Delivering The European Spatial Development Perspective

Delivering the European Spatial Development
Perspective
Dr. David Shaw

Olivier Sykes
Department of Civic Design

University of Liverpool
October 2001
Planning Officers Society Delivering the ESDP
Delivering the ESDP

Table of Contents
List of figures 2
List of Maps 2
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations 3
Executive Summary 5
Chapter 1: Applying the ESDP to RPG 8

1.1 The context for the development of a European spatial
development policy
1.2 The development of the European Spatial Development
Perspective
1.3 The European context and regional planning policy context for
England
1.4 Applying the ESDP to other spatial strategies
1.5 Aims and Objectives of the current research
1.6 Research Approach
1.7 Structure of the Report
Chapter 2: The RPG Review 18

2.1 Introduction
2.2 Placing RPG within its European context.
2.3 Vertical and horizontal co-operation in spatial policy
making
2.4 Spatial Development Policy Principles
2.5 Spatial representations
2.6 Key issues
Chapter 3: Regional player survey 34

3.1 Introduction
3.2 Views of the ESDP and its implications for RPG
3.3 The role of the ESDP in informing policy debate
3.4 Treatment of Cross-border issues in RPG
3.5 Other key points and Issues
Chapter 4: Case studies 39

4.1 Introduction
4.2 West Midlands
4.3 North West England
4.4 East Midlands
4.5 Conclusion
Chapter 5: Delivering the ESDP: Towards Best Practice 59

5.1 Introduction
5.2 Towards Best Practice
5.3 Concluding Remarks
Sources 66
Appendices 71
1
List of Figures
Fig. 1 ESDP Key Spatial Development Principles
Fig. 2 Key Stages and timetable for the RPG review process
Fig. 3 Progress of RPG reviews in England
Fig. 4 Relationship between functional maps and the spatial structure of
the region, West Midlands Polycentric Framework.
Fig. 5 Final list of matters for the EIP into Draft RPG for the North West
Fig. 6 Matters linked to the European spatial planning agenda – North West
Fig. 7 Matters linked to the European spatial planning agenda – East
Midlands
List of Maps
Map 1: Regional Context Diagram Draft RPG for the North West
Map 2: Regional Context Diagram Draft RPG for the North East
Map 3: Key Diagram Draft RPG for the North West
Map 4: Key Diagram Draft RPG – Proposed Changes, East Midlands
2
List of acronyms and abbreviations

ANEC Association of North East Councils
CAP Common Agricultural Policy
CEC Commission of the European Communities or European Commission
CSD Committee on Spatial Development
DETR Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions
EEDA East of England Development Agency
EMRLGA East Midlands Regional Local Government Association
ESDP European Spatial Development Perspective
EU European Union
GOEE Government Office for the East of England
GOEM Government Office for the East Midlands
GONE Government Office for the North East
GONW Government Office for the North West
GOSE Government Office for the South East
GOSW Government Office for the South West
GOWM Government Office for the West Midlands
GOYH Government Office for Yorkshire and the Humber
INTERREG EU initiative for the promotion of co-operation in the field of spatial
planning
IRS Integrated Regional Strategy
NETA North European Trade Axis
NSR North Sea Region
NWDA North West Development Agency
NWMA North West Metropolitan Area
NWRA North West Regional Assembly
PC Programme Complement
PPG Planning Policy Guidance Note
RDA Regional Development Agency
RES Regional Economic Strategy
RPG Regional Planning Guidance Note
RSDF Regional Sustainable Development Framework
SPD Single Programming Document
SSDA Strategic Spatial Development Areas
SWRDA South West Regional Development Agency
TETN Trans-European Transport Networks
WMLGA West Midlands Local Government Association
3
4
Executive Summary
1. This report examines the extent to which the European context for planning in
general, and more particularly the European Spatial Development Perspective,
is being used to inform and shape the development of regional planning
guidance for the nine English regions. The work was commissioned by the
Planning Officers Society and carried out by a team from the Department of
Civic Design at Liverpool University.
2. PPG 11 - Regional Planning (DETR, 2000) makes it very clear that the
European context and the ESDP are critical elements that need to be taken
into account when considering the factors which will affect the future wellbeing
of a region’s spatial development. Such perspectives should be taken into
account explicitly when developing the spatial strategy for the region and,
where appropriate, in relation to any relevant policies. In approving an RPG
the Secretary of State needs to be satisfied that the spatial strategy for the
region has had sufficient regard to these European considerations.
4. The evaluation of the most recent RPG documents revealed that there was
considerable variation in the way that different regions appear to have
considered the European agenda and the ESDP as factors that provide an
important context for regional well being and which, can be used to inform the
development of respective strategies and policies. The research suggested
that there were four key elements that can be used to judge whether the
requirements of PPG11 have been satisfied.
Placing RPG within its European context: All the RPG documents reviewed
considered aspects of the European context for the region. Most also included
maps showing the location of the region in UK and European space, although
the effectiveness of these in conveying a sense of the functional linkages
between the region and other parts of the UK and Europe was limited. In
terms of the European contexts identified by the ESDP the extent to which
these are discussed varied. A number of the documents included a discussion
of the ESDP and relevant EU programmes in sections on the regional context,
but did not make clear if, or how, these had informed the spatial strategy for
the region or the development of policy. Some regions presented a fuller
consideration of European contexts and made a clear attempt to link these to
the strategies and policies of RPG. In general it seems that links are made
where there are clear and sectoral linkages such as in relation to Structural
Funds, the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, Trans-European
Transport networks, and other EU legislation and programmes. Broadly
speaking there appeared to be consistency between the priorities established
for spatial development, including regeneration priority areas, in the RPG
documents, and the availability of EU funding.
The process of RPG preparation: In terms of horizontal linkages within the

region, all the RPG documents refer to the relevant RDA for the region and
made links to the RES, discussing, or re-stating its aims and objectives. It
seems therefore, based on a reading of the RPG documentation, that
horizontal collaboration between RPBs, RDAs and GOs, has occurred across
the regions during the preparation of RPGs. However, whilst the links
between RPGs and RESs are much in evidence, the links to Regional
5
Sustainable Development Strategies were (with some exceptions) generally

less clear in the documentation reviewed. In terms of evidence of intra-
regional collaboration, beyond the RPB, RDA and GO, the RPG
documentation also contains references to a wide range of other sectoral
agencies, that have been consulted, and will need to play a role in delivering
RPG objectives. A number of RPGs linked policies to the agencies that would
be required for their implementation. In terms of cross-boundary horizontal
linkages, all the documents contained some reference to cross-border issues
in national and transnational space, usually in the sections that set out the
regional context. Cross-border issues identified in RPGs included: transport,
waste management, water strategies, minerals planning, functional sub-
regions with a cross-boundary dimension, and in some cases transnational
relationships. However, there was great variety in the extent to which these
issues were considered and carried forward in the rest of the document. A
variety of mechanisms to address cross-border issues were outlined including
inter-regional studies, cross-border sub-regional studies, and participation in
INTERREG projects. A number of the documents included commitments to
take forward cross-boundary working in their sections on implementation.
Spatial development policy principles: The majority of the documents

referred to one or more of the ESDP policy guidelines as having relevance for
the region, but the extent to which the implications of this were developed and
used to inform the strategies and policies of RPG varied. In general there
seems to be a high level of consistency between the spatial development
principles of the ESDP and the strategies and policies of the RPGs. Many of
the individual topic policies in the RPG documents can be seen to have a
close affinity with the spatial principles and policy aims of the ESDP even
though this consistency is rarely made explicit by a direct reference to the
ESDP. Interestingly, it is perhaps at the higher strategic level in some regions
that the influence of the ESDP has been most marked. The three guiding
principles appear to have informed approaches to developing RPG in a
number of regions. Whilst in most of the documents there was little
development of these themes beyond the initial acknowledgement of
relevance, there was evidence in certain regions that concepts such as poly-
centricity and rural-urban partnership have exerted a more profound influence
on the direction, development and structure of RPG.
Spatial representations: Most maps showing the position of the region in

relation to other UK regions and in European space are geography maps,
which show location but fail to highlight functional relationships and linkages.
A number of RPGs include maps showing the relevant INTERREG IIIB regions
to which the region belongs. In terms of linkages to other regions, these are
generally shown but rarely weighted, and in some regions the key diagram
does not represent cross border linkages at all or just represents fixed
features such as roads or railways. There is a good deal of variation in the
appearance of the Key Diagrams with some being OS map based and others
being more schematic. The schematic diagrams tend to be more dynamic and
arguably convey a better idea of the pattern of future development, the
importance of different intra- and inter-regional linkages and relationships, and
functional sub-regions. However, even in the schematic diagrams the cross-
6
border linkages are not weighted in terms of their significance. The more
traditional OS style diagrams have a more static feel and tend to only
represent ‘fixed’ cross-border infrastructure such as roads or railways.
5. The research suggests that the European agenda is beginning to be recognised

more explicitly in the development of spatial planning strategies at the regional
scale. Four factors may account for variations in approach:
i) Timing. More recent RPGs would appear to be taking much
greater cognisance of the European agenda. This is not really very
surprising, as the nature of guidance issued by central government has
become clearer, more explicit and formalised over time.
ii) Stage in the Process. It seems that the process of testing the
Draft RPG through a process of public consultation followed by an
Examination in Public, and subsequent Panel Report enables the
European dimension (or the lack of it) to be highlighted and considered
more explicitly through the redrafting of RPG.
iii) The role of key individuals. Where there are a number of
influential actors in the process who have a keen interest in, and
concern for, European spatial planning, this will help to shape the
nature of the RPG. Given that the RPG preparation is a multi-agency
process key individuals do not necessary have to be part of the
Regional Planning Body, but could be from the Government Office or
the Planning Inspectorate, or other interested parties.
iv) The empirical reality of the region. For some regions their
connections to Europe, relationships with other UK regions and internal
structure were reflected in the way that RPG was produced. In some
instances this led to a fuller consideration of the European agenda as a
whole, and the ESDP in particular. It seems that in some regions, the
more distinctly spatial ESDP principles provided a new ‘lens’ through
which to view the region and facilitated a new analysis of key spatial
and thematic planning issues. In other regions, whilst the ESDP was
perhaps less influential in shaping the analytical and policy approaches
adopted, it nevertheless served to reinforce certain indigenously
derived conclusions and policy choices.
6. In conclusion, therefore it would appear that the European context and the
ESDP are beginning to be accepted as an important frame of reference in the
production of Regional Planning Guidance. Given the emerging policy context
it would be naïve, to expect the RPGs across the country to have embraced
the principles in similar ways. Regional distinctiveness, for example, means
that the European context may need to be given greater or lesser emphasis.
The checks and balances involved in the process of RPG preparation do
appear to highlight where the European dimension has not adequately been
taken into account. In embracing the European agenda those involved in
developing regional planning policy need to embrace a shift in outlook and
culture which requires a much more explicit consideration of a region’s links to
other regions, both adjacent, but also in terms of cross border and
transnational relationships. The findings of this study suggest that this is
beginning to happen.
7
Chapter 1: Applying the ESDP to RPG

1.1 The context for the development of a European spatial
development policy
The forces that influence the location of economic activities operate increasingly at
European or global levels, while traditionally spatial development policies have been
developed at national or regional levels (DETR, 1998). There has been a growing
recognition of this at the European level since the late 1980s and this has
accompanied by the realisation that planning issues (like environmental issues) cross
political and administrative boundaries (see CEC, 1994; Williams, 1996; DETR, 1998;
CEC, 1999).
Within the EU the influence of globalisation on patterns of spatial development has

been accentuated by the effects of continuing European integration and the creation
of a single market. In the future EMU will tend to increase integration, bringing more
inter-dependencies and competition between cities, regions and member states
within the EU. Although competition is seen as driving development, it may lead to
increasing spatial disparities, which are perceived to be a threat to European
economic and social cohesion.
Recognition of the influence of EU sectoral policies with a territorial significance has

also progressively increased in the member states and the EU. The ESDP highlights
the areas of European Commission competence which are the most significant in
terms of their implications for spatial development:
Competition Policy
Trans-European Networks (TENs)
Structural Funds
Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)
Environmental Policy
Research, Technology and Development
Loan activities of the European Investment Bank
(CEC 1999, p.13).
As such policies effect national and regional spatial planning policies they, by
extension, influence the pattern of spatial development in the EU. Importance is
attached to the diversity of the EU and this has led to a desire to see that the three
fundamental goals of EU policy - economic and social cohesion; conservation and
management of natural resources and the cultural heritage, and, a more balanced
competitiveness of the European territory (CEC 1999) are achieved equally in all
regions through balanced and sustainable development of the territory. By
understanding the spatial effects of integration and the EU sectoral policies, co-
ordinated attempts can be made to achieve these three key objectives through
spatial planning. It was the recognition of this by Member states of the EU and the
European Commission, which provided the rationale for the development of the
European Spatial Development Perspective.
8
1.2 The development of the European Spatial Development

Perspective
In the early 1990s, especially at the European scale, there were signs that there was
a growing interest in spatial planning as a potential policy arena and integrative tool
in its own right (Nadin and Shaw, 1997). For example, Europe 2000 (CEC, 1991)
opened with a statement that planning in isolation at a regional, or national scale was
really no longer possible. Europe 2000+ (CEC, 1994) saw further debate promoting
the merits of a more integrated spatial development framework for the whole of the
European territory. There was sufficient consensus among the member states that
they should work together on an informal and voluntary basis to develop a European
Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP). As the ‘Territory’ is a new dimension of
European policy over which the Commission has no competence in the Treaties
establishing the EU, the task of preparing the ESDP was given to the Committee on
Spatial Development an informal group of Ministers with responsibility for spatial
planning. At the Leipzig meeting of 1994 its status was established as a non-binding
and indicative, rather than prescriptive, document.
The ESDP has therefore been progressed through intergovernmental working which
operates outside the formal competencies of the EU and to certain degree reflects
the importance that each member state gives to this collaborative process (Wilkinson
et al, 1998 and Bishop et al, 2000). A first draft was presented at Noordwijk in 1997,
followed in June 1998 by a complete draft at Glasgow, and the final document was
approved at Potsdam in May 1999. In order to achieve a balanced and sustainable
development of the territory of the EU, the ESDP emphasises three key spatial
development policy objectives (Fig. 1).
Figure 1: ESDP Key Spatial Development Principles

• the development of a balanced and polycentric urban pattern of
development and a new urban rural relationship which recognises inter-
dependence and fosters partnership;
• securing parity access to infrastructure and knowledge; and
• sustainable development, prudent management and protection of nature

and cultural heritage.
(CEC, 1999)
Whilst the ESDP is, not a master plan for the development of Europe as a whole
(Healy 1999), there is nevertheless a commitment to taking it forward from the spatial
planning ministers of the member states. Part A S.4 of the ESDP sets out the way
that it is to be “applied” and makes clear that this is through voluntary co-operation
based on the principle of subsidiarity. Integrated application of the ESDP policy
options is to be achieved by a reorientation of national policies and community
sectoral policies at three levels of spatial co-operation - the Community Level; the
transnational/national level; and the regional/local level. The ESDP calls for
‘horizontal’ co-operation between the authorities responsible for sectoral and spatial
9
policies at each administrative level as well as ‘vertical’ co-operation between the

different levels, for example, between the national and local level. The member
states should also, take into account the policy aims and options of the ESDP in their
national planning systems in the way they see fit, and; also take into consideration
the European dimension…in adjusting national spatial development policies, plans
and reports (CEC, 1999, para. 184).
In order to carry forward the application of the ESDP, EU Spatial Planning Ministers
agreed on an Action Plan at Tampere in October 1999. One of the key aims of this
was the promotion of a spatial dimension in Community and national policies. The
Plan also identified 12 activities to be undertaken in order to achieve the key aims of
the ESDP including the integration of ESDP policy orientations into national spatial
planning. Such calls for a ‘Europeanisation of state, regional and urban planning’
(CEC, 1999, p. 45) can be seen as echoing Bruce Milan’s statement in the foreword
to Europe 2000 that planning in isolation is no longer possible. The ESDP clearly
reflects this sentiment in its statement that:
‘In their spatially relevant planning, local and regional government and
administrative authorities should, …overcome any insular way of looking at
their territory and take into consideration European aspects and
interdependencies right from the outset.’
(CEC, 1999, p. 45)
It is the application of the principles of ‘Europeanisation’ and ‘spatialisation’ to

Regional Planning Guidance documents in the UK context, which forms the focus of
the current research.
1.3 The European context and regional planning policy context for
England
Prior to 1997, Conservative governments largely ignored, or at least kept at arm’s
length, the EU implications for statutory land use and policy making functions of
government. Nevertheless many government policies were modified to accommodate
European influences, for example, revised Planning Policy Guidance Notes
increasingly confirmed the need for local authorities to ensure that their decisions
complied with European directives, and planning procedures were sometimes altered
to meet the needs of EU Directives (e.g. EIA directives). At the level of local
authorities, statutory development plans and other strategic planning documents
were clearly shaped by European influences in three main ways:
(i) providing the context within which the plan is prepared (e.g. Kent
Structure Plan Third Review);
(ii) influencing the formulation of individual policies (e.g. Gwynedd
County Council)
(iii) requiring the identification of critical areas (e.g. Special Areas of
Conservation and Special protection Areas)
(Wilkinson et al, 1998 and Bishop et al, 2000)
10
With the election of a New Labour government in 1997 the apparent ambivalence to
European influences on planning was about to change. In 1998 Richard Caborn, the
then Minister for the Regions, Regeneration and Planning, issued a statement that
the European context for planning had largely been missing from the planning system
in the UK and that ‘there needs to be a significant European dimension to our
planning system’ (DETR, 1998, p 6). Significantly, ‘Modernising Planning’ also noted
that ‘spatial development issues do not respect national boundaries’, and that, ‘…for
too long, there has been a tendency to ignore cross-border and transnational
planning issues. A modern planning system cannot afford to do this.’ (DETR, 1998,
p.6). Such statements can be seen as recognising the idea articulated in Europe
2000 and the ESDP that an insular approach to planning at regional or national scale
is no longer possible.
Perhaps one of the most obvious ways that the Government has sought to enhance
the European dimension of the UK planning system is in relation to the advice it has
given to regional planning bodies on the way that they should prepare new Regional
Planning Guidance (RPG). This is significant as the ESDP makes it clear that
‘Regional and local authorities are key players in European spatial development
policy.’ (CEC 1999, p.42). “Draft Planning Policy Guidance Note (PPG) 11: Regional
Planning’ published in 1999 made clear that ‘intergovernmental and Community
based European activities, policies and programmes and funding regimes that impact
on the region’, provide one of the key contexts that should shape the scope and
format of RPG, and that before issuing an RPG the Secretary of State, ‘will need to
be satisfied that the spatial strategy for the region has had sufficient regard to these
European considerations’ (DETR 1999a, para. 3.3).
The final version of PPG 11 published in October 2000 (DETR, 2000) further
emphasises the importance of full cognisance of the European agenda in the
preparation of revised RPGs. Paragraph 3.1 of PPG 11 states that:
‘Widening the spatial planning scope of RPG is in keeping with trends

elsewhere in Europe. Moreover, both the European Spatial Development
Perspective and the Community Initiative on Transnational Co-operation on
Spatial Planning - INTERREG IIC and IIIB - programmes will provide a
European context for the preparation of RPG.’
(DETR 2000, Para. 3.1)
PPG 11 para. 3.2 repeats the three key policy principles which underpin the ESDP
(see Fig. 1 above) and emphasises their relevance to RPG, whilst para. 3.3 states
that, ‘Implementation of the ESDP requires co-operation across national, regional
and local boundaries.’ The importance of horizontal consistency between RDA
strategies, RPG and any relevant Single Programming Documents is also stressed,
as is the need for RPBs and other regional stakeholders to ‘take account of inter-
governmental and EU legislation, polices, programmes and funding regimes that
impact on the region.’ (DETR, 2000, para. 3.5). The potential need for RPBs to liase
with neighbouring regions and regional bodies in other member states ‘as
appropriate’ is also acknowledged.
11
PPG 11 para. 3.9 discusses the appropriateness of sub-regional strategies as a

means of resolving certain spatial development issues and relationships and
indicates that there may be instances where sub-regional solutions need to be
developed for issues that cross regional boundaries.
In conclusion, recent years have seen a steady strengthening of Government advice

in relation to the need to develop the European dimension in regional planning
documents. In particular the final version of PPG 11 makes clear that a RPG should
be set within a framework which acknowledges a region’s links to other regions and
European and global contexts. It also places emphasis on the key policy principles of
the ESDP, the importance of horizontal consistency between RPG and other regional
strategies (with the long-term objective of RPGs developing into comprehensive
regional spatial strategies - para. 3.7), and the need in some instances to develop
cross-boundary solutions.
The overriding theme that has emerged from this review is the acceptance, and
transposition into policy documents of the notion that ‘planning in isolation is no
longer possible’. Whilst the UK may be an island in the strict geographical sense, the
twin realities of Europeanisation and globalisation mean that policy makers must
overcome any insular way of considering the territories they plan for if they wish to
develop plans and policies which are well adapted to securing the future sustainable
development of their areas and regions.
1.4 Applying the ESDP to other spatial strategies

Whilst the main focus of the research is the current RPG review process in the
English regions, because other countries are free to adopt different approaches in
applying the ESDP, it is worth commenting briefly on how it is being applied to certain
other spatial strategies in the UK and Europe.
For some member states most notably the Netherlands, but also Denmark, the
European agenda, especially at the national scale was already informing the way that
national planning reports and policy frameworks were being developed, and the
application of the ESDP has had little impact in practice. Elsewhere, for example, in
Wales and Catalonia, the ESDP is being used to inform debates concerning the need
for more coherent strategic spatial strategies at the national, regional or metropolitan
scale. In Wales the ESDP has provided both an inspiration, a reference point and
methodological opportunity in the development of a ‘National Spatial Planning
Framework’. In Catalonia, the ESDP is seen as a document, which can help to
support arguments for the development of new institutions and mechanisms to
promote the notion of strategic spatial thinking at the regional and sub-regional scale.
Elsewhere, at the transnational scale, not unsurprisingly given the links of the
INTERREG IIC/IIIB programmes to the ESDP, visioning statements such as the
Vision for North West Europe, are using the ESDP as a reference point and are
seeking to explore, elaborate, and apply its concepts to particular mega-regions.
Therefore in some countries it seems that the principles of the ESDP were felt to be
already implicit in national Planning Reports and policy prior to the final publication of
the ESDP. In other countries, the ESDP is being used as a reference point for policy
development and in some cases as a source of debate about innovations in spatial
12
planning policy instruments and systems. It is only in England, however, that there is
an explicit requirement to use the ESDP as a reference point to inform strategic
spatial thinking. In England, as described in Section 1.3 above, the ESDP has been
embodied in the new ‘PPG 11 – Regional Planning’ (DETR, 2000), as one of the key
contextual documents which regional planning bodies must have regard to in
developing RPG. Thus it would appear from this brief overview of how the ESDP is
being used in other spatial strategies, that it is being applied more explicitly in
England than elsewhere in Europe.
1.5 Aims of the current research

Informed by the context described above, this report details the findings of research
designed to ascertain the extent to which the European contexts in general and the
ESDP in particular have influenced the current round of RPG reviews. The specific
objectives of the research were:
1. To conduct a review of emerging RPG documentation in order to ascertain

the extent to which they have had regard to European considerations in
general, and the European Spatial Development Perspective in particular.
2. To conduct a regional player survey of those involved in current RPG
reviews to highlight issues that may not be revealed by the desk-based
review.
3. To consider selected regions in more detail in order to highlight RPG review
process issues.
The evolving policy background to regional planning in England is something that

ought to be remembered in the context of the current research. Figure 2 below
presents the new key stages and timetable for the development of RPGs, which in
theory should take about 2.5 years. Figure 3 identifies the stages that different
regions had reached in the process when the research was undertaken. It is
therefore to be expected that the degree of advancement of different RPGs through
the revision process and the nature of the guidance in place at the time will have a
bearing on the degree to which European considerations have informed the process.
The research thus represents a snapshot of a rapidly changing and evolving situation
and is therefore intended to be indicative in character.
13
Figure 2: Key Stages and timetable for the RPG (comprehensive review)
process
Stage Regional Planning Guidance Prepared by

regional planning body (RPB), in co-
operation with Government Office (GO)
and other stakeholders, and issued by the
Secretary of State
1. Identifying the brief/issues RPB in consultation with GO draw up the
project brief for RPG review, including the
relevant regional objectives and likely issues,
and hold a one day public conference to seek
agreement: 3.5 months.
2. Developing the draft strategy RPB in co-operation with GO and other
stakeholders, carries out technical/survey
work, commences an independent
sustainability appraisal of the impacts of the
initial proposals for development etc. and
then develops and refines options into draft
RPG: 12 months.
3. Consultation on draft RPG RPB submits draft RPG and appraisal to the
SoS. Draft strategy is then published for
consultation with a RPB letter inviting
representations and a press notice issued
announcing timing of the public examination.
Written responses to Panel Secretary (which
are copied to GO/RPB): 3.5 months.
4. Testing Following receipt of responses, Panel in
consultation with the RPB and GO agree a
list of matters and invite participants to public
examination. Draft RPG tested at
examination in front of independent Panel
appointed by the Secretary of State: 4
months.
5. Publication of Panel report Panel reports to the SoS (which GO copies to
RPB and other public examination
participants) and report is published: 2
months.
6. Proposed Changes to RPG Following Panel’s report, SoS publishes
proposed changes to draft RPG with
statement of reasons. 8 week consultation
period on these changes before final RPG is
issued: 6 months.
7. Issue of final RPG RPG approved and issued by SoS.
Total time from start of process: approx. 2.5

years.
8. Development and local transport plan SoS (GO) with support of RPB, to ensure that
conformity development and local transport plans are
consistent with RPG.
9. Monitoring and review RPB, in liaison with GO and other
stakeholders, to establish monitoring
machinery to check on achievement of RPG
targets and review it either in whole or in part,
as appropriate.
(DETR, 2000).
14
Figure 3: Progress of RPG reviews at time of research
Region RPG Reviewed & Progress

North East RPG Proposed Changes Draft (April 2001)
(consultation until 19/07/01)
London Initial Proposals for SDS (May 2001)
(consultation until 31/07/01)
East Anglia RPG Final RPG (November 2000)
East Midlands RPG Proposed Changes (March 2001)
South East RPG Final RPG (January 2001)
South West RPG Proposed Changes (December 2000)
West Midlands RPG Consultation Draft Policy Options

(May 2001)
Consultation until 20/07/01
Yorkshire and the Humber Proposed Changes Draft (March 2001)
RPG (consultation until 01/06/01)
North West RPG Draft RPG (July 2000)
(EIP 02/01 - panel report 07/01)
1.6 Research Approach

The research design responded to the objectives set out above and was made up of
two key components:
(1) The development of an evaluative framework for RPG, which would be

undertaken by trained evaluators who were, retired members of the POS.
(2) Structured interviews with key regional players.
In order to evaluate the most recently published version of Regional Planning

Guidance in a systematic, comprehensive, and comparative manner, to help ensure
consistency of approach and provide a comparable format, it was necessary to
develop an ‘Evaluative Framework’. This framework identified the issues and
established a method (using check-lists, criteria and tables), to evaluate the extent to
which the most recent RPG documents had explicitly considered the implications of
Europe and the ESDP in shaping the context and strategic development needs of
their particular region. In devising the Evaluative Framework reference was made to
the methodology adopted by the lead researcher in appraising the extent to which
Draft RPG for North West England had addressed the European agenda (Shaw,
2000).
15
More specifically, an evaluative framework to be applied to RPG documentation

should seek:
• To consider the extent to which emerging RPG documents adequately

acknowledge the European context for their regions.
• To identify if emerging RPGs provide evidence that the ESDP has been used as
a framework for the development both of the spatial strategy and of individual
policies.
• To evaluate the extent to which there is horizontal and vertical integration of

institutions and policies. Do RPGs provide a consistent frame of reference for
other regional and sub-regional policy documents, especially those associated
with European structural funds? This not only relates to institutions internal to
the region but also to the way the region relates to adjacent regions and also
transnational collaboration. In particular, does RPG adequately consider
significant cross border issues of relevance to the region?
The final version of the framework (Appendix 1) is organised around four key themes,
which reflect the issues discussed above:
(1) the European context in which RPG has been prepared,

(2) the process of RPG preparation,
(3) the extent to which the policy principles of the ESDP are reflected in RPG,
both in the spatial strategy and the detailed policies; and,
(4) the use of spatial representations and images to illustrate spatial
development contexts and policies.
A final section (5) asks the evaluator to give an overall qualitative assessment of how
effectively they feel that the RPG responds to the call in PPG 11 that RPGs ought to
have regard to European considerations. The evaluation focused on a review of the
most current RPG documentation available, using the Evaluative Framework. Figure
3 indicates the version of RPG that was reviewed for each region. The review took
place with the documents that were available at the end of April 2001. It is important
to note that the evaluation was snapshot at a particular moment in time within a
policy context that is rapidly changing and evolving. The evaluation for each RPG
was undertaken by two evaluators. Three former planning officers were engaged to
act as evaluators of the RPG documents (see Appendix 2) and the University team
also produced a standard evaluation to ensure consistency of approach. The
evaluators were sent a copy of the Evaluative Framework in advance of a training
day held in Liverpool, at which the method and approach to be adopted in reviewing
each policy document were explained. Part of this seminar involved a workshop
where various elements of the Evaluative Framework were tested in relation to the
Draft RPG for the North West, which had previously been subject to such a rigorous
appraisal (Shaw, 2000). This was to ensure that there was a common understanding
of the issues to be examined and the approach to be adopted. Once completed the
evaluative frameworks were reviewed to assess the extent to which there were
common themes and general issues of concern common to a number of RPGs.
16
Recognising that a desk based evaluation of written documents might not adequately
reflect the wider RPG process, a Regional Player Survey was conducted. Structured
interviews took place during May and June with representatives of the Regional
Planning Bodies and the regional Government Offices.
In light of some of the issues, which emerged from the desk based review of RPGs it
was also decided to conduct in-depth case studies of selected regions that were at
different stages in the RPG review process. This was to enable a more thorough
evaluation of the extent to which the ESDP had been a factor shaping emerging
RPGs. The case studies were based on a wide range of documentation and sought
to identify factors that had influenced the way that the European agenda had
informed the RPG process. The selected regions were: the West Midlands an RPG
process which is still in the early stages and where the concept of polycentricity is
central to the thinking of the RPB, the North West where the examination in public
highlighted the need to address European issues more explicitly, and the East
Midlands where modifications to the RPG have reflected the need to address the
European agenda.
1.7 Structure of the Report

Chapters 2 presents the review of RPG documentation and Chapter 3 outlines the
findings of the regional player survey. Chapter 4 presents the case studies of the
RPG process in the West Midlands, North West and East Midlands. Chapter 5 draws
the different strands of the research together to give a picture of the current process
of ‘Delivering the ESDP’ in the English regions and identifies best practice
approaches.
17
Chapter 2: Review of RPG Documents

2.1 Introduction
This chapter presents the desk-based evaluation of RPG documents. The
presentation of findings follows the structure of the Evaluative Framework discussed
in Section 1.6 above. The discussion is not intended to evaluate the way that each
RPG has responded to the European agenda, but rather to provide a broad overview
using examples to illustrate particular points. The concluding section highlights key
issues emerging from this evaluation.
2.2 Placing RPG within its European context

PPG 11 indicates that before issuing RPG the Secretary of State will need to be
satisfied that PPG has had sufficient regard to the European considerations, set out
in paragraphs 3.01-3.05 of PPG 11, including the main policy themes of the ESDP
which are presented in PPG 11 para. 3.02 (DETR, 2000). This section considers if
the background discussion, which underpins the RPG strategies, fully and adequately
acknowledges the European context.
All the RPG documents reviewed considered aspects of the European context for the
region. Most also included maps showing the location of the region in UK and
European space, although the effectiveness of these in conveying a sense of the
functional linkages between the region and other parts of the UK and Europe was
limited. Most of the maps were ‘geography’ maps which simply indicated the position
of the region, although some RPGs, such as, the Proposed Changes drafts for
Yorkshire and the Humber and the East Midlands, also included maps showing the
INTERREG programme areas (the North West Metropolitan Area and the North Sea
Region) of relevance to their regions. Other RPGs make some contextual references
to INTERREG in the text these include, the draft South West RPG, RPG 9 for the
South East and the RPG for the North East Proposed Changes document.
In terms of the European contexts identified by the ESDP the extent to which these
are discussed varied. A number of the documents included a discussion of the
ESDP and relevant EU programmes in sections on the regional context, but did not
make clear if, or how, these had informed the spatial strategy for the region or the
development of policy. Often such discussion amounted to little more than
acknowledging the existence of the ESDP and listing some of the key policy
principles.
However, some regions including the South East, East Midlands and Yorkshire and
the Humber, presented a fuller consideration of European contexts. In the Proposed
Changes Draft for Yorkshire and the Humber, the impact of EU policies and
programmes with a spatial impact is discussed and direct reference is made to the
‘policy implications of Objective 1 and 2 areas’ with the policies affected being
indicated. The links with other European and English regions were also more
comprehensively considered in this RPG than in the majority of documents. In RPG
9 for the South East (DETR, 2001) the European spatial and policy contexts are
outlined in the discussion of regional context, as are global and international
18
developments. Reference is made to EU programmes and legislation including CAP

and its reform, structural funds, and the impact of the Habitats and Landfill Directives.
The enlargement of the EU and the effects of EMU on London’s role as a financial
centre are also mentioned as key future developments in Europe, which may impact
on the region. In the chapter dealing with the Core Strategy, further consideration is
given to the spatial position of the region, and the functional linkages that exist in
European and UK space.
In general it seems that where are clear sectoral linkages, such as in relation to
Structural Funds, the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, Trans-European
Transport networks, and other EU legislation and programmes, the connections to
RPG policies are made explicit. For example, there are frequent references to
European Directives in the topic chapters of the RPGs, most dominantly Special
Protection Areas under the European Birds Directive, Special Areas of Conservation
under the Habitats Directive, and the Bathing Water Directive. In regions where
there are structural fund designations, references are made to these and the areas
covered are indicated either on the key diagram, for example, South West RPG, or
on maps showing available economic assistance, as in the North West, North East,
South East, East Midlands and West Midlands documents. In some regions, other
EU initiatives have also been identified, such as, the RECHAR, and RESIDER areas
in the North East, although such designations are no longer part of Structural Funds.
Broadly speaking there appeared to be consistency between the priorities

established for spatial development, including regeneration priority areas, in the RPG
documents, and the availability of EU funding. In the South West for example, policy
EC 2 on ‘Areas of Special Need’ applies to areas such as, the Isles of Scilly,
Cornwall, and deprived parts of Devon and urban areas such as Bristol and
Plymouth, which have Objective 1 and 2 status respectively. Similarly, Spatial
Strategy policy SS2, which promotes regeneration in the Western Sub-region, aims
at ‘maximising the opportunities afforded by Objective 1 funding’. The RPG for the
North East recognises that EU structural funds have ‘helped the existing
competitiveness of the North East’ and that EU funding ‘has a considerable impact in
directing investment to the region and to particular areas’ (ANEC, 2001, p.38, Para.
4.13).
Overall therefore, there seems to be a broad consistency between spatial strategies

and the location of EU funding designations within regions. It should be remembered
that in many areas there is a patchwork of economic assistance reflecting the funding
available through different European, national and regional programmes and that the
strategies of RPGs and RESs also reflect this. Another consideration is that the
current round of EU structural funds lasts until 2006 whilst RPGs have a 15-20 year
time horizon.
19
2.3 Vertical and horizontal co-operation in spatial development

policy-making
2.3.1 Introduction
Section 4 of the ESDP calls for effective horizontal and vertical integration of policy to
ensure a consistent approach to spatial development. The evaluative framework
sought to explore the extent to which there is evidence in the RPG documentation of
horizontal and vertical co-operation within the region and with agencies and areas
that are outside it, particularly where there are significant cross-boundary issues.
Aspects of vertical integration in European space have already been considered
above in terms of the consideration given in RPG to certain EU programmes and
designations. Vertical integration in terms of the relationship of the RPGs strategies
and policies to the spatial development policy principles and aims of the ESDP is
considered in Section 2.3.4 below.
2.3.2 Horizontal integration within the region
In terms of horizontal integration within regions, the Evaluative Framework sought to

identify evidence of inter-agency collaboration, and of consistency between RPG and
the other key regional strategies. All the RPG documents refer to the relevant RDA
for the region and make links to the RES, discussing, or re-stating its aims and
objectives. For example, RPG 6 for East Anglia indicates that EEDA’s RES, ‘Moving
Forward’, ‘complements and sits beside this regional planning guidance’ (DETR,
2000, p.19, Para. 4.12), and then re-states its aims and objectives. In the chapter on
implementation, the role of EEDA is highlighted, as is the need to ensure that the
‘maximum advantage is taken of the current national and European designations in
the region’ (DETR, 2000b, p.71). In the indicative policy options draft of RPG for the
West Midlands mention is made of the close working relationships that have been
established between the West Midlands Local Government Association (WMLGA),
the RDA (Advantage West Midlands), and the GO for the region (WMLGA, 2001).
Similarly, in RPG for the South West the shared objectives of and ‘two-way
relationship’ between RPG and the SWRDA’s regional strategy are emphasised. It
seems therefore that, based on a reading of the RPG documentation, that horizontal
collaboration between RPBs, RDAs and GOs, has occurred across the regions
during the preparation of RPGs.
Whilst the links between RPGs and RESs are much in evidence, the links to Regional
Sustainable Development Frameworks (RSDF) were generally, with some
exceptions, less clear in the documentation reviewed. In Draft RPG Proposed
Changes for Yorkshire and the Humber, chapter 3 takes as its starting point for the
development of a vision and objectives for RPG, the objectives of the RSDF. In the
East Midlands, the Integrated Regional Strategy (IRS) developed by the Regional
Assembly constitutes the RSDF for the region. The IRS’s fourth objective is to
‘manage the distribution and location of activities and the provision of infrastructure in
order to encourage sustainable patterns of development and to support
regeneration’. It is the role of RPG to respond to this spatial dimension of the IRS,
and four further sub-objectives for RPG are defined. In other regions the RSDF has
yet to be endorsed such as in the South West and the North East, whilst in some
regions where an RSDF is in place, such as the North West, it is unclear from the
20
references to it in the text, what its objectives are and how exactly it has informed
RPG.
In terms of evidence of regional collaboration beyond the RPB, RDA and GO, the
RPG documentation also contains references to a wide range of other sectoral
agencies, that have been consulted, and will need to play a role in delivering RPG
objectives. These included: the Environment Agency, the Countryside Agency,
Health Authorities, regional tourist boards, English Heritage, the Highways Agency,
the Strategic Rail Authority, NHS Executives, the Housing Corporation, Sport
England, and British Waterways. In Draft RPG for the North West the agencies
which it is felt should be involved in implementing different policies are indicated in
the margins. In Yorkshire and the Humber, implementation tables at the end of each
chapter indicate the delivery mechanisms such as, development plans and LTPs, and
identify the lead and supporting partners, that will carry forward each policy. In the
Proposed Changes Draft for the South West the chapter on implementation and
monitoring clearly identifies the agencies and sectors that will be essential to the
implementation of RPG. The private sector, central government and local authorities
are identified as the key players, with other agencies such as the SWDA, Countryside
Agency, Environment Agency, and Health Authorities also being mentioned.
2.3.3 Treatment of cross-border issues in RPG
The documentary review considered whether the RPGs acknowledged issues that
had a cross-border, dimension, either in national or transnational space. The ESDP
emphasises the importance of co-operation beyond administrative boundaries both at
the inter-regional and intra-regional levels. The Evaluative Framework also
considered if mechanisms such as, cross-border discussions, inter-institutional
arrangements or studies existed to respond to cross-border issues.
All the documents reviewed contained some reference to cross-border issues in

national and or transnational space, usually in the sections that set out the regional
context. However, there was variety in the extent to which these issues were
considered and carried forward in the rest of the document. There was evidence in
a number of RPGs that the issue of cross-boundary relationships has been a
consideration in the process of developing RPG. For example, the final Guiding
Principles of the West Midlands Draft Spatial Strategy include a commitment ‘to have
full regard to the linkages and relationships that exist between the West Midlands and
adjacent areas’ (WMLGA, 2001, p.80). In the East Midlands the IRS indicates that
RPG must have ’full regard to the importance of linkages between different parts of
the region and with adjacent regions’ (EMRLGA, 2001, p.5).
The examples of cross-border issues identified in RPGs included: transport (including

TETNs), waste management, water strategies, minerals planning, functional sub-
regions with a cross-boundary dimension, and in some limited cases transnational
relationships. For example, RPG 9 for the South East makes reference to the fact
that ‘the South East is the main gateway between the UK and neighbouring
European countries for business, trade and many other aspects of national life’, and
suggests that greater attention be paid to the relationships between London, Paris,
Brussels and Amsterdam (DETR, 2000b, p.13). In Yorkshire and the Humber and
the North West, there is some recognition that the inter-regional transpennine
21
corridor, the East-West Northern European Trade Axis, has important transnational
dimensions.
The documents make reference to a variety of mechanisms to address cross-border

issues notably cross border sub-regional studies. In many cases proposals for such
studies recognise the potential importance of cross border issues, but such issues do
not at present directly inform strategy and policy. The proposed inter-regional study
for the London-Stansted-Cambridge sub-region in RPG for the South East RPG 9
(Chapter 12) is an example of a mechanism by which cross border issues can be
addressed. Inter-regional multi-modal studies such as, the West Midlands to North
West Conurbation study, are another mechanism identified in the documentation for
the consideration of cross-border issues. In the Proposed Changes Draft for
Yorkshire and the Humber, the strategies and studies related to cross-border issues
are identified as part of the discussion of the relationships with other English and
European regions. These include INTERREG (NETA, Norvision, and the Vision for
North West Europe), the South Pennine Integrated Transport Study, and cross-
boundary environmental designations. In most cases the findings of studies intended
to investigate cross-border issues were not available when the RPG documentation
was prepared and will inform future strategy development.
A number of RPG documents go beyond mentioning cross border studies, and

include commitments to take forward cross-boundary working in their sections on
implementation. The South East and South West documents include sections on
intra- and inter-regional co-operation, and place emphasis on the fact that the
implementation of the objectives of RPG will require co-operation with neighbouring
regions and between authorities within the region. Mechanisms by which local
authorities within the region can co-operate in implementing sub-regional strategies
are identified. These include joint development plans and local transport plans, the
preparation of studies and strategies covering more than one local authority area,
and participation in transnational spatial planning projects.
A number of the RPGs adopt sub-regional ‘packaging’ within their strategies. In the
East Midlands five sub-regions have been identified as a means of allowing a sub-
regional interpretation of the guidance. The regions are seen to have an ‘internal
coherence’ in terms of their assets, opportunities and problems, and their boundaries
are indicative and do not strictly conform to administrative boundaries. The
relationships between the sub-regions are also considered, as are the links with
adjoining regions. In the Southern sub-area the close functional relationships with
large urban areas in adjoining regions, such as, Coventry and Milton Keynes is
recognised, as is the general pressure from the South East, the West Midlands and
East Anglia. In the Eastern sub-area the role of Peterborough in the south of the
sub-area is recognised, and the policy aims to minimise further increases in car-
borne commuting across the regional border. In the South West the spatial strategy
has been developed around sub-regions and their principal urban areas (PUAs), and
the text recognises that not all planning issues will ‘tidily match the boundaries of the
administrative areas of local authorities or other agencies either within or
neighbouring the South West region’ (SWRPC, 2000, p.11, para. 3.1).
The discussion above has highlighted the way in which cross-border issues are
treated in the RPG documents and discussed the responses that have been adopted
22
in a number of regions. Overall the picture is mixed, and in certain RPGs there is
little evidence to indicate how cross-boundary issues have been considered in
preparing RPG and how they will be addressed in terms of implementing aspects of
the strategy. It is not to say that dialogue has not occurred or that mechanisms do
not exist to address the issues, rather that there is little evidence of this in the
document. Some RPGs seem to have an almost parochial perspective in terms of
the extent to which they acknowledge and respond to issues that have a cross-
boundary dimension. However, in other regions the importance of cross-boundary co-
operation for the delivery of the RPG strategy was clearly recognised including co-
operation at the intra-regional level in the case of functional sub-regions. This was
reflected by references in the chapters on implementation to the need to secure
effective cross-boundary working.
2.3.4 Vertical Linkages
The Evaluative Framework also sought to consider the vertical integration of policy in
national and regional space. In the case of RPGs this can be seen to relate to the
relationship between RPG and national policy guidance and the policies and
strategies of regional and sub-regional stakeholders.
All the RPGs contained evidence of links to a variety national policy guidance and
strategies including:
Planning Policy Guidance Notes, Mineral Planning Guidance Notes, Circular

6/98 on ‘Affordable Housing’, Circular 1/97 ‘Planning Obligations’, Rural,
Urban, and Transport White Papers, the ten year transport plan ‘Transport
2010’, the report of the Urban Task Force, the Health White paper ‘Saving
Lives: Our Healthier Nation’ July 1999, the England Rural Development
Programme, the DTI Competitiveness White Paper, the Crime and Disorder
Act 1998, ‘The National Waste Strategy 2000’, Environment Agency
strategies, the SUSTRANS National Cycle Route, Countryside Agency
strategies, National Forest strategy, AONB designations, Railtrack network
management programme.
In terms of vertical integration in regional space all the documents clearly address
their policies to the development plan and local transport plan authorities and in many
cases to other agencies responsible for regional or local level plans. Links and
references are made to a wide variety of strategies from the regional to the local level
including:
Single Programming Documents, sub-regional strategies (for example the

East Lancashire Partnership’s Strategy in the North West), Local Bio-Diversity
Action Plans, Local Agenda 21 strategies, Local Environment Agency Plans,
‘Travelwise’ campaigns, quality bus partnerships, urban design frameworks,
Integrated Development Plans (Objective 1 and 2 areas), and Health Action
Zones.
Therefore it would appear from the documents that there is good vertical integration
in national space and that the RPGs have been prepared with regard to variety of
national, regional and local legislation, guidance and strategies. Most RPGs include
23
a full list of PPGs and MPGs in their Appendices, whilst the glossaries in a number of
the documents include references to a number of other agencies, strategies, and
policy documents enabling the reader to form a picture of the different documents
and agencies that inform and deliver policies. In the Draft RPG for the North West
references to other relevant documents are included at the bottom of each page.
2.4 Spatial development policy principles

The evaluation also aimed to explore the extent to which the spatial policy principles
and aims of the ESDP have been applied to the RPG documents and have informed
the specific policies of RPG. In ESDP terms this can be described as vertical
integration of policy in European space.
The majority of the documents referred to one or more of the ESDP policy guidelines
as having relevance for the region, but the extent to which the implications of this
were developed and used to inform the strategies and policies of RPG varied.
In general, the review suggested that there is a high level of consistency between the
spatial development principles of the ESDP and the strategies and policies of the
RPGs. This appeared to be the case even where the consistency with the ESDP
was not made explicit by a direct reference to the ESDP. This confirmed the findings
of earlier research conducted in North West England, which found that in the case of
Draft RPG for the North West, it would be ‘relatively easy in re-editing to link policies
with the ESDP in the explanation/justification for the policies’ (Shaw, 2000, p.23). It
was clear from the review that many of the individual topic policies in the RPG
documents can be seen to have a close affinity with the spatial principles of the
ESDP. In essence it was possible to infer consistency between the objectives of the
documents and the principles of the ESDP even where this was not made explicit.
This finding is not that surprising. The principles and policies of the ESDP can to a
large extent be seen to represent the current orthodoxy in terms of spatial planning
for sustainable development. The ESDP has been developed as an iterative process
by the CSD with input from an emerging European spatial planning community of
academics and practitioners. The resulting principles and policy options can
perhaps be characterised as essentially consensus based and broad brush.
Most of the RPGs make at least some reference to the three guiding principles of the
ESDP, usually in their sections on regional context, however the extent to which they
are used to inform the development of the guidance varies greatly. In the North
West, the principles of the ESDP are stated, and in the chapter on regional context
the region is described as being poly-centric. The guidance contains policies that
seek to concentrate development on the conurbations of Greater Manchester and
Merseyside, whilst considering the needs of other settlements both within and outside
the Merseybelt. In the North East, Newcastle upon Tyne is recognised as the
regional capital and Gateway city to the region and as a city of European importance.
In the South West RPG the ESDP’s principle of co-operation between cities and
surrounding rural hinterlands is identified as being ‘of particular relevance to RPG’
(SWRPC, p.4). In the Proposed Changes Draft RPG for Yorkshire and the Humber,
the ESDP principles are described as providing a highly relevant context for RPG and
there is a section explaining how the core vision and objectives, and spatial strategy
24
of RPG are consistent with these. In essence most regions appear to have picked
out the elements of the ESDP, which were felt to be most relevant to their region and
sought to demonstrate how the approach that has been adopted reflects these. This
can be seen as using the ESDP as an indicative framework of options and ideas for
spatial development. However, it is not clear from the documents whether the ESDP
has actually actively informed the development of the strategies, or if it there has
been a process of post-rationalisation, mapping the RPG objectives back onto the
ESDP principles.
By contrast there are a number of regions where it seems that the ESDP may have
had a more profound effect on the overall approach adopted. In the South West,
East Midlands and the West Midlands it seems that the ESDP ideas are perhaps
being more imaginatively used in structuring the approach to developing RPG. The
South West RPG has adopted a polycentric approach based on the functions of
different settlements, rather than on a demographic hierarchy. Particular attention is
paid to the relationships between the Principal Urban Areas (PUAs) and Significant
Settlements and their sub-regional hinterlands. A key principle for the future
development of the region is the development of an integrated approach to urban
and rural areas. The approach recognises the need to secure effective cross-
boundary co-operation at the intra-regional level, particularly in view of the fact that
the planning issues associated with a number of the PUAs increasingly extend into
adjoining districts. Thus Policy SS 3 advocates a co-ordinated approach, which
allows for a selective review of Green Belt boundaries in the region, which should
prevent growth leaping into commuter towns leading to less sustainable patterns of
development.
In the text of the Proposed Changes Draft of RPG for the East Midlands, the sub-
areas approach is justified in terms of the ESDP’s emphasis on the need for policy to
take full account of urban-rural relationships and interdependencies. An explicit link to
the ESDP is made in Chapter 7, which presents the policies for five sub-areas. The
justification stresses the importance of an understanding of how the urban and rural
network of the East Midlands functions and how it could be improved. The sub-area
boundaries do not align with existing ‘largely artificial’ administrative boundaries, but
are based on an assessment of functional relationships.
In the process of developing new RPG 11 for the West Midlands a consensus is
starting to emerge that a fundamental change of policy direction is required,
particularly regarding the relationship between the Major Urban Areas and the rest of
the region. The Draft Spatial Strategy and Indicative Policies document ‘Moving
Forward’ indicates that consideration has been given to the ESDP’s three key
principles in the development of the West Midlands strategy. Research has been
commissioned into a methodology for mapping the functions of different parts of the
region and developing a Polycentric Framework for the West Midlands. The Draft
Spatial Strategy outlines key policy principles and 11 supporting objectives, including
Objective 11 which aims to, ‘Create a “joined up” multi-centred regional structure
where all areas have distinct roles to play’ (WMLGA, 2001, p.22).
Overall, the evaluation suggests that the strategies and policies of the RPG
documents reviewed are broadly consistent with those of the ESDP although links
are generally not made explicit. The majority of the documents referred to one or
25
more of the three overarching ESDP policy guidelines as having relevance for the
region. In most of the documents there was little development of these themes
beyond the initial acknowledgement of their relevance, however, there was evidence
in certain regions that concepts such as polycentricity and rural-urban partnership
have exerted a more profound influence on the direction, development and structure
of RPG.
2.5 Spatial representations
2.5.1 Introduction
The Evaluative Framework also considered whether the European spatial context in
which the RPG had been developed, was acknowledged, and represented through
appropriate maps and diagrams and whether the key spatial diagram effectively
represented the region’s links with rest of the UK, EU and world.
2.5.2 Representation of the European spatial context for the region and RPG
The spatial representations used in the RPG documents are of variable quality in
terms of their effectiveness in illustrating strategies and functional linkages.
As already noted in Section 2.2 all the RPG documents reviewed considered aspects
of the European context for the region and as part of this most also included maps
showing the location of the region in UK and European space. However, the
effectiveness of the maps in conveying a sense of the functional linkages between
the region and other parts of the UK and Europe was generally limited. Most of the
maps were locational ‘geography’ maps, which simply indicated the position of the
region. In the North West (see Map 1) the contextual map accompanies the
paragraph which discusses the regional context, including the East-West links that
will ‘become increasingly important as part of a North European Trade Axis extending
from Ireland to the Baltic’ (NWRA, 2000, p.3). However, the map is not used as an
aid to the understanding of such concepts.
In the North East a rather interesting approach was adopted with a West-East vertical
axis instead of a North-South axis (see Map 2). This unusual approach had the
virtue of challenging the way one thinks about the region’s position in Europe, and
this was reinforced by inclusion of 500km radii added to the diagram which showed,
for example, that Newcastle is closer to the Hague than it is to Penzance. However,
the map did not give an indication of the linkages within European space.
Perhaps surprisingly, given the geographical location of the region and the relatively
comprehensive treatment given in the text to issues relating to its European context,
the ‘South East Region in Context’ diagram does not convey any sense of the flows
that make the region the ‘main gateway between the UK and neighbouring European
countries for business, trade and many other aspects of national life.’ (DETR, 2001,
p.13).
26
Map 1: The North West in Context
source: NWRA (2000), People Places and Prosperity: Draft Regional Planning
Guidance for the North West, p. 3.
27
Map 2: The North East in Context
source: ANEC (2001), Draft Regional Guidance for the North East – Proposed
Changes Draft, Appendices.
28
So overall there would appear to be scope for improvement in the visual

representation of the European spatial context in which RPGs have been developed.
The Panel in the East Midlands suggested that it was useful to have a ‘family of
maps’ showing other policy contexts including the INTERREG areas. Thus such
maps were retained in the East Midlands, though not highlighting the region itself on
these maps limited their effectiveness in conveying a sense of the region’s European
context. In the Proposed Changes for Yorkshire and Humberside maps showing the
North West Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Region have been introduced.
The Key Diagrams were also evaluated in terms of the representation of links with
the rest of the UK, EU and the world, and the degree to which they provided a
dynamic representation of the spatial development of their regions.
In terms of linkages to other regions, these are generally shown but rarely weighted,
and in some regions the key diagram does not represent cross border linkages at all
(RPG 6 East Anglia) or just represents fixed features such as roads or railways
(North East, Yorkshire and the Humber). In other regions where the diagrams are
more schematic such as, the North West (see Map 3) the key cross-boundary
transport corridors are shown with arrows, but not weighted in relation to their relative
significance. For example it is not clear if the M62 corridor is more significant than the
corridor from the M6 into the Yorkshire Dales National Park, or if the M6 southwards
link to the West Midlands is more important than the M6 to Workington link. In their
representations to the EIP of Draft RPG for the North West, the North West Regional
Assembly noted that further additions to the Key Diagram in RPG ’would cause it to
lose its purpose and impact’. This is perhaps a valid point in view of the different
functions that a Key Diagram has to fulfil, notably setting the context for lower tier
plans. The problem of overcrowding the Key Diagram could perhaps be remedied by
representing the higher level functional linkages in European space on the European
context diagram as already discussed.
There is a good deal of variation in the appearance of the Key Diagrams with some
appearing to be OS map based and others being more schematic. The schematic
diagrams tend to be more dynamic than the others and arguably convey a better idea
of the pattern of future development, the importance of different intra- and inter-
regional linkages and relationships, and functional sub-regions. For example, the
East Midlands Key Diagram (Map 4) has a dynamic feel with a simple key system. It
also shows three cross-border multi-modal studies and the area to be included in the
inter-regional study of the Milton Keynes sub-region. The South West RPG Key
Diagram has a similar dynamic feel and is easily related to the strategy and policies
in the text by means of a simple key, which includes references to the relevant
Chapters and policies. The more traditional OS style diagrams have a more static
feel and tend to only represent ‘fixed’ cross-border infrastructure such as roads or
railways.
29
Map 3: Key Diagram - Draft Regional Planning Guidance for North

West England
source: NWRA (2000), People, Places and Prosperity –Draft RPG, p. 8.
30
Map 4: Key Diagram - East Midlands RPG Proposed Changes Draft
source: EMRLGA, Draft Regional Planning Guidance for the East Midlands –
Proposed Changes, p. 9.
31
It is perhaps a matter of opinion as to how effective one feels that different

approaches are in representing the spatial strategy and contexts for RPG. However,
in general the more schematic diagrams seem to give a better idea of the importance
of intra- and inter-regional linkages. It also perhaps interesting to ask if the variety in
approaches adopted suggests some variation in the conception of the role of the key
diagram between different regions.
2.6 Key issues
From the review of RPG documents a number of key issues emerged:
• In general, whilst the European context is acknowledged in the documents, the

way that it has informed the strategy and particular policies is poorly
articulated and explained. Similarly, in general whilst reference is made to the
ESDP document there is little discussion of how it has informed strategy and
policy. In a number of regions where Proposed Changes have been published
following the EIP and Panel Reports, there is a more comprehensive treatment
of the European context and issues raised by the ESDP, for example the
Proposed Changes Drafts of RPG for Yorkshire and the Humber, and the East
Midlands.
• Most maps showing the position of the region in relation to other UK regions
and European space are simple geography maps, which show location but fail
to highlight functional relationships and linkages. However, the Proposed
changes to Draft RPG for the East Midlands (March 2001), and Yorkshire and
the Humber (March 2001), include maps, which show the two INTERREG IIIB
regions to which the regions belong.
• In terms of the spatial planning approach advocated by the ESDP, from the
documentation there appears be good vertical integration – at least in national
space. However, links to the European level and the ESDP are poorly dealt
with even where there is broad consistency between the RPG strategy and
policies and the policy orientations of the ESDP.
• In terms of horizontal co-ordination there is evidence in the documents of

consensus building within regions with references to regional partners and
other regional strategies and agencies. For example, in Yorkshire and
Humberside the responsibilities for the implementation of each policy are set
out at the end of each chapter. In terms of horizontal co-ordination that is
cross border in nature, there is generally little documentary evidence of the
existence of cross-boundary mechanisms, although in a number of RPGs,
reference is made to cross border multi-modal studies, for example, the North
West in the context of the Regional Transport Strategy. This is not to say that
dialogue has not occurred, but the outlook of many RPGs appears fairly
parochial. Similarly regional and national gateways and spillover effects into
adjacent regions are not comprehensively picked up. Despite this general
perspective, a number of RPGs display a commitment to taking the inter-
regional dimension forward. In the South East the proposed Milton Keynes
area sub-regional study is intended to be jointly led by the ‘respective regional
planning bodies’ (South East, East Midlands, and East of England), and there
32
is discussion of the need for inter- and intra-regional co-operation, both in

national and transnational space, in the chapter on implementation. The
South West RPG also recognises that ‘Implementation of this guidance will
also require close co-operation with neighbouring regions’ and states that,
‘The new regional planning body will need to ensure that the co-ordination
work is progressed effectively’ (SWRPC, 2000, pp.57-58).
• The spatial development policy principles contained in the ESDP are so wide
ranging that every RPG reviewed contains policies that can be mapped onto
these. However, links to the ESDP are rarely if ever made explicit at the level
of individual policies.
• The spatial representations used in the RPG documents are of variable quality
in terms of their effectiveness in illustrating strategies and functional linkages.
Linkages to other regions are generally shown but rarely weighted, and in
some regions the key diagram does not represent cross border linkages (see
for example, the key diagram in RPG for East Anglia). Some schematic key
diagrams are more dynamic than others and convey the pattern of future
development, the importance of different intra and inter-regional linkages and
relationships, and functional sub-regions (e.g. the East Midlands and South
West). Other key diagrams are more static in the way they represent
strategies (e.g. Yorkshire and the Humber). This perhaps suggests some
variation in the perceived role of the key diagram.
Thus overall the extent to which the ESDP has informed the development of RPG
seems to vary considerably between the regions. A number of factors seem to be
important in explaining the differences. Perhaps one of the most significant factors is
timing. This seems to have two dimensions. First those RPGs that are more recent
in origin tend to pay more attention to European considerations. Secondly, the stage
of RPG in the preparation process also seems to be an important factor. In a number
of regions following the EIP, Panel Report and subsequent re-drafting of RPG, some
of the European considerations seem to be more explicitly articulated. A final
dimension which the RPG review seemed to suggest was significant, was the
empirical reality of the region. For some regions, connections to Europe, relationships
with other UK regions and internal structure impacted upon the way that RPG was
produced and contributed to a greater cognisance of the European agenda.
33
Chapter 3: Regional Player Survey
3.1 Introduction
In order to supplement the desk based evaluation and to gain a better insight into the
wider RPG process, a Regional Player Survey was conducted. Structured interviews
took place during May and June with representatives of the Regional Planning
Bodies and the regional Government Offices. The survey was undertaken to verify
the conclusions reached from the evaluation of the RPG documents, and to gain an
up-to-date perspective on the evolving RPG process.
3.2 Views of the ESDP and its implications for RPG

The ESDP is generally seen as a document embodying spatial development
principles rather than as a document promoting a particular kind of planning process.
The ESDP was described as coming up with a set of ‘norms or values for spatial
planning’ or as containing ‘sound principles’.
In terms of the spatial policy principles and aims of ESDP, there was a feeling that
even though the consistency between RPG strategies and policies and the ESDP
was not made explicit, there was nevertheless general consistency. A number of
interviewees noted that the values of the ESDP were in many respects similar to
those of the British planning system, for example, the commitment to containing
urban sprawl and securing urban regeneration. Another example of shared
objectives was in relation to the integration of land use and transport planning which
is promoted by the ESDP and also an objective of UK Government policy.
Consequently it was broadly possible to map the objectives of the strategies and
policies of the RPGs onto the ESDP principles, and in some regions consideration of
the ESDP seems to have consisted of little more than a checklist or badging exercise
in order to satisfy the requirements of PPG 11. The degree of concurrence between
the values and objectives of the ESDP and the UK planning system reflects the way
that the ESDP has been developed as a dialogue between European planners, and
essentially reflects the current orthodoxy in terms of policy thinking on sustainable
spatial development.
In terms of the spatial planning process advocated by the ESDP, one interviewee
noted that in some respects the ESDP’s approach is more spatial than traditional
town and country planning which reflects the dichotomy between land use and
economic planning in the UK. In another region it was acknowledged that the RPG
being developed was not yet truly spatial despite the broadening of its scope during
the current review. Another interviewee suggested that pragmatism was the real
motivation for pursuing a more spatial/sectoral co-ordination approach, in terms of
getting other agencies ‘on-side’ in order to deliver the RPG strategy.
A useful role of the ESDP, mentioned in three regions, was that of highlighting the
spatial implications of EU programmes. In one case the view was expressed that the
structural funds were a more important factor than the ESDP in shaping regional
policy.
34
So overall the survey revealed a general feeling that the principles of the ESDP were
already largely being applied in the English planning system. This was reflected in
the national guidance that has appeared in recent years and in the emerging
strategies and policies of the current round of RPG reviews.
3.3 The role of the ESDP in informing policy debate

The interviews confirmed the findings of the documentary review, suggesting that
there is wide variety in the extent to which the ESDP has informed the development
of different RPGs.
In some regions although the RPG was broadly consistent with the policy principles
of the ESDP, the ESDP had not really played a key role in informing the debate. In
such regions, the ESDP was seen as an important contextual document, but much
less significant than other policy documents such as PPGs, or regional documents
such as the RES. In a number of cases the ESDP was described as ‘another peg’ on
which to hang the justification for policy responses already suggested by regional
analysis and national policy guidance. However, in other regions, the ESDP is being
more actively employed as a justification for policies and strategies.
It was suggested in one interview that the ESDP’s role in informing policy debate was
limited, as few stakeholders beyond the GO and the RPB had even heard of the
document let alone read it. In two regions the relative lack of representations
submitted to the EIP on the European dimension and the ESDP was noted. In at
least three regions, the role of the regional Government Offices in getting the
European context and the ESDP onto the agenda for the EIPs was seen as critical.
In addition the attitude of the EIP panel could also prove significant and again there
appear to have been a variety of experiences. In one region the Panel did not seem
to have an interest in the ESDP and did not respond to a background paper on the
subject submitted by the RPB. In other regions it seemed that the Panel took greater
cognisance of the European agenda and the ESDP. This in turn led to a
strengthening of these dimensions in the Proposed Changes and Final versions of
RPG. In one region the Panel Report relied on a polycentricity based justification in
proposing changes to the Draft RPG (see Chapter 4).
An interesting point, which seemed to confirm an idea suggested through the desk
based review, was that the indigenous characteristics and realities of certain regions
were key factors in determining both the degree of consistency with the ESDP and its
role in informing policy development. In one region the strategy for RPG had evolved
from the principles that were felt to be important in the region at the time, and these
were coincident with central ESDP principles. After the publication of the ESDP, a
checklist appraisal had been undertaken to assess the consistency of the RPG
themes with the ESDP, but the origin of the approach and strategy was firmly rooted
in the region itself. In other regions the ESDP appears to have been actively used to
inform policy debates rather than simply being viewed in terms of a policy checklist.
In one region it was noted that the ‘diverse mosaic of sub-regions fits ESDP thinking’
whilst in another it was suggested that the RPG was ‘very much informed’ by the
ESDP in terms of the polycentricity issue. In three regions the relevance of the
ESDP’s policy principle of a new urban-rural partnership and rural-urban networks
was highlighted. There was a feeling in two regions that RPG did not yet ‘have a
35
handle’ on this issue and that it was linked to the problem of how to take account of
the different characteristics of deep and suburban rural areas. In another case, a
closer consideration of cross-boundary issues was noted as something that had been
encouraged by the ESDP
Overall, the survey suggested that in three cases the ESDP had been one of number
of key factors, which had helped to stimulate a radical re-consideration of the spatial
structure of the region and the approach to developing RPG. The concept of
polycentricity seems to be the most relevant element of the ESDP principles, and in
some regions it had clearly caught the imagination of key players in the RPG process
as a new ‘lens’ through which to view functional linkages within the region.
3.4 Treatment of cross-border issues

In terms of cross-border linkages, there was an acknowledgement in number of
regions that the ideas in the ESDP had occasioned a re-appraisal of RPG’s approach
to such issues. In two regions the ESDP’s emphasis on cross border dimensions was
specifically described as useful. Again the empirical reality of individual regions
played a role, for example, in one region it was felt that there were no significant
cross-border issues, which were not already being dealt with by mechanisms at the
structure plan and local authority level. By contrast, in another region the ESDP’s
promotion of horizontal co-operation at the intra- and inter-regional scales was seen
as useful ‘hook’ on which to hang a justification of intervention on the basis of sub-
regional issues, when addressing the structure plan level. However, it was
acknowledged that there might be problems between levels of governance in pursing
a sub-regional approach.
The role of the EIP Panel was again identified as being significant and there was a
great contrast in the approach adopted to the consideration of cross-border issues.
In one region the Panel was felt to be ‘not looking outside the region’. In another
region, the Panel did not invite neighbouring regions to attend the EIP and an
interview in an adjacent region revealed that the neighbouring RPB had in fact twice
applied unsuccessfully to attend the EIP. In contrast, the Panel in another region had
invited transnational representatives from France to attend the EIP, and seemed to
regard the consideration of links to other regions as being one of the most relevant
messages of the ESDP. In another region the Panel Report had recommended a
reduction of the housing allocation in one part of the region on the basis that a too
high a figure may lead to increased in-commuting to a city in a neighbouring region.
The issue of inter-regional migration was discussed and overall the Panel was
described as having ‘plugged’ cross-boundary issues.
On balance it seems that the call for effective horizontal integration in dealing with
planning issues with a cross-border dimension, is an aspect of the ESDP that is
recognised, but developed to a varying extent across the regions. The discussions
often seemed to focus on specific responses to specific problems such as Multi-
Modal Studies for certain transport corridors, with a feeling that these sufficiently
addressed the cross-border dimension. However, in a number of regions there was a
clear acknowledgement that the cross-boundary dimension was insufficiently
developed in the RPG and that there were as yet no ‘good mechanisms’ to resolve
inter-regional issues. However, one issue raised was the difficulty of tackling some of
36
these inter-regional issues when there was a lack overall guidance relating to how
the region should fit into the wider English and UK contexts.
3.5 Other Points and Key Issues

The key points to emerge from the survey can be summarised as:
• The ESDP was described in one interview as ‘Something from Europe that the
regions are interpreting’, and it was noted that the ‘missing bit is the national
perspective’. This led to a consideration of whether there was a need for a
national spatial strategy, or whether the present situation is the best with each
region developing its own approach and interpretation of the ESDP in a
‘bottom-up’ approach. The advantages of a national spatial strategy were felt
to be certainty whilst a potential disadvantage could be the constraint of the
regions’ flexibility to develop their own approaches to issues.
• In light of some of the conclusions of the desk based review of ‘Spatial

Representations’ in RPG documents (see Section 2.5), it is noteworthy that
the sometimes contentious nature of representing growth corridors on maps
was cited as one reason for the adoption of a less schematic approach in the
Key Diagram. Issues of timing were also mentioned and in one region it was
acknowledged that the OS map based approach was used as there was not
time for the production of a schematic Key Diagram.
• The important role that individuals have in influencing the extent to which the
RPG process and documentation has regard to particular issues, in this case
European considerations and the ESDP, was emphasised by the survey.
Individuals may be associated with any of the stakeholder organisations
involved in the RPG process including the RPBs, Government Offices, other
regional bodies, or be part of the EIP Panel.
• Another theme to emerge form the survey was that there appears to be a
mutual learning process between the different regions in the development of
RPG. The representatives of the RPBs and Government Offices were clearly
aware of aspects of the RPG process in other regions and the way European
considerations were being addressed in different ways at all stages of the
process. A number of interviewees mentioned the research, which has taken
place into a polycentric framework for the West Midlands and indicated that
the relevance of this to their own regions was now being considered. In one
region it was suggested that further training or information on the ESDP would
be useful, particularly in view of the launch of INTERREG IIIB and the
increased level of resources now available through this funding channel.
• The survey strongly reinforced the idea that the empirical reality of the region
was an important factor influencing the treatment of the European agenda and
the response to the ESDP. The conditions in some regions lent themselves to
a natural application of the principles of the ESDP. In essence, connections to
Europe, relationships with other UK regions and internal structure were
reflected in the way that RPG was produced and perhaps led to a fuller
consideration of the European agenda as a whole and the ESDP in particular.
37
It seems that in some regions, the ESDP principles provided a new ‘lens’
through which to view the region and aided a new analysis of key spatial and
thematic planning issues. In other regions, whilst the ESDP was perhaps not
the origin of certain analytical and policy approaches adopted, it nevertheless
served to reinforce indigenously derived conclusions and policy choices.
Overall, the ESDP seems to be being used as a framework from which regions are
selecting the aspects, which they feel are most relevant. There appear to be three
broad approaches to this. Some regions appear to regard the ESDP as a
requirement to be satisfied through a checklist or badging exercise, which maps the
strategy and policies of RPG onto the principles of the ESDP. Other regions seem to
regard the ESDP as a useful source of further justification on which to ‘hang’
particular policy ideas, and see the document perhaps more as a menu of interesting
spatial development policy ideas of varying relevance to their regions, but which often
provide a useful lens for conceptualising planning issues and regional structure.
Finally, there is evidence that in perhaps three regions the ESDP has been one of a
number of key factors, which have helped to stimulate a radical re-consideration of
the spatial structure of the region and the approach to developing RPG.
38
Chapter 4: Case studies

4.1 Introduction
The purpose of the case studies is to enable a more thorough evaluation of the
extent to which the ESDP has been a factor shaping emerging RPGs, by highlighting
process issues. In each region, the following discussions will seek to identify factors
that have influenced the way in which the European agenda has informed the RPG
process. The situation in the West Midlands is considered where the RPG review
process is in its an early stages. It is also a region where the concept of polycentricity
has been prominent in shaping strategic development policy, and Draft RPG will be
prepared within the context of the most up to date policy framework. The North West
RPG is considered because the Examination in Public (EIP) has recently occurred
and the European dimension was considered quite extensively during the
proceedings. Finally, the East Midlands RPG is used as an example to illustrate how
there has been a very clear strengthening of the European dimension in the
Proposed Changes Draft following the EIP. It is important to recognise that the case
studies are not intended to necessarily identify best practice in terms of outputs, but
to illustrate how at different stages of the process of RPG preparation, the European
agenda has the informed the development of strategy.
4.2 The West Midlands
4.2.1 Introduction
RPG 11 for the West Midlands was the last of the old style RPGs to be issued, in
1998. The West Midlands is therefore a region where the RPG review is at a
relatively early stage in the process and is taking place within the most up-to-date
policy framework. The review was formally launched in February 2000 when a Draft
Project Brief was issued. The final Project Brief, which included a Draft Vision for the
Region, was issued in April 2000 and was followed by a period of consultation. A
number of research studies were commissioned to inform the process and ‘Moving
Forward – Draft Spatial Strategy and Indicative Policies’ was issued in May 2001
(WMLGA, 2001). It is planned to publish a Draft RPG by October 2001.
4.2.2 Developing RPG for the West Midlands
The starting point for reviewing RPG11 was the feeling that it was fundamentally
flawed and there was a need to completely re-think the planning strategy for the
region. The existing policy approach was leading to an unsustainable outward
dispersal of people and jobs from the urban cores of the region resulting in, ‘little
improvement to the overall quality of life in the Region whether in the Urban Areas,
the “overspill” areas or indeed the remoter parts of the Region’ (WMLGA, 2001,
p.10).
In response to this situation, a set of Guiding Principles were developed to shape the
development of the new spatial strategy for the region:
39
A: To secure more sustainable patterns of development throughout the

region
B: To encourage a better balance between jobs, houses and services
within each part of the Region in order to create more sustainable and
stable communities
C: To encourage economic growth and increased prosperity throughout
the RPG period, which serves the broad sustainable development
needs of the Region
D: To ensure that regional inequalities in education, employment, health,
environment and social and cultural potential are narrowed
E: To facilitate appropriate development in rural communities where job
and service needs exist.
(WMLGA, Policy Group, March 2001)
Guided by these principles, the RES, the Regional Sustainability Action Framework,
and Regional Cultural Strategy, the Urban and Rural White Papers, regional
consultations and the findings from commissioned research:
‘...a consensus is starting to emerge that, in developing an overarching spatial

strategy for the West Midlands, a fundamental change of policy direction is
required’.
(WMLGA, 2001, p.10)
The new approach advocated by the Draft Spatial Strategy is based around the
following five key principles:
• Concentrating development and investment within the Major Urban Areas

so that they can increasingly meet their own economic and social needs;
• Modernising and diversifying the Region’s economy but ensuring that
opportunities for growth are linked to meeting needs and help reduce social
exclusion;
• Promoting sustainable urban renaissance;
• Promoting sustainable rural renaissance;
• Modernising the transport infrastructure of the Region to enable these
principles to be realised.
(WMLGA, 2001, p.10)
The Draft Project Brief for the review of RPG for the West Midlands acknowledged
that the RPG review is the ‘principle vehicle for the delivery of the spatial policy
principles of the ESDP at the regional level’ (WMLGA, 2000). The concept of
polycentricity was also considered to be central to the policy principles of the ESDP.
In July 2000 the WMLGA and DETR jointly commissioned a study by ECOTEC
Research and Consulting and the West Midlands Joint Data Team to develop a
‘Polycentric Framework for the West Midlands’.
The project brief stated that there was a need to clearly define the polycentric
approach and to consider how it might be developed as an analytical tool. The
starting point for the consideration of polycentricty in the West Midlands study was
that ‘polycentricity should mean more than “multi-centred” in terms of the traditional
settlement hierarchy’ (WMLGA, 2000). Polycentricity is seen more in terms of the
40
distribution of layers of different functions so that: ‘The relative significance of a

particular place...(depends), not on its size, but on the importance of the specific
function, the coincidence of functions, and/or its linkages to other functions and
places.’ In terms of developing RPG the brief states that:
‘It is intended that a clearer understanding of the roles and inter-relationships

between places will enable each place to be given equal consideration as to
its needs and as to how it might contribute to “balanced competitiveness”
across the Region. The approach being investigated, therefore, inherently
addresses urban-rural relationships, and among other benefits, should prove
valuable in providing baseline information and assist the RPG sustainability
appraisal process’
(WMLGA, 2000)
The overall aim of the project was to develop a polycentric framework as a ‘practical
tool’ which recognises that places have multiple roles and have different spheres of
influence for these roles. A key aim was to shed light on how the ‘relationships
between places vary according to the particular functions and linkages involved’
(WMLGA, 2000).
The final project report indicated that the ‘notion of polycentric development has
gained prominence through the central role it has been afforded in the ESDP’, and
that ‘It lies at the heart of a new concept for the spatial development of the EU – as
such, it largely relates to the EU scale’ (ECOTEC & JDT, p.3). The report discusses
the ESDP’s policy principles and; its pursuit of balanced spatial development across
the EU within the global economy integration zones; the role of Gateway cities in
providing points of access to the EU territory; the issue of complementarity and co-
operation between cities and regions in terms of their functions; the application of
polycentricity within a region in terms of the functional interdependencies that exist
between cities; the value of ‘voluntary co-operation across administrative boundaries’
for some functions such as transport or waste management; and; the promotion of
city clusters or networks of smaller towns to create viable markets.
In terms of the ESDP the report notes that ‘the ESDP helps us to determine some of
the key attributes of a regional polycentric framework’ (ECOTEC & JDT, p.4), which
can be seen as a means of delivering an integrated regional perspective by bringing
together the economic, social, urban and rural structures of a region into a single
framework which can assist in encouraging balanced spatial development. The
Polycentric Framework is seen as having the potential to help inform policy
development in relation to four key elements of spatial structure related to the West
Midlands:
41
1. The desired settlement structure, including consideration of central places

offering different levels of public services, settlement development patterns –
including growth points – and development axes
2. The desired open space structure, including significant environmental
resources and the use of open spaces
3. The desired infrastructures locations and routes, including traffic and
communications infrastructure, freight distribution facilities and public utility
and waste disposal infrastructure
4. The desired economic structure of the region, including the location of
different types of economic activity
(ECOTEC & JDT, 2000)
An important methodological feature of the approach is the consideration of ‘functions

first’. In essence the analysis has been developed around functions and their
location rather than specific places such as towns, cities or villages. The approach is
different in that it does not view places as a ‘given’, or a settlement’s significance as
being defined by size. Places are seen as being where functions are located and are
constructs of the functions present. There is also a recognition that ‘Functions do
not, necessarily, neatly fit some pre-defined population threshold or politico-
administrative boundary’ (ECOTEC & JDT, p.10), although the need to overlay such
boundaries in order to facilitate strategy implementation is acknowledged.
The functional analysis, which informed the development of the Polycentric

Framework was based around the four elements of the spatial structure of the region
presented above. Twenty-two functions were identified as components of the
polycentric framework. From the available data sets relating to these functions,
eleven summary maps representing different perspectives of the four elements of the
spatial structure of the region were produced (Fig. 4).
Figure 4. Relationship between functional maps and the spatial structure of

the region, West Midlands Polycentric Framework.
Summary Map Perspective on Spatial Structure

1 Population Change and migration Settlement structure
patterns
2 Changing residential patterns Settlement Structure
3 The agricultural economy Open-space structure
4 Vulnerable areas Economic structure
5 The service economy Economic structure
6 The knowledge based economy Economic structure
7 Landscape quality Open-space structure
8 Tourism centres Economic structure
9 Key industrial sectors Economic structure
10 The distribution industry Economic structure
11 Broad industrial concentration Economic structure
(ECOTEC & JDT, 2000, p. 12)
The Framework showed that the region could not be divided into neat sub-areas
based around a number of key centres, although it did highlight the role of, and the
42
relationships between, different areas. One key element to emerge was the
separateness of the ‘areas of economic activity and those of growing residential
attractiveness.’ (ECOTEC & JDT, p.19). The analysis also indicated that:
• Most economic activity is concentrated in a limited number of key areas, which

also contain the region’s administrative centres (with the exception of food and
drink related industries),
• Generally those areas with a concentration of traditional industrial activity are
also are losing population and are not attractive residential areas,
• The new service economy is in part reinforcing some old patterns but also
creating new patterns of development (knowledge based activities are tending
to develop in the old industrial centres but also in a sweep around the south of
the region),
• Areas of increasing residential attractiveness are concentrated in a Northern
band from the edge of Stoke-on-Trent to Shrewsbury and in a ‘broken’
southern sweep from southern Coventry to Hereford.
(ECOTEC & JDT, p.20)
There is a recognition that the functional complexity of the region ‘limits the extent to
which a stylised representation of the polycentric framework of the region can be
usefully developed as a policy tool’ (ECOTEC & JDT, p. 19). It was beyond the
scope of the study to elaborate on how the perspectives provided by the polycentric
framework may be used in the formulation of policy and the report concludes that:
‘Overall, the study has demonstrated that it is possible to develop a

polycentric framework for a region using available data sets. The value
of the framework will be determined by those practitioners who make
use of it, particularly to explore different options for revised Regional
Planning Guidance.’
(ECOTEC & JDT, p.22)
In terms of utilising such ideas in the RPG, it is still too early to draw conclusions as
to extent to which, polycentric thinking has informed strategic policymaking. The Draft
Spatial Strategy and Indicative Policies which have just been published recognise
that the national and European contexts for the region will need to be considered in
the full Draft of RPG (WMLGA, 2001, p.9). But some of the proposed Objectives do
seem to suggest that Polycentricity research is informing strategic objectives and
more detailed policies. Objective 6 which aims to promote Birmingham as a world city
advocates a re-distribution of functions to the region thus contributing to the
achievement of balanced development at the European scale. There is however,
perhaps scope to consider the city and the region’s role more explicitly and whether
contributing to polycentricity at the European scale may involve closer linkages with
London, an existing zone of global integration, or with the East Midlands and/or the
North of England as envisaged by the ‘Vision for North West Europe’ (SWG, 2001).
In terms of the spatial strategy itself it is perhaps a little surprising in light of the
polycentricity research that Objective 11 - ‘To create a joined-up multi-centred
regional structure where all areas have distinct roles to play’, is the last of the
43
headline objectives in the spatial strategy. Admittedly there appears to be no order

of priority attached to the Objectives, but it might have been expected that such a
‘structuring’ spatial objective may have come before some of the more detailed
objectives thus helping to define the spatial strategy.
Overall however, it seems that the ESDP’s policy principles have provided a useful
lens for conceptualising planning issues and regional structure in the West Midlands.
Consequently, the ESDP appears to have been one of a number of key factors,
which have contributed to a radical re-consideration of the spatial structure of the
region and the new approach to developing RPG.
4.2.3 Conclusion
It would appear that the case of RPG for the West Midlands reinforces the findings of
both the desk based and survey based elements of the study in terms of the
significance of timing, the role of key individuals, and the regional context in
influencing the extent to which the European agenda is embraced by RPG. It is clear
that a number of key factors have contributed to making the region one of those
where the ESDP’s spatial development principles have exerted a profound influence
on certain key regional players and the approach taken to developing RPG.
A key factor seems to have been the consensus, which emerged during the early
stages of the process that the existing RPG was not working, which meant that the
RPG review started with a ‘clean slate’. Within this context the ESDP, and
particularly its promotion of polycentric and balanced development, was seen by
certain key regional players as a useful, ‘tool which appeared’, with strong potential to
help inform the strategy of revised RPG. In essence, the complete review of RPG
principles gave a window of opportunity to consider the relevance and applicability of
the concept of polycentricity to the West Midlands, and to interpret the region as a
network of centres rather than a hierarchy of centres. There is also a clear
interaction with the developing national policy agenda as reflected by the DETR’s
backing of research into the development of a ‘Polycentric Framework for the West
Midlands’. The findings of this research demonstrated that it is possible to develop a
methodology for producing a polycentric framework using available data sets to
portray the functions and roles of different areas in the region, although linkages
between functions in different parts of the region were less easy to demonstrate.
Therefore, the prominence given to the ESDP, in terms of the decision to commission
research in order to operationalise the concept of polycentricity, appears to have
been driven by a combination and coincidence of factors linked to the empirical
planning issues facing the region, an engagement with the European agenda from
sections of the RPB, and the strengthening of central Government support and
promotion of the European dimension in regional planning. However, as the
consultant’s report stresses, the value of the Polycentric Framework will be
determined by how it is used to develop and test policy options for the RPG review.
44
4.3 Regional Planning Guidance for the North West of England
4.3.1 Introduction
In July 2000 the North West Regional Assembly presented its Draft Regional
Planning Guidance to the Secretary of State, Transport and the Regions. In the
forward to the North West’s Draft RPG (North West Regional Assembly, 2000) the
claim was made that this was the first RPG in England to have been prepared in
accordance with the new framework set out by the Government in their ‘PPG 11:
Regional Planning Public Consultation Draft’ (DETR, 1999a). This case study is
intended to show how the period of public consultation and the Examination in Public
can help address some of the shortcomings of a Draft RPG especially in relation to
the European agenda.
4.3.2 Draft RPG for the North West and its Examination in Public
Following the formal submission of Draft RPG, key stakeholders were invited to make
formal representations highlighting their views and concerns. This period of public
consultation ended formally on 13th October 2000. The Government Office for the
North West (GONW) were concerned that European considerations had not been
given sufficient weight in the preparation of the RPG, or at least that such
considerations were not made explicit within the body of the document. A desk-
based study was therefore commissioned to evaluate this aspect of Draft RPG
(Shaw, 2000). This concluded by suggesting that there was little evidence to suggest
that the European agenda had been seriously considered within Draft RPG, though
many of the detailed policies did fit within the framework established by the ESDP.
This report helped to inform GONW’s response to Draft RPG, which noted the lack of
a full consideration of the European agenda, as reflected by the extracts below:
‘The Draft RPG could do more to explain the European Union and the
European Spatial Development Perspective. The main policy themes of the
latter are important as context to the new RPG for the North West, and should
be explained.’
(GONW, Statement to EIP of Draft RPG for the North West, S/1/360)
‘There is clearly a need to explicitly consider the implications of European

integration and enlargement for the future of the North West,…..Will
enlargement of the EU create new markets for goods and services in the North
West in Middle and Eastern Europe, for instance, and what would that imply
for transport and communications systems across the Pennines?… The links
between the broad regional strategy and the ESDP could, and should be
made explicit.’
(GONW, EIP Statement, S/1/360)
45
The issue of horizontal co-operation was also raised by GONW:
‘In addition to ensuring that the European agenda is more clearly recognised,
understood and explicitly feeds into the RPG process, the ESDP suggests a
need for regional planning to take much greater cognisance of linkages. There
are already good officer level linkages between the RPG team and other
regional institutions in the North West. But there needs to be greater evidence
provided to suggest that the cross border policy context and issues are being
adequately considered.’
(GONW, EIP Statement, S/1/360)
The Government Office also suggested that the RPG might give fuller consideration
to the implications of the spatially significant EU policies identified in the ESDP and
that the three key spatial development principles could be more strongly represented
in Draft RPG.
It was not just the Government Office who raised this issue, there were a number of
other agencies and organisations in the region who felt the European agenda had not
been fully considered including the North West Development Agency (NWDA) and
the Merseyside Policy Unit.
The representations from regional stakeholders informed the selection of matters to

be discussed at the Examination in Public of Draft RPG (See Figure 5). These were
made public on February 5th 2001 and included at least four matters with clear links
to the European spatial planning agenda (see Fig. 6).
Figure 5: Final List of Matters for the Public Examination into the Draft
Regional Planning Guidance for the North West (February-March
2001)
1: Structure and Context of the Draft Regional Planning Guidance

2: Core Strategy and Sustainability
3: Sustainable Development Framework
4: Economic Competitiveness with Social Progress
5: Housing Provision
6: Green Belts
7: Regional Transport Strategy
8: Cross-Boundary Issues
9: Rural and Coastal Communities
10: Environmental Quality
11: Implementation, Monitoring and Review
46
Figure 6: Matters with Clear Links to the European Spatial Planning

Agenda - EIP into Draft RPG for the North West
Matter 1.3: Is the Regional Context sufficiently explained in relation to European,

national, regional and sub-regional strategies?
Matter 1.4: Is there sufficient information about the agencies that will assist with, or be
responsible for , delivering the strategy of the RPG?
Matter 8.1: Is the Draft RPG compatible with the emerging guidance for adjacent
regions and Wales?
Matter 8.2: What, if any, additional cross-boundary guidance is needed in the following
areas:
i. Chester and Ellesmere Port in relation to North East Wales?
ii. South and East Cheshire, and Greater Manchester in relation to
the East and West Midlands?
iii. Cumbria, North and East Lancashire, and Greater
Manchester in relation to the North East and Yorkshire and the
Humber?
Matter 1.3 is clearly linked to the issue of European contexts and the ESDP. Matter
1.4 can also be seen to relate to the ‘sectoral co-ordination’ role of spatial planning,
something that has been much debated within the European spatial planning
community, and the horizontal integration promoted by the ESDP (CEC, 1999, para.
161). Matter 8 relates to cross-boundary issues primarily within UK national space
and with the adjacent regions of, North East Wales, the East and West Midlands, the
North East, and Yorkshire and the Humber. The ESDP advocates horizontal
consideration of cross-boundary spatial development issues and relationships at all
spatial scales down to the level of ‘intra-regional’ co-operation between local
authorities within a region. Therefore questions relating to inter-regional issues, and
sub-regional areas, can be seen as part of the spatial planning ‘approach’ or process
advocated by the ESDP.
The Examination in Public (EIP) took place between February 13 and March 2, 2001.
For each of the ‘matters’, key stakeholders were invited to submit written statements
and to attend a roundtable discussion when the Panel felt they had relevant points to
raise. The following paragraphs briefly highlight some of the key points that
emerged in these discussions.
In response to Matter 1.3, it was noted at the EIP that the NWRA had recognised that
there needed to be a fuller recognition of the European context in paragraph 2.1 of
the RPG. The NWRA’s Written Statement to the EIP had highlighted the fact that the
aims and objectives of the Core Strategy for Draft RPG did reflect the three key
principles of the ESDP and that its approach recognised the polycentric nature of the
region. The statement also asserted that the move away from the strategy in RPG
13, which concentrated development in the Mersey Belt and the north-south spine of
47
the region, had been ‘influenced by the principles of balanced polycentric

development as outlined in the ESDP’. However, the statement also recognised that
with the publication of final ‘PPG 11 - Regional Planning’ (DETR, 2000), ‘more
emphasis should be given to the ESDP and the INTERREG Programme in RPG’.
The NWRA suggested that a map of the INTERREG Programmes Areas could be
included in the final version of RPG.
Such issues were also reflected in the discussions at the EIP. In terms of the wider
European spatial context for the North West, Professor Brian Robson, speaking on
behalf of the INTERREG IIC North European Trade Axis (NETA) project, emphasised
the view that the North West should been seen as part of an wider region stretching
from Ireland through the UK to northern Europe, and felt that the implications of the
economic links with Ireland needed more recognition. Such a perspective may be
important in a national context, and an east-west focus may help to counter spatial
imbalance and resultant problems such as congestion in the South East. Manchester
City Council used Matter 1.3 to argue that Manchester should be recognised as the
regional capital and the key driver of the regional economy, and related this to the
national, European and international scales. This built on the argument presented in
their statement that the city’s international profile and success clearly enhanced the
competitiveness of the region as a whole at the European scale. Similarly, in relation
to competitiveness, the NWDA representative suggested that the RPG suffered from
a lack of context and raised the issue of inter-regional competition both in national
and transnational space. GONW again suggested that the European context could
have been explained more fully in RPG, and were interested to know how useful the
NETA concept might be in this regard. There was also some discussion of the
application of the concept of polycentricity and the Panel Secretary asked about the
idea of a region based on a cluster of conurbations including Leeds, Manchester
Liverpool and Sheffield (the written statement on behalf of NETA had raised this
issue). In relation to the latter point there was also some debate as to whether the
West Midlands conurbation should form part of such a region, with a general feeling
that linkages were less well developed in this case.
In terms of Matter 8, as well as the NWRA and GONW, statements were submitted
from local authorities within the region, sub-regional partnerships, cross-border
groupings of local authorities, the Peak District National Park Authority, and the West
Midlands Local Government Association (the RPB for that region). A number of the
statements submitted made reference to the ESDP as a means of supporting their
arguments.
In its written statement, GONW linked the need for an effective consideration of
cross-boundary issues back to ‘PPG 11 - Regional Planning’ and the ESDP, noting
that ‘Implementation of the ESDP requires co-operation across, regional, national
and local boundaries’, although the statement also noted that there are ‘no clear
conflicts between the draft RPG strategy and the emerging guidance in adjoining
regions’. Consideration was given to sub-regional issues that crossed local authority
boundaries and the potential for sub-regional strategies to address issues that
‘cannot be resolved if left to individual authorities’. The statement echoes PPG 11
and suggests that:
48
‘There may also be instances where sub-regional strategies need to be

developed that cross regional boundaries and which require complementary
policies and proposals to be identified in RPGs in neighbouring regions.’
(GONW, 2001, EIP Statement, S/8/360)
Examples of the need for additional cross regional boundary guidance in specific
areas included the Chester sub-region’s relationships with North East Wales,
Cumbria’s links with Southern Scotland and Lancashire, and Greater Manchester’s
links with Yorkshire and the Humber. In the context of the North West and Yorkshire
conurbations reference is made to the ‘Spatial Vision for North West Europe’, which
identifies these as being a counterweight global gateway, and to the potential role of
the NETA corridor. The statement concludes that ‘There is a need to consider cross
boundary issues more explicitly in the review of RPG’.
The NWRA’s Statement (S/8/438) describes the consultation that has occurred at
various stages in the process with neighbouring countries and regions and notes that
‘None of the respondents in the adjoining regions and countries has expressed
concerns about the core strategy, aims and objectives of Draft RPG for the North
West’. The point is made that the aims and objectives of the other regions strategies
are broadly similar and emphasise sustainable development. The aims and
objectives of the neighbouring regions’ and Wales’ strategies are reproduced in the
statement. The statement also summarises the concerns of a number of respondents
to the consultation process including, the need to develop ‘firm’ trans-boundary
mechanisms for the delivery of the strategy, and for inter-regional links to be
identified more clearly on the key diagram.
The need for additional cross-boundary guidance in relation to different areas was
also considered. The representations of local authorities, and sub-regional groupings
of local authorities were considered such as those from the
‘Chester/Cheshire/Flintshire/Wrexham Liaison Group’ and the ‘Standing Conference
of South Pennine Authorities’ (SCOSPA - see below), which deal with cross-
boundary issues relating to North East Wales and Cheshire, and transpennine links,
respectively. It is not felt that additional guidance in RPG is required in respect of
these two areas, although it is recognised that a reference could be inserted outlining
the basis of a future North East Wales-Cheshire study, and reference is made to the
NETA project in respect of Yorkshire and the Humber as an example of the ‘close co-
operation and partnership between the two regions’.
As already noted a number of organisations submitted representations on Matters

8.1 and 8.2. The Standing Conference of South Pennine Authorities (SCOSPA) is an
organisation of local authorities, water companies and community groups, which
have interests that straddle the regional boundary between the North West and
Yorkshire and the Humber. SCOSPA’s submission to the EIP notes that the
description in Draft RPG of the Pennine ‘chain’ as, ‘to some extent a physical barrier
to transport and communication’ , is unnecessarily negative. The contrast is drawn
with European regions such as the Randstaad and the Rhine-Rhur region, and the
claim is made that in those regions ‘trans-regional identities are celebrated, not
considered as some sort of physical impediment’. More specifically attention is
drawn to transpennine issues that need to be addressed including, ‘A shared corridor
49
of opportunity stretching from Liverpool Bay across to the Humber Estuary and into
the European Union’. The statement also suggests that the expansion of the section
on European context would improve the RPG document and notes that ‘the trans-
regional approach is explicit to the ESDP document’.
The submission of the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities (AGMA) also

considers that trans-boundary issues at a variety of spatial scales should be given
greater emphasis including:
‘The economic linkages including the Liverpool-East Coast Ports Trade Axis;
the INTERREG II aspects of a global gateway across the North West,
Yorkshire and Midlands as part of the need to balance out the existing
European Metropolitan areas; and recognition of the fact that motorways have
created an economic region spanning the Pennines…’
(Association of Greater Manchester Authorities, 2001)
In these representations there was clearly a recognition that trans-boundary issues

exist at a variety of spatial scales, and that in the context of the East-West
transpennine corridor, trans-boundary issues can be simultaneously viewed from
intra-regional, inter-regional, and transnational perspectives.
4.3.3 Conclusion
The purpose of the discussion above has been to give a flavour of the kinds of issues
that were raised by a variety of regional stakeholders, particularly when linked to the
European agenda and the ESDP. Whilst it is too early to determine the outcome of
the EIP process (the Panel Report was published in July 2001) its seems reasonable
to suggest that the process enables agendas that have not been addressed with
sufficient rigour, at least from the perspective of different stakeholders, to be publicly
considered. This was certainly true in relation to the European agenda for the North
West.
4.4 Developing RPG for the East Midlands
4.4.1 Introduction
The RPG for East Midlands will replace the existing RPG 8 issued in 1994 and is
expected to cover the period up to 2021. The regional planning body is the East
Midlands Local Government Association (EMRLGA). Draft Regional Planning
Guidance for the East Midlands was prepared by the EMRLGA and issued in
November 1999. The Public Examination was held in June 2000 and the Panel
reported in October 2000. Taking in to account the recommendations of the Panel
Report a proposed Changes Draft of RPG was published in March 2001.
Consultation on this draft ended on the 15th of June 2001. The discussion below will
draw on a number of sources to shed light on attitudes and developments in relation
to the European agenda and its treatment in the RPG process. The views of the
EMRLGA and the Government Office for the East Midlands (GOEM) as expressed
through background papers and statements submitted to the EIP; the
50
recommendations of the Panel Report, and elements of the Proposed Changes Draft,
will be considered to show how the treatment of the issues has developed.
4.4.2 An ‘Integrated Regional Strategy’
At the inaugural meeting of the East Midlands Regional Assembly in December 1998
it was decided to produce an Integrated Regional Strategy (IRS) as an overarching
guide for the development of all regional policies and strategies. Although the
decision to develop, the IRS predated guidance on the preparation of Regional
Sustainable Development Frameworks (RSDF) it was subsequently decided that the
IRS should constitute the RSDF for the region. The IRS has four key themes:
1. Improving the economic performance of the region to provide a wide range of

job opportunities, access to employment and training, and improve the quality
of life across the East Midlands;
2. Achieving social inclusion throughout the East Midlands to combat inequality
and provide a genuine opportunity for all to be able to access jobs, services
and facilities;
3. Conserving and improving the quality of the region’s environment and
managing the use of natural resources;
4. Managing the distribution and location of activities and the provision of
infrastructure in order to encourage sustainable patterns of development and
to support regeneration.
RPG is seen as responding to the fourth ‘spatial’ theme of the IRS, and four more
specific spatial objectives were established for the RPG:
• To ensure that decisions about the distribution and location of activity are
consistent with sustainable development principles;
• To enhance the region’s infrastructure, including maximising transport choice
and exploiting opportunities offered by information technology;
• To recognise and respect the distinctive characteristics of different parts of the
region and the need for regional policies to take account of these;
• To have full regard to the importance of linkages between different parts of the
region and with adjacent regions.
In Background Paper 2, submitted to the EIP by the EMRLGA, on the role of the IRS,
the RPG is described as sitting ‘neither above nor aside from other regional
strategies’ (EMRLGA, 2000, p.2). The consistency between RPG and the RES is
also discussed, with specific reference being made to the on-going liaison between
the EMRLGA and the East Midlands Development Agency (EMDA) as the
preparation of the two documents has progressed. There have also been a number
of joint studies, including an urban capacity study and a study to investigate the
development potential of the area around East Midlands airport and Junction 24 of
the M1. A meeting of the Regional Assembly in September 1999 allowed members
to consider the compatibility of the EMDA strategy and the emerging RPG strategy.
The overall conclusion was that the strategies were ‘largely compatible and
complementary’. One example of consistency is that the EMDA document and RPG
both promote a sub-regional approach and allude to the importance of cross-
boundary working both within the region and at the inter-regional level.
51
4.4.3 The Examination in Public
The matters to be considered at the EIP were selected by the Panel on the basis of
the 300 representations received and after taking into account the views of GOEM
and the EMRLGA. Matters with clear links to the European agenda and spatial
planning are identified in Figure 7.
Figure 7: Matters dealt with at the EIP of draft RPG for the East Midlands
with relevance to the European agenda
1.1 Does the scope and content of the draft Regional Planning Guidance
provide an appropriate level of linkage to the European Spatial
Development Perspective and does it provide and adequate framework
for Development Plans?
1.1 Are the housing requirements soundly based and compatible with
proposals and policies in existing and emerging Planning Guidance for
other regions?
6.1 Is there a special need for the proposed development in the vicinity of
the East Midlands airport and M1 junction 24 and would such a
development be consistent with the need to physically regenerate
Nottingham, Derby and Leicester and is it possible to limit the
development to “appropriate” users?
6.3 Will the priority and policy framework given to the Northern Coalfields
sub-area bring about significant improvement in the quality of life and
have the economic and environmental consequences of the policies
on the area, and adjacent areas outside the Region, been adequately
considered?
6.4 Is the relationship between the Southern sub-area and southern
Lincolnshire with the policies and proposals in adjoining regions on that
is compatible with the sustainable development objective and policies of
the draft Regional Planning Guidance?
4.4.5 The European Agenda and the ESDP
The EMRLGA presented a comprehensive background paper on INTERREG and the

ESDP to the EIP. This outlined the evolving policy context since ‘Modernising
Planning’ (DETR, 1998) culminating in the publication of PPG 11. The paper states
that: ‘The development of Draft RPG for the East Midlands has sought to embrace
the modernising agenda in taking its first steps to identify the European context for
regional planning in the East Midlands’ (EMRLGA, Statement to EIP, No. 3). The
spatial development trends of European significance that are highlighted in the ESDP
are discussed and it is noted that ‘Similarities can be drawn down from such EU
trends to the national level and indeed to parts of the East Midlands’. In relation to
the spatial planning approach promoted by the ESDP it is noted that:
52
‘Although the current ESDP policy option framework relates to a wider agenda
than the traditional UK land-use planning system, efforts have been made
during the development of draft RPG for the East Midlands to consider this
European dimension.’
(EMRLGA, 2000)
The statement also discusses the ESDP Action Programme and outlines 3 key
strands which may have particular relevance for the East Midlands:
• Strand 1: Promoting a spatial dimension in Community and national

policies
• Strand 2: Improving knowledge, research and information on territorial
development
• Strand 3: Preparing for an enlarged territory of the EU
In terms of INTERREG the statement discusses the IIC and IIIB programmes and
how these have been taken forward so far and will be taken forward in future.
Reference is made to an INTERREG IIC ‘North Sea Region’ (NSR) project led by
Lincolnshire County Council with partners in Denmark the Netherlands, Norway and
Sweden, which sought to identify and exchange experience on mechanisms that can
help to ensure the vitality and self-sufficiency of rural service centres. The statement
notes that ‘This project could be seen to test and seek to inform existing and
emerging regional and local policy, including emerging RPG for the East Midlands’.
There is also discussion of other projects that have taken place in the region under
INTERREG IIC including the North West Metropolitan Area ‘OPTIMUM’ project which
sought to identify regional mobility measures and to secure better integration
between mobility management and the spatial planning process. There is also a
discussion of the spatial visions being developed for the NWMA and the NSR which
are seen as linking the ‘objectives of the ESDP with the spatial development policies
of the constituent member states and regions’.
Overall therefore, the EMRLGA’s background paper suggests a good cognisance of

the European agenda through its comprehensive treatment of the European spatial
planning policy context and clear efforts to link elements of this to the East Midlands.
4.4.6 Cross-border and Inter-regional Issues
In terms of cross-border and inter-regional issues the background papers also give a
very comprehensive treatment which outlines the position as regards, RPG in
neighbouring regions and the current state of discussions between RPBs, and future
areas of co-operation. There is also a clear recognition that many parts of the region
are ‘outward looking’ and that Chapter 7 of RPG, which deals with urban and rural
networks and sub-areas, seeks to reflect this.
Interestingly, sub-areas and intra-regional cross-border relationships were two

dimensions of RPG where GOEM gave a clear indication that links to the ESDP
could be strengthened. GOEM’s EIP written statement 1.1 noted that:
53
‘The draft RPG is not very explicit on how the ESDP has influenced its
approach. While the draft RPG divides the region into sub areas and considers
them individually, it is not clear whether the approach was driven by the ESDP
aim relating to “The development of polycentric and balanced urban system
and the strengthening of the relationship between urban and rural areas’.
(GOEM, 2000, Statement to EIP, Matter 1.1)
The Proposed Changes Draft now makes an explicit link to the ESDP in the
introduction to Chapter 7 on ‘Urban and Rural Networks’, and stresses the
importance of an understanding of how the urban and rural network of the East
Midlands currently functions and how it could be improved over time. Section 2.4 of
the Proposed Changes Draft of RPG, which introduces the sub-areas makes
reference to intra- and inter-regional linkages. The areas have been identified
because they have ‘some internal coherence’, and do not ‘coincide with (largely
artificial) administrative boundaries…’. It is also stressed that ‘there are important
linkages across sub-area boundaries and with adjoining regions’ (EMRLGA, 2001,
p.18).
On a more general level, the EMRLGA’s EIP Background Paper 14 considers ‘Inter-
regional Liaison’, and aims to place the development of RPG ‘in the context of
developments in the five regions that border the East Midlands’ (EMRLGA, 2000,
Background Paper 14, p. 1). It also outlines the measures that have been taken to
ensure that RPG is compatible with emerging guidance for other regions and the
issues of concern that have arisen during officer led inter-regional liaison with
neighbouring RPGs. These include:
• In relation to the East of England, the issue of the provision of housing in

Lincolnshire, especially in relation to reducing in-commuting to Peterborough, is
discussed. The Wash and the Fens are also considered as two cross-border
‘major environmental resources’, and the ‘Wash Estuary Management Steering
Group’ is identified as a mechanism which brings together interests from both
regions. The INTERREG IIC project led by Lincolnshire County Council on
‘Sustaining the Vitality and Self Sufficiency of Rural Service Centres’ is also
mentioned as an example of inter-regional and transnational co-operation which
includes local authorities from the East of England including Norfolk and Suffolk
County Councils.
• In relation to the development of RPG for the North West, the lead role on behalf
of the EMRLGA was taken by Derbyshire County Council. Other issues
considered included, cross-border development pressure in the Peak sub-area,
and multi-modal studies with particular links being made to the South Pennine
Integrated Transport Study (SPITS), the South Manchester study, and the project
for a Mottram-Tintwhistle by-pass.
• In relation to the South East cross-border issues included the housing figures in
RPG 9, which the EMRLGA felt were too low and may lead to unacceptable
development pressure on the Southern Sub area. With Milton Keynes the
EMRLGA felt that future growth should be addressed by a cross-border sub-
regional study and that the study area should be extended north to include Corby.
54
Another mechanism identified to address cross-border issues is the London to

East-Midlands multi-modal study.
• In terms of RPG for Yorkshire and the Humber concerns focus on the South
Yorkshire Objective 1 area and the effects this may have on the Northern
Coalfields regeneration area. Derbyshire County Council have again taken the
lead in representing the EMRLGA view on the Draft RPG for Yorkshire and the
Humber. For their part the Regional Assembly for Yorkshire and the Humber
have expressed concern at the number of greenfield sites allocated for
development in the East Midlands, and the limited amount of brownfield land
identified for re-development. Key areas of current and future co-operation
include SPITS, and also the ‘historic Lincolnshire’ issue in terms of the
Lincolnshire development partnership.
• In terms of the West Midlands there are long-standing arrangements which

programme two liaison meetings per year. Multi-modal studies, such as the West
Midlands to-Nottingham study and the potential of the A5 corridor, are the main
issues discussed.
Reflecting the issues outlined above, the Background Paper notes that the East
Midlands is:
‘…heavily effected by developments ‘just over the border’. The

influence of London and the South East, the conurbations of the West
Midlands, the North West and South Yorkshire, mean that many parts
of the East Midlands ‘look outwards’’.
(EMRLGA, 2000, EIP Background Paper 14)
The statement ends by indicating that: ‘The EMRLGA believes that an understanding
of such linkages is crucial to the successful development of RPG in the East
Midlands, and is committed to an on going programme on inter-regional liaison and
joint working’ (EMRLGA, 2000, p.10).
4.4.7 The Panel Report
The Panel Report was published in October 2000 and is the ‘principal source of the
substantive and presentational differences’ between the Draft RPG and Proposed
Changes Draft RPG. The Panel Report considers the treatment of the European
context in Chapter 3 ‘Scope and Format’. In terms of the ESDP, the Panel state that
they felt that, ‘EMRLGA demonstrated that the ESDP has greatly influenced the form
and content of the draft Guidance’, and that ‘the Draft Guidance sets out an approach
to the development of a balanced and polycentric urban system by advocating the
need to avoid over-concentration’ (East Midlands EIP Panel Report, 2000, p. 12).
Overall, in relation to the treatment of the European agenda, the Panel conclude that:
55
‘While some opportunities have been missed to fully interpret the polycentric
approach to reflect the unique pattern of the major urban areas within the
Region, we are satisfied that EMRLGA has attempted to incorporate the
concept in the overall strategy. In the opinion of the Panel the draft Guidance
also adequately deals with the need to develop a new urban-rural relationship
by stressing the relationship between settlements and their hinterlands and
encouraging the development of small and medium sized towns to incorporate
facilities to service a wider area.’
(East Midlands EIP Panel Report, 2000, p. 12)
The Report also acknowledged that in terms of the ESDP’s key principle of securing
parity of access to infrastructure and knowledge some aspects of this may be ‘better
dealt with’ in other documents relating to the IRS.
In terms of the region’s position in European space, the Report draws attention to the
intervention of the RTPI who suggested that the draft Guidance provided little
analysis of ‘where the Region stands in relation to Europe and almost no spatial
dimension as to where it should be going’ (EM Panel Report, p.12). In responding to
this comment the Report notes that, though relevant background papers were
prepared by the EMRLGA, there is still, ‘room for a clearer response to the
geographical position of the region in relation to Europe’. The Panel also state that
they agree with the RTPI’s position that the RPG should give ‘more consideration to
the relationship of the Region to the Metropolitan Regions of Europe which the ESDP
describes as the driving force of Europe’ (EM Panel Report, p.13). The Report also
suggests that greater attention needs to be paid to the problems and opportunities
afforded by the TENs routes in the region particularly in terms of the potential danger
of these emerging as growth corridors.
In relation to sub-areas, the Panel endorsed the approach adopted in Draft RPG and
indicated that the ‘sub-area approach is helpful in that it will encourage Local
Authorities to recognise common issues across administrative boundaries’ (EM Panel
Report, p.14). The Panel were also of the opinion that ‘each sub-area does present
unique strategic issues which have cross-boundary implications at the structure plan
and inter-regional level’. (EM Panel Report, p.14). Cross-boundary implications for
development plans are recognised in the Proposed Changes Draft of RPG through
Policy 10 which states that ‘Local authorities should take account of cross-boundary
influences in drawing up development plans’ (EMRLGA, 2001, p.32).
In terms of diagrams the Panel recognised that ‘it would be impossible to illustrate
every policy feature on the Key Diagram and retain any degree of legibility’ (EM
Panel Report, p.14). But the Report did go on to suggest that:
‘This problem can be overcome by the use of supplementary policy maps or

diagrams to support particular policy areas such as environmental protection
and enhancement and transportation. To some extent the maps in the draft
Guidance showing Key Environmental Assets, Communications and
Infrastructure and the Interreg IIC General Cooperation Programmes already
reflect such an approach’.
(East Midlands EIP Panel Report, pp. 14-15)
56
The Panel consider that PPG 11 recognises the need for the Key Diagram to ‘identify
the role of important regional assets in the regional strategy as well as areas of
change such as major areas of growth’ (EM Panel Report, p.15). The report
recommends the use of a ‘family’ of maps to illustrate policy givens in order to allow
the Key Diagram to concentrate on the more strategic elements of the strategy such
as regional assets, areas of change, and infrastructure. The Report also indicates
that the Panel were:
‘…sympathetic to the suggestion made at the public examination that the base
for the Key Diagram should provide a better representation of the linkages with
surrounding regions’
(East Midlands EIP, Panel Report, p.15)
The views of Panel outlined above are reflected by the recommendation that a Key
Diagram be included which identifies ‘major natural assets, major areas of change
and strategic infrastructure improvements on a base that clearly represents linkages
to surrounding regions’ (EM Panel Report, p.15).
Another dimension of the Report which, clearly relates to the European agenda, is its
consideration of the development potential of the area around Junction 24 of the M1.
The Report relies on an argument rooted in the need to secure the ‘proper
development of the polycentric structure of the Three Cities Sub-area’ and
recommends that the policy in Draft RPG, promoting the development of a prestige
business park in the Junction 24, area be deleted (Matter 6.1). Such a development
would pose a threat to the achievement of polycentric growth, and the report states
that:
‘RPG should recognise the potential of an integrated approach to realising the

accessibility benefits of the Junction 24 / airport location for the rest of the
Three Cities Sub-area and the region as a whole and promote an alternative
polycentric approach to the attraction of inward investment’
(East Midlands EIP Panel Report, p. 165)
4.4.8 Conclusion
The findings of the East Midlands case study can be divided into two areas. Firstly
the extent to which the RPG review has had regard to European considerations, and
secondly the way in which the stages in the process have influenced this:
• The East Midlands, background papers suggest a good cognisance of the

European agenda and the ESDP in particular. It is notable that the discussion of
the ESDP and INTERREG makes an attempt to relate these aspects of the
European agenda to the experience of the East Midlands rather than leaving the
discussion at the level of generalities. Similarly, there is a recognition that the
scope of the ESDP and ‘spatial planning’ is different and more wide-ranging than
that currently addressed by RPG. It is interesting in the East Midlands, that in the
context of the IRS, the RPG is seen as sitting alongside the other regional
strategies rather than above them. With the IRS, the spatial planning approach
could perhaps be seen to be represented by the whole suite of regional policy
57
documents rather than RPG alone, for example, the RDA strategy ‘Prosperity
Through East Midlands People’ also relates to the IRS. In fact, the four themes
of the IRS (Economic, Social, Environmental and ‘Spatial’) are delivered through
different strategies with the primary three being the RES the RPG and the
IRS/RSDF. It is also interesting to note that the RES does not include a diagram
showing the spatial import of its strategy. Perhaps this is because the IRS
establishes the roles of the different strategies more clearly with the role for RPG
being to provide the spatial dimension for the IRS. However, the RES does pick
up a number of clear spatial themes for example in relation to the development of
sub-regional strategies and the importance of cross-boundary working in
delivering some of these objectives. The section on ‘Engaging other regional
Partners’ mentions the role of Local Authorities and includes a commitment to
‘work across regional boundaries on a collaborative basis with our 5 neighbouring
RDAs and others on issues such as transport and sectoral initiatives’ (EMDA,
1999, p. 34). These approaches and commitments appear to be supported
‘spatially’ by the policies of RPG. It seems that the European context and the
ESDP in particular have been influential in the development of RPG. It would also
appear that the empirical reality of the region, in terms of its internal spatial
structure and links to other regions, has been a significant factor in heightening
the relevance of key aspects of the ESDP’s policy principles and planning
approach. In terms of horizontal integration of policy within the region, the
decision to produce an IRS to help co-ordinate different regional strategies, and
the recognition of sub-areas that transcend administrative boundaries, suggest an
approach very much in keeping with that of the ESDP. The consideration given to
inter-regional issues also appears to have been influenced by the fact that the
region has more adjacent regions than any other, whilst the recognition that a
number of the sub-areas are ‘outward looking’ seems broadly consistent with the
ESDP’s calls for policy makers to ‘overcome any insular way of looking at their
territory’.
• In terms of the influence of process on the extent to which the RPG has had
regard to European considerations, there appears to have been a strengthening
as RPG has progressed through successive stages of the review. The
representations of GOEM and other organisations to the EIP, and the comments
and recommendations of the Panel, have clearly led to changes in the RPG
document which have resulted in the European context being more explicitly
linked to certain policy choices and approaches in the Proposed Changes Draft.
There is also evidence that the Panel regarded the ESDP as a useful policy
document through their reliance on it as justification for some of their suggestions
and recommendations. Their interest in cross-border issues, perhaps reflecting
the geographical realities of the region, was particularly prominent. The Panel
Report recommends the inclusion of a Key Diagram ‘on a base that clearly
demonstrates the linkages to surrounding regions’, and agrees with the RTPI’s
comment at the EIP that RPG could do more to consider the relationship of the
region to the metropolitan regions of Europe. However, the Report also
recognises that to crowd the Key Diagram with too much information may make it
illegible. It is suggested that other policy contexts can be represented on
supplementary maps and diagrams, as is already the case for Key Environmental
Assets and INTERREG areas.
58
Chapter 5: Delivering the ESDP: Towards Best

Practice
5.1 Introduction
This chapter brings together the findings of the different strands of the research to
present an overview of the process of ‘Delivering the ESDP’. The research
essentially presents a snapshot of a particular moment in time and it should be
remembered that RPG process is on-going (for example the Panel Report into the
EIP for the North West has recently been published). The analysis has not just
sought to describe the situation when the report was produced, but also to give an
insight into the process. It is clear that over time as a fuller understanding of the
ESDP and the European agenda’s role in the RPG process is gained, then their
influence has become more embedded and explicit in the documentation.
The first chapter of the report outlined the background for the research project and
described the evolution of European spatial development policy and the development
of the ESDP. It is clear that there has been a gradual shift in attitude overtime, with a
realisation that there must be clear recognition of the impact of Europe on the
planning system, especially at a time when spatial development issues increasingly
transcend national boundaries. The clearest way to date in which the Government
has sought to enhance the European dimension of the English planning system has
been in relation to the advice that it has given to Regional Planning Bodies on the
way that they should prepare new RPGs. With the publication of ‘PPG 11–Regional
Planning’ (DETR, 2000) it is clear that RPG should be set within a framework which
recognises a region’s links to other regions and European and global contexts.
Overall the shift in policy in recent years can be seen as an acceptance and
transposition into national policy of the notion that ‘planning in isolation is no longer
possible’.
5.2 Towards Best Practice
5.2.1 Introduction
It is important to note that no single best practice example for the application of the
ESDP was identified by the research although a number of the documents seemed to
have more fully embraced the European agenda than others. The RPGs appeared
to have adopted very different approaches, which reflected different interpretations of
PPG 11 and the ESDP, and the particular circumstances of the region.
The documentary review and regional player survey identified a number of key issues
in relation to; the extent to which RPG has regard to the region’s European context;
the process of RPG preparation; the application of the ESDP’s spatial development
principles; and the use of spatial representations to illustrate key European and
regional contexts. The Best Practice recommendations below are structured around
these four key issues. The findings are discussed and approaches are identified that
are felt to be effective in responding to different aspects of the European spatial
context and spatial planning agenda.
59
5.2.2 Placing RPG within its European context
All the RPG documents reviewed considered aspects of the European context for the
region. Most included maps showing the location of the region in UK and European
space, although the effectiveness of these in conveying a sense of the functional
linkages between the region and other parts of the UK and Europe was limited. In
terms of the European contexts identified by the ESDP the extent to which these are
discussed varied. A number of the documents included a discussion of the ESDP
and relevant EU programmes in sections on the regional context, but did not make
clear if, or how, these had informed the spatial strategy for the region or the
development of policy. Some regions presented a fuller consideration of European
contexts and made a clear attempt to link these to the strategies and policies of RPG.
In general it seems that links are made where there are clear and sectoral linkages
such as in relation to Structural Funds, the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy,
Trans-European Transport networks, and other EU legislation and programmes.
Broadly speaking there appeared to be consistency between the priorities
established for spatial development, including regeneration priority areas, in the RPG
documents, and the availability of EU funding.
Best Practice
It is useful to explicitly consider how the European policy contexts

identified by the ESDP (Paragraph 28) as having implications for spatial
development in the EU, impact on the region. This approach is already
adopted in the Proposed Changes Draft of RPG for Yorkshire and the
Humber which, discusses ‘EU Policies and Programmes with a Spatial
Impact’ and the relevance of these in providing a policy framework and as a
means of implementing the regional strategy (RAYH, 2001, p.6).
As far as possible the national and European spatial contexts for a region
should be represented on the Key Diagram. This implies that inter-regional
linkages of regional significance should be shown and preferably
represented in such a way that their relative significance can be gauged. It
is recognised that in order to avoid ‘crowding’ the Key Diagram with too
much information, it may be appropriate to use of a ‘family’ of maps to
represent different policy contexts. This was a recommendation of the
Panel Report into RPG for the East Midlands, and is already reflected by the
approach adopted in the East Midlands and Yorkshire and the Humber
where maps are included showing the relevant INTERREG Regions. It is
important that such maps indicate the position of the region itself. Where
there is a specific INTERREG project it may also be appropriate to illustrate
the area covered on the European contextual diagram, for example in the
North West of England, the NETA programme.
A further issue, which the DTLR may wish to consider, is the respective
role of RPGs and RESs in responding to a region’s European spatial
context.
60
5.2.3 The process of RPG preparation
Horizontal coordination between RPBs, RDAs and GOs, is clearly essential if the
sectoral coordination role of spatial planning is to be realised. In terms of horizontal
linkages within the region, all the RPG documents refer to the relevant RDA for the
region and made links to the RES, discussing, or re-stating its aims and objectives. It
seems therefore, based on a reading of the RPG documentation, that horizontal
collaboration between RPBs, RDAs and GOs, has occurred across the regions
during the preparation of RPGs. However, whilst the links between RPGs and RESs
are much in evidence, the links to Regional Sustainable Development Frameworks
were (with some exceptions such as East Midlands and Yorkshire and the Humber)
generally much less clear in the documentation reviewed.
Best Practice
It would appear that in most regions there is a need to give greater

prominence and priority to the preparation of RSDFs, particularly in view
of the ‘overarching’ strategic role identified for these by Government
guidance. Even in regions where the RSDF is in place there would
appear to be a need to ensure that its role is adequately described and
acknowledged in other regional strategies. In particular it may be useful
for the DTLR and RPBs to consider whether there is a case for the wider
adoption of the approach used in the East Midlands, where the IRS/RSDF
is clearly identified as the overarching regional document.
Consideration could be given to whether this approach may allow a
more effective delivery of the planning approach and spatial
development principles advocated by the ESDP, and help to define the
role of different regional strategies.
In terms of evidence of intra-regional collaboration beyond the RPB, RDA and GO,
the RPG documentation also contains references to a wide range of other sectoral
agencies, that have been consulted, and will need to play a role in delivering RPG
objectives.
Best Practice
A number of RPGs such as RPG for Yorkshire and the Humber and Draft
RPG for the North West, link policies to the agencies that will play a role
in their implementation. This is an approach, which usefully concretises
the sectoral co-ordination role of spatial planning.
In terms of cross-boundary horizontal linkages, all the documents contained some

reference to cross-border issues in national and transnational space, usually in the
sections that set out the regional context. Overall however, in most cases there is
scope to further develop this and the consideration of inter-regional and intra-regional
cross-boundary issues. Cross-border issues identified in RPGs included, transport,
waste management, water strategies, minerals planning, functional sub-regions with
a cross-boundary dimension, and in some cases transnational relationships.
However, there was great variety in the extent to which these issues were considered
61
and carried forward in the rest of the document. A variety of mechanisms to address
cross-border issues were outlined including inter-regional studies, cross-border sub-
regional studies, and participation in INTERREG projects. A number of the
documents included commitments to take forward cross-boundary working in their
sections on implementation.
Best Practice
In most RPGs there is scope to further develop the consideration given

to cross-border issues both in national and transnational space, and the
consideration of inter-regional and intra-regional cross-boundary issues.
A number of the documents included commitments to take forward
cross-boundary working in their sections on implementation. This is an
approach, which other regions may wish to consider, particularly those
where there are significant intra- and/or inter-regional issues, which may
impact on the delivery of the RPG strategy. Although inter-regional
linkages are of varying importance in different regions, in a number of
regions, there seems to be a need to overcome a certain insularity in the
approach adopted to preparing RPG.
5.2.4 Spatial development policy principles
In general there seems to be a high level of consistency between the spatial

development principles of the ESDP and the strategies and policies of the RPGs.
Many of the individual topic policies in the RPG documents can be seen to have a
close affinity with the spatial principles and policy aims of the ESDP even though this
is not made explicit by a direct reference to the ESDP. The majority of the documents
referred to one or more of the ESDP policy guidelines as having relevance for the
region, though in most of the RPG documents there was little development of these
principles beyond the initial acknowledgement of relevance. In a few regions
concepts such as poly-centricity and rural-urban partnership had exerted a more
profound influence on the direction, development and structure of RPG.
Best Practice
Overall, there is scope for the ESDP to be more constructively applied to

the RPG process in England. Rather than being viewed as a checklist to
be satisfied the ESDP could be used more imaginatively in debating the
development of RPGs particularly their spatial strategies. A move to a
more genuinely spatial planning approach would be aided by this and a
number of regions have already moved in this direction with their
current RPG reviews. For example there is clearly still scope in most
regions for polycentricity as a concept to contribute to the generation of
new policy approaches. Where polycentricity has been used as a means
of conceptualising the region it has helped to do this. In the South West
for example, there has been a move away from a simple demographically
based settlement hierarchy, to an approach, which considers the
functions of different places and their relationships with their rural
62
hinterlands. The principle of a new urban rural relationship is one that is

also pertinent across the English regions. The ESDP’s promotion of
planning which is not constrained by administrative boundaries is also
something, which may usefully be employed in developing RPG, in
terms of approaches to intra- and inter-regional functional sub-areas.
Similarly, in the West Midlands the concept of polycentricity is being
used as a building block for the development of RPG. Finally, each
region remains free to choose its own approach to the development of
RPG and Government is keen to see the development of regional
specificity in RPGs. In some regions it seems that the ESDP has already
contributed to regionally specific analysis and policy development,
elsewhere it could be more fully applied and/or articulated.
• Spatial representations: In the RPG documentation, most diagrams showing the

position of the region in relation to other UK regions and in European space are
geography maps, which show location but fail to highlight functional relationships
and linkages. A number of RPGs include maps showing the relevant INTERREG
IIIB regions to which the region belongs. In terms of linkages to other regions,
these are generally shown but rarely weighted, and in some regions the key
diagram does not represent cross border linkages at all or just represents fixed
features such as roads or railways. There is a good deal of variation in the
appearance of the Key Diagrams with some being OS map based and others
being more schematic. The schematic diagrams tend to be more dynamic and
arguably convey a better idea of the pattern of future development, the
importance of different intra- and inter-regional linkages and relationships, and
functional sub-regions. However, even in the schematic diagrams the cross-
border linkages are not weighted in terms of their significance. The more
traditional OS style diagrams have a more static feel and tend to only represent
‘fixed’ cross-border infrastructure such as roads or railways.
Best Practice
For diagrams to effectively represent a region in its wider UK and

European contexts, they need to be more than simple ‘geography maps’
showing the location of the region. More thought needs to be given to
how the functional linkages with other regions and countries and key EU
contexts such as INTERREG programme areas and projects can be
represented. A starting point could be to include maps showing the
position of the region in relation to any relevant transnational mega
regions and INTERREG projects, for example, NETA and the Spatial
Vision for North West Europe. Such maps are already included in a
number of RPG documents. Similarly, there is perhaps scope for many
of the Key Diagrams to adopt a more schematic approach, which seeks
to relate the strategy for the region to the various relevant sub-regional,
regional and inter-regional contexts.
63
5.3 Concluding remarks
Overall, the various elements of the research suggest that the European context is
starting to be addressed across the regions but that there are significant variations in
the extent to which it is informing the development of RPG. The documentary review
and regional player survey point to a number of factors that seem to be significant in
explaining this variation:
• Timing. More recent RPGs would appear to be taking much greater cognisance
of the European agenda. This is not really very surprising, as the nature of
guidance issued by central government has become clearer, more explicit and
formalised over time.
• Stage in the Process. A second factor, which is clearly related but slightly
different, is the stage of advancement of RPG through the preparation process
when the evaluation was undertaken. It seems that the process of testing the
Draft RPG through a Public Consultation followed by an examination in Public,
and subsequent Panel Report enables the European dimension (or the lack of it)
to be highlighted and considered more explicitly through the redrafting of RPG.
This was illustrated in the case of the North West and the East Midlands.
• The role of key individuals. In preparing RPG the importance of key individuals
in shaping the agenda and the process should not be underestimated. Where
there are a number of influential actors in the process who have a keen interest
in, and concern for, European spatial planning, then perhaps not unsurprisingly
this will help to shape the nature of the RPG. In the West Midlands for example,
interest in the concept of polycentricity directly derived from the ESDP has been
important in shaping regional thinking. Given that RPG preparation is a multi-
agency process key individuals do not necessarily have to be part of the Regional
Planning Body, but could also be part of the Government Office or indeed part of
the Planning Inspectorate.
• The empirical reality of the region. A final dimension, which the study seems to
suggest is significant, is the empirical reality of the region. For some regions their
connections to Europe, relationships with other UK regions and internal structure
were reflected in the way that RPG was produced and perhaps led to a fuller
consideration of the European agenda as a whole and the ESDP in particular. It
seems that in some regions, the more distinctly spatial ESDP principles provided
a new ‘lens’ through which to view the region and facilitated a new analysis of key
spatial and thematic planning issues. In other regions, whilst the ESDP was
perhaps less influential in shaping analytical and policy approaches adopted, it
nevertheless served to reinforce indigenously derived conclusions and policy
choices.
In conclusion therefore, it would appear that the European context and the ESDP are
beginning to be accepted as important frames of reference in the production of
Regional Planning Guidance. Interestingly, it seems that the ESDP is being more
explicitly applied in England than elsewhere in Europe. It is only in England that there
is an explicit requirement in national guidance to use the ESDP as a reference point
64
to inform strategic spatial thinking. However, despite this there is scope to be more
explicit about the links between the European context as a whole and the ESDP, and
the strategies of RPGs. The Best Practice recommendations above suggest
approaches to facilitate this.
Given the emerging policy context it would be naïve at this stage for RPGs across
the country to have embraced the principles of the ESDP in similar ways. Regional
distinctiveness, that which we have termed the ‘empirical reality of the region’, for
example, means that the European context may need to be given greater or lesser
emphasis. The checks and balances involved in the process of RPG preparation do
appear to highlight where the European dimension has not adequately been taken
into account.
In taking account of the European agenda there is a need for a shift in outlook to
include a more explicit consideration of a region’s links to other regions both those,
which are immediately adjacent, but also across transnational borders. The findings
of this study suggest that such a change in culture is beginning to happen and that
there is a growing awareness that, whilst the UK may be an island in the strict
geographical sense, the twin realities of Europeanisation and globalisation mean that
policy makers must overcome any insular way of considering the territories they plan
for if they wish to develop strategies well adapted to securing the future sustainable
development of their areas and regions.
65
Sources
RPGs Reviewed
Association for North East Councils (April 2001), Draft Regional Planning Guidance
for the North East (RPG1) – Incorporating Secretary of State’s Proposed Changes.
East Midlands Regional Local Government Association (March 2001), Draft Regional
Planning Guidance for the East Midlands (RPG8)-Proposed Changes.
DETR (January 2001), Regional Planning Guidance for the South East (RPG9).
DETR (November 2000b), Regional Planning Guidance for East Anglia to 2016
(RPG6).
South West Regional Planning Conference (December 2000), Draft Regional

Planning Guidance for the South West (RPG10) Proposed Changes Public
Consultation.
Regional Assembly for Yorkshire and the Humber (March 2001), Draft Regional
Planning Guidance for Yorkshire and the Humber (RPG12) Incorporating Secretary
of State’s Proposed Changes.
West Midlands Local Government Association (May 2001), Moving Forward-Draft

Spatial Strategy and Indicative Policies.
North West Regional Assembly (2000), People, Places and Prosperity: Draft
Regional Planning Guidance for the North West.
Other Sources
Association of Greater Manchester Authorities (2001), Statement to the Examination

in Public of Draft RPG for the North West, Matter 8 Cross Border Issues.
Atkinson, R. (2001), ‘The Emerging European ‘Urban Agenda’ and the European
Spatial Development Perspective: Towards an EU Urban Policy?’, European
Planning Studies, (9/03), 2001, pp. 384-406.
Bishop K., Tewdwr-Jones M., Wilkinson D. (2000), From Spatial to Local: The Impact
of the European Union on Local Authority Planning in the UK, Journal of
Environmental Planning and Management, (43/3), pp. 309-334.
CEC (1991) Europe 2000: Outlook for the Development of the Community’s Territory,
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
CEC, (1994), Europe 2000+; Co-operation for European territorial development,

Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
66
CEC (1997), The EU Compendium of spatial planning systems and policies,

Luxembourg.
CEC (1999), European Spatial Development Perspective: Towards a Balanced and

Sustainable Development of the Territory of the European Union, Luxembourg.
Chester/Cheshire/Flintshire/Wrexham Liaison Group (2001), Statement to the

Examination in Public of Draft RPG for the North West, Matter 8 Cross-Boundary
Issues.
Davies, H.W.E., Gosling, J.A. and Hsia, M.T., (1994), The Impact of the European
Community on Land Use Planning in the UK, RTPI, London.
DETR (1998), Modernising planning: A policy statement by the Minister for the
Regions, Regeneration and Planning. (January 1998), London.
DETR (1999a), Draft Planning Policy Guidance Note 11: Regional Planning Public
Consultation Draft, HMSO, Norwich.
DETR (1999b), Subsidiarity and Proportionality in Spatial Planning Activities in the

European Union, London.
DETR (1999c), A better Quality of Life: A Strategy for Sustainable Development for
the UK, (Cm 4345, May 1999).
DETR (2000a), Planning Policy Guidance Note 11: Regional Planning,

HMSO,Norwich.
ECOTEC & Department of City and Regional Planning Cardiff University (2001),
Final Report: Comparative Spatial Planning Methodologies Research Study, Cardiff.
ECOTEC & JDT (2000), A Polycentric Framework for the West Midlands,
Birmingham.
East Midlands Development Agency (1999), East Midlands Prosperity Through East
Midlands People, Nottingham.
EMRLGA (2000), EIP into Draft RPG for the East Midlands: Background Paper 2 -
The Role of the East Midlands Integrated Regional Strategy (IRS).
EMRLGA (2000), EIP into Draft RPG for the East Midlands: Background Paper 3 -
INTERREG and the ESDP.
EMRLGA (2000), EIP into Draft RPG for the East Midlands: Background Paper 14 –
Inter-regional Liaison.
ERDF and Cohesion Fund, Newsletter No. 64:Cooperation on developing the territory
of the European Union: agreement at the Potsdam Council, May 1999.
67
Faludi, A.. (1997), ‘European Spatial Development Policy in ‘Maastricht II’?’ in

European Planning Studies, (5/4), Abingdon.
Faludi, A.. (2000), ‘Strategic Spatial Planning in Europe: Institutional Aspects’, in W.

Salet and A. Faludi Eds., The Revival of Strategic Spatial Planning, Proceedings of
the Colloquium, Amsterdam, 25-26 February 1999.
Faludi, A., Zonneveld, W. and Waterhout, B. (2000), ‘The Committee on Spatial

Development: Formulating a spatial perspective in an institutional vacuum’, in
Thomas Christiansen and Emil Kirchner Eds., Committee Governance in the
European Union, pp, 115-131, Manchester.
Giannakourou, G. (1996), ‘Towards a European Spatial Planning Policy: Theoretical

Dilemmas and Institutional Implications’ in European Planning Studies, (4/5),
Abingdon.
GOEM (2000), Public Examination into Draft Regional Planning Guidance for the
East Midlands,Statement in Respect of Sub-Issue 1.1 ‘Does the scope and content of
the draft RPG provide an appropriate level of linkage to the ESDP and does it provide
an adequate framework for Development Plans?’, Nottingham.
GONW (2000), Merseyside Objective Programme 2000-06: Single Programming

Document.
GONW (2001), Statement [S/1/360] to the Examination of Draft RPG for the North
West, Matter Heading 1, Structure and Context of the Draft Regional Planning
Guidance, Manchester.
GONW (2001), Statement [S/8/360] to the Examination of Draft RPG for the North
West, Matter Heading 8, Cross Boundary Issues.
GOSE (2000), Proposed Changes to Draft Regional Planning Guidance for the South
East.
Healy, A. (1999), ‘European Spatial Development’, paper presented at, National

Young Planners Conference, University of Strathclyde, (April 1999).
Jensen, Ole B., and Jorgensen, IB. (2000), ‘Danish Planning: the long shadow of
Europe’, in A. Faludi and K. Bõhme eds. Nordic Planning Meets Europe, Built
Environment, (26/1), Oxford.
Manchester City Council, (2001), Statement [S/1/375] to the Examination in Public of

Draft RPG for the North West, Matter 1 Structure and Context of the Draft Regional
Planning Guidance.
Nadin, V., and Shaw D., (1997), ‘On the Edge’, Town and Country Planning, (66/5),
pp. 143-145.
Nadin V., and Shaw D., (1998), Transnational Spatial Planning in Europe: The Role
of INTERREG IIC in the UK, Regional Studies, (32/3), pp. 281-289
68
Nadin V., and Shaw D., (1999), Subsidiarity and Proportionality in Spatial Planning
Activities in the European Union, DETR, London.
Nadin, V. (2000a), ‘Action on the ESDP’, in Town and Country Planning (69/3),
London.
Nadin, V. (2000b), Spatial Planning and EU Competences, Draft Paper for the
European Council of Town Planners, ESDP Conference, London December 2000.
Nadin, V., Pilgrim, J. and Shaw, D., (2000), INTERREG IIC and the UK: A
Comparison of the Operational Programmes and Projects, A report prepared for the
English Regions Association.
North European Trade Axis Project, (2001), Statement to the Examination in Public of
Draft Regional Planning Guidance for the North West, Matter 1 Structure and Context
of the Draft RPG.
NWDA, (1999), England’s North West: A Strategy Towards 2020.
North West Regional Assembly, (1999), Regional Planning Guidance Review:

Choices for the North West, Wigan.
North West Regional Assembly, (2000), People, Places and Prosperity: Draft
Regional Planning Guidance for the North West, Wigan.
North West Regional Assembly, (2001), Statement [S/1/438] to the Examination in

Public of Draft RPG for the North West, Matter 1 Structure and Context of the Draft
Regional Planning Guidance, Wigan.
Parke, J., Mafham, K., and Rumbold, O. (2000), Panel Report of the Examination in
Public of Draft Regional Planning Guidance for the East Midlands, Nottingham.
Standing Committee of South Pennine Authorities (2001), Statement to the

Examination in Public of Draft RPG for the North West, Matter 8 Cross Boundary
Issues.
Shaw, D. (2000), The Review of North West Regional Planning Guidance (RPG 13):
An Assessment of the Extent to which draft RPG has regard to European
Considerations, Report for the Government Office for the North West.
Sykes, O. (2001), ‘The Treatment of Cross-Border Issues in Regional Planning

Documents in the UK – the case of North West England’, paper presented at,
EuroConference Regional Governance, KoRIs and ARL, Hannover, May 2001.
Richardson, T. and Jensen, Ole B. (1999), ‘The trouble with the ESDP’, in North - the
Journal of Nordregio, (10/6), p.13.
Study Programme on European Spatial Planning UK (1999), Urban-Rural

Relationships: Territorial Differentiation and Polycentric Development.
69
WMLGA, (2000), A polycentric framework for the West Midlands: Proposed Study,
Brief for Consultants, Birmingham.
Wilkinson D., Bishop K. and Tewdwr-Jones M. (1998), The Impact of the EU on the
UK Planning System, DETR, London.
Williams, R. H. (1996), European Union Spatial Policy and Planning, London.
Websites:
http://www.netaproject.org.uk/default.htm
http://www.go-nw.gov.uk/
Summary of Proceedings, ‘Welsh Spatial Planning Framework Key Challenges for

Wales’, The National Assembly for Wales, Thursday 7 of December 2000.
http://www.wales.gov.uk/subiplanning/content/spatial/spf_2000_e.htm
http://www.esprid.org
70
APPENDIX 1 - Evaluative Framework for RPG
Introduction
This evaluative framework should be applied to the most recent version of the RPG
document. The framework is organised around three key themes: the European
context in which RPG has been prepared, the process of RPG preparation, and the
extent to which the policy principles of the ESDP are reflected in RPG both in the
spatial strategy and the detailed policies. A final section considers the way in which
the RPG document uses spatial representations and images to illustrate spatial
development contexts and policies.
PART I - Placing RPG within its European context.

This part of the evaluation aims to establish the extent to which the European
influences which will inevitably affect the future prosperity of the region, have been
properly explored and acknowledged in the RPG document. PPG 11 indicates that
before issuing RPG the Secretary of State will need to be satisfied that PPG has had
sufficient regard to the European considerations, set out in paragraphs 3.01-3.05 of
PPG 11, including the main policy themes of the ESDP which are presented in PPG
11 para. 3.02. Reflecting this, section 1.1 considers if the discussion of the
background for the preparation of the RPG strategy fully and adequately
acknowledges the European context.
PPG 11 also makes it clear that RPG should provide the context for accessing
European funding, most notably the Community Initiative on Transnational Co-
operation on Spatial Planning (INTERREG) and EU Structural Funds. Reflecting this,
section 1.2 seeks to establish if RPG provides a sufficiently consistent framework so
that the region has the greatest opportunity to access European funding.
1.1 The Policy Context: Does the RPG fully and adequately acknowledge the
European context?
a). In the discussion of the regional context, is consideration given to

he region’s position in European space and the implications of this for the
region’s future development?
71
b). How far does the contextual discussion go in taking into account the European
policy areas highlighted by the ESDP that have an impact on spatial development
and other European contextual issues such as enlargement and monetary union?
(see Table 1 below)
Table 1: The extent to which European spatial development issues

are adequately reflected in the RPG document.
Contextual European Considered explicitly Considered as part of

Factors. as part of the context the explanation of
to the spatial topic policies.
development strategy.
Contexts Identified in
the ESDP.
Community Competition
policy
Trans-European
Networks
Structural Funds
Common Agricultural
Policy
Environment Policy
Research Technology
and development
Loan Activities of the
European Investment
Bank
Prospective Influences
Enlargement
Monetary Union
c). Does the RPG document acknowledge the ESDP and make it clear how it has
informed the development of the spatial strategy for the region? How is the
importance of the ESDP recognised?
72
1.2 A Framework for Accessing European Funding: Does RPG provide a

sufficiently consistent framework so that the region has the greatest opportunity to
access European funding?
a). To what extent does the RPG make reference to any opportunities for
accessing major European funding?
• Objective 1
• Objective 2
• Transitional Funding
b). Is there a broad degree of consistency between the spatial strategy of RPG
and the location of EU structural fund designations within the region?
c). To what extent are other EU funding programmes such as Community

Initiatives acknowledged as a potential mechanism to help deliver the key
objectives of the spatial strategy?
• LEADER
• URBAN
• INTERREG IIIB
73
d). Does RPG acknowledge the existence of any relevant Trans-European Mega-
regions, e.g. the Atlantic Area, North-Western Metropolitan Area?, and is there any
explanation of how these trans-national stategies have informed the spatial strategy
and detailed policies?
e). Is mention made of any specific projects that have been advanced through the
mechanisms considered in (c). and (d). above?
PART II - Process: What evidence is there in the RPG

document of the vertical and horizontal co-operation in spatial
development policy-making advocated by the ESDP?
Section 4 of the ESDP considers the application of the ESDP and calls for effective
horizontal and vertical integration of spatial development policy to ensure a
consistent approach. The purpose of this section is to explore the extent to which
there is evidence in the RPG document of horizontal and vertical co-operation within
the region and with agencies and areas that are outside it.
2.1 Effective Horizontal Integration within the Region.
a). Inter-agency collaboration within the region
(i). What evidence is there of horizontal collaboration between different agencies

within the region?
74
(ii). To what extent is there explicit reference to other agencies?
b). What is the evidence in RPG that there is a consistency of approach with the
other key regional strategies i.e. RDA Regional Strategy, and the Regional
Sustainable Development Framework?
(i). Regional Development Agency’s Regional Strategy.
(ii). Regional Sustainable Development Framework
2.2 Horizontal Collaboration which is Cross Border in Nature.
a). Is there acknowledgement of issues that cannot be resolved within the region
and have a cross border dimension i.e. inter-regional/national and
transnational?
75
b). Does RPG identify suitable mechanisms to consider these issues such as
cross-border discussions or inter-institutional arrangements, Cross Border
Sustainability Appraisal, Cross Border Multi-Modal Studies etc?
2.3 Vertical Linkages.
a). What evidence is there of vertical integration within national space?
(i). Between national policy guidance and the policies of RPG?
(ii). Within the region with regional and sub-regional stakeholders?
76
PART III - Spatial Development Policy Principles.

The purpose of this section is to explore the extent to which the policy principles and
aims of the ESDP have been applied to the RPG document and have informed the
specific policies of RPG. The ESDP contains three broad policy principles
accompanied by thirteen aims (Table 2).
Table 2: Policy principles and aims of the ESDP.
Development of a balanced and polycentric pattern of urban

development;
Polycentric and balanced Spatial Development in the EU
Dynamic Attractive and Competitive Cities and Urbanised Regions
An urban-rural relationship which recognises inter-dependence and
fosters partnership;
Indigenous Development, Diverse and Productive Rural Areas
Urban-Rural partnership
Securing parity of access to infrastructure and knowledge;
Integrated approach to improved transport links and access to
knowledge
Polycentic development model: a basis for better accessibility
Efficient and sustainable use of the infrastructure
Diffusion of innovation and knowledge
Sustainable development, prudent management and protection of the
natural and cultural heritage;
Natural and cultural heritage as a development asset
Preservation and development of the natural heritage
Water resource management – a special challenge for spatial
development
Creative management of cultural landscapes
Creative management of the cultural heritage
3.1 Policy principles and aims of the ESDP: Table 2 above presents the broad
policy guidelines and supporting policy aims set out in the ESDP. Is there any
evidence that these have helped to inform the spatial development strategy and
specific policies of the RPG document? If so could you provide examples?
77
PART IV- Spatial Representation.

a). Is the European spatial context in which RPG has been developed properly
acknowledged and represented through appropriate maps and diagrams, or
are these simply administrative and locational?
b). Are there any visual representations of the transnational study areas?
c). Within the key strategic diagram is weight attached to the links with the rest of
the UK, EU and world?
d). To what extent does the key spatial diagram provide a dynamic representation
of the spatial development of the region?
78
PART V - Overview
5.1 Overall, how effectively do you feel that the RPG responds to the call in PPG
11 for RPGs to have regard to European considerations such as,
‘intergovernmental and EU legislation, policies and programmes and funding
regimes that impact on the region’ including the ‘main policy themes of the
ESDP?’ (PPG 11 para. 3.5). Please provide a brief explanation of your
assessment, identifying features and approaches in the document that might
be considered to be best practice.
79
APPENDIX 2 - Planning Officer’s Society Evaluators
Of those contacted, the following retired members agreed to take part in the project
and received training in the use of the evaluative framework:
Lynda Addison
Former Director of Planning and Transport London Borough of Hounslow and
adviser to LPAC and SERPLAN. As a consultant involved in research into
pan-regional arrangements for planning in the South East following the
changes in the administrative structures for London and the South East.
Member of the POS Best Value working group.
Leslie G. Coop
Former Chief Planning Officer at Oldham MBC. Closely involved in North
West RPG process as Chair of the NWRA’s ESDP and INTERREG working
group. Commented on earlier drafts of the ESDP and involved in the
European Issues Topic Group. Chair of the NWRA’s officer group which
produced the existing RPG 13 and Chair of steering group which is
supervising its current review.
Richard Jarvis
Former Director of Planning and Development at Flintshire County Council.
Currently engaged in PhD research at the Department of Civic Design, the
University of Liverpool. A member of the countryside council for Wales. From
1996-2000 acted as the planning advisor to the Local Government Association
and the Welsh Local Government Association and as Honorary Secretary to
the Planning Officer’s Society for Wales. Author of ‘Structure Planning and
Strategic Planning Guidance in Wales’ in Mark Tewdr Jones (ed.) British
Planning Policy in Transition, UCL, 1996. Has acted as the Technical
Secretary to Strategic Planning Advisory Committee responsible to writing and
producing submission to SoS for Wales ‘Strategic Planning Guidance in
Wales’ (May 1993).
80

Delivering The European Spatial Development Perspective

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Delivering The European Spatial Development Perspective

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Delivering the European Spatial Development

Dr. David Shaw

Department of Civic Design

Delivering the ESDP

Chapter 1: Applying the ESDP to RPG 8

Chapter 2: The RPG Review 18

Chapter 3: Regional player survey 34

Chapter 4: Case studies 39

Chapter 5: Delivering the ESDP: Towards Best Practice 59

List of acronyms and abbreviations

The process of RPG preparation: In terms of horizontal linkages within the

Sustainable Development Strategies were (with some exceptions) generally

Spatial development policy principles: The majority of the documents

Spatial representations: Most maps showing the position of the region in

5. The research suggests that the European agenda is beginning to be recognised

Chapter 1: Applying the ESDP to RPG

Within the EU the influence of globalisation on patterns of spatial development has

Recognition of the influence of EU sectoral policies with a territorial significance has

1.2 The development of the European Spatial Development

Figure 1: ESDP Key Spatial Development Principles

• securing parity access to infrastructure and knowledge; and

• sustainable development, prudent management and protection of nature

policies at each administrative level as well as ‘vertical’ co-operation between the

(CEC, 1999, p. 45)

It is the application of the principles of ‘Europeanisation’ and ‘spatialisation’ to

(Wilkinson et al, 1998 and Bishop et al, 2000)

‘Widening the spatial planning scope of RPG is in keeping with trends

(DETR 2000, Para. 3.1)

PPG 11 para. 3.9 discusses the appropriateness of sub-regional strategies as a

In conclusion, recent years have seen a steady strengthening of Government advice

1.4 Applying the ESDP to other spatial strategies

1.5 Aims of the current research

1. To conduct a review of emerging RPG documentation in order to ascertain

The evolving policy background to regional planning in England is something that

Stage Regional Planning Guidance Prepared by

Total time from start of process: approx. 2.5

Figure 3: Progress of RPG reviews at time of research

Region RPG Reviewed & Progress

West Midlands RPG Consultation Draft Policy Options

1.6 Research Approach

(1) The development of an evaluative framework for RPG, which would be

In order to evaluate the most recently published version of Regional Planning

More specifically, an evaluative framework to be applied to RPG documentation

• To consider the extent to which emerging RPG documents adequately

• To evaluate the extent to which there is horizontal and vertical integration of

(1) the European context in which RPG has been prepared,

1.7 Structure of the Report

Chapter 2: Review of RPG Documents

2.2 Placing RPG within its European context

developments. Reference is made to EU programmes and legislation including CAP

Broadly speaking there appeared to be consistency between the priorities

Overall therefore, there seems to be a broad consistency between spatial strategies

2.3 Vertical and horizontal co-operation in spatial development

2.3.2 Horizontal integration within the region

In terms of horizontal integration within regions, the Evaluative Framework sought to

2.3.3 Treatment of cross-border issues in RPG

All the documents reviewed contained some reference to cross-border issues in

The examples of cross-border issues identified in RPGs included: transport (including

The documents make reference to a variety of mechanisms to address cross-border

A number of RPG documents go beyond mentioning cross border studies, and

2.3.4 Vertical Linkages

Planning Policy Guidance Notes, Mineral Planning Guidance Notes, Circular