Philip Allmendinger

The creation of devolved administrations in Scotland and Wales, coupled with the proposals for the English regions are creating new operational environments for local government in different parts of the UK. This paper reviews both the key factors affecting these new environments and their relationship with local government. The paper assesses the factors influencing the context for change, and considers these comparatively within England, Scotland and Wales. Attention is focused on emerging forms and practices of spatial planning within the devolved countries at the local level, caused by sub-national, local and community institutional change. Spatial planning is utilized as an example of the changing nature of central–local government relationships within the UK. The article concludes that there is evidence of convergent and divergent trends occurring at different speeds within the three countries and that the new local government relationships in Scotland and Wales may be more defined as a direct consequence of devolution. In England, by contrast, the new relationships between local government and central government appear more complex, not least as a result of the emerging picture of governance being brought about by regionalization. This leaves the future structure and powers of spatial planning within English local government more uncertain at the present time.

This paper provides a review of some of the key articles and research examining the relationship between planning regulation and its impact on the housing market in the UK and the US. In both countries, demographic change coupled with economic growth has increased demand for housing units and in the UK, over 4 million new units are estimated to be needed by 2016. Given these pressures, the interaction of the planning system and the housing market is critical. The articles reviewed below mainly adopt a mainstream economics approach to modelling the impact of planning on housing markets. They are concerned with outcomes. An additional or alternative approach is provided by behavioural analyses of the relationship between planning and housing development. These enable the more complex interactions to come to light. This paper indicates the differences that exist between the UK and US planning approaches; however, in both countries, planning constraints are seen to raise price, reduce supply, increase density and, in the UK at least, reduce choice. However, planning is also seen to provide certainty and reduce risk. Of key interest is the price elasticity of supply of housing. Post-war estimates suggest a value for the long-run elasticity to be between 0 and 1 for the UK, and 6 to 13 for the US.

The post-positivist domination of planning theory in recent years has rightly highlighted the social and political context of theories. Its impact through various guises including collaborative, postmodern and neo-pragmatic approaches has been significant. However, one area that has been immune to these broad changes and interpretations is typologies of planning. Typologies provide heuristics for academics and practitioners that help map the landscape of ideas that influence a particular field. As such they are crucial to any understanding of a diverse theoretical area such as planning. This article seeks to develop a post-positivist typology for planning theory. My typology is based upon the broad themes of post-positivism including the belief that all theory is to greater or lesser degrees normative, a non-linear conception of time and progress and the introduction of spatial and temporal variance in any understanding of the formulation, interpretation and application of theory. The result is an approach that does away with two traditional planning theory dualisms - the procedural-substantive distinction and the theory-practice gap. It also provides a locally diverse and unique interpretation of planning theory at the national and sub-national scale that rejects the idea that local interpretation of theories and their application can be assumed to be consistent with ideas operating at a higher (often supra-national) scale.

In the Unted Kingdom New Labour has claimed to be pursuing a ‘third way’, with policy implications intended to break away from and/or move beyond established debates and policy alternatives. In this paper we explore, identify, and discuss what New Labour's third way means with regard to neighbourhood regeneration in England. The paper has two main aims: first, to review developments in neighbourhood regeneration policy and, second, to assess New Labour's third way in respect of neighbourhood regeneration. The paper is in four main parts. The first provides a broad-brush review of the New Right approach to neighbourhood regeneration in the form of the Thatcher and Major governments. This provides the point of departure for the second part, which discusses the Blair government's neighbourhood regeneration policies in terms of policy change or continuity in four substantive areas: welfare policy, housing policy, regeneration, and the institutional context for regeneration. The third part identifies some of the key themes in New Labour's approach and the final part draws some overarching conclusions.

Devolution has built upon and encouraged feelings of distinctiveness in Scottish Planning. However, beyond broad support there is little empirical evidence or assessment of future trajectories for planning. Based upon a comprehensive survey of planners across Scotland concerning attitudes towards planning post devolution this article highlights a number of important points. The main issue relates to the hiatus between high expectations and the perceived impact of the Parliament upon planning thus far. However, such expectations do not necessarily imply a divergence of planning between Scotland and the rest of the UK. Planners in Scotland, like their counterparts in England and Wales, desire a more community based and effective planning system. The Scottish Parliament is therefore yet to justify itself to planners.

Over the last two decades, there have been numerous advancements in theorising the significance of subnational territories within both the global economy and nation-states. Within the United Kingdom over the last few years, academic study has tended to concentrate on the ‘new regionalism’ and the rescaling of political processes caused by the ‘hollowing out’ of the nation-state and governmental devolution and decentralisation to the subnational level. Part of the reason for this push towards a renewed interest in regional governance and policy processes has been the autonomous institutional capacities of regions to harness regional economic development with planning processes. The new regionalism (a contentious label) has occurred throughout the United Kingdom, but has been implemented separately in each country, through the creation of Regional Development Agencies in the English regions, and new politically accountable elected forums in Wales and Scotland. In this paper, we provide one of the first attempts empirically to analyse the new institutional structures through a survey of agencies across Britain—in England, Scotland, and Wales—in order to provide a comparative assessment of evolving forms of regional governance. We illustrate a mixed reaction from public-policy stakeholders with concern over the ability of these new forums to develop a capacity to harness both economic development and planning policy processes. On a more conceptual level, the research indicates uncertainty over both the future spatial dimension of planning processes and the scale links between the new regional level and the existing national and local levels of governance.

The election of the 'New Labour' government in the UK in May 1997 heralded the start of a new opportunity and era for politics. A determination to modernise the institutions of Britain, associated with a commitment to foster social justice and community with concern for the market, has created a new ethos within government. Led by a Prime Minister viewed as embodying vision and change, the government has started to amend 18 years of Conservative policies structurally, constitutionally and sector ally. The British planning system has changed very little in format and style since its statutory inception in the 1940s, and one would think that this institutional process is an obvious candidate for modernisation. But New Labour possessed very few ideas to amend planning while in opposition, and the proposals announced over the past 24 months that impact on planning suggest continuation rather than radical overhaul. This paper charts the legacy for New Labour in the fields of planning and environmental policy left by the outgoing New Right Major government, and additionally attempts to identify the political ideological ethos and history of policy development behind possible changes to planning. It outlines the major policy amendments announced to date and offers a perspective on the trajectory of planning under a New Labour administration in the years ahead.