Future ecological planning

1. Future ecological planning Carolyn Harrison Emeritus Professor, Department of Geography University College London

3. Ecological planning The purpose of ecological planning is to: “ make collective choices about the states of the environment we want, prevent breaches of environmental constraints and make adaptations possible when such constraints have been breached”

4. Lecture outline • Briefly review the environmental and ecological consequences of London’s ‘muddled growth’ • Introduce the RCEP’s 23rd Report 2002 on Environmental Planning as a framework • Review ‘The London Plan’ in terms of the RCEP’s recommendations • Speculate tentatively about future ecological planning

11. Metropolitan Green Belt

12. The environmental and ecological consequences of ‘muddled growth’ • A distinctive urban environment: polluted land, air and water, with a heat island, flash floods… • A substantial green estate – quality and character reflect urban density and disturbance • A fragmented green matrix of semi-natural and largely artificial habitats – garden escapes abound • Poor quality inner city environments • A global ‘ecological footprint’ far exceeding its fair share

16. Brent reservoir: urbanisation and disturbance effects (Batten)

17. London: Index of Deprivation

18. London’s ecological footprint • The area of resource use, on a per capita basis, required to support the city • 293 times the size of the city itself- an area the size of Spain! • Per capita footprint in terms of global resources is c. 6.3 global hectares: our ‘earth share’ is only 2.18 global hectares • London’s profligate use of resources in comparison to its fair share is unsustainable

19. RCEP Environmental Planning • Found a proliferation of plans on different topics and spatial scales • Absence of an integrated, holistic approach to planning • A ‘predict and provide' approach that marginalized the environment • In the context of sustainable development a system that was not fit for purpose

20. Royal Commission on Environmental PollutionRecommendations • Clearer policies and objectives for the environment • Statutory recognition of planning in protecting and enhancing the environment: goals and targets • The introduction of holistic spatial planning covering all aspects of sustainable development • Much improved availability of environmental information • Engage a wider range of people in decisions about setting and achieving environmental goals so that the public trust the planning process.

21. The purpose of town and country planning and its statutory role • ‘to facilitate the achievement of legitimate economic and social goals whilst ensuring that the quality of the environment is safeguarded and, whenever appropriate, enhanced.’ (RCEP 23rd Report para 8.33) • Statutory role of planning is to develop and set agreed environmental goals and targets

22. Spatial strategies Integrated Spatial strategies should be four dimensional addressing environmental capacity: • the atmosphere • ground water • the land surface and • should look into the future 20-30 years

23. Recommendations continued • All aspects of land use should be included – for example, proposed development should take account of pressures placed on environmental resources – aggregates and water supply, waste disposal, biodiversity,energy requirements etc. • Improved accessibility of information to assist in target setting and achievement • Greater public participation as a means of gaining public confidence in the planning process

24. The London Plan 2004 Is consistent with many of these recommendations • Takes a long term perspective – 25+ years • A spatial plan – addressing all land uses • Sets clear targets for environmental policies • Establishes base line information against which progress can be made • Involved many groups in consultation and was scrutinised in public

25. Five main environmental strategies in the London Plan • Waste: EU requires alternatives to landfill by 2010; a recycling target of 25%; plus re-use and waste reduction • Air quality: congestion charge;vehicular emission standards to be met; increase public transport; proposed central Low Emission Zone • Biodiversity: key species and site protection • Energy: reduce CO2 by 20% relative to 1990 level by 2010; introduce zero-carbon developments; sustainable construction practices • Noise: reducing ambient levels

26. Ecological assumptions underpinning the environmental strategies • Efficiency of resource use – including land recycling, high density development, re-use of waste • Greater self-sufficiency - in energy production, consuming more of its own waste • Reducing levels of waste, pollution, and environmental degradation

27. ‘An exemplary, sustainable world city’?The basic assumptions of The London Plan • Has to welcome all expected growth in GDP and in population • Has to concentrate incremental employment in the central area • Has to expand transport networks to support this structure • All growth has to fit within the Green Belt – a compact city

28. Necessary powers for implementation or ‘patronage, persuasion, and publicity ?’ • The Mayor has limited powers – no significant tax raising powers • Has to work in partnership with London’s functional bodies: London Development Agency; Transport for London, • The 32 London Boroughs: responsible for their own local plans that should conform to the London Plan, • Plus a host of other statutory organisations,NGOs and the voluntary sector

29. Connecting with London’s Nature

30. Thinking ecologically ….the SINC approach • Maintaining and enhancing biodiversity conservation – the intrinsic value of nature and nature that is distinctively urban • Valuing nature for all the benefits it affords society – the multiple values approach • Access to high quality natural areas as a matter of social equality – Areas of deficiency in access to wildspace • A robust system fit for purpose - SINCs are recognised in the London Plan

32. Biodiversity Targets • There is no net loss of important wildlife habitat • That a net reduction is achieved in the Area of Deficiency of accessible wildlife sites • No net loss - losses have occurred and will continue to occur but will new sites be added of equivalent quality and accessibility? • Reduction in Areas of Deficiency? are being monitored and a base line has been established, but how to deliver in practice?

33. Section 106 Agreements or Planning Gain • Entered into by LPA and a developer to deliver public benefit were development to go ahead. • No third party enters negotiations so the process lacks transparency and fairness • National studies show 106s little used for biodiversity benefits off site • In London they are routinely used for social housing benefits and occasionally for green roofs • Inadequate for delivering larger scale environmental benefits

34. Conclusions • A market led Planning Systemprevails – not driven by a central concern for the environment • ‘Predict and provide’ continues - pressures put on natural resources are not fully counted • A stronger planning systemis needed: habitat fragmentation will increase; areas deficient in access to greenspace are unlikely to be reduced; sustainable construction practices will marginalize biodiversity; ‘collective needs’ reliant on Section 106s will be insufficiently funded…..

35. Who is leading on ecological planning? • The EU - on air and water quality, carbon trading, habitat conservation; sustainability assessment • The Mayor and his team - on congestion charging, low emissions zone, energy efficient construction in the public sector • Central Government - lagging behind on climate change; on mandatory sustainable construction practices; changes to the Planning System have not been holistic or fundamental enough to put an ecological approach at its centre.

36. The future ? • We are already confronting the consequences of breaching environmental capacity manifest in global climate change and rising sea levels. • To adapt we will require a stronger planning system that puts environment and ecology at its centre.