mainstreaming the european landscape convention in uk planningrevisedAlister Scott
This document discusses mainstreaming the European Landscape Convention (ELC) into UK planning policy and practice. It outlines how spatial planning approaches can meet the goals of the ELC by taking a holistic view of the landscape. UK planning policy shows some alignment with ELC principles but does not explicitly reference the convention. Statutory development plans generally do not mention the ELC or reflect its aims. However, some local plans and neighborhood plans demonstrate good practice in landscape protection. Overall, greater awareness and integration of the ELC is needed across UK planning and policymaking.
KKKH4284 URBAN PLANNING OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
TASK 5 : LOCAL AGENDA
LECTURERS :
PROF. IR. DR. RIZA ATIQ ABDULLAH O.K. RAHMAT
DR NAZRI BORHAN
DR NORLIZA MOHD AKHIR
The RPFP presents the vision for the physical and socio-economic development of the region for the next twenty-six (26) years, as well as, the policy guidelines and directions
for the major components of the plan, namely, Protection Land Use, Production Land Use, Settlements, and Infrastructure Support.
Land-use planning involves managing the use and development of land to achieve goals like preventing urban sprawl and protecting natural resources. In the Philippines, key tools for land-use planning include the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) and Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP) produced by local governments. The CLUP guides long-term land use over 10-15 years, while the CDP is a shorter-term action plan. Zoning is also used to regulate land use types in different zones. Key institutions involved in land-use planning in the Philippines include the DENR, LMB, DILG, NEDA and local planning councils.
Nature after Mineral - Review of Minerals Development FrameworksCharlie Butt
This document summarizes a study examining how Minerals Development Frameworks (MDFs) in England are facilitating the delivery of biodiversity targets through policies on minerals site restoration. It outlines the methodology, which involved reviewing government and non-government guidance on biodiversity and minerals restoration, and assessing the policies of MDFs that have progressed to an advanced stage of preparation. Key guidance documents promoting the restoration of minerals sites for biodiversity are identified. A set of criteria indicating best practice in integrating biodiversity objectives into MDF policy is also presented, based on the guidance review. The study findings will analyze MDF policies against these criteria to evaluate the extent to which they are facilitating the delivery of biodiversity action plan targets through restored minerals
Urban Planning and Real Estate by John ratcliffeDe Ri
This chapter provides context on urban planning and real estate development. It discusses the origins and purpose of modern town planning systems, which aim to balance public and private interests in land use. While the planning system was established in 1947 to facilitate post-war reconstruction, current policy goals center around sustainable development and reducing environmental impacts like climate change. The chapter notes population is becoming increasingly urbanized and cities now account for most economic activity.
Councils in the West of England Council want people's views on future plans for new homes and transport. This presentation by David Turner at the Bristol Planning and Law Conference provides an overview.
The document discusses plans for a Joint Spatial Plan and Joint Transport Study for the West of England region. It notes that the region needs to plan for at least 85,000 new homes and 95,000 new jobs by 2036. A 12-week public consultation is being launched to gather input on housing and employment land needs, and transport priorities and solutions. The consultation will help inform a draft Joint Spatial Plan and Joint Transport Study that will guide development and infrastructure investment across the region over the next 20 years.
This document discusses the need for a more collaborative approach to planning that centers communities. It provides an example of the High Bickington Community Trust in Devon that worked for 9 years to develop a plan for their community through the planning system. Key lessons are that community groups understand local needs better, need input from professionals, and the current adversarial system fails to find optimal solutions and limits community participation. The document advocates for a planning system that is more outcome focused and promotes place qualities through genuine collaboration between planners and communities.
Comprehensive planning is an essential framework for housing and urban development. It involves creating a comprehensive development plan that covers the entire local jurisdiction, incorporates national policies, and is based on analysis of socioeconomic, physical and environmental data. It contains multi-sectoral goals, plans and projects for production, settlements development and protection. A key component is the land use plan, which designates the future use of public and private land based on the planned organization of activities and transportation. The objectives of land use planning include promoting efficient land use, influencing decisions, reconciling land use conflicts, and protecting agricultural and environmentally sensitive areas. The process involves data collection, analysis, goal setting, generating alternative strategies, and adopting, implementing and monitoring
Similar to Exploring the UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology (20)
Optimizing Post Remediation Groundwater Performance with Enhanced Microbiolog...Joshua Orris
Results of geophysics and pneumatic injection pilot tests during 2003 – 2007 yielded significant positive results for injection delivery design and contaminant mass treatment, resulting in permanent shut-down of an existing groundwater Pump & Treat system.
Accessible source areas were subsequently removed (2011) by soil excavation and treated with the placement of Emulsified Vegetable Oil EVO and zero-valent iron ZVI to accelerate treatment of impacted groundwater in overburden and weathered fractured bedrock. Post pilot test and post remediation groundwater monitoring has included analyses of CVOCs, organic fatty acids, dissolved gases and QuantArray® -Chlor to quantify key microorganisms (e.g., Dehalococcoides, Dehalobacter, etc.) and functional genes (e.g., vinyl chloride reductase, methane monooxygenase, etc.) to assess potential for reductive dechlorination and aerobic cometabolism of CVOCs.
In 2022, the first commercial application of MetaArray™ was performed at the site. MetaArray™ utilizes statistical analysis, such as principal component analysis and multivariate analysis to provide evidence that reductive dechlorination is active or even that it is slowing. This creates actionable data allowing users to save money by making important site management decisions earlier.
The results of the MetaArray™ analysis’ support vector machine (SVM) identified groundwater monitoring wells with a 80% confidence that were characterized as either Limited for Reductive Decholorination or had a High Reductive Reduction Dechlorination potential. The results of MetaArray™ will be used to further optimize the site’s post remediation monitoring program for monitored natural attenuation.
Improving the viability of probiotics by encapsulation methods for developmen...Open Access Research Paper
The popularity of functional foods among scientists and common people has been increasing day by day. Awareness and modernization make the consumer think better regarding food and nutrition. Now a day’s individual knows very well about the relation between food consumption and disease prevalence. Humans have a diversity of microbes in the gut that together form the gut microflora. Probiotics are the health-promoting live microbial cells improve host health through gut and brain connection and fighting against harmful bacteria. Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus are the two bacterial genera which are considered to be probiotic. These good bacteria are facing challenges of viability. There are so many factors such as sensitivity to heat, pH, acidity, osmotic effect, mechanical shear, chemical components, freezing and storage time as well which affects the viability of probiotics in the dairy food matrix as well as in the gut. Multiple efforts have been done in the past and ongoing in present for these beneficial microbial population stability until their destination in the gut. One of a useful technique known as microencapsulation makes the probiotic effective in the diversified conditions and maintain these microbe’s community to the optimum level for achieving targeted benefits. Dairy products are found to be an ideal vehicle for probiotic incorporation. It has been seen that the encapsulated microbial cells show higher viability than the free cells in different processing and storage conditions as well as against bile salts in the gut. They make the food functional when incorporated, without affecting the product sensory characteristics.
Kinetic studies on malachite green dye adsorption from aqueous solutions by A...Open Access Research Paper
Water polluted by dyestuffs compounds is a global threat to health and the environment; accordingly, we prepared a green novel sorbent chemical and Physical system from an algae, chitosan and chitosan nanoparticle and impregnated with algae with chitosan nanocomposite for the sorption of Malachite green dye from water. The algae with chitosan nanocomposite by a simple method and used as a recyclable and effective adsorbent for the removal of malachite green dye from aqueous solutions. Algae, chitosan, chitosan nanoparticle and algae with chitosan nanocomposite were characterized using different physicochemical methods. The functional groups and chemical compounds found in algae, chitosan, chitosan algae, chitosan nanoparticle, and chitosan nanoparticle with algae were identified using FTIR, SEM, and TGADTA/DTG techniques. The optimal adsorption conditions, different dosages, pH and Temperature the amount of algae with chitosan nanocomposite were determined. At optimized conditions and the batch equilibrium studies more than 99% of the dye was removed. The adsorption process data matched well kinetics showed that the reaction order for dye varied with pseudo-first order and pseudo-second order. Furthermore, the maximum adsorption capacity of the algae with chitosan nanocomposite toward malachite green dye reached as high as 15.5mg/g, respectively. Finally, multiple times reusing of algae with chitosan nanocomposite and removing dye from a real wastewater has made it a promising and attractive option for further practical applications.
Evolving Lifecycles with High Resolution Site Characterization (HRSC) and 3-D...Joshua Orris
The incorporation of a 3DCSM and completion of HRSC provided a tool for enhanced, data-driven, decisions to support a change in remediation closure strategies. Currently, an approved pilot study has been obtained to shut-down the remediation systems (ISCO, P&T) and conduct a hydraulic study under non-pumping conditions. A separate micro-biological bench scale treatability study was competed that yielded positive results for an emerging innovative technology. As a result, a field pilot study has commenced with results expected in nine-twelve months. With the results of the hydraulic study, field pilot studies and an updated risk assessment leading site monitoring optimization cost lifecycle savings upwards of $15MM towards an alternatively evolved best available technology remediation closure strategy.
2. Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: Findings from Heritage Counts 2016 Data
(in England)
£21.7 Billion
Gross Value Added (GVA)
£18.4 Billion from Heritage
Tourism by domestic/int’l
visitors
328,700 people employed
in heritage
£9.6 Billion
Repair & maintenance in
construction sector output
3. Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: Cuts
RESCUE Monitoring Cuts Online. 2018
From ~2010 onwards..
University Department Cuts 2
Archaeology Units 7
Museum Closures 45
Museum Cuts 81
Local Authority Cuts 122
4. Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: Cuts
2004-05
96,045 students
Down by
89,610 students
2013-14
Students Numbers for Historical & Philosophical Studies by HESA
6. The Historic Environment Protection Reform Group Consultation (2016)
A Heritage Sector (not Government) consultation run by the Heritage Environment Forum
The Rural Planning Review: call for evidence (2016)
Exploring more streamlined planning system in rural areas to benefit farming and rural businesses, and to support economic growth.
The Neighbourhood Planning Act (2017)
Was under consultation in 2016. Sought to ensure planning conditions requiring developers to take action before work were only used when strictly
necessary, but in a way that makes sure heritage/ environmental safeguards remain in place through the TPCA 1990
The Museums Review (2016)
The first in a decade to examine museums on how museums/galleries can ‘thrive’
Heritage2020 (2016)
An initiative that focuses on where collaborative working can deliver benefits for understanding, protecting and engaging with the Historic
Environment in England.
The Raynsford Review of Planning (2017)
Set up to identify how the government can reform the English planning system to make it fairer, better resourced and capable of producing
quality outcomes, while still encouraging the production of new homes.
The National Planning Policy Framework (2015-2018)
The consultation on proposed changes to national planning policy was published on 7 December 2015. The first consultation closed on 22 Feb
2016. We have also recently had another Consultation on the NPPF which closed last week on the 10th May.
Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: UK Consultations
7. Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: Brief Background
PPG16: Planning and Archaeology
8. PPG16: Planning and Archaeology
Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: Brief Background
A:The Importance Of Archaeology
3. Archaeological remains are irreplaceable. They are evidence - for prehistoric periods, the only evidence - of
the past development of our civilization.
6. Archaeological remains should be seen as a finite and non-renewable resource, in many cases highly fragile
and vulnerable to damage and destruction.Appropriate management is therefore essential to ensure that they
survive in good condition. In particular, care must be taken to ensure that archaeological remains are not
needlessly or thoughtlessly destroyed. They can contain irreplaceable information about our past and the
potential for an increase in future knowledge.They are part of our sense of national identity and are valuable
both for their own sake and for their role in education, leisure and tourism.
8.With the many demands of modern society, it is not always feasible to save all archaeological remains.The
key question is where and how to strike the right balance.Where nationally important archaeological remains,
whether scheduled or not, and their settings, are affected by proposed development there should be a
presumption in favour of their physical preservation.
9. Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: Brief Background
PPS5: Planning for the Historic Environment (March 2010)
Brought together PPG16
and PPG15 which
covered listed buildings
and Conservation Areas
10. Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: Brief Background
National Planning Policy Framework (2012)
11. Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: Brief Background
Planning Framework
Law
•Town and Country Planning Act 1990
•Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation
Areas) Act 1990
•Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004
Planning Policy
•Development Plan
•NPPF
•Planning Practice
Guidance
Advice
•Good Practice
Advice
Other documents •Conservation Principles
12. Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: Brief Background
Planning Framework
National: Central
Government •NPPF
Regional: GLA
(London Only)
•London Plan: Spatial Dev't
Strategy for Greater
London
Local: LPA
•The Local
Plan
Area: Parish/Town
Councils,
Designated
Neighbourhood
Forums
•Neighbourhood Dev't
Plans/Orders, Community Right
to Build Orders
13. Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: Brief Background
National Planning Policy Framework (2012) ensured:
Section 128: The applicant (developer) must provide sufficient information in order to assess the historic
environment impacts of their proposed development.
Section 128, 141, 169: The LPA should maintain or make available an HER to provide relevant information to
an applicant, who should then make any evidence from their assessments available to HER
Section 129, 132: The significance of a heritage asset and its conservation should be weighed against the
wider benefits of the proposed development. The more important the heritage asset the more weight will be
given to its conservation and enhancement
Section 133, 134: Substantial or total loss of a designated heritage asset should be wholly exceptional
unless…overwhelming public benefits outweighs loss/harm
Section 135: The degree of harm to the significance of a non-designated heritage asset will be balanced
against the merits of the proposed development…
Section 139: Non-designated heritage assets of equal significant to Scheduled Ancient Monument..subject to
same policy considerations
14. 14Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: NPPF
NPPF: Old versus
New
2012
2018
Pursuing sustainable development involves seeking positive improvements
in the quality of the built, natural and historic environment, as well as in
people’s quality of life, including (but not limited to):
● making it easier for jobs to be created in cities, towns and villages;
● moving from a net loss of bio-diversity to achieving net gains for
nature6
● replacing poor design with better design;
● improving the conditions in which people live, work, travel and take
leisure; and
● widening the choice of high quality homes.
These objectives should be delivered through the preparation and
implementation of plans and the policies in this Framework; they are
not criteria against which every decision can or should be judged.
Planning policies and decisions should play an active role in guiding
development towards sustainable solutions, but in doing so should take
local circumstances into account, to reflect the character, needs and
opportunities of each area.
15. The presumption in favour of sustainable development
11. Plans and decisions should apply a presumption in favour of sustainable development.
For plan-making this means that:
a) plans should positively seek opportunities to meet the development needs of their area, and be sufficiently flexible
flexible to adapt to rapid change…
…unless:
• the application of policies in this Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a
strong reason for restricting the overall scale, type or distribution of development in the plan area7; or
• any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed
against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole.
For decision-taking this means:
c) approving development proposals that accord with an up-to-date development plan without delay; or
d) where there are no relevant development plan policies, or the policies which are most important for determining
the application are out-of-date, granting permission unless:
• the application of policies in this Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a clear
reason for refusing the development proposed7; or
• any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed
against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole.
Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: NPPF
NPPF 2018
16. Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: NPPF
NPPF 2018
56. Planning conditions should be kept to a minimum and only imposed
where they are necessary, relevant to planning and to the development to
be permitted, enforceable, precise and reasonable in all other respects.
Agreeing conditions early is beneficial to all parties involved in the
process and can speed up decision making. Conditions that are
required to be discharged before development commences should be
avoided, unless there is a clear justification20.
20 When in force, sections 100ZA(4-6) of the Town and Country Planning Act
1990 will require the applicant’s written agreement to the terms of a
pre-commencement condition, unless prescribed circumstances apply.
17. Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: NPPF
NPPF 2012
Historic environment
169. Local planning authorities should have up-to-date evidence about the
historic environment in their area and use it to assess the significance
of heritage assets and the contribution they make to their environment.
They should also use it to predict the likelihood that currently unidentified
heritage assets, particularly sites of historic and archaeological interest, will
be discovered in the future. Local planning authorities should either
maintain or have access to a historic environment record.
170. Where appropriate, landscape character assessments should also be
prepared, integrated with assessment of historic landscape character,
and for areas where there are major expansion options assessments
of landscape sensitivity.
18. From MainTextTo Footnote…
Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: NPPF
2012
2018
139. Non-designated heritage assets of archaeological interest that
are demonstrably of equivalent significance to scheduled
monuments, should be considered subject to the policies for
designated heritage assets.
20. Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: NPPF
The use of the term ‘HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT’
Has Been
Deleted
From the Current Draft NPPF
41 Times….
22. Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: Museum Review
The Mendoza Review wants museums to:
• Helping adapt to today’s funding environment
• Improving the curation and management of collections so that they are
accessible to the public
• Growing and diversifying audiences
• Ensuring museums contribute to the priorities of the local area
• Delivering cultural education
• Developing future leaders
• Diversifying the workforce of museums
• Increasing digital capacity and using digital technology to create innovative
and engaging exhibition content
• Working internationally
Great – now show me the money!
23. Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: Museum Review
258m
221m
200
210
220
230
240
250
260
270
2010/11 2015/16
Annual Local Gov’t Spending on Museums
in England
Annual Local Gov Spending on Museums (England
24. Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: Museum Review
The Museums in the UK
2017 Report
shows that
at least 76 museums have
closed since 2005,
with
64 of those having closed
since 2010.
The majority of closures
since 2010 are due to local
authority cuts.
25. Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: What To Do?
Have
Your
Say
Understanding:
Provide Diverse
Views
Awareness:
Know what is
changing
Evidence:
Support a
statement
Research:
Highlight issues
27. Exploring UK Policy and Its Impact on Archaeology: Conference
Confirmed Speakers:
Georgina Holmes-Skelton, Head of Government Affairs at National Trust
Gail Boyle, Senior Curator, Bristol Museum; Council, Gloucestershire Archaeological Society; Chair, Society
for Museum Archaeology, Trustee, Treasure Valuation Committee
Chris Patrick, Conservation Officer at Birmingham City Council
Victoria Bankes-Price, Policy Advisor at Woodland Trust
Rob Lennox, Policy Advisor at CIfa
Editor's Notes
Ok so hello and welcome. Today I really just wanted to use this opportunity to highlight some changes happening in the political landscape which affects archaeology, and museums as well…
While the title says UK – I’m really actually focusing a lot on England.
I’m going start off with a very quick overview of the state of arts and culture, and move onto a brief background of archaeology in the planning system for those who may not know about it, and then will really just go through two consultations that have occurred recently to demonstrate the changes that are impacting our work…
First off I wanted to mention some of the highlights from research produced by Historic England on behalf of the Historic Environment Forum. It started around 2002 and each years publishes different facts and figures about different heritage-related themes.
In 2016 the report looked at the social and economic value of heritage to communities, individuals and the economy.
It found Heritage generates an estimated £21.7 billion in Gross Value Added (GVA) which is equivalent to 2% of the national GVA. and it employs over 328,700 people.
It also found that domestic and international heritage-related visits generated over £18bn in expenditure in England.
Heritage was identified as one of the 12 unique selling points for the UK (the others being innovation, creativity, technology, entrepreneurs, heritage, culture, countryside, shopping, luxury, food, music and knowledge.)
It also suggested that identity, place branding and heritage are becoming even more important in determining the future social and economic outcomes of our local places.
The Heritage Lottery Fund also commissioned research in 2010 that estimated for every £1 spent as part of a heritage visit, 32p is spent on site and the remaining 68p is spent in local businesses: restaurants, cafés, hotels and shops (HLF, 2010).
Also, the heritage tourism sector paid almost £2 billion to the Exchequer in tax revenue in 2015.
So – lots of social and economic benefits…
On this slide we see RESCUE’s monitoring cuts that they are publishing online. It’s not really accurate - im not sure how often they update it, but it still demonstrates the dire situation we see ourselves in. Obviously Austerity and the tightening of the public purse strings have had and continue to have a considerable impact on delivery of local services.
As most of us know, since 2010 when the Government introduced its deficit reduction programme, public sector budgets fell dramatically. In the 2016 Budget, the Chancellor announced further cuts of £3.5bn to public spending by 2020. This is on top of the 7.8 per cent cuts we’ve already seen since 2010 (IFS, 2015).
Local authorities in England lost 27 per cent of their spending power over five years from 2010 to 15 (JFR, 2015). Some services, such as planning and ‘supporting people’ have seen cumulative cuts of 45 per cent (JFR, 2015).
The Local Government Association highlighted almost half of all councils — 168 — wont receive any core central government funding by 2020, and that local councils will see central funding fall by 77% by that time.
They’ve also said Councils cannot run vital local services on a shoestring’ and added ‘even if they stopped filling in potholes, maintaining parks and open spaces, closed all children’s centres, libraries, museums, leisure centres, turned off every street light and shut all discretionary bus routes’ there will still be a £5.8bn funding gap in 2020.
So far we've seen thousands of staff laid off, closed libraries, museums and leisure centres, and cut grants to charities and arts bodies.
The impact of these cuts is definitely felt in the heritage sector: there's been a 27 per cent cut in Historic England and English Heritage spending since 2014, and a 35 per cent reduction in Local Authority Historic Environment staff since 2006.
Ok so here I briefly want to mention the scrapping of Archaeology A-levels which obviously lowers archaelogy’s profile, but also I wanted to address the growing concerns of both a steady decline since 2011 in the number of university applicants taking up archaeology degrees, as well as a general turn away from the humanities as a subject with a drop of 6.7% between 2005 to 2014 according to HESA (Higher Education Statistics Agency)
IN 2016 we saw a 4% decline in UK applicants overall from the previous year, but really also we see – both here and in the US – a move away from the social sciences and humanities towards STEM subjects (UCAS).
I also wanted to mention a quote in 2014 from the Secretary of State for Education just to highlight the mindset in government in seeing archaeology as uneconomical and drilling in this idea that the arts and humanities can't provide employability. Nicky Morgan suggested
‘if you didn’t know what you wanted to do…then the arts and humanities were what you chose’ while ‘subjects that keep young people’s options open and unlock doors to all sorts of careers are the STEM subjects’ (Gov.uk, 2014). So a clear comment about opportunities and employability, and a clear dismissal of the really great transferable skills that subjects such as archaeology offer without necessarily having a linear career path.
Meanwhile Historic England says there’s an existing skills shortage in the workforce leading to concerns we can’t meet the needs of proposed infrastructure projects.
(The two uni cuts it shows are the closure of the Institute of Archaeology and Antiquity in Birmingham Uni and redundancy threats to the department in Bristol.)
Ok – so – what else is happening. These two DCMS papers!
I wanted to flag these up because they’re recent, and relevant.
The Culture white paper came out in 2016 and was basically the first white paper for culture in more than 50 years and actually only the second ever published. The first being Jennie Lee's White Paper “A Policy for Arts – First Steps’ in 1965.
So this one was seen to be the latest contribution to public support for art and culture, and does actually mention the historic built environment.
It was what led to the Review of Museums in England, which I’m using as a ‘case’ later on – but was criticised for being ‘too much gobbledegook and bland generality’ and ‘lacking focus.
Also, Ed Vaizey – who was Minister for Culture and the Digital Economy at the time – was also criticised for not being honest about the threat to England’s cultural landscape from local authority cutbacks, brought about by the reduction in grants from central government that i mentioned earlier. Instead, inside you’ll see Vaizey promoting “Commercial Academy for Culture to improve and spread commercial expertise in the cultural sectors’ and pledged culture for everyone. So – very fluffy – but meaningless in a practical sense.
The Heritage Statement, which came out last December at the Heritage Alliance AGM – was actually a bit more interesting.
It talks about creating a 'Heritage Council’ to ”work across all Whitehall departments” – which was actually a recommendation made by APPAG when it first formed some 15 years ago.. so people like Lord Renfrew were glad to see it finally made into a DCMS policy document.
We still need more clarity on what exact form/function the 'Heritage Council' will have, and I do know it’s something Heritage Alliance is keeping track off. They've just recently announced its core members which are the usual suspects such as Heritage Alliance, Historic England, the National Trust, HLF and so on…
One thing i should add is in its launch, the then Minister of Culture was very pro-tourism so it may be that that's the underlying thread of this heritage council with tourism being one of the fastest growing industries.
Ok so onto changing policy. Um, a little warning - the slides from here on are text heavy...
So this slide is just to give an idea of some of the consultations and calls for evidence that have happened over the past two years…
Basically, a lot of change to planning…
I’m not going to cover all of them – only the National Planning Policy Framework which you can see at the bottom, and then really briefly the Museum Review just to get the other end of the spectrum.
But the others are relevant as well and if you search online you can find responses from various groups or see its progress…there was actually just one open for two months, closed on the 10th, about revising developer contributions to development..but I don’t know the details about that but sounds pretty significant considering archaeology is largely funded through developed .
First I’m going to give a little background to archaeology in the planning system to bring everyone up to date with what I’m talking about. And I also want to add that commercial archaeology – or development-led archaeology – employs over 4000 archaeologists according to CIFA’s annual report, and in another report by Landward Research, the commercial archaeology sector was the biggest employer of archaeologists, at least in 2013 when the report came out…
HERITAGE2020
There are five strategic themes of: Capacity Building, Constructive Conservation and Sustainable Management, Discovery Identification and Understanding, Helping Things to Happen, and Public Engagement. The vision and priorities for each of these themes are set out in the Framework document that was finalised in 2014. 1.3 At the end of 2016, Heritage 2020 ran its first consultation exercise. The consultation took the form of an online survey that sought to: raise awareness across the historic environment sector of the Heritage 2020 initiative gain input into the initial areas for action that had been identified by each of the five working groups involve the wider sector in the Heritage 2020 initiative. 1.4 The consultation ran from 25 November to 20 December 2016. It was publicised through social media, at Heritage Day and through The Heritage Alliance’s e-newsletter, Heritage Update. There were 55 respondents from people working at a wide variety of heritage organisations as well as freelancers and anonymous individuals. 1.5 The responses are summarised in this document under the five Heritage 2020 themes. The full responses have been made available to the Heritage 2020 working
NPPF
The previous Conservative Government of the 2015-2017 Parliament made a number of changes to the planning system in the Housing and Planning Act 2016, and the Neighbourhood Planning Act 2017 with the aim of speeding up the delivery of new homes. Changes to the planning regime for onshore wind turbines were also made in the Energy Act 2016, aimed at giving local communities a greater say about these developments. It also made a number of Budget announcements and published a number of consultations on planning reform. The most recent and most wide-ranging of these was the Housing white paper, Fixing our broken housing market, published in February 2017. The Government consulted on its proposals in the white paper, but had not issued a response before the 2017 general election. Responding to it and making changes will therefore be task for the new Government. Many of the planning related proposals in the white paper would be done by making changes to the NPPF. Some of the headline proposals from the white paper include: • giving local authorities the opportunity to have their housing land supply agreed on an annual basis and fixed for a one year period; • further consultation on introducing a standardised approach for local authorities in assessing housing requirements; • changing the NPPF to introduce a housing delivery test which will highlight whether the number of homes being built is on target; • increasing nationally set planning fees; and • further consultation on introducing a fee for making a planning appeal. Before the general election, in February 2017, a new consultation on planning and affordable housing for build to rent was published. The Government also published the report submitted by the Community Infrastructure Review Group
WHATS THE NPPF – Introduce it…
Ok so very quickly.
In November 1990, the government basically put archaeology into the planning system by publishing a landmark guidance note for planning officers and anyone involved in the planning process called, Planning and Policy Guidance note 16 Archaeology and Planning and more commonly PPG16.
If you look through it, it very clearly mentions the importance of archaeology…
and within it secured almost all of the advances made during the ‘rescue’ era of British archaeology in the 1970s and 80s while reducing our reliance on state funding.
Here we see it very clearly saying archaeological remains are irreplaceable, and that there’s a presumption in favour of their physical preservation - which is now a presumption in favour of sustainable development.
Fast forward 20 years and PPG16 along with PPG15 gets consolidated into PPS5.
However PPS5 – which aimed to promote the value of the historic environment – didn’t really have the time to have much impact before being replaced by NPPF.
With the 2008 Crash, the UK construction industry was devastated and so the 2010 Coalition government began their bonfire on both the quangos and regulation.
So what followed was the The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which replaced PPS5, and dilutes a lot of principles laid out in PPG16.
So the we're revising came out in 2012 - and it basically streamlined the planning process – it made it simple – and it also supported localism or a sort of decentralisation of power. ..
What was positive about the NPPF is that it actually embedded archaeology and heritage, meaning it went in a core document of planning rather than a side guidance note…
it also said that planning policies and decisions should reflect and promote relevant EU obligations and statutory requirements – so for heritage, that's Valetta, Florence and Faro Conventions.
Some of the negatives was that it virtually removed the emphasis of public engagement and archives and somewhat added to the idea that archaeology is an issue to be resolved.
It also began the over emphasis of designated heritage assets, perhaps to the detriment of non-designated heritage assets…
And, you could say there was no real commitment in it for publishing results, beyond lodging an archive with a local museum.
So just to give an idea of legislation.
The NPPF is a framework which sits under the laws, Planning Act 1990 and the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
So there are Laws, or Acts –
Planning Policy such as the Framework,
Advice – such as good practice notes and so on
The NPPF is not a statutory document. It’s not planning law – it’s planning policy. Which means breach of it is not unlawful. It’s basically there to explain planning legislation, and is a guidance in a way.
Perhaps it’s here I should mention two things which you may hear about..
In 2008 the introduction of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) was secured under Section 106 of the Planning Act 2008. This is basically about negotiations and costs related to the impact and effects of development. The Community Infrastructure Levy is a a planning charge to help deliver infrastructure to support development in the area.
And this slide puts it into the various tiers of government
Ok so here what we're looking at is what the NPPF from 2012 ensured, and what has been removed in the recent draft. The consultation for the draft closed last thursday and Government is aiming to have something out by the summer.
Here's a list of relevant policy to the historic environment. All the red bits have now disappeared from the revised version, with the black text being moved around to footnotes or edited in some way.
The NPPF 2012 caused a lot of concern in how it really squashed explicit mentioning in policy towards the protection of the historic environment into a simplified framework. And now, 5/6 years on, we're seeing it getting squashed even more...
You can argue that different local authorities work in different ways to implement the framework, but if cuts are ruining services it's pretty hard to maintain things that can easily fall under the radar.
So here I'm just going through some of the text and marking out differences between the previous one that came out in March 2012 and the proposed draft that came out a couple of months ago.
The previous NPPF explicitly said that applications for planning must be determined in according with the development plan ‘unless material considerations indicate otherwise’. In the new revised version we see the removal of a lot of references to the natural and historic environment – sometimes put into footnotes. If you look in the previous NPPF it mentions material consideration 38 times, and in the new one only 20 times – I should add that material consideration isn’t ‘material’ as in earth or anything, but can be a guidance consideration. For example, the NPPF is a material consideration for planning, or more commonly hear of, the PPG16 had mentioned archaeology as a material consideration in determining planning. So it's a sort of loss of a reference point perhaps.
What’s on the slide are two paragraphs from old and new – again one explicitly mentioning the natural and cultural environment, biodiversity, and so on, whereas in the new one they’ve removed the footnote referring to section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act (which emphasised material considerations could override policies) and replaced it with a very vague strange paragraph talking about how the framework can be used loosely.
I should also add that they’ve removed the second bullet point on achieving net gains for nature as well as the footnote to the Natural Environment White Paper, the Nature Choice: Securing the Value of Nature (2011)…
So – again – there’s a sort of oversimplification we see with the draft – they don’t even clearly define sustainable development (whereas the previous one explicitly defined it using the UN definition of meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.) They’ve also removed explicitly mentioning ‘five guiding principles’ which include living within the planet’s environmental limits and the use of science and so on..
Here on the slide, is the presumption in favour of sustainable development…
The bit i've marked in red at the bottom - basically what it's saying is that development should by default be approved where policies are quote on quote out-of-date, but doesn’t specify what constitutes an out-of-date policy.
It seems to mean that all development needs to conform to existing policy and if local policy has conflicts with any new policy it should be considered “out-of-date”. Basically they’ve put a ’use by’ date on local policy declaring it invalid.. making it a new rigid and inflexible automatic grant of permission when LPA’s are unable to demonstrate a constant housing supply…
So again i'm just bringing up little changes that make a difference. I've also highlighted Footnote 7. That footnote points us to protected sites that are considered able to justify rejecting development. It lists Birds and Habitats, designated Sites of Special Scientific Interest; the Green Belt, Local Green Space, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, ancient woodlands or trees, and designated heritage assets but basically refers us to ANOTHER footnote (footnote 55) within the footnote for 'other heritage assets'. And i'll explain why that' s relevant in a few slides...
This next slide is also from the draft..
I thought this was really interesting – it's a sort of manifestation of a rolling back of government - which to me demonstrates a really neoliberal laissez faire approach within today's politics and economy. Basically, in order to put on a pre-commencement condition on a planning application, APPLICANTS themselves have to agree and accept it! Which seems to me to be an extraordinary case of conflict of interest.
Footnote 20 does mention “unless prescribed circumstances apply”, but the Government hasn’t set out what these so called prescribed circumstances are.
Pre-commencement conditions are part of a planning process that by definition must be undertaken BEFORE development, before destruction. And the question is – why hasn’t archaeology been automatically exempt in this new addition to decision-making in planning?
Um, so this here is the deletion of paragraphs 169 and 170 of the existing NPPF. It basically sets out the policy requirement for local authorities to use up-to-date information on the historic environment to help predict the likelihood or potential of unidentified heritage assets showing up on future projects. They also require local authorities to have access to HERs and encourage the preparation of landscape character assessments.
SO these sort of policies are absolutely crucial to the way local authorities manage the likely occurrence of discovering unknown archaeology or heritage features during the development process.
It also supports them in providing the appropriate and timely assessment and management of discovering unknown features.
Elements of these two statements have sort of been added loosely to parts of the glossary of all places, completely downgrading its importance, and failing to address concerns of undiscovered heritage assets within the planning process at an early stage. It also doesn't really offer us much should archaeology be found on a site post-commencement of development works…
These paragraphs have been replaced with a single sentence saying the conservation of wildlife and cultural heritage are important considerations.
So here - i've mentioned that a lot of policies are moving to footnotes. There’s a lot of downgrading the importance of policy provisions by putting it into the footnote particularly if they are policies about how to when to refuse development. So immediately - a very clear statement the NPPF is pro-development. Which is not a bad thing - but there's a balance.
So here - this is the famous footnote 55 from a few slides back - the paragraph i've put a red cross next to is the main text policy from 2012 that has been removed and put into the footnote.
I just want to read it. It says Non-designated heritage assets of archaeological interest, that are demonstrably of equivalent significance to scheduled monuments.
So - not really giving too much attention to non-designated sites unless they are on the same bench as designated sites.
Ok moving quickly to the Glossary. As i mentioned some whole bits of main text are now here - specifically about access to HERs (which if you remember was in paragraph 169 that I showed as entirely removed)
First – with ‘Archaeological interest’ you can see that they’ve removed the last sentence.
They’ve also actually removed the entire definition of the Historic Environment as well…which is odd.
Then, Historic Environment Records are now considered resources instead of services. The question is really whether this reduces the scope and importance of HERs and whether it loses the link between HERs and their accompanying archaeological and conservation advisory services.
So - concluding the NPPF – references to the ‘historic environment’ has been cut from 85 to 44 times. And what seems to be going on is really a progressive slow move away from one mindset into this minimalist mindset towards planning.
A lot of people argue that the natural and historic environment will never be removed from planning. If we think about it, it's only been in planning since 1990 in the UK - and since that time we see cuts in funding, support and institutional memory through staff cuts, and real changes in actual 'mission statements' and roles.
So to me - as everything - there is trade offs. Even the UN sustainable development goals have trade offs - or a sort of mutual exclusivity between some of them - so the question is - why can't it disappear. what's stopping it?
Ok quickly moving on to the Museum Review – this was a consultation for the end of 2016. It was open for 2 months only – they did get over 1600 responses to their online survey, and 30 written submissions from industry experts, museums, charities, funding bodies and other organisations.
The team analysed the responses and over the next couple months provided recommendations to Government in the Mendoza Review – written by Neil Mendoza (a former banker) – in 2017.
The inquiry was commissioned by government in response to the 2016 Culture White Paper that i showed earlier and it called for “a wide-ranging review of national, local and regional museums, working closely with Arts Council England (ACE) and the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF)”.
Very briefly - i want to look at some facts and figures about museums. We could claim that Museums are at the heart of national and local culture, but theyve really been starved of funding over the past decade. The report itself states Museums contribute to a range of social priorities, including health, education, community engagement, and social inclusion.
They're also actually visited by more than half of the population at least once a year, and three in Britain - the British Museum, the National Gallery and the Tate Modern - are among the top ten most popular in the world.
They're actually a great contribution to the economy, the UK branding campaign, and to a sense of placemaking. But still - total Government funding has remained largely flat for the last decade.
Between 2005 and 14, the Museums Association tracked more than 40 closures, with those funded by Local Authorities most at risk because of pressure on council funding.
So the Mendoza Report actually depressingly opens with the line: “It is unlikely that there will be significant additional money available for the sector in the immediate future,” and so ‘The main thrust of the recommendations is simple to ensure that we use existing funding in the best way possible.”
It calls for the creation of a Museums Action Plan by September this year that would be designed to “help England’s museums and galleries thrive and grow”.
And it also actually even suggests that Britain should stop building new museums to ensure that the ones that we have can survive. The idea behind it is basically that
Institutions across the country are struggling to make ends meet and rather than investing in new infrastructure the money should be used to fix the historic buildings that house collections or help digitise collections for the modern age.
Though backed by the Museums Association, it did cause some controversy. Keiran Long, A former V&A curator, responded that new museums are as "essential as bus stops, job centres or town halls to the communities they serve".
The Government is expected to respond with an action plan for museums by September.
There is definitely a gap between the Government ambition on what they want from museums and what they are actually setting out to deliver and support .
So here are the nine key priorities the Review recommends to be included in the Museum Action plan...
It's pretty shocking actually - the philosophy seems to be do so so much more with so so much less. Baffling. ● Helping adapt to today’s funding environment● Improving the curation and management of collections so that they are accessible to the public● Growing and diversifying audiences● Ensuring museums contribute to the priorities of the local area● Delivering cultural education● Developing future leaders● Diversifying the workforce of museums● Increasing digital capacity and using digital technology to create innovative and engaging exhibition content● Working internationally
Where's the money? Here is how much less we are actually talking about.
This was published by the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) confirming the decline in local authority funding for museums and galleries in England. You can see that spending fell from £285m to 221m per year over a five year period (2010/11 -2015/16).
Adjusted for inflation, it represents a wopping 31% real-terms decrease between 2010 and 2016.
So we're talking severe reduction in staffing levels and in overall inability to do any basic front house tasks let alone the nine priorities we just saw!
Again, according to the Museums Association, since 2010 64 museums have closed across the UK nearly all because of cuts in public funding. Some councils have even flogged off things from their museums’ collections to supplement the shortfall in the central government subvention.
Sad.
Ok - so. Feeling down? depressed? annoyed? invigorated? Bored??
Well - you'll be pleased to know that changes dont need to happen without some noise.
Personally, id go as far as say that being involved in consultations - providing your evidence and raising the issues - is probably more important that voting.
These things sometimes feel that they write themselves - but they dont. Whoever is putting the pressure on and making the case, is the one who gets written into these things.
So get involved, there are lots of organisations and groups consistently putting pressure on government from things such as international students and their contribution to the UK, to acknowledging the importance of the arts, or HERs, and so on.
Now’s the time. Government is in minority in parliament without the DUP, so opposition is in a good position to pull on those issues and threads and ask the questions that need asking.
A quick flag up of a consultation closing in August that was announced last week if you're interested –
A few months ago there was an Open Letter written by RESCUe about concerns with the rejection of the polluters pay principle, the precautionary principle and the preventative principle…
This is one of the UK documents in which some heritage organisations claimed those principles could be embedded into.
As far as I know – not much has ever been mentioned about the historic environment by Gove with this future bill.
So – this may be a good opportunity to flag that up.
And also, I'm a big believer in being involved with consultation - which is part of the reason AHRC Heritage and RESCUE are pulling together this conference in October.
These are just some of the speakers, we're waiting on a few more responses.
It would be great to see you there so mark it in your calendars!