Blame it on austerity? Examining the impetus behind London’s changing green space governance

Whitten, Meredith

doi:10.3351/ppp.2019.8633493848

Cited by 20 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since 2010, successive UK governments have enacted significant cuts on local government and environment sector funding, leading local planning authorities (LPAs) to cut between 20 and 90% of their budgets for environmental management. Further, LPAs’ budgets for discretionary services, under which greenspace delivery and management typically falls, have experienced deep cuts [ 48 ]. The impact of this has been a contraction of the quality of landscape management and a curtailing of strategic development in new resources due to a lack of capital investment and revenue funding.…”

Section: Financing Green Infrastructurementioning

confidence: 99%

Access to Nature in a Post Covid-19 World: Opportunities for Green Infrastructure Financing, Distribution and Equitability in Urban Planning

Mell

Whitten

2021

IJERPH

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Covid-19 changed the way many people viewed and interacted with the natural environment. In the UK, a series of national lockdowns limited the number of places that individuals could use to support their mental and physical health. Parks, gardens, canals and other ”green infrastructure” (GI) resources remained open and were repositioned as “essential infrastructure” supporting well-being. However, the quality, functionality and location of GI in urban areas illustrated a disparity in distribution that meant that in many cases communities with higher ethnic diversity, lower income and greater health inequality suffered from insufficient access. This paper provides commentary on these issues, reflecting on how planners, urban designers and environmental organizations are positioning GI in decision-making to address inequality. Through a discussion of access and quality in an era of austerity funding, this paper proposes potential pathways to equitable environmental planning that address historical and contemporary disenfranchisement with the natural environment in urban areas.

show abstract

Section: Financing Green Infrastructurementioning

confidence: 99%

Access to Nature in a Post Covid-19 World: Opportunities for Green Infrastructure Financing, Distribution and Equitability in Urban Planning

Mell

Whitten

2021

IJERPH

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although never statutorily prescribed, parks have been ubiquitous in the urban landscape since the 19th century (Whitten, 2019). The improvement of citizens' health and well-being was a strong driver behind the Victorian parks movement to address poor air quality and crowded, unhealthy conditions in rapidly urbanizing towns and cities (Dempsey, 2012).…”

Section: A Brief History Of Funding Parks In Englandmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The creation of parks was partly borne out of the strengthening of local government from the 1870s onwards alongside a competitive spirit between authorities to improve their urban environments (Walker and Duffield, 1983). Since the end of the 19 th century, the responsibility for parks has been embedded within the local government (Whitten, 2019).…”

Section: A Brief History Of Funding Parks In Englandmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the UK, their discretionary status means parks have a low priority and many local governments do not keep records on their expenditure (CABE Space, 2006a). This makes a parks department's case for more resources very hard to make, and adversely affects the ability of park managers to sustain the social, environmental and health benefits of parks (Whitten, 2019). To address the issue of inadequate funding, income generation is becoming an increasingly important part of the remit of parks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Acceptability of income generation practices in 21st century urban park management: The case of city district parks

Nam

Dempsey

2020

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is growing interest in understanding the benefits of parks and green space in financial terms, particularly from policymakers and decision-makers. Applying a financial value is an increasingly popular practice designed to communicate urban green space benefits to budget holders. This is pertinent for local governments who routinely struggle to secure funding for parks, given their nonstatutory status around the world. To address this, it is perhaps inevitable that the application of a wide range of funding models to parks is being explored. However, there is little empirical evidence that users and residents share this sentiment. This paper aims to address this gap in knowledge by exploring how feasible and acceptable such income generation practices are for stakeholders directly involved in using and managing parks. We asked local residents, parks managers, community groups and academics in one northern English city how feasible and acceptable they considered different income generation practices if applied to their local parks. The findings showed that overall, income generated by cafés and organised events were considered acceptable by residents but to a lesser extent by community groups and professionals. Voluntary donations, car parking and increased taxation were considered unacceptable by all stakeholders, while using the planning system to secure funding was considered acceptable. The findings suggest a variety of acceptable income-generating practices which may help stakeholders to address pragmatically the current challenges of managing urban parks.

show abstract

“…For example, Newcastle has recently applied a charitable trust model to manage a number of its city's parks [49]. There is also a growing reliance on volunteers to take on more responsibility for green space management [50]. There are claims that volunteering can contribute positively to people's mental health [51]; however, this is not fully examined, given the potential pressures that ensue when taking on responsibilities once held by the state sector [52].…”

Section: Place-keeping: In the Pursuit Of Effective Urban Park Managementioning

confidence: 99%

Place-Keeping for Health? Charting the Challenges for Urban Park Management in Practice

Nam

Dempsey

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a growing body of evidence that demonstrates the health and well-being benefits of urban green spaces. There is less evidence on the effect of the management of such spaces on our health and well-being. This paper attempts to address this gap in knowledge by calling on empirical evidence collected in the United Kingdom (UK) city of Sheffield. Interviews conducted with professionals and community groups involved in the management of six district parks are analysed using the place-keeping analytical framework. The results highlight the overriding importance of local and national policy regarding how they inform the availability of funding, which is increasingly dependent on partnerships, and governance arrangements to contribute to a park's maintenance, which is monitored through evaluation. The findings show how policies without funding can jeopardise the effective management of parks and how the concept of making park management a statutory service might have more traction if we consider its contribution to people's health.

show abstract

Blame it on austerity? Examining the impetus behind London’s changing green space governance

Cited by 20 publications

References 25 publications

Access to Nature in a Post Covid-19 World: Opportunities for Green Infrastructure Financing, Distribution and Equitability in Urban Planning

Access to Nature in a Post Covid-19 World: Opportunities for Green Infrastructure Financing, Distribution and Equitability in Urban Planning

Acceptability of income generation practices in 21st century urban park management: The case of city district parks

Place-Keeping for Health? Charting the Challenges for Urban Park Management in Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About