1.1. Sustainable Development and Sustainable Communities
Sustainable development issues have been raised in the Stockholm Conference and through the General Assembly of United Nations several decades ago [
1,
2,
3]. These have been pronouncedly reiterated in 1992, when representatives from nearly 180 countries met at the UN Conference on Environment and Development (Earth Summit) in Rio de Janeiro to discuss how to achieve sustainable development.
Agenda 21, a plan of action has been agreed with a recommendation that all countries should produce national sustainable development strategies [
4]. The United Kingdom was one of the first to publish an Environment White Paper in 1990 [
5]. A focus on environmental sustainability has been followed up on with the publication of the first Sustainable Development Strategy in 1994 [
6] and revised strategy
A Better Quality of Life: A Strategy for More Sustainable Construction, published in 1999 [
7]. In preparing this strategy, the government has built on the achievements of the 1994 strategy, to which a new approach has been added with emphasis on the social dimension of sustainable development, alongside economic issues, the environment and resource use.
Sustainable development requires an international co-operation on matters such as trade, relief of global poverty, and environmental problems.
Towards Sustainability, the fifth Environmental Action Programme of the European Union [
8] has been especially influential. Therefore, many of the policies in the 1999 strategy [
7] have been shaped by EU decisions, for example on the single European market or on environmental policy. This strategy has identified four crucial aims: “social progress which recognises the needs of everyone; effective protection of the environment; the prudent use of natural resources; and the maintenance of high and stable levels of economic growth and employment”; and seven priorities for future sustainable development, listed in
Table 1 [
7].
Table 1.
Priorities for sustainable development in England [
7].
Table 1.
Priorities for sustainable development in England [7].
Priorities for sustainable development |
---|
1. More investment in people and equipment for a competitive economy 2. Reducing the level of social exclusion 3. Promoting a transport system, which provides choice, minimises environmental harm and reduces congestion 4. Improving larger towns and cities to make them better places to live and to work 5. Directing development and promoting agricultural practices to protect and enhance the countryside and wildlife 6. Improving energy efficiency and tackling waste 7. Working with others to achieve sustainable development internationally
|
The sustainable development agenda has been shaped by a Sustainable Communities Plan (
Sustainable Communities: Building for the future) [
9], Planning Policy Statements (statements of government’s national policy and principles towards certain aspects of the town planning framework in England) and White Papers (documents produced by the government setting out details of future policy on a particular subject and allowing an opportunity to gather feedback before it formally presents the policies as a Bill).
Planning Policy Statements (PPS) have explained the sustainable development with a particular emphasis on the planning system, housing, waste management, renewable energy and
etc. [
10,
11,
12,
13]. For the planning system, six objectives have been recognised as key components that need to be addressed in order to deliver sustainable development [
11] (
Table 2).
Table 2.
The planning system with focus on sustainable development, in Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1) [
11].
Table 2.
The planning system with focus on sustainable development, in Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1) [11].
Objectives for the planning system |
---|
1. Development plans should ensure that sustainable development is pursued in an integrated manor, in line with principles of sustainable development 2. Regional planning bodies and Local Planning Authorities (LPA) should ensure that development plans contribute to the global sustainability by addressing causes and potential impacts of climate change 3. A spatial planning approach should be at the heart of planning 4. Planning policies should promote high quality and inclusive design in the layout of new development and individual buildings in terms of function and impact 5. Development plans should contain clear, comprehensive and inclusive access policies—in terms of location and external physical access 6. In developing the vision for their areas, planning authorities should ensure that communities are able to contribute to ideas about how that vision can be achieved
|
With regards to the housing, strategic planning objectives are listed in
Table 3. PPS3 has proposed that Local Planning Authorities (LPA) should encourage applicants to bring forward sustainable and environmentally friendly new housing developments [
13]. Also, when developing and assessing housing provision, LPA should carry out a sustainability appraisal of environmental, social and economic implications, including costs, benefits and risks of the development. High quality housing is a fundamental contribution to delivering sustainable communities [
13,
14].
Table 3.
Housing policy with focus on sustainable development, in PPS3 [
13].
Table 3.
Housing policy with focus on sustainable development, in PPS3 [13].
Strategic objectives for the housing policy |
---|
1. Achieving a wide choice of high quality homes, both affordable and market housing, to address requirements of the community 2. Widening opportunities for home ownership and ensure high quality housing for those who cannot afford market housing, in particular those who are vulnerable or in need 3. Improving affordability across the housing market, also by increasing the supply of housing 4. Creating sustainable, inclusive, mixed communities in all areas, both urban and rural
|
PPS strongly emphasise renewable energy. It has been declared that an increased development of renewable energy is a vital component in facilitating delivery of commitments on climate change and renewable energy [
10].
In Local Government White Papers, the government has set intentions to delegate powers to the LPA and to enable further community involvement in the management or ownership of local facilities and assets [
15,
16].
Taken together, policies and papers published from 1999–2006 have proven that a steadily growing population and competition has necessitated looking for rational planning and community management instruments, which could allow a better coordination of sustainable development processes in seeking to improve quality of life indicators. Sustainable development strategy has become an undisputable foundation for the administration of local governments and leaders of local communities [
17,
18]. This notion has also been reflected in the Sustainable Communities Plan and regional action plans from 2003–2004 [
9,
19]. At present, Planning Policy Statements are set to be replaced by a National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) [
20]. Since NPPF reiterates many key points from previous PPS, it is important to evaluate how efficiently previous policies have been in delivering objectives set by the sustainable development agenda and to establish to what extent these policies improved the quality of life for those most deprived communities.
Following the sustainable development agenda, an ambition to create sustainable communities by building “balanced places” has been a defining feature of former Labour government. In 2003, recognising needs of the population in England and in order to reduce housing shortage in London and in the East South, to tackle the decline of low income urban neighbourhoods in the North and Midlands, and to provide communities with “decent homes and a good quality local environment in all regions”, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has introduced a programme of action “Sustainable Communities: Building for the future” [
9], for which the definition of sustainable communities has been developed in Egan’s review [
19] as follows: “Sustainable communities meet the diverse needs of existing and future residents, their children and other users, contribute to a high quality of life and provide opportunity and choice. They achieve this in ways that make effective use of natural resources, enhance the environment, promote social cohesion and inclusion and strengthen economic prosperity”. With Sustainable Communities Plan government has continued for more than 50 years enduring top–down activities to create more harmonious, cohesive, and socio-economically competitive places [
21,
22]. Although the nature of such activities has been modified several times, all changes have been implemented to suppress the extent of urban problems resulting in the development of various urban regeneration programmes: beginning with the predominant approach of comprehensive redemption by changing the physical urban landscape and hoping for social and economic benefits with Liverpool and Manchester overspill towns Runcorn, Warrington and others started to be developed in 1950s and 1960s; continuing with the public welfare settlement in 1970s and with improved governance and institutional arrangements for urban regeneration in 1990s [
22,
23].
In recent work, Raco [
17] offers a critical analysis on the building of sustainable communities and spatial policy process arguing that the definition of “balanced places” is not neutral but socially constructed and involves “power-infused, often normative, visions, and imaginations”, which ultimately affects citizen social status and entitlements, providing a different meaning to the definition of “sustainable communities”. State attempts to meet needs of particular “types” of citizens, such as key workers or highly skilled migrants, increasingly have a spatial dimension [
17].
1.2. Indicators and Performance Requirements
Two main documents have been published that are central to the indicators concerned with sustainable communities:
Local Quality of Life Indicators–supporting local communities to become sustainable [
24] and
The New Performance Framework for Local Authorities and Local Authority Partnerships [
25]. The first document has identified three main targets that sustainable communities should work towards and has introduced local quality of life indicators, while the second report [
25] has set out seven key areas where local quality of life indicators need to be improved (
Table 4).
Table 4.
Indicators and performance requirements for sustainable communities [
24,
25].
Table 4.
Indicators and performance requirements for sustainable communities [24,25].
Targets |
1. Balanced and integral society 2. meeting the needs of existing and future generations 3. respecting the needs of other communities to make their communities sustainable
|
Areas of local quality of life indicators |
1. Community cohesion and involvement 2. Community safety 3. Culture and leisure 4. Economic well-being 5. Education and life-long learning 6. Environment 7. Health and social well-being 8. Housing 9. Transport and access
|
Areas for improvement (quality of life indicators being addressed are listed in brackets) |
1. Stronger communities (Community cohesion and involvement; culture and leisure) 2. Safer communities (Community safety) 3. Children and young people (Economic well-being; education and life-long learning) 4. Adult health and wellbeing (Health and social well-being) 5. Tackling exclusion and promoting equality (Community cohesion and involvement) 6. Local economy (Economic well-being) 7. Environmental sustainability (Environment; housing; transport and access)
|
Both reports have identified the same areas which complement the overall sustainable development agenda and seven components (social and cultural, governance, environmental, housing and the built environment, transport and connectivity, economy, and services) with respective indicators identified by Egan [
19]. The report
Sustainable Communities: Building for the Future has set key requirements for the achievement of sustainable communities: flourishing local economy, strong leadership, effective engagement, safe and healthy local environment, sufficient size and scale, good public transport, good infrastructure, well integrated mix of homes, good quality public services, diverse and vibrant local culture, a sense of place and the right links with wider regional community [
9].
It has been proposed that the local government must be accountable to communities it serves. In the report
Strong and Prosperous Communities: The Local Government White Paper [
15], Prime Minister Tony Blair has stated that local government “provides leadership for local areas and communities, democratic accountability for a wide range of public services”. This White Paper has been aimed to “give more power to citizens and for communities to have a bigger say in the services they receive and the places where they live”. According to the report ‘Sustainable Communities: People, Places and Prosperity: A Five Year Plan for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister 2005’, local government must offer “local leadership which is visible, representative, responsive and accountable to local people—with mayors where people want them” [
26]. Egan has declared that an essential component in creating a shared vision is engaging the public in thinking about the future [
19]. The role of local government as the controlling power has been proposed to increase with the sustainable community agenda. There has had to be a rebalancing of the relationship between central government, local government and local people [
15]. According to Egan, local authorities (LA) should have taken a leading role [
19]. There has been a requirement for effective communication between neighbouring authorities and local governments as the sustainability strategy of one area needs to complement those of neighbouring areas [
19]. In forging these complex partnerships, it has been important for LAs to recognise the priorities, aspirations and expectations of their communities.
The focus on the localism has been continued since the Coalition government has been elected in 2010. It has generated debate on what level of non-government organisation should be given to local level. The
Localism Act 2011 has shifted the power of decision making to the local level, which will be guided by NPPF [
20]. However, there is a notion that NPPF has missed to indicate the balance between local and national responsibilities [
27].
The main aim of the research in this paper is to analyse the former labour government agenda on sustainable communities and what challenges face communities of Stockbridge Village (SV), Murdishaw and Halton Brook (HB), which have been considered to be amongst the most deprived areas of England during the 1980s, 1990s and at the start of the 21st century.
The key objectives of research were the following: (1) to carry out an investigation on government agenda and policy on sustainable communities; and indicators for the achievement of sustainable communities; (2) to assess the currently known/existing situation in Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council (MBC) and Halton Borough Council (BC) in terms of quality of life indicators and broader government policy; (3) carry out investigations to establish the concerns and aspirations of the residents of SV, Murdishaw and HB.