Impact case study database

The uptake of neighbourhood planning has been mixed, with more uptake seen in affluent areas. This means that some local communities have missed the opportunity to shape their neighbourhood. The research has demonstrated that an overriding cause of this was the lack of support for NPGs, who depend on volunteers, who navigate a complex and lengthy system [refs 1, 3 and 7]. Parker’s work has challenged and underpinned new government policy and practice in order to increase both uptake and the support required to enable communities to successfully shape their neighbourhoods through Neighbourhood Plans. As a result, the research has informed legislative and national support package reform.

Legislative reform and improved support programme for neighbourhood planning

By September 2019, over 850 Neighbourhood Plans had reached the neighbourhood referendum stage, where Plans have successfully completed the examination stage, and communities vote on the Plan. If successful at the referendum stage, the Plan will be adopted by the local authority, and policies within it should add value to those in the existing Local Plan. The 2014 User Experience of Neighbourhood Planning research [ref 1] was crucial in elucidating the reasons for the low uptake and completion rates of Neighbourhood Plans, highlighting several issues and means to improve. A bias towards affluent areas was revealed, meaning that the benefits of neighbourhood planning were not being realised by urban and disadvantaged areas. [Text removed for publication].

[Text removed for publication]. In August 2020, the Housing Secretary announced that funding to help communities in urban and deprived areas plan their local neighbourhoods will almost double [source 5].

Improving transparency and consistency through new guidelines for examiners

Further research [Section 3, ref 2] identified the examination stage as lacking transparency for NPGs navigating the system. It showed that a draft Neighbourhood Plan going to the examination stage needed to be robust, as well as highlighting the lack of consistency between examiners, which appeared to be due to the fact that no standardised training was offered to examiners. This research was summarised by Reading in a briefing paper (April 2017) submitted directly to policymakers in the MHCLG, and which featured in the House of Lords debate during the passage of the Bill and formed the basis of a subsequent publication [ref 2]. [Text removed for publication]. The subsequent Neighbourhood Planning Act (2017) provided measures ensuring that local authorities have due regard for Plans which have been independently examined.

Parker’s research has informed new guidance for independent examiners acting on behalf of the Neighbourhood Planning Independent Examiner Referral Service (NPIERs). Described as “vanguard research” by one of the primary providers of examination services [source 7], the “research work was critical in its role in instigating and informing the production of the now published sector led advice to neighbourhood plan examiners and others involved in the examination process”. The source also stated: “Within the examiner community, I believe there is an ongoing expectation that the learning from continuing research undertaken by Professor Parker will be both integral and critical to establishing greater efficacy in delivering neighbourhood planning” and affirmed that this “was a key driver of the NPIERS panel’s work” [source 3]. [Text removed for publication]. This means that “clearer and comprehensive guidance about examination” was produced for all parties, which “included not only the examination process, but also … common issues that occur at examination” and ensures that NPGs now have an “increased awareness and knowledge of what happens ‘post-examination’” [source 3]. As a result, NPGs can now have confidence that the examination stage will be more consistent and communities can have more confidence that their Plans will be respected by decision-makers (the local planning authorities).

Increasing the quality of debate on planning and Neighbourhood Plans

Parker’s work is also informing the quality of debate on planning policy more generally. He was invited by the Head of Policy at the Town and Country Planning Association to contribute to the Raynsford Review of Planning in England (p.46) specifically on neighbourhood planning. In citing Reading’s research on neighbourhood planning exclusively, the report again highlighted the role of the local authority and examiners, and their potential impact on a successful outcome in terms of implementation of the plan by decision-makers (including local authorities and developers) or not; the concern therefore being that neighbourhood plans can fail, through no fault of their own, but because of the interplay of other factors, including the National Planning Policy Framework. The recommendations of the Raynsford Review have been widely cited and endorsed, including by the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE). Parker was also called to give evidence for the House of Lords review of the rural economy to discuss the role of neighbourhood planning in November 2018.

In addition to engaging with NPGs across England, Parker has extensively engaged with practitioner groups, delivering keynotes for the Neighbourhood Planning Conference in London (March 2017), Young Planners Conferences, and the RTPI’s north-west (2015) and south-east (2017) conferences. Parker was also an invited speaker to the CPRE (2017) and the Planning Officers Society (September 2018). In 2018, the National Association of Local Councils released a report called Where Next for Neighbourhood Plans? Can They Withstand the External Pressures? This extensively cites the work at Reading between 2015 and 2018, including the outcome of the Hive Event in June 2018; it urged the government “to realise the full potential that effective neighbourhood planning offers”. The resultant book informed by the Hive event was specifically designed by the Reading authors as a guide for NPGs. Indeed, a leading neighbourhood planning forum consultancy describe the book as being able to “refresh perspective of what NP can achieve” [source 8]. More recently Parker has been invited to speak at the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Civic Societies on “Public participation in planning” (March 2019) and the APPG for Housing and Planning on “Are Neighbourhood Plans working for communities?” (June 2019)

While the planning system provides opportunities for communities to get involved in development decisions that affect them, in practice they have often found it difficult to have a meaningful say in a complex system. The influence of the research in underpinning national policy [sources 1,2,4,6] and practitioner guidance [sources 3,7,8] has therefore directly impacted NPGs and the ability to involve citizens in effective planning. It is enabling them to navigate a complex system to achieve the aspirations of the wider community – the very intentions of the neighbourhood planning policy in the first place. The significance of the new support measures for neighbourhood planning in England is that they aimed to provide the means for an increase in, and more equitable distribution of, neighbourhood planning uptake, reaching those communities which are less affluent, through a clearer, more consistent and more accessible approach.