Egan Review Skills for Sustainable Communities

SKILLS FOR SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIESTh

e Ega

n Rev

iew

Office of the Deputy Prime MinisterEland HouseBressenden PlaceLondon SW1E 5DUTelephone 020 7944 4400Website www.odpm.gov.uk

© Crown Copyright 2004

Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown.

This publication, excluding logos, may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium forresearch, private study or for internal circulation within an organisation. This is subject to it beingreproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledgedas Crown copyright and the title of the publication specified.

For any other use of this material, please write to HMSO Licensing, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ Fax: 01603 723000 or e-mail: [email protected].

Further copies of this publication are available from:

RIBA Enterprises Ltd15 Bonhill StreetLondonEC2P 2EATel: 020 7256 7222Fax: 020 7374 2737E-mail: [email protected]

or online via the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister’s website at www.odpm.gov.uk/eganreview

ISBN 1 85946 142 5

RIBA Product Code no. 35230

Printed in Great Britain on material containing 75% post-consumer waste and 25% ECF pulp.

April 2004

Reference no: 04UPU1892

Front cover image reproduced courtesy of Gallagher Estates – ‘the master developer for Bathgate’

Photographs from left: ODPM/Murray Grove, Cartwright Pickard Architects/© Photograph, Peter Karry/www.JohnBirdsall.co.uk/Construction Photography

SKILLS FOR SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIESTh

e Ega

n Rev

iew

1

FOREWORD BY SIR JOHN EGAN 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7Introduction 7Summary of Recommendations 11

CHAPTER ONE: THE COMMON GOAL: DEFINING AND MEASURINGSUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES 17

CHAPTER TWO: RESPONSIBILITIES AND PROCESSES FOR DELIVERY 31

CHAPTER THREE: THE RIGHT SKILLS FOR THE JOB 51

CHAPTER FOUR: THE WAY FORWARD 63

ANNEX A: TASK GROUP BIOGRAPHIES 90

ANNEX B: SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES INDICATORS 92

ANNEX C: OCCUPATIONS INVOLVED IN PLANNING, DELIVERING AND MAINTAINING SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES 100

ANNEX D: DEFINITIONS OF GENERIC SKILLS 103

TABLE OF CONTENTS

3

When the Deputy PrimeMinister invited me toundertake a Skills Review,the focus was very muchon the professional, builtenvironment skillsnecessary to deliversustainable communities.Professional skills arevitally important, but

simply upgrading these in isolation will not,I believe, deliver the outcomes the Governmentis seeking – communities in which people wantto live and work, and which are sustainable forfuture generations.

The Government’s concept of the ‘SustainableCommunity’ is, in my view, an exceptionally goodone, but making it work across the country willrequire the active engagement of more than justbuilt environment professionals. A wide range ofoccupations – from planners, architects andsurveyors, to staff from central, regional andlocal government, to retailers, educators andpolice officers will have an essential role to playin making communities attractive, safe places tolive. This approach will require new skills andnew ways of working for everyone involved.

Why do we need a new approach? People are veryclear about what they want from their communities

– places that are safe, clean, friendly, andprosperous, with good amenities such aseducation, health services, shopping and greenspaces. These priorities are widely known,and have been shown to work in successfulcommunities that have built up over hundredsof years. They are reflected in the ideal goalas set out in the Government’s SustainableCommunities Plan (and in the first Chapter ofthis report). But in too many places our currentapproach and systems are failing to deliver whatpeople want.

There are some good examples of wherewe get it right, principally in the renaissanceof city centres and in some individual places,but in general development is not resulting incommunities in which people can live wholesomeand prosperous lives, let alone experience asustainable twenty-first century.

There are too many housing estates simplydumped into spaces with no amenities and nothought for their future governance. Too manyugly retail parks serving no other purpose thanshopping by car. Too many hospitals and schoolsisolated from the communities they serve. Toomany business parks, pristine and splendid, buthermetically sealed from the outside world, thuseffectively relieving business from the need togive leadership to the communities they serve.

FOREWORD BYSIR JOHN EGAN

4

The Egan Review: Skills for Sustainable Communities

The reasons for this are complex – planningguidelines have, in the past, often led to singlepurpose developments because it was easier forall concerned, except of course for the communityat large; the highly regulated development processhas resulted in guidance on matters such ashighways acting as straightjackets on gooddevelopment making it impossible to deliver safeand attractive places; successive governmentshave vied with each other to emasculate theauthority of local government, often resulting inpoor leadership and vision for the local area; andsome developers have delivered lowest commondenominator sites because there has been noincentive to do otherwise.

To turn things around we need a common goal,a clear understanding of the sort of communitieswe are trying to achieve; strong and empoweredleadership at local level that will drive a visionforward in conjunction with all key partners;efficient, transparent processes for delivery(including creation of the vision, development ofa Sustainable Communities Strategy detailinginfrastructure requirements and developmentopportunities, arrangements for engaging thelocal community, and cost effective pre-applicationand planning processes); and above all skilledcommitted individuals working together to makepeople’s priorities a reality.

Delivering better communities requires not onlythe professional skills of planning, architectureand surveying, but also a broad range of genericskills, behaviour and knowledge – such as

governance of communities, economic planningfor prosperity, communication (especially listeningto and selling to communities), risk taking, andabove all leadership and partnership working.Local authorities and local agencies will needto demonstrate high levels of competency in thelatter two, as much of the work to develop andretrofit communities will need to be done locally –it cannot be done from the centre simply becauseit needs to be supported by local people. Thispresents as much of a challenge for national asfor local government. Central departments willneed to demonstrate risk taking and delegationskills to free up local agencies to deliver onthe ground.

Upskilling the broad range of core and associatedoccupations with a role in planning, delivering andmaintaining sustainable communities representsa very significant challenge, but it is one that wemust take on if things are to change and realprogress is to be made. Ensuring that allparticipants have competencies in the genericskills at levels commensurate with their roles,will require political determination, finance, andengagement from everyone involved. I believethat a new national body is needed to lead on thiscomplex skills agenda and I urge the Deputy PrimeMinister to establish this as quickly as possible.

This Skills Review is only a starting point; thedirection it advocates will need to be developed bythe proposed National Centre for SustainableCommunities Skills, and informed by research intosustainable communities as a common goal.

5

Foreword by Sir John Egan

We have some major opportunities ahead ofus to try and get this right. These include thelow demand pathfinders in the North of Englandand the growth areas in the South East. Theinvolvement of the Prime Minister in chairingthe cabinet sub-committee on the ThamesGateway and other growth areas demonstratesthe strength of Government commitment to thisagenda. I hope that the processes set out in thisreport will be followed and the legacy of thecabinet sub-committee will not only be magnificentnew communities in the Thames Gateway andelsewhere, but also a leading example of howjoined-up working can be achieved at all levelsof Government.

This was a new and broad area of work for me,and as expected it proved challenging. It neededan equally broad range of knowledge and expertiseto assist in the formulation of the ideas I have putforward, and I drew together a Task Group tosupport me. All members of the Group gave metheir full commitment and dedication and I thankthem all, with special thanks to those memberswho chaired sub-groups on particular issues.

Sir John EganChair of the Review

6

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONSCABE Commission for Architecture and the

Built Environment

DEFRA Department of Environment, Food andRural Affairs

DETR Department of Environment, Transportand the Regions

DfES Department for Education and Skills

IDeA Improvement and Development Agency

LDF Local Development Framework

LGA Local Government Association

LSC Learning and Skills Council

LSP Local Strategic Partnership

NRU Neighbourhood Renewal Unit

ODPM Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

RCE Regional Centre of Excellence

RTPI Royal Town Planning Institute

SEEDA South East Regional DevelopmentAgency

SSC Sector Skills Council

SSDA Sector Skills Development Agency


7

INTRODUCTIONPlaces where people want to live – and that aresustainable – do not happen by chance. They arethe product of visionary thinking and commitmentby highly skilled civic and national leaders,developers and professionals, with the fullengagement and support of local partnersand communities.

To understand the skills needed to deliversuch communities, we need first to have a goodgrasp of the meaning of the term ‘sustainablecommunity’, and the processes by which suchcommunities are delivered. We also need to knowthat our concept of a sustainable community isbroadly supported by the people.

Our approach to this Review has been to ask aseries of questions: what sort of communitiesare we trying to create, and how should wemeasure achievement; what are the most effectivedelivery processes, and who is responsible forthese; and finally what skills are needed to makethe processes work effectively, and how do webridge the gap between our current skills baseand the skills we want?

We believe that delivery of sustainable communitiesand the skills necessary to support delivery havemuch in common with the way that successfulorganisations operate and the skills that they display.

Such organisations have clear goals, efficientdelivery processes, effective systems for constantprocess improvement, good leaders who can makeconnections between skills in different professions,and staff with the right skills who are focused asa team on delivering the common goal.

Common goal (Chapter One)

We have developed a definition of the ‘sustainablecommunity’ which we propose should become acommon goal for everyone involved – central andlocal government, service providers, communities,the private and the voluntary sectors. It is based onthe criteria in the Sustainable Communities Plan,1

which have been tested by MORI focus groups andwhich are supported by a wealth of historic andresearch data. Our definition is:

Sustainable communities meet the diverseneeds of existing and future residents, theirchildren and other users, contribute to ahigh quality of life and provide opportunityand choice. They achieve this in ways thatmake effective use of natural resources,enhance the environment, promote socialcohesion and inclusion and strengtheneconomic prosperity.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 ODPM (2003) Sustainable Communities: Building for the future

8


This definition is backed up by a set of sevencomponents and associated sub-components,and together they constitute the ‘common goal’.We believe that once adopted by all stakeholders,the definition and indicators for measuringprogress, can be a means of securing moreeffective joining up of policy agendas in national,regional and local government; provide aframework for delegating much more performancerelated responsibility from national to localgovernment; create a mechanism for identifyingessential components in very significant newdevelopments; and provide a framework withinwhich skill sets can be developed.

Progress towards a more sustainable future willneed to be tracked, and we have identified a smallnumber of performance indicators that could beused to demonstrate achievement.

Responsibilities and Processesfor Delivery (Chapter Two)

We examined the processes required to achieveour common goal and where responsibility for co-ordinating and orchestrating delivery should lie.We were immediately struck by the success oflocal authorities that have visionary leadership –at member and officer level. We believe that localauthority chief executives and leaders, with thesupport of their cabinets, are best placed todevelop a vision for the future of their area basedon the sustainable community components weidentify, and to secure the buy-in of the communityand other stakeholders. Regional bodies must bekey partners in the delivery process, but only local

authorities have the right blend of local knowledge,presence and accountability to make this work.

We propose that the mechanism for engaging allkey stakeholders in developing the vision shouldbe a Sustainable Community Strategy. We feel thatthe current approach to Community Strategiesoften lacks clear direction and is insufficientlycomprehensive to deliver our common goal. Webelieve that existing and future Strategies shouldbe aligned better with the objective of deliveringsustainable communities, and should articulateclearly how sustainable development can be usedto promote economic prosperity, social cohesionand environmental quality in their area.

In particular, Sustainable Community Strategiesand their associated action plans need to identifyinfrastructure requirements to supportdevelopment opportunities and growth. They needto balance the cost of investment with the longerterm wealth that will be generated by sustainabledevelopment opportunities. Such Strategies shouldgive a greater degree of confidence to developersand investors, and should help the community tosee the positive effects and wealth creationbenefits of major development.

Successful delivery of the vision will requireeffective planning processes, including pre-planning application discussions for verysignificant developments that engage all keyplayers from the outset of the process. We want tosee developers, councillors, local authority staff,infrastructure providers, community groupsand built environment professionals all working

9

Executive Summary

together from the start of a project to createplaces where people want to live. We propose theformalisation and adoption countrywide of suchpre-planning application processes – and we wantto see more effective community engagement asthe norm not the exception. Pre-planningapplication discussions should take on board theprinciples and processes of quality placemaking.We believe that mixed development solutions,together with masterplanning and urban, ordesign coding will ensure design quality is highon the agenda. Expert assistance should beavailable to local planners to help them dealwith significant development proposals.

Planning authorities will also need to reviewtheir planning application processes to maximisetransparency and efficiency. If the private sectoris to contribute to developing communities thenit is essential that its investment is not squanderedthrough uncertain and inefficient procedures.Process re-engineering has proved effective inother industries and we believe that applying thisapproach to planning will pay dividends. Outcomesmight include different approaches and differentteams for handling very significant and otherapplications, and revised processing targets.

Developers must be key partners in any strategyto deliver sustainable communities, as theyprovide dynamism, creativity and investment totake visions forward. But just as other playersmust adopt a new approach, so too must manydevelopers raise their game in a number of

respects. Rather than using the financial bottomline as an excuse to deliver mediocre design andmediocre building quality – numerous examples ofisolated ‘placeless’ estates across the country aretestament to how to do it wrong – developers mustbuy-in to the common goal, commit to deliveringhigh quality attractive places for people to live,and engage proactively with local authorities andother partners to create Sustainable CommunityStrategies and Local Development Frameworksfor their area. The benefits will be clarity aboutdevelopment opportunities and faster agreementon planning permission where proposals reflectthe vision for the area and the goal of sustainablecommunities.

Involving councillors in pre-planning andplanning brief discussions is important if theyare to understand the way in which proposals havebeen shaped to meet the needs of the community.There are propriety issues here and we proposenew advice should be issued for local authoritiesby the end of this year.

Skills (Chapters Three and Four)

The initial focus of the Review was very firmlyon professional built environment skills. But ourwork to define and operationalise the commongoal, clarify responsibilities, and outline processimprovements, made clear to us that there is amuch larger range of skills needed to deliversustainable communities.2

2 This larger range includes trade skills for construction workers. Kate Barker has considered trade skills as part of her Review of Housing Supply,Delivering Stability: Securing Our Future Housing Needs (2004), so they are not addressed in this report.

10


We believe that it is the generic skills, behaviourand knowledge that will make the differencebetween successful delivery and failure. Skillssuch as the ability to create a vision, leadershipto achieve buy-in to the vision, communication,teamworking, project management, process re-engineering, understanding sustainabledevelopment, effective financial management,understanding the economics of developmentand the processes of local democracy. Alongsidethese we need an understanding of delegatedresponsibilities and greater delegation skills,particularly from national to local governmentlevel. We also need high quality brokering skillsin government regional offices and agencies.

These skills are needed, to different degreesand varying levels, by all those with a role toplay in delivering sustainable communities.This includes local authority staff, staff fromregional and central government, developers,and built environment professionals, as wellas schoolteachers, police, retailers andhealth service professionals. Using the sevensustainable community components as a basis,we identified around one hundred differentoccupations engaged in this agenda. All of theseneed their individual professional/specialist skills,but they also need the generic skills outlinedabove, so that they can work together to deliverthe vision for their areas.

Of the one hundred or so occupations, we identifieda significant number as ‘core’ occupations – peoplewho spend almost all of their professional timein activities to do with planning, delivering and

maintaining sustainable communities. These arethe built environment professionals – planners,architects, urban designers, etc – and decisionmakers and influencers – staff from local, regionaland central government, developers and investors,staff from voluntary and community associations.A second group comprised 'associatedoccupations' – those whose contribution isextremely important to creating sustainablecommunities but who are not involved full timein the development process – examples arepolice officers, educators, health servicemanagers, and staff in local businesses. A thirdgroup comprised those who have a legitimateinterest in sustainable communities but whoare not necessarily employed in the sector; thisincludes the wider public, media, members ofresidents and neighbourhood groups, studentsand school children.

We considered the evidence for generic skills andpeople shortages in the core group. A number ofstudies point to shortages of generic skillsamongst built environment professionals, andthere is evidence of people shortages in somecore occupations (eg civil and structural engineers,town planners, transport planners). Both couldhamper our ability to deliver the SustainableCommunities Plan.

Action is needed both to encourage more peopleto enter core occupations, and to upskill andprovide information to all three of the groupsidentified above. But the breadth of theseoccupations and their different training andaccreditation processes make it difficult for

11

Executive Summary

existing providers and institutions to deliver therequisite skills to everyone involved.

We therefore consider that a new mechanismis needed to deliver across these occupations.We believe that responsibility for driving theskills agenda forward, and for maintaining andenhancing its profile must be entrusted to a newNational Centre for Sustainable Community Skills.

The Egan Task Group has not maderecommendations about the format the Centreshould take – physical or virtual – where it mightbe located, or how it should be staffed andfinanced. These will be for others to decide.

However, we are clear that its overarching aimmust be to develop world class skill sets amongstall those involved in planning, delivering andmaintaining sustainable communities and we setout the tasks that we envisage it undertaking.These present a considerable challenge, but if weare successful, the future for communities inEngland should be truly sustainable.

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Common Goal (Chapter One)

● We recommend that Government, localauthorities and other stakeholders (built-environment professionals, public serviceproviders, developers and communityorganisations) adopt the common goal anda common understanding of what the term‘sustainable community’ means. Our definition

and seven components constitute a model thatothers may wish to use. It may need to besupplemented to reflect local priorities and theviews of local people. (Paragraph 1.8)

● We recommend that by the end of 2005, localauthorities should:– incorporate in their Sustainable Community

Strategies (Chapter Two) a process throughwhich they and their partners will select theindicators from Annex B that are mostrelevant to the needs of their communities;

– identify mechanisms for establishingbaselines and regularly tracking progresstowards achieving sustainability with thelonger term aim of tracking all of theindicators; and

– make provision for taking action to addresspoor performance where it occurs.

Feedback to local people should be an essentialpart of this process.(Paragraph 1.16)

● We recommend that Government works with theSustainable Buildings Task Group to developfurther our proposal for a sustainablecommunities code/benchmarking, that will giveclear information about the environmental andquality standards that sustainable communitiesshould achieve, and how these translate intopractical building standards. Government shouldalso look at ways of incentivising progress, withthe longer term aim of meeting developmentsthat achieve carbon emissions and wasteminimisation standards consistent with asustainable one planet level within, sayeight years.

12


Design standards and guidelines for verysignificant developments should also beaddressed. We want to halt single use of landfor industrial, commercial, housing, retail andleisure development without full considerationof mixed-use alternatives. (Paragraph 1.21)

Responsibilities and Processesfor Delivery (Chapter Two)

● We recommend that local authoritiesshould have the lead role for co-ordinatingand orchestrating delivery of sustainablecommunities, through bringing together serviceproviders and other key players with the localcommunity. They should regard this role as theirprincipal purpose. However, they must earn theconfidence placed in them to deliver througheffective management of their functions.Successful authorities which improve thesustainability of their communities year on yearshould be rewarded with enhanced financialdelegations from central government.(Paragraph 2.4)

● We recommend that the Government placesa clear responsibility on all relevant publicservices, including central governmentdepartments, to support, contribute to, andpromote sustainable communities.(Paragraph 2.11)

● We invite central and local government towork together to reshape Community Strategiesso that they become more sharply focusedSustainable Community Strategies throughwhich a vision is developed, set and

operationalised, and development opportunitiesare captured to help secure delivery of the vision.Infrastructure requirements to createsustainable communities should be identifiedtogether with their costs and benefits.(Paragraph 2.18)

● In implementing the new system, we believethat the Government should take the opportunityto make it clear that the Local DevelopmentFrameworks, informed by the SustainableCommunity Strategy, should be key deliverymechanisms for creating sustainablecommunities. We think it is important torecognise that the planning system is essentialto the delivery of sustainable communities and itmust be reconnected with the central leadershipand vision of a local authority. (Paragraph 2.26)

● We recommend that the Government and localauthorities take forward proposals to developand promote an effective system of pre-application discussions for very significantdevelopment projects. Swift planning approvalshould follow where the eventual developmentproposals fully support the vision. Box Fiveoutlines common principles. (Paragraph 2.33)

● We consider that planning processes can beimproved and clarified for all participants andwe recommend that in each local planningauthority, processes for dealing with planningapplications should be subject to basic processmapping and re-engineering This should takeaccount of the developer’s perspective as wellas that of the local planning authority.(Paragraph 2.39)

13

Executive Summary

● We recommend the Government works withpartners to undertake a review of existingplanning targets, with the aim of producinga system that reflects the Government’scommitment to high quality and timelydecision making for all types of applications.We propose that the Government shouldexamine the scope for using a combination ofnational and local targets. Any new targetsshould reflect the outcomes of planning processre-engineering. (Paragraph 2.44)

● We believe that the Government and theLocal Government Association should worktogether to address issues of proprietysurrounding members involvement in pre-planning and planning brief discussions.We wish to see advice for local authoritiesissued by the end of 2004.(Paragraph 2.52)

Skills – The right skills for the job(Chapter Three)

● We firmly believe that attempting to upskillprofessionals in isolation will not producethe outcomes we are seeking. Instead successwill lie in changing the behaviour, attitudes andknowledge of everyone involved, many of whommay not have realised in the past that theyhad anything to do with each other, or withsustainable communities. We want to seeplanners interacting with tenant associations,highways engineers teaming up with urbandesigners, and central government officialswho plan hospitals and schools working withthose who will be maintaining the surrounding

streets and buildings in ten years time. There isno quick fix – sustainable communities are aholistic long-term objective requiring a holisticapproach to skills to deliver the outcome we areseeking. (Paragraph 3.8)

Skills – The way forward (Chapter Four)

Encouraging entrants into core occupations

● We recommend that the Government shouldwork with professional institutions, localauthorities, education institutions, Sector SkillsCouncils and Regional Centres of Excellenceto develop professional campaigns that willraise the profile of core occupations andunderstanding of their role in sustainablecommunities and in turn encourage entrantsinto these occupations. (Paragraph 4.13)

Gateway education

● We recommend that Government shouldwork with education providers, professionalinstitutions, employers, Sector Skills Councilsand Regional Centres of Excellence to ensure thatan introduction to the generic skills forms partof existing formal training courses for builtenvironment professions; and that cross-sectorworking is introduced at an early stage. Inclusionof training in generic skills should be arequirement for accreditation purposes. Werecognise that this is already the case with someprofessional training, but want to see thisapproach more widely adopted. (Paragraph 4.18)

14


Professional development

● We recommend that:– employers of people working in core

occupations commit to developing andimplementing measures that delivercomprehensive and continual on the jobtraining opportunities to developcompetencies in generic skills for sustainablecommunities;

– employers should make CPD training ingeneric skills compulsory for staff workingin core occupations rather than an optionalextra; and

– where CPD is accredited by professionalinstitutions we recommend that employerswork with those institutions to consider howbest to accredit on the job training in genericskills and interdisciplinary working.(Paragraph 4.24)

Continuous development and review

● We recommend that employers of those incore occupations (local authorities, government,private sector consultancies and developers etc)should work with the key professionalinstitutions, Sector Skills Councils, and otherskills bodies to develop occupationalbenchmarks for core occupations (or enhanceexisting benchmarks where these exist) thatreflect their sustainable communities role.The feasibility of an on-line benchmarking andassessment tool should be considered.(Paragraph 4.28)

Skills management for associated occupationsand the wider public

● We recommend that organisations withresponsibilities for training those who work inassociated occupations (Chapter Three) reviewtheir training programmes to ensure theseinclude both the generic skills and anappreciation of sustainable communities.Joint project working with others from coreand associated groups will increase cross-occupational understanding and allow goodpractice to be shared. Ideally, Regional Centresof Excellence should have a role in brokeringsuch projects.

● We consider that access to information aboutsustainable communities needs to be madeavailable to a wide audience to enable themto contribute to delivering such communities.We recommend that a high quality on-line toolshould be available. We further recommend thatRegional Centres of Excellence should have arole in collating information about successfulprojects. (Paragraph 4.33)

Training for elected members

● On balance, we do not support compulsorytraining at present. Instead we prefer toencourage elected members to participatein training through provision of excellentcourses/exchanges that help them to fulfill theirelected role better. We accept this needs to bekept under review, and compulsory training maybecome necessary if a voluntary approach isunsuccessful. We suggest this is reviewed by

15

Executive Summary

the Government and the Local GovernmentAssociation in 2006. We are unanimous thattraining, whether compulsory or voluntary,should be broadened to embrace the deliveryof sustainable communities, and that itsusefulness and effectiveness should beevaluated. (Paragraph 4.38)

Delivery mechanisms

● We recommend that the Government sets upa national centre for sustainable communityskills. Its first task will be to take forward theimplementation of much of this report. Thename of the centre will need to be decided butfor working purposes at this stage we will referto it as the National Centre for SustainableCommunity Skills – NCSCS. (Paragraph 4.41)

● We propose that the overarching aim of theNCSCS should be to develop world class skillsets amongst all those involved in planning,delivering and maintaining sustainablecommunities. It should seek to achieve thisaim by:– providing a high profile national focus for

sustainable community skills developmentand research;

– working with education providers, employers,professional institutions, relevant SectorSkills Councils, Regional Centres ofExcellence and other skills bodies to provideand promote excellence in sustainablecommunity skills development;

– acting as a catalyst for innovation and afocus for national and international debateon sustainable community skills issues;

– acting as a resource and communicationshub for individuals, organisations andcommunities working in the sustainablecommunities agenda;

– working with others to operationalise thecommon goal, and ensure its relevance tothe public’s requirements; and

– researching with other partners the long-term environmental standards thatsustainable communities should aim for, andhow, in practical terms, these should beachieved. (Paragraph 4.42)

Who will run the national centre?

● We recommend that the Centre should be runby practitioners who themselves demonstratethe generic skills, knowledge and behaviourrequired to help deliver prosperous sustainablecommunities. (Paragraph 4.45)

Priorities for action

● We recommend that the Government’simmediate priority on skills should be to set upand resource the National Centre. This needsto be done quickly if the new communitiesenvisaged in the Sustainable Communities Planare to be delivered within declared timetables.For this reason we recommend that the Centrebe open for business by early 2005.(Paragraph 4.56)

THE COMMON GOAL:DEFINING AND MEASURINGSUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES

Chap

ter 1

Credit: English Regional Development Agencies

DEFINING SUSTAINABLECOMMUNITIES1.1 Sustainable communities do not come

about by chance – they are something wemust work to create. To identify the skillswe need to create them, we must firstunderstand what we mean by the term‘sustainable communities’.

1.2 Considerable work has already been doneto draw up a definition of this term – mostrecently in the Sustainable Communities:Building for the Future Report3 which setout twelve ‘key requirements’, and theSustainable Communities: Dimensions andChallenges Report4 which identified keycomponents of sustainable communities.We have reviewed this work, consultedwith a range of professional and specialistorganisations and other governmentdepartments, and developed the followingcommon definition:

1.3 We have not attempted to defineprescriptively the physical area or size ofpopulation that constitutes a sustainablecommunity. This is a judgement that localauthorities and stakeholders need tomake. In one area, a city may constitutea sustainable community and in another,a town, or collection of towns, or individualneighbourhoods. We also recognise thatfunctioning sustainable communities willfrequently cross-administrative boundaries.


COMPONENTS OF SUSTAINABLECOMMUNITIES1.4 We used our definition to identify seven key

components of a sustainable community andto derive a framework for delivery. DiagramOne summarises our components. Thisconstitutes our ‘common goal’.

1.5 Each component is described in moredetail in Box One. We believe it is essentialthat all components are addressed if we areto plan, deliver and maintain sustainablecommunities – there is no hierarchy.Depending on local circumstances, theremight be a trade-off in the short-term inthe priority given to different components,but in the longer term, all are essential tomake a place sustainable.

Definition of Sustainable Communities:Sustainable communities meet the diverseneeds of existing and future residents, theirchildren and other users, contribute to a highquality of life and provide opportunity andchoice. They achieve this in ways that makeeffective use of natural resources, enhance theenvironment, promote social cohesion andinclusion and strengthen economic prosperity.

3 Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, (2003), Sustainable Communities: building for the future. 4 Kearns, A. and Turok, I. (2003), Sustainable Communities: Dimensions and Challenges.

18

19

Chapter 1 The Common Goal: Defining and Measuring Sustainable Communities

DIAGRAM ONE: COMPONENTS OF SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES

SOCIAL ANDCULTURAL

Vibrant, harmoniousand inclusivecommunities

GOVERNANCEEffective and inclusive

participation,representationand leadership

TRANSPORTAND

CONNECTIVITYGood transport services

and communication linkingpeople to jobs, schools,

health andother services

HOUSING ANDTHE BUILT

ENVIRONMENT A quality built

and naturalenvironment

ECONOMYA flourishingand diverse

local economy

ENVIRONMENTALProviding places

for people to live in anenvironmentally-

friendly way

SERVICES A full range of

appropriate, accessiblepublic, private,community and

voluntary services

SUSTAINABLECOMMUNITIES

20

BOX ONE: COMPONENTS AND SUB-COMPONENTS OF SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES

A COMMON SUB-COMPONENT across all components is:● All provision and/or activity to be high quality, well-designed and maintained, safe, accessible,

adaptable, environmentally and cost-effectively provided

SOCIAL AND CULTURAL – Vibrant, harmonious and inclusive communities● A sense of community identity and belonging● Tolerance, respect and engagement with people from different cultures, background and beliefs● Friendly, co-operative and helpful behaviour in neighbourhoods● Opportunities for cultural, leisure, community, sport and other activities● Low levels of crime and anti-social behaviour with visible, effective and community-friendly policing● All people are socially included and have similar life opportunities

GOVERNANCE – Effective and inclusive participation, representation and leadership● Strategic, visionary, representative, accountable governance systems that enable inclusive, active

and effective participation by individuals and organisations● Strong, informed and effective leadership and partnerships that lead by example (eg government,

business, community)● Strong, inclusive, community and voluntary sector (eg resident’s associations, neighbourhood watch)● A sense of civic values, responsibility and pride● Continuous improvement through effective delivery, monitoring and feedback at all levels

ENVIRONMENTAL – Providing places for people to live in an environmentally-friendly way● Efficient use of resources now and in the future in the built environment and service provision

(eg energy efficiency, land, water resources, flood defence, waste minimisation etc)● Living in a way that minimises the negative environmental impact and enhances the positive impact

(eg recycling, walking, cycling)● Protecting and improving natural resources and biodiversity (eg air quality, noise, water quality)● Having due regard for the needs of future generations in current decisions and actions


21


HOUSING AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT – A quality built and natural environment● Creating a sense of place (eg a place with a positive ‘feeling’ for people, and local distinctiveness)● Well-maintained, local, user-friendly public and green spaces with facilities for everyone including

children and older people● Sufficient range, diversity and affordability of housing within a balanced housing market● A high quality, well-designed built environment of appropriate size, scale, density, design and

layout that complements the distinctive local character of the community● High quality, mixed-use, durable, flexible and adaptable buildings

TRANSPORT AND CONNECTIVITY – Good transport services and communicationlinking people to jobs, schools, health and other services● Transport facilities, including public transport, that help people travel within

and between communities● Facilities to encourage safe local walking and cycling● Accessible and appropriate local parking facilities● Widely available and effective telecommunications and Internet access

ECONOMY – A flourishing and diverse local economy● A wide range of jobs and training opportunities ● Sufficient land and buildings to support economic prosperity and change● Dynamic job and business creation● A strong business community with links into the wider economy

SERVICES – A full range of appropriate, accessible public, private, communityand voluntary services● Well-educated people from well-performing local schools, further and higher education

and training for lifelong learning ● High quality, local health care and social services ● Provision of range of accessible, affordable public, community, voluntary and private services

(eg retail, food, commercial, utilities)● Service providers who think and act long term and beyond their own immediate geographical

and interest boundaries

22


BOX TWO: FOCUS GROUPSThe groups were drawn from different areas and housing conditions namely Greenwich, Telford,Poundbury, Dewsbury, Northampton, and East Manchester. Participants came from a range of agesand social classes. They considered the Task Group's definition, the components and sub-componentsof the term ‘Sustainable Communities’, and identified any gaps or unclear terminology.

When participants were asked what they associated most closely with the word ‘community’, theiremphasis was very much on the people element – families, children, friends.

They found the term ‘Sustainable Community’ generally acceptable, although many participantsfelt adding ‘sustainable’ was jargonistic and made little difference to their initial idea of community.The overriding view was that people make up a community and that children are important for the future.

The groups broadly agreed with our seven components. They thought social and cultural cohesion(encompassing safety, stability and social order) to be fundamental, along with trustworthy localgovernment and good local services.

Focus Groups

1.6 We tested how our definition and componentsmatched up with people’s perceptions of whatmakes a sustainable community. MORI ran aseries of six focus groups for us with thepublic. A summary of the results is inBox Two.

1.7 We believe that our definition andcomponents should be used to help createa ‘common language’ about the meaning ofsustainable communities; a language thatcan be used and understood by everyoneinvolved – politicians and the officers thatserve them, professionals, regeneration

Cred

it: w

ww

.Joh

nBir

dsal

l.co.

uk

23


practitioners, developers, voluntary andcommunity groups and the communityitself, so that everyone can contribute todelivery of the common goal.

1.8 We recommend that Government,local authorities and other stakeholders(built-environment professionals, publicservice providers, developers andcommunity organisations) adopt thecommon goal and promote a commonunderstanding of what the term‘sustainable community’ means. Ourdefinition and seven componentsconstitute a model that others may wishto use. It may need to be supplementedto reflect local priorities and the viewsof local people.

OPERATIONALISING THECOMMON GOAL1.9 Our description of the common goal will

need further research to refine it in the lightof experience about what works for existingand future communities. But we believe itcan act as a useful framework to:

● secure more effective joining up of policyagendas at national, regional and local,government, so that these deliver theneeds of the people for safe, clean,prosperous and attractive communities;

● delegate much more performance-relatedresponsibility from national to localgovernment, where this has been

demonstrated to be earned (Chapter Two);● identify essential components in very

significant new developments (ChapterTwo); and

● provide a basis from which skill sets canbe developed (Chapters Three and Four).

MEASURING PROGRESS TOWARDSSUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES1.10 In addition to creating a ‘common language’,

we consider that our definition and indicatorswill help provide a benchmark against whichprogress towards greater sustainability canbe measured. The rate of progress revealshow successful we are in assembling theright teams with the right skills to deliverthe communities we deserve.

Indicators

1.11 We have identified a small number ofperformance indicators, representing ourseven components, that could be used to help

24

set clear, measurable and public targetsagainst which progress could be regularlytracked. We examined the extensive rangeof over four hundred existing indicatorsdeveloped to meet particular needs by, forexample the Audit Commission, the Officeof the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), theSustainable Development Commission,and the Department for Environment,Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).

1.12 For each of the seven components, weselected between four and nine indicatorsthat we felt most effectively represented keyaspects. The resulting fifty indicators includea mixture of subjective and objective datainputs. We consider the use of subjectiveindictors to be essential – from the MORIfocus groups and other surveys, we knowthat people want to live in places that areclean, safe and friendly, places that havequality open spaces and that offer jobs andgood education. We concluded that indicatorsreflecting people’s perceptions of where theylive must be part of the process of assessingprogress towards delivery, and the resultsmust inform decisions on action needed toimprove sustainability. Many local authoritiesalready do this but we believe that it shouldbe common practice for all.

1.13 Forty-six of the indicators are thosethat are already recommended for useby local authorities (but are not necessarilycompulsory). These are drawn in the mainfrom the Audit Commission’s Library of Local

Performance indicators5 and from otherexisting datasets. In addition, we recommendfor the first time three other piloted andtested indicators, plus a further indicatorwhich is brand new. The full list is set outin Annex B.

Using the indicators

1.14 We recognise that the seven componentsmay be most relevant at different spatiallevels, and that measurement of thecomponents should recognise this. Forexample, economic data may be mostrelevant at regional or sub-regional level,whereas indicators of cleanliness, safety,and open spaces are likely to be mostrelevant at neighbourhood level (say 3,000 –5,000 homes). For other indicators, such asprovision of local services, data at districtlevel may be most relevant. Local authorities,working with the Audit Commission, need tomake their own judgements about the levelat which particular data sets should becollected and interpreted.

1.15 We believe that the indicators we haveidentified offer a well balanced menu fromwhich local authorities and their partnerscan choose to help them demonstrateprogress in delivering sustainablecommunities. The choice of indicatorswill depend on local circumstances and theneeds and priorities of local people. As suchwe do not believe that the entire set shouldbe mandatory. In particular we do not want


5 Audit Commission, IDeA (2003) Library of Local Performance Indicators

25


the indicators to be seen as yet another boxticking exercise, or a set of hurdles to jump.We envisage the indicators being used as ameans of demonstrating to the communitywhat the problems are, what action will betaken to address them and how progress willbe monitored. They should be used tomotivate, to measure the impact of processesand actions, and could in future form thebasis of useful comparisons – particularlyinternational comparisons – on theeffectiveness of action taken to addressspecific problems.

1.16 We recommend that by the end of 2005,local authorities should:

● incorporate in their SustainableCommunity Strategies (Chapter Two)a process through which they and their

partners will select the indicators fromAnnex B that are most relevant to theneeds of their communities;

● identify mechanisms for establishingbaselines and regularly trackingprogress towards achievingsustainability with the longer term aimof tracking all of the indicators; and

● make provision for taking action toaddress poor performance whereit occurs.

Feedback to local people should bean essential part of this process.

1.17 Central government departments need torecognise the importance of these indicatorsand their use at local level alongside theirexisting single service indicators and targets.

MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION 1.18 Diagram Two, Moving in the right direction,

illustrates how progress towards delivering asustainable community may be pursued overtime. Ideally the overall direction of travel isin a straight line towards a clear goal, but inreality the route may vary because of specificblockages and barriers. Progress in onecomponent (for example redesigning a towncentre to attract new retail and businessopportunities) may temporarily have anegative impact on another – such ascreating a strong sense of place – andthis may be reflected in the results of

Cred

it: B

eaco

ns fo

r a

Bri

ghte

r N

DC

Part

ners

hip,

Eas

t Man

ches

ter

26

DIAGRAM TWO: MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION

Strong senseof place

Outmoded,traditionaleconomy

Robust, flexible

economy

Poor physicalenvironment

Existingcommunity

Sustainablefuture

Policy & practice direction


27


monitoring. Temporary trade-offs, wheresome components have to take a back seatwhile other priorities are addressed, areperfectly acceptable as long as the long-termtrend for each component is in the rightdirection – towards the sustainable future.Decisions about such trade-offs will requiresound judgement, as well as leadership andcommunication skills.

1.19 Moving towards the sustainable communityideal must be the long-term aim for allcommunities, urban and rural, North andSouth. Having said this, there is action wecan take straight away to halt movementaway from our ideal.

1.20 We must stop generating newdevelopment that conflicts with the goal.In particular:

● We want to see a sustainablecommunity development code orbenchmarks established to giveclear information to developers, localauthorities and communities about theenvironmental and quality standards thatsustainable communities should achieve,and how these translate into practicalbuilding standards. Such a code orbenchmarks should be informed byexisting examples of best practice,and make use of tools such as thosedeveloped by the Building Research

Establishment and SEEDA (SouthEast England Development Agency)Sustainability Checklist for Developmentthat place our country at the forefront ofinternational standards.

● We believe such a code or benchmarksshould be in place inside twelve months.We recommend that Government workswith the Sustainable Buildings Task Group6

to develop further this proposal, andshould look at ways of incentivisingprogress, with the longer term aim ofdevelopments meeting carbon emissionsand waste minimisation standardsconsistent with a sustainable one planetlevel within, say eight years.

6 The Sustainable Buildings Task Group is charged with identifying specific, cost-effective, improvements in the quality and environmentalperformance of buildings which industry can deliver in both the short and long term, together with further actions that Government could taketo facilitate faster progress.

Cred

it: ©

Ric

hard

Eat

on/P

hoto

fusi

on

● We consider it essential to improve qualityof place, and recommend that all newproposals for major building developmentsshould meet recognised design qualityguidelines or standards where they exist– for example, the Construction IndustryCouncil’s Design Quality Indicators,7

and BREEAM EcoHomes.8 Again, werecommend that Government works withthe Sustainable Buildings Task Group toidentify preferred guidelines/standardsand any gaps or improvements required,and how these could be addressed as amatter of priority.

● We reject the use of land for singleindustrial, commercial, housing, retailor leisure development without fullconsideration of mixed-use alternatives;and we reject very significantdevelopments not supported by

comprehensive masterplans and design(or urban) codes. The latter should pay fullregard to the physical, environmental,economic and social context of thedevelopment, encapsulated in our sevensustainable community components.

1.21 We recommend that Government workswith the Sustainable Buildings TaskGroup to develop further our proposalfor a sustainable communitiescode/benchmarking, that will give clearinformation about the environmentaland quality standards that sustainablecommunities should achieve, and howthese translate into practical buildingstandards. Government should also lookat ways of incentivising progress, withthe longer term aim of meetingdevelopments that achieve carbonemissions and waste minimisationstandards consistent with a sustainableone planet level within, say eight years.Design standards and guidelines for verysignificant developments should also beaddressed. We want to halt singleuse of land for industrial, commercial,housing, retail and leisure developmentwithout full consideration of mixed-use alternatives.

7 Design Quality Indicators developed by the Construction Industry Council and Imperial College, London.8 Building Research Establishment (2000) BREEAM EcoHomes


28

Cred

it: w

ww

.Joh

nBir

dsal

l.co.

uk


29

IMPLICATIONS FOR SKILLS1.22 The range of components and sub-

components set out in Box One serves toillustrate the complexity of the sustainablecommunities agenda. To make this workwe need a wide range of skills – from thetechnical such as designing high qualitytownscapes, to the more generic such asstrong, informed leadership. In addition tothese, we need people with the ability tothink and work outside their traditionalcompartments, who can bring togetherdisparate organisations and interests tohelp deliver the common goal. This willrequire new skills and new ways of thinkingand acting from all those involved in delivery.

Cred

it: B

uild

ing

Des

ign

Part

ners

hip,

Arc

hite

ct/E

ngin

eer.

Phot

ogra

ph, M

artin

e H

amilt

on K

nigh

t

RESPONSIBILITIESAND PROCESSESFOR DELIVERY

Chap

ter 2

32


2.1 Having a common goal of ‘sustainablecommunities’ and a means of monitoringprogress towards it is a good starting point.Delivering a sustainable community is adifferent challenge. Successful deliveryseems to us to depend on a clearunderstanding of who should lead on thisagenda, what other organisations andindividuals must be involved (partnershipworking), what sustainability means for anarea (the vision), coupled with effective andefficient delivery processes. We know frompast experience that simply upskilling staffto work with existing inefficient processeswill not produce the change we require.Skills improvement and processimprovement must go hand in hand.

THE LEADERSHIP ROLE2.2 Improving delivery processes starts with

establishing who is responsible for what.We think it is essential to clarify whotakes the lead in delivery of sustainablecommunities, and we believe this roleshould lie with local authorities. This viewwas endorsed by the majority of respondentsto our public consultation, with the provisothat such responsibility must be merited.9

2.3 Our reasoning is that no other institution hasthe same responsibility for the long-termsuccess of one locality, and no other

institution is directly elected by andaccountable to the residents of one locality.A further factor is that the majority of thesustainable community components (ChapterOne) can only be delivered at local authoritylevel. We acknowledge the importance ofthe regional context and consider thatRegional Development Agencies (as driversof regional economies), Regional Assemblies(as custodians of regional spatial andtransport planning), and Regional PlanningBoards (which determine regional housingcompletion targets) etc must be key partnersin the delivery processes, but believe thatonly local authorities have the right blend oflocal knowledge, presence and accountabilityto make this work.10

9 73 per cent (51 out of 70) of those who responded to our question agreed that local authorities were best placed to lead on delivery.10 In some areas, special delivery vehicles have already been developed eg Urban Development Corporations and Urban Regeneration Companies.

Cred

it: E

nglis

h Pa

rtne

rshi

ps

33

Chapter 2 Responsibilities and Processes for Delivery

2.4 We recommend that local authoritiesshould have the lead role for co-ordinating and orchestrating deliveryof sustainable communities, throughbringing together service providersand other key players with the localcommunity. They should regard this roleas their principal purpose. However,they must earn the confidence placedin them to deliver through effectivemanagement of their functions.Successful authorities which improvethe sustainability of their communitiesyear on year should be rewarded withenhanced financial delegations fromcentral government.

2.5 We suggest that central government shouldpublicly recognise local authorities in this role.Once our sustainable community componentsand indicators (Chapter One) are fullyoperationalised, the Government shouldconsider whether local authorities shouldhave a clearer statutory duty to improvethe sustainability of their communities.

2.6 Many local authorities already regardthemselves as being in the business ofdelivering sustainable communities orregeneration – which is close to the conceptof sustainable communities – and givinga lead to others in the public, private andvoluntary sectors who are also engagedin that process. The Core Cities Group for

example, which includes most of thebig regional cities in England, explicitlyrecognises the role of local authorities inthis respect.11 Unfortunately, not all localauthorities see themselves playing suchan explicit leadership role, nor do all havea clear vision of what they are seeking toachieve over the next twenty to thirty years.

2.7 To meet sustainable community objectives,local authority leaders will need to create theright culture and delivery processes within

11 See ODPM (2004) Competitive European Cities: Where Do the Core Cities Stand? and Core Cities Working Group. (2003) Cities, Regions andCompetitiveness: Second Report

34


their own organisations. We believe that formany authorities this will entail a move awayfrom isolated delivery of individual servicestowards cross-cutting delivery focused onsustainable community objectives. For somelocal authority staff, this will require newskills and ways of working that emphasiseteam effort, shared values and delivery ofcommon goals.

PARTNERSHIP WORKING 2.8 Having said that local authorities should take

the lead role, we do not believe that they candeliver by themselves. A broad range ofoccupations and organisations, serviceproviders and interest groups must also beinvolved in the sustainable communitiesagenda. Our approach requires local authoritychief executives and leaders to take a pro-active role in creating the multi-disciplinary

and multi-organisational partnerships thatwe believe are essential to success. ExistingLocal Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) mayprovide a useful model here.12 We proposethat local partnerships for sustainablecommunities should include developers,local councillors and council staff, keyagencies such as police, education, health,environment and utilities, representativesof the local community, and the businesscommunity. These groups need to worktogether to create both shared values anda sense of responsibility for making deliveryof sustainable communities a reality intheir area.

2.9 If such partnerships are to be successful,they must have transparent structures,with clear duties and responsibilities forall involved, and sufficient authority to joinup the roles of different agencies. LocalPublic Service Agreements (LPSAs) are onemechanism that could be used to set andagree joint targets for local priorities, andthus to bring focus and performancemanagement across public services at locallevel. We would like to see the LPSA regimedeveloped to incorporate the sustainablecommunities agenda, so that local authoritiesand other public sector agencies can properlyaccount for their role and contribution todelivering sustainable communities.

12 LSPs are part of the Government’s 20-year programme to tackle deprivation. They are multi-agency bodies pulling together leaders in public, privateand voluntary sectors as well as the community, aiming to improve local quality of life and ensure public services work better. 380 are establishedto date, of these 87 are in receipt of the Neighbourhood Renewal Fund grant.

Cred

it: w

ww

.Joh

nBir

dsal

l.co.

uk

35


2.10 Joining up delivery locally presents asmuch of a challenge for central as forlocal government. The way that nationaldepartments operate and set prioritieshas a major impact on the ability of localpartnerships to deliver. If delivery againstlocal shared priorities is to become areality, we need to see all relevant centralgovernment departments (rather than justODPM) taking ownership of the sustainablecommunities agenda, embedding it in theirown policy development and in the directiongiven to their regional and local agencies,thereby freeing up those agencies to deliveron the ground. More cross-departmentalworking on policy development will alsobe required.

2.11 We recommend that the Governmentplaces a clear responsibility on allrelevant public services, includingcentral government departments, tosupport, contribute to, and promotesustainable communities.

2.12 The contribution of local service providersto sustainable communities must also berecognised through national inspectionregimes. We regard proposals for therevision of the Comprehensive PerformanceAssessment process as a step in the rightdirection, but other inspectorates need tofollow suit by including sustainablecommunities in their judgement criteria.Inspection could also be more joined up –perhaps through the Audit Commissionreporting on the impact on sustainablecommunities of all public services atlocal authority level.

CREATING THE VISION2.13 Many local authorities already have a vision

for their area that sets out its intended futuredirection. We believe that all local authoritiesshould work with their partners to developa shared vision and values for theircommunities. An essential component increating a shared vision is engaging thepublic in thinking about the future – localauthorities and their partners mustunderstand the priorities, aspirations andexpectations of their communities if they areto deliver places in which people want to live.

2.14 We do not underestimate how difficult thiscan be – people within a community oftenhave very different ideas of what they wantfor the future, and this can change over timeas the composition and aspirations of thosewho live and work there evolve.

Cred

it: B

eaco

ns fo

r a

brig

hter

NO

C Pa

rtne

rshi

p,

East

Man

ches

ter

36


Nevertheless, we think it is essential forsuccessful delivery to have a clear senseof future direction, an understanding ofshared values (safe, clean, friendly etc –see Box Two on Focus Groups) andinformation on local priorities (eg bettereducation, improved public transport), towhich all delivery partners and localcommunities can sign up to.

2.15 We know that in many local authorities,Community Strategies13 are already beingdeveloped to engage the public in visioningprocesses. However, our feeling is that manyCommunity Strategies currently lack thesense of purpose and direction that isnecessary to deliver sustainablecommunities.

2.16 We propose that they should becomeSustainable Community Strategies, settingout not only the vision for the community,based on our common goal (Chapter One),but also how sustainable development canbe used to promote economic prosperity inthe area, to promote and benefit socialcohesion and enhance environmental quality.To do this the Strategy and associated actionplans, including the Local DevelopmentFramework, will need to set out detailsof steps needed to deliver across thesustainable community components(Chapter One) including:

● the economic performance of the areaand the opportunities for future economiccompetitiveness;

● major development opportunities that areavailable to help shape the community, tocreate neighbourhoods where peoplechoose to live, and when theseopportunities will be brought forward;

● the infrastructure necessary to supportplanned development, the long-term costs,location and timing of capital investmentin public services, and the communitybenefits associated with this;

● specific action needed to help local peopleaccess the opportunities and wealthcreated; and

● people and skills needed to effect delivery,and learning and skill strategies to helplocal people fill some of the gaps.

13 The Local Government Act 2000 requires local authorities to produce Community Strategies, although most are prepared by Local StrategicPartnerships.

Cred

it: w

ww

.Jas

onH

awke

s.co

m

37


2.17 The Sustainable Communities Strategy shouldalso reference and complement other keyarea wide plans such as Local NeighbourhoodRenewal Strategies, regional and sub-regional strategies, and the strategies ofneighbouring local authority areas.

2.18 We invite central and local governmentto work together to reshape CommunityStrategies so that they become moresharply focused Sustainable CommunityStrategies through which a vision isdeveloped, set and operationalised, anddevelopment opportunities are capturedto help secure delivery of the vision.Infrastructure requirements to createsustainable communities should beidentified together with their costsand benefits.

2.19 We also looked at financing sustainablecommunities – particularly capital investment.Without the right conditions for suchinvestment, the communities we are seekingwill not be delivered. The key for investors iscertainty of infrastructure – transport, utilities,and services, such as hospitals and schools.We urge the Government to do further workon identifying and implementing measuresthat achieve this certainty.

EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVEPROCESSES2.20 Visions and ideas need to be given

practical expression in terms of delivery,and it is the planning system that providesthe mechanism for delivering the built

BOX THREE: AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT WORKSManchester City Council has created a three tier strategic framework for delivering sustainablecommunities within which the public, private and community and voluntary sectors can operate.

1st tier: at local authority area level, or each district within the local authority area – regenerationstrategies that connect opportunities for economic and infrastructure development to regional and sub-regional strategies.

2nd tier: within the local authority area – thematic strategies and partnerships on key quality oflife themes that determine people's decisions about whether a place is good to live in. Examples areeducation, crime and anti-social behaviour, the condition of public space, transport, the quality andrange of housing on offer.

3rd tier: at ward or neighbourhood level – bringing thematic strategies and partnerships togetherto create attractive places to live. It is at this level that residents can be most effectively engaged, andwhere public services must demonstrate joined up delivery if sustainable communities are to becreated and maintained.

38


environment aspects of sustainablecommunities, as well as some of theother social, environmental and economicobjectives often through the system ofplanning obligations. We consider that astrong effective and responsive planningsystem is required to deliver sustainablecommunities in the quantity and within thetimescales envisaged in the SustainableCommunities Plan. We therefore askedwhether the current land use planningsystem is fit for purpose in terms ofdelivering our goal.

2.21 We concluded that over many years andin many places there has been an obviousfailure of the planning system and the wayit has been operated to deliver desiredoutcomes. It has too often resulted in poorquality places and it is no wonder that peoplein existing communities resist furtherdevelopment so strongly. Proposals for newdevelopments have been approved in the pastwith little recognition of the impact they have

on existing services and facilities, and currentplanning processes are unduly adversarial.The result is uncertainty and delays andunnecessary stress and costs for existingcommunities as well as costs to developers –who have to assemble a bigger portfolio ofsites than strictly necessary to ensure asteady turnover.

2.22 What we need are processes that minimiseconflict (whilst recognising that planning isin many respects a political activity concernedwith the allocation of societal goods, and thatelimination of all conflict is impossible),maximises transparency (so that all keyplayers including communities canunderstand the processes), and delivers

Cred

it: w

ww

.Joh

nBir

dsal

l.co.

uk

39


quality outcomes within a reasonablypredictable timescale.

2.23 We are aware of the Government's planningreform agenda and believe that this isalready moving things in the right direction.Nevertheless, we considered there wasscope for further improvement. We examinedtwo aspects:

● the framework of national, regional andlocal policies and plans which define

where development should take placeand what form it should take; and

● the process by which decisions onindividual applications for planningpermission are made.

PLAN MAKING 2.24 Following consultation on the Planning Green

Paper,14 a Bill to reform the planning systemis currently going through Parliament. Box

14 ODPM (2001) Planning Green Paper - Planning: delivering a fundamental change.15 ODPM (2004) Consultation Paper on Planning Policy Statement 1: Creating Sustainable Communities.

BOX FOUR: PLANNING REFORM The problems with the operation of the planning system have been widely recognised over the last fewyears and were set out by the Government in its Green Paper Planning – delivering a fundamentalchange in December 2001. Relevant changes include:

● putting sustainable development at the heart of planning through the statutory requirements in the Billand making it the key principle of national policy in draft Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS 1);15

● creating a more effective system for determining the broad distribution of new development at theregional level, with better integration of land use, transport and economic planning together withgreater devolution of responsibility for policy formulation;

● removing a tier of plans and simplify and speed up the local planning process, with a more flexibleand responsive system setting out core policies and more locally focussed action plans for newsettlements, regeneration areas, urban extensions etc;

● introducing a framework for stronger, more inter-active, community involvement at a formative stagein producing policy and plans, in pre-application discussions with developers in preparing theirproposals, and in actively engaging with community groups; and

● providing a variety of new tools (planning zones, local development orders, improved CompulsoryPurchase Order powers) which will facilitate the assembly of sites, and speed up the processof delivery whilst ‘front loading’ community involvement.

40


Four outlines the changes we view as beingparticularly relevant to the sustainablecommunities agenda.

2.25 We welcome the community focus of thislegislation and the link that is proposedbetween the Community Strategy and thenew Local Development Frameworks(LDFs). We further welcome the statementof sustainability purpose, which the Billplaces at the heart of the planning system.

2.26 In implementing the new system,we believe that the Government shouldtake the opportunity to make it clear thatthe Local Development Frameworks,informed by the Sustainable CommunityStrategy, should be key deliverymechanisms for creating sustainablecommunities. We think it is importantto recognise that the planning system isessential to the delivery of sustainablecommunities and it must be reconnectedwith the central leadership and visionof a local authority.

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL2.27 We believe that the opportunities presented

by the proposed planning reforms will onlybe realised if there is a change in the waythat the process of dealing with planningapplications is managed, and in the cultureand attitudes of organisations, professionsand individuals involved, includingdevelopers. The key changes the Task Groupwanted to see are:

● new processes for handling verysignificant developments, including pre-application processes;

● process mapping and re-engineering of allplanning processes to improve efficiencyand quality of outcomes;

● an end to mechanical processing ofapplications, in which very significantdevelopment and minor house extensionsare managed through the same systems.This will also imply a revision ofprocessing targets;

● the establishment of integrated cross-cutting teams within local authorities tooversee implementation of major projects;

● developers playing their part in deliveringsustainable communities by buying intothe common goal, helping to gain approvalof the community for their developmentproposals, and raising their game in termsof quality of output;

● a higher level of engagement and trainingfor local authority elected members(Chapter Four);

Cred

it: w

ww

.Joh

nBir

dsal

l.co.

uk


● elected members playing a full part in pre-application and planning brief discussionswhilst maintaining propriety; and

● culture change for everyone involved.

NEW PROCESSES FOR HANDLINGMAJOR DEVELOPMENTS,INCLUDING INTRODUCTION OFPRE-APPLICATION PROCESSES2.28 The Sustainable Communities Plan attempts

to tackle, amongst other things, failinghousing markets in some parts of Englandand excess demand in other areas. As aresult of the plan, we expect a number ofmajor and difficult sites will come forward fordevelopment. These include developments inLow Demand Pathfinder areas resulting fromlarge-scale demolition of abandoned housing

in and near inner cities; huge sites in theThames Gateway left over from chalkextraction and historic industrial uses; andexpansions of towns in the South as a resultof accelerated growth. All of these are at ascale that will have significant impact on thesustainability of the resulting communities,and their neighbours, for years to come.

2.29 Dealing with very significant sites16 effectivelyis therefore critical, and local authorities andtheir partners, particularly those responsiblefor delivery of social and physicalinfrastructure, need to have processesin place that will deliver the essentialcomponents in the right place and at theright time to ensure the resultingcommunities are sustainable. Our sevencomponents (Chapter One) could form auseful framework for identifying whatneeds to be incorporated into thedevelopment from the outset.

2.30 We consider effective pre-applicationdiscussions between developers, localauthorities and other interested parties to bea key element in determining future successof a development. Such discussions arealready undertaken by some authorities butthis tends to be on an ad-hoc, informal andunder-resourced basis. There is no commonapproach, so developers that deal with morethan one authority have to be prepared toadapt to different ways of working.

16 We have not attempted to define ‘very significant’ but we mean the one per cent of the substantial development proposals that come forward each year.ODPM may wish to develop a more precise definition.

41

© C

AB

E. M

ark

Ellis

and

Ash

ley

Bin

gham

, ICD

Ltd

42


2.31 Effective involvement of the communityin these discussions is increasing, but itis complex and time consuming, oftenhighlighting tensions that the authority needsto address.17 Nevertheless we believe that thepeople's voice must be heard from the outset.No manufacturer would set out to deliver anew product without first having designed itcarefully and market-tested it on a sample ofconsumers. Yet very significant developmentthat has the potential to affect the lives ofwhole communities does not necessarilygo through an analogous process.

2.32 Effective pre-application discussion requiresauthorities to be proactive with regards todevelopment, and to take the lead in workingout the shared vision and promotingcollaboration. It requires a move fromgatekeeper to facilitator, and a commitment tothe process of continuous improvement –a willingness to learn from mistakes and to trynew ways of working. It also requires a highlevel of skill in listening to and interacting withcommunities. We believe that this approachwill support more rapid and effective decisionmaking on large applications and will help toclarify quickly where potential applications areunlikely to be acceptable.

BOX FIVE: COMMON PRINCIPLES OF PRE-APPLICATION PROCESSES● Involve all parties at an early stage (local community, business community, developers, key service

deliverers, and landowners).● Agree objectives and the interpretation of national and regional policy (Planning Policy Statements

and Regional Spatial Strategies) as they apply to the project. These should be interpreted accordingto local conditions. Where necessary advice should be sought from the appropriate body (RegionalPlanning Body or Government Office for the Region).

● Agree a timetable for pre-application discussions between the authority, the developer, and otherparties, including those responsible for infrastructure, and for the rest of the process once a planningapplication is formally submitted. This will create greater certainty about timing of the decision.

● Engage elected members in the pre-planning process.● Identify the causes of any problems that arise and amend the process accordingly.● Consider use of masterplanning and ‘Urban Coding’ for major schemes to engage all key players

and consider alternative designs. There are some excellent examples of masterplans already inexistence (Northampton, Chatham, East Manchester and Gateshead) and the Deputy Prime Ministeris proposing a series of Urban Coding pilots, which we welcome.

17 Research by Heriot-Watt University, published by ODPM (2003), looks at how planning in other countries has become more inclusive and whatskills are needed.

43


2.33 We recommend that the Government andlocal authorities take forward proposalsto develop and promote an effectivesystem of pre-application discussionsfor very significant developmentprojects.

Swift planning approval should followwhere the eventual developmentproposals fully support the vision.Box Five outlines common principles.

2.34 We do not believe that it is fair to expect localplanners alone to cope with the sort ofsignificant development we identify above.Many local authorities deal with suchdevelopment proposals only rarely, andcannot necessarily be expected to havesufficient relevant expertise in-house. Weneed to make the best use of available peopleby giving local authorities access to highlyexperienced teams to assist in the deliveryof significant developments where there is ashortage of in-house expertise. We welcomethe ODPM’s intention to create a PlanningAdvisory Service18 which, among other things,will provide local authorities with access toan advisory panel of planners andregeneration specialists. There will doubtlessbe useful lessons from PAS pilot schemes,and in the longer term we expect to seethe concept extended to make these skillcombinations available to a wider audienceof local authorities.

ESTABLISHMENT OF INTEGRATEDCROSS-CUTTING TEAMS TOOVERSEE IMPLEMENTATIONOF MAJOR PROJECTS2.35 We believe that the relevant professions

that make up development teams in localauthorities should be trained from the outsetto work together towards delivery of thecommon goal. It is clear to us that creatingsustainable communities is a collaborativeeffort between a number of occupations/professions and they must therefore beimbued with team working skills and anunderstanding of their common objective ifthey are to deliver sustainable development.

2.36 We want to see local authorities keepingeffective teams together to work onsignificant developments throughout theirarea. The private sector knows to keep awinning team together; the public sectorneeds to learn the same lesson and provide amechanism whereby people and knowledgecan be successfully transferred. However,where the local authority does not havethe in-house expertise to deliver significantdevelopments, it must consider drafting inexperienced teams to help with the task.There is no reason why groups of localauthorities should not work together tocreate joint teams.

18 The objectives of the new Planning Advisory Service are: to support all local authorities in continuous improvement of their services and adoptionof best practice, in both plan making and development control; to provide tailored services to assist failing authorities in the development andimplementation of their improvement plans; to market the benefits of best practice to all local planning authorities and convince them of the needto change and improve; to offer direct support to individual local authorities to deliver key government objectives such as large scale developmentsor regeneration projects.

44


PLANNING PROCESS MAPPINGAND RE-ENGINEERING2.37 We were advised that a typically large

development might involve some pre-planning application discussion between adeveloper and local authority planning staff.Following the receipt and validation of theapplication, statutory consultees are askedfor a view, as are those living in the vicinityof the development. The proposal is thenconsidered by a planning committee, whereviews and objections are reviewed, as isconformity with the Local Plan. Decisions areall too often deferred for a site visit or furtherindependent advice. At a future meeting, theapplication may be decided, subject tocontinued negotiation on the planningobligation. It is not unusual for the wholeprocess from identifying a site to finaldevelopment approval to take, literally years,with three to four years being the norm forvery significant applications.

2.38 Based on our experience in other industries,we consider that process mapping and re-engineering can improve delivery across allservices. We believe this should be equallytrue for planning processes. We understandthat some local planning authorities havealready mapped and re-engineered theirplanning processes, and that this hasresulted in substantial improvements totheir performance in handling applications.An example of resulting changes includes

provision of clearer information to developerson details that must accompany anapplication, in order to reduce delays thatfollow requests for additional information.

2.39 We consider that planning processescan be improved and clarified for allparticipants and we recommend that ineach local planning authority, processesfor dealing with planning applicationsshould be subject to basic processmapping and re-engineering. Thisshould take account of the developer’sperspective as well as that of the localplanning authority.

2.40 Process mapping and re-engineering is animportant skill in itself that local authoritiesneed to have access to. Box Six outlinesbasic principles.

AN END TO MECHANICALPROCESSING OF APPLICATIONS 2.41 One logical outcome of process re-

engineering is the adoption of differentprocesses for dealing with different scales ofapplication. Local authorities deal with over600,000 applications a year which varysignificantly in size and type, and it is clearthat there is 'no one size fits all' solution thatlocal authorities can adopt. We suggest thatthe large number of relatively minor/otherapplications (around 98 per cent) needdifferent handling from the around one percent of very significant housing/business/

45


BOX SIX: PROCESS RE-ENGINEERING TOOLBOXDelays and uncertainty in the development control process are major causes of complaints fromdevelopers and others engaged in regeneration. There are lessons to learn from other sectors, such asmotor manufacturing and computing, about re-engineering the processes involved to speed deliveryand quality of decisions.

The development control process is generally triggered by a developer or a retailer spotting anopportunity and seeking initial planning approval. This sets in train two interdependent processesrunning in parallel that frequently interact with each other – one involving the planners and the otherthe developer.

A jointly developed ‘ideal’ map helps to illustrate the optimum working of a planning process. This can becontrasted with ‘real’ examples of what actually happens through the use of typical examples of specificdevelopments. Separate maps may be needed for major, minor and other applications.

Each process map needs to highlight the main stages in the development control process including:

● community consultation and political processes; ● key players contributions and their impact on the critical path; ● the time and effort involved in each stage; and● key meetings and important points of interaction between developer and planner, and outcomes.

These maps can be supported by several more detailed maps of sub-processes.

Maps can help identify the points at which problems, delays and reworking occur for developers andplanners, and establish causes. These can be set alongside a simple financial model of the developmentprocess to show the profile of the developer’s financial commitment over time and the increase in landvalues up to the point of sale, rents or retail sales, as well as local authority costs. This comparisonshould highlight the overall costs of delays.

Using this information, authorities should be able to standardise and improve processes, identify whereelectronic solutions might be appropriate, plan workloads and develop improved performancemeasurement systems.

Consideration of how these redesigned processes might best be delivered must also include assessmentof the type and level of skills required to undertake them.

46


retail applications, with the former dealt withthrough a more streamlined or outsourcedprocess. We are told that many localauthorities already have different systemsfor dealing with major and minor/otherapplications, with a high proportion ofdecisions on the latter being delegated toofficers. Some authorities even have separateteams for the two, and we think this needs tobe a more widespread practice.

2.42 We are mindful of the extent to whichmany local planning authorities currentlyuse qualified planning staff to deal withminor/other applications that have relativelylittle impact on the community. We do notbelieve this makes best use of the skills wehave available. We see no point in using moreexperienced people with strategic skills toundertake tasks that could be completedprimarily by planning technicians who may

be given the requisite skills through practical,on the job training. We suggest local planningauthorities need to examine carefully thecompetencies required to deal effectively withminor/other applications and ensure theymatch staff skills and qualifications to the job.Planning technicians should of course havethe option of converting to more strategicroles should they wish to do so, includingsupport to become fully qualified planners aspart of a career development strategy.

2.43 New systems for handling very significantand minor/other applications will require anew approach to the setting of nationaltargets to measure the performance of localplanning authorities. Current processingtargets19 do not really work – they are notabout delivering quality decisions ordevelopment, and we heard numerouscomplaints that they focus too much onnumbers and box ticking, and can distortdecision making. But in our view the basicproblem is that they have been bolted on toa process that is fundamentally inefficient.

2.44 We recommend the Government workswith partners to undertake a review ofexisting planning targets, with the aimof producing a system that reflects theGovernment’s commitment to highquality and timely decision making forall types of applications. We propose

19 60 per cent of all major applications to be determined within 13 weeks; 65 per cent of all minor applications within 8 weeks; 80 per cent of otherapplications within 8 weeks.

47


that the Government should examine thescope for using a combination of nationaland local targets. Any new targets shouldreflect the outcomes of planning processre-engineering.

ROLE OF DEVELOPERS2.45 We said earlier in this Chapter that local

authorities were best placed to lead on co-ordinating delivery of sustainablecommunities. We also said they cannotdo this alone but require support andcommitment from a wide range of differentpartners. We see developers as a key groupin this partnership, providing dynamism,creativity and investment (risk capital) totake visions forward.

2.46 We accept that developers, like any otherprivate enterprise, seek to maximisereturns on their investments. The very bestdevelopers combine this with delivering highquality attractive places that recognise theimportance of sustainability and the benefitsof mixed uses and activities. But we believethat all too often, the financial bottom line isused as an excuse for delivering mediocredesign and poor building quality – thenumerous examples of isolated ‘placeless’estates with near identical houses acrossthe country are testament to this. Pastapproaches have failed to recognise the long-term impact that developers can haveon communities. People have to live with

their products day in and day out overgenerations, and badly designed, poorquality neighbourhood layout or developmentcan quickly have a detrimental effect on thequality of life – and even on the reputationand prospects – of people living there andnearby.

2.47 We propose that developers should raisetheir game in a number of respects.They should:

● accept their role as key players in theplanning, delivery and maintenance ofsustainable communities, and buy intothe common goal (Chapter One);

● develop a strong commitment to deliveringhigh quality, attractive places where peoplechoose to live and work, by employingthe principles of good design and positiveplace making. This means investing theintellectual and financial capital inoptimising the nature and quality of aproposed development;

● engage pro-actively with local authorities,local communities and other partnersto create the Sustainable CommunityStrategy for an area, and associated LocalDevelopment Framework (Chapter Two);and

● seek opportunities to apply the commongoal approach (Chapter One) not only tonew development, but also to the mistakesof the past – by reintegrating mono-cultural housing with hospitals, schools,

48


employment and shopping centres, andhelping to develop support services forisolated housing estates.

2.48 This new approach will require developersto review and enhance their own skills and toimprove their understanding of the role andpositive contribution of other participants inthe development process. In particular it willrequire improved skills in interacting withand listening to communities, and in workingwith them to secure the optimum benefitsfrom new development.

2.49 The benefits for the development industryfrom such upfront engagement shouldbe greater clarity about developmentopportunities in any particular area, andfaster agreement on planning permissionswhere proposals reflect the LocalDevelopment Frameworks and the commongoal of sustainable communities. Bothof these should impact positively onthe financial bottom line by reducinguncertainty at different stages.

INVOLVEMENT OF ELECTEDMEMBERS IN PRE-PLANNING ANDPLANNING BRIEF DISCUSSIONS2.50 There is a structural issue in the way that

planning is dealt with by planning authoritiesin that strategic objectives relating to

planning and regeneration are dealt with byan inner cadre of the Council – the electedMayor or the Cabinet – but planning decisionsare made by traditional planning committees.We appreciate that the intention of this is tomaintain the propriety of decision-making butthe effect of the present arrangements can beto produce a disjunction between policiesdesigned to deliver sustainable development,and planning decisions.

2.51 We heard of a number of situations whereofficers work up a scheme with a developerwhich is then refused planning permissionby members who are unaware of the way inwhich the proposals have been shaped tomeet the needs of the community. We thinkit should be possible for members toparticipate to some extent in pre-applicationdiscussions or to participate in formulation ofplanning development briefs for larger siteswithout prejudicing proper consideration ofthe decision in due course.

2.52 We believe that the Government andthe Local Government Association shouldwork together to address issues ofpropriety surrounding membersinvolvement in pre-planning and planningbrief discussions. We wish to see advicefor local authorities issued by the endof 2004.

49


CULTURE CHANGE2.53 Our recommendations above aim to build

on the structural and organisational changesalready underway in planning. However,these alone will not deliver the communitieswe are aiming to create – there must also bea change of culture in the way that all partiesin the planning system behave. ODPM hasalready recognised this through its culturechange initiative.

2.54 We consider that an essential aspect ofculture change must be for local authoritiesto see it as their responsibility to deliverthe development proposals set out in theirplan. This is not simply a matter of decidingwhether development proposals broughtforward by the private sector are approvedand not only a matter of more positive

engagement in pre-application discussions.Local authorities must see it as their role tofacilitate implementation of the development(eg by resolving any problems that arise withinfrastructure providers) and to secureongoing management and maintenance onlarger projects – it is essential to secure thecontinued quality of the development in thelonger term.

2.55 In addition, developers need to adopt thecommon goal (Chapter One) and workcollaboratively with authorities andcommunities to deliver the vision for thearea. Infrastructure providers need to engagepro-actively in identification of requirementsand formulation of solutions. We recognisethat this will entail new skills, behaviour andknowledge for all concerned.

THE RIGHT SKILLSFOR THE JOBCh

apter

3

Credit: Construction Photography

5252


3.1 The vital link between the responsibilitiesand processes we have described in previouschapters and successful delivery ofsustainable communities is skilled andknowledgeable people, working togetherto deliver the common goal. World classcompanies know that the difference betweensuccess and failure lies in the skill level ofthe people they employ; we believe this isequally true for sustainable communities.Only by developing the skills, behaviour andspecific knowledge of everyone involved inthis agenda – albeit to different degrees andat varying levels, depending on their role andresponsibilities – will we be able to deliverthe communities we want.

3.2 In this and the following chapter we consider:

● Who is involved in planning, deliveringand maintaining sustainable communities?

● What skills, behaviour and knowledge dothey need to contribute to this agenda?

● Where are the skills gaps (both amongstthe current workforce and in the size of theworkforce) and how good is the evidencesupporting this?

● How should we fill those gaps?

● What are the priorities for action, andwho should be involved in delivery?

3.3 Where we talk about ‘skills’ throughout thischapter and the rest of our report, thisincludes skills, behaviour and knowledge.

WHO IS INVOLVED IN CREATING,DELIVERING AND MAINTAININGSUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES?3.4 Our work in Chapter One to define a

sustainable community bought hometo us the complexity of the sustainablecommunities concept, and the vast rangeof people, occupations and skills that needto be involved in making it work. Using ourseven components as a basis, we quicklyidentified a significant number of occupations(over hundred) that have differing degreesof involvement in planning, delivering andmaintaining sustainable communities(Annex x). This is not a definitive list; it simplyprovides a starting point to consider who isinvolved and what skills and knowledgethey need to play their part effectively.

3.5 We found the list fell into three broad groups– each with different skills and knowledgeneeds. Box Seven sets out our first group -those that we believe are ‘core’ to successfuldelivery. By ‘core’ we mean people whospend almost all of their time in activities todo with planning, delivering or maintainingsustainable communities, or theirinvolvement is critical to the success ofthose communities. Cr

edit:

Bea

cons

for

a br

ight

er N

DC

Part

ners

hip,

Eas

t Man

ches

ter

53

Chapter 3 The Right Skills for the Job

Implementers and Decision MakersLocal authority elected members (particularlyleaders, cabinet, and planning committee members)20

Local authority Chief Executives and local authoritystaff Members of Local Strategic PartnershipsRegional Assembly members and staffChief Executives and staff of relevant regionalorganisations eg: RDAs, Regional Housing BoardmembersInfrastructure provider and maintenance managerseg: transport, ICT, water and sewage etcRegeneration leaders eg: URCs and other specialpurpose vehiclesChief Executives and staff of relevant nationalagencies eg: Countryside Agency, EnvironmentAgency, English Partnerships, Highways AgencyMPs and civil servants with relevant policyresponsibility eg: ODPM, Home Office, DEFRA,Transport, DTI, Health, Education, Police, GOR

Built Environment OccupationsPlanners eg: urban, rural, highways, transport,environmentalUrban designersArea masterplannersArchitects eg: architects, architectural technicians,architectural technologists, landscape architects,police architectural liaison officersEngineers eg: civil, structural, building services,geotechnical, highways, transport, environmental

Surveyors eg: geomatic/land, valuation, quantity,general practice, building, building inspectors Construction industry managersEducators of built environment professionals

Environmental OccupationsEnvironmental officers eg: conservation, tree, playEnvironmental advisors eg: English Heritage,Environment Agency, English Nature, CountrysideAgency, Forestry Commission, Transport 2000, CPREEnvironmental managers eg: nature conservation,environmental health officers

Social OccupationsManagers of housing and social services

Economic OccupationsDevelopers eg: housing and commercial.Investors in property eg: institutional, privateand public eg: EP and RDAsEconomic development agency managers and officers

Community OccupationsProfessional community and voluntary workers(ie this is their paid employment)Community/Neighbourhood wardens and CommunitySupport Wardens

Cross-Cutting Occupations Neighbourhood renewal and regenerationpractitioners

BOX SEVEN: CORE OCCUPATIONS ENGAGED IN SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES

20 In some areas, parish councils and councillors will have an important role to play in contributing to sustainable communities, particularly thosecouncils that have achieved Quality status as part of the Government’s Quality Parish Initiative. Such councils will have demonstrated their ability toengage with all parts of their community and to work in partnership with principal local authorities and other public service agencies to improve localquality of life. Elected members of these bodies may also need access to skills development and information.

54


3.6 Our second group of ‘associated occupations’comprises those whose contribution isextremely important to successful delivery,but who are not involved full time across theplanning, delivering and maintaining stagesof a sustainable community. Examples areeducators, police officers, health servicemanagers and staff in local businesses.

3.7 Our third group – ‘the wider public’ – consistsof those whose interest does not come aboutby virtue of their occupation but whose activeengagement is essential, particularly inmaintaining sustainable communities.This group includes local residents, as wellas the media, members of neighbourhoodgroups and tenant associations, studentsand school children.

3.8 We examine the skills, behaviour andknowledge needs of these groups, and howrelevant experience, information and training

might best be delivered. Because our originalremit from the Deputy Prime Ministerfocused on built environment professionals,we have looked in most detail at skills issuesrelevant to this element of our coreoccupations group. However, we firmlybelieve that attempting to upskill theseprofessionals in isolation will notproduce the outcomes we are seeking.Instead success will lie in changing thebehaviour, attitudes and knowledge ofeveryone involved, many of whom maynot have realised in the past that theyhad anything to do with each other, orwith sustainable communities. We wantto see planners interacting with tenantassociations, highways engineersteaming up with urban designers, andcentral government officials who planhospitals and schools working with thosewho will be maintaining the surroundingstreets and buildings in ten years time.There is no quick fix – sustainablecommunities are a holistic long-termobjective requiring a holistic approach toskills to deliver the outcome we areseeking.

WHAT SKILLS, BEHAVIOUR ANDKNOWLEDGE ARE NEEDED?3.9 Previous chapters have already highlighted

some of the skills we consider essential todelivery of our common goal. These areprincipally generic skills such as leadership,

Cred

it: K

ent A

rchi

tect

ure

Cent

re

55


creating and getting buy-in to a vision,communication, engaging with and listeningto customers, team working, projectmanagement, financial management etc, thatcan be found across a wide range of differentoccupations and industry sectors. Weconsider that these skills need to beunderpinned by behaviours and attitudes thatare critical to delivery of complex projects,such as a ‘can do’ approach, being open tochange, challenging assumptions andcreativity etc. To be effective in a sustainablecommunities context, the above skills andbehaviours need to be supplemented byknowledge of key issues such as

environmental best practice, what constitutesgood design, crime, an understanding of localdemocracy, and of development finance.21

3.10 We have set out in Box Eight the genericskills, behaviour and knowledge that weconsider to be essential for deliveringsustainable communities. Again, it is not adefinitive list, but work by other organisationsand agencies reaches broadly similarconclusions.22 Definitions of the skills weidentify are set out in Appendix D.

3.11 Our three groups of occupations/interestswill require these skills behaviours andknowledge to different degrees and to varyinglevels to play their part in the sustainablecommunities agenda. Core occupations willprobably require all of them; the wider publicmay simply need access to the right level ofinformation about environment, design, andother knowledge areas we have identified;and associated occupations will needsomething in the middle. We believe that ifthose in core and associated occupationshad these generic skills, behaviour andknowledge, individual and cross-professionalperformance would be significantly enhanced.

21 Respondents to our public consultation identified the following generic skills, knowledge and behaviour: communication skills, partnership working,negotiation, mediation, consultation, project management, mentoring, urban design, politics, finance, economics, urban regeneration, crime anddisorder, sustainable energy use, cultural diversity.

22 ODPM/NRU (2002) The Learning Curve, Developing Skills and Knowledge for Neighbourhood RenewalEnglish Partnerships/KPMG/Urban Catalyst (2004) Assessment of Training Needs in Urban Development and Regeneration.Royal Town Planning Institute (2004) Policy Statement on Initial Planning Education Durning, B. and Glasson, J. (2004) Skills Base in the Planning System Vol 1Richards, M./Transport Planning Skills Initiative (2003) Transport Planning Skills Initiative – Researching the ProfessionPlanning Network (2001) Defining the Educational and Training Needs for the New Urban Agenda

Cred

it: E

ssex

Cou

nty

Coun

cil

56


Knowledge of:

The seven sustainablecommunities componentsand how they interact.

Sustainable developmentincluding best environmentalpractice

Housing and built environment

Transport and connectivity

Wider national and localeconomy

Governance, citizenship andprocesses associated with localdemocracy

Spatial planning and masterplanning

Behaviours:Ways of Ways ofthinking: acting:

Creativity Entrepreneurial

Strategic Can-dothinking mentality

Open to Co-operationchange

Awareness Able to seekof limitations help

Challenging Humilityassumptions

Flexible Committed tomaking ithappen

Clear Respect forfor diversityand equalopportunity

Skills:

Inclusive visioning

Project management

Leadership

Breakthroughthinking/brokerage

Team/partnership workingwithin and between teams,based on shared sense ofpurpose

Making it happen givenconstraints

Process management/changemanagement

BOX EIGHT: GENERIC SKILLS, BEHAVIOUR AND KNOWLEDGE CONSIDEREDESSENTIAL FOR DELIVERING SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES

57


Knowledge of:

Urban design and urban coding

Attracting financial capital

Development processes

Behaviours:Ways of Ways ofthinking: acting:

Decisive Able totake action

Respect Havingfor and a sharedawareness sense ofof the purposecontributionof otherprofessionals

Skills:

Financial managementand appraisal

Stakeholder management –including ability to workwith local residents andresidents/community groups

Analysis, decision making,evaluation, learning frommistakes

Communication – includingintelligent listening to thecommunity, and promotion ofdevelopment solutions

Conflict resolution

Customer awareness and howto secure feedback

58


WHERE ARE THE SKILLS GAPS?3.12 Having identified the skills that we believe

are essential to help deliver sustainablecommunities (Box Eight), we considered theextent to which these already exist within ourcore occupations, or were perceived as inshort supply. We looked at evidenceconcerning:

● gaps in skills demonstrated by people inthe workforce, which makes them lesswell equipped to do the job required; and

● shortages of skilled people to fill job orcourse vacancies in particular geographiclocations.

SHORTAGES OF SKILLS3.13 For some core occupations, specifically built

environment professionals, the generic skills,behaviours and knowledge need to sitalongside existing specialist or technicalskills such as planning, architecture, design,and surveying. We have not undertaken anaudit of professional training because we donot believe that this is where the fundamentaldifficulties lie. We concur with the findings ofthe Urban Task Force which concluded that“the teaching in basic professional technicalskills is excellent. The main problem is a lackof cross discplinary learning with a strongvocational element”.23 This view is underlined

by recent work carried out by Oxford BrookesUniversity on the skills base in the planningsystem. It concluded from the availableliterature that “currently planners are wellequipped with discipline skills they needto undertake their work, but that it is thewider areas of key/transferable andprofessional/management skills where theneeds and shortages occur, ie skills whichcan be acquired through initial education,but which also require experience”.24

3.14 There is broad agreement in other studiesthat it is the generic rather than technicalskills that are in short supply. KPMG/UrbanCatalyst’s work for ODPM and EnglishPartnerships reached similar conclusions inrespect of regeneration professionals,25 as didthe stakeholder interviews carried out byErnst and Young for this Review. Many ofthe respondents to our public consultationconfirmed these views.

23 Urban Task Force (1999), Towards an Urban Renaissance, 24 Durning, B. and Glasson, J. (2004) Skills Base in the Planning system Vol 125 English Partnerships/KPMG/Urban Catalyst – (2004) Assessment of Training Needs in Urban Development and Regeneration.

59


3.15 These findings suggested to us that theprocess of defining educational needs bythe professions has delivered specialists whomay have good technical skills but who havea less good understanding of generic skillsand of what makes communities sustainable.We know some schools and professionalbodies are already addressing the genericskills element of training courses, but want tosee this becoming widespread. We are clearthat there has to be a mechanism for

introducing generic skills alongsidethe technical skills into the training ofprofessionals (Chapter Four) and thatspecialist training has to be re-focussedon delivery of the final output – sustainablecommunities. This has implications for theway in which training courses are specifiedand accredited, that will need to be pursuedwith professional institutions and educationalproviders.

Cred

it: w

ww

.Joh

nBir

dsal

l.co.

uk

3.16 We were not able to identify comprehensiveinformation on generic skills shortagesamongst other ‘core’ occupations.

SHORTAGES OF PEOPLE3.17 The shortage of skilled people in many of

the core occupations – planners, engineers,surveyors etc – has been the subject ofnumerous studies over the last twentyyears, including analysis of vacancy figuresand job advertising. In spite of thesestudies, it remains difficult to get accurate,comprehensive data about the real extent ofexisting and predicted shortfalls in the coreoccupational groups. It is now the explicit roleof Sector Skills Councils26 to assess skills

shortages and gaps for the occupations theycover – this means improved data for thesespecific groups should be available in future.

3.18 We commissioned our own literature review27

to identify existing knowledge and estimatesof the number of people in the coreoccupations, and asked how far these fellshort of current and predicted future demand.We sought advice from the researchers onthe robustness of the evidence base on whichexisting estimates were made and askedthem to identify gaps in information.

3.19 The key findings of this project aresummarised in Box Nine.

26 Launched in July 2003, ‘21st Century Skills Realising Our Potential’ the Government’s Skills Strategy White Paper sets out the skills challenge and howwe will meet it. The strategy seeks to ensure that, across the nation, employers have the right skills to support the success of their businesses andorganisations, and individuals have the skills they need to be both employable and personally fulfilled. A key component of the delivery of the SkillsStrategy is the Sector Skills Development Agency’s ‘Skills for Business’ network of Sector Skills Councils (SSCs). It is the explicit role of Sector SkillsCouncils to assess skills shortages and gaps for the occupations they cover – this means improved data for these specific groups should be availablein future.

27 ODPM (2004) Skills Assessment Project – Core occupations for Delivering Sustainable Communities


60

Cred

it: C

onst

ruct

ion

Phot

ogra

phy

Cred

it: C

onst

ruct

ion

Phot

ogra

phy

61


BOX NINE: SKILLS ASSESSMENT PROJECT – CORE OCCUPATIONS FOR DELIVERINGSUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES

OverviewThe report looks at evidence into the current supply and demand levels for core occupations. It alsoconsiders future supply trends, and changes in demand that might follow from the SustainableCommunities Plan.

It concludes that data relating to current and future supply of built environment professions is availablefrom a number of sources, but there is a paucity of information on supply of other core occupations.There is limited information on demand for core occupations, and none on additional demand that theSustainable Communities Plan might generate.

Generally, there are significant difficulties with the quality of source data on many core occupations.Data from the Labour Force Survey tends to reflect traditional industry definitions; professionalinstitutions are a good source of information but their membership is not always the sum total of peopleworking in a particular occupation; and third party reports are often based on research where the samplesize is limited and may be unrepresentative, with weaknesses in methodologies. These findings are thenrepeated in other reports so that relatively weak sources of information become perceived fact oraccepted wisdom.

Supply data – built environment professionsSupply data for some built environment professionals such as architects, planners and engineers isof relatively good quality, because it draws on information from professional bodies and the Office ofNational Statistics Labour Force Survey.

There is qualitative and quantitative evidence of a shortage of supply in some core occupations.These include: civil and structural engineers, town planners, and transport planners and engineers.

Two key trends point to the possibility of future shortages. Firstly, there has been an overall declineover the last 10 years in the number of applicants to built environment degree courses. Secondly, theage structure of some professions is such that there will be a retirement bulge over the next decade.This is not consistent across all built environment occupations – architecture and surveying areexceptions with the number of applicants to courses remaining steady.28

There is no readily available data on the geographical or occupational mobility of these core groups.

28 Returns to RTPI on applications to accredited planning courses showed a slight increase in 2003.

62


3.20 Respondents to our public consultationidentified the following occupations asexperiencing shortage against demand:planning, transport planners, engineers,conservation officers, urban designers,design professionals, surveyors, trafficengineers, landscape architects, advisers,consultants and volunteers.

3.21 The difficulties identified above point to aneed for better information about skillsshortages, supply/demand and future trendsamongst those in core occupations if we are

to develop polices that adequately addressthese problems. The work of Sector SkillsCouncils should play a major role here.However, providing a firm evidence baseacross all the core occupations could takemany years, and we do not believe it isappropriate to hold back action on skillsuntil such evidence is assembled. Wetherefore set out in our next Chapter thework we consider to be necessary to drivethe skills agenda forward.

Supply data – other core occupationsSupply data for other occupations such as environmental, social and voluntary occupations is lessaccurate as it is not captured by the Labour Force Survey or any professional body; findings from thesegroups include:

● The environmental sector covers a broad range of disciplines, but data capture is complicated byproblems with definitions. There is anecdotal evidence of shortages of conservation officers.

● Data limitations make it impossible to identify the number of civil servants whose direct responsibilityis related to sustainable communities. Data on local government staff is similarly limited.

● There is anecdotal evidence from Urban Regeneration Companies (URC's) of a shortage of staffwith core skills.

Future demand – core occupationsIt is not possible to identify any comprehensive research on future demand for core occupations,particularly increased demand created by the Sustainable Communities Plan. Demand forecasts arecomplicated by a high number of variables to be considered, including overall conditions in the UKeconomy, unemployment levels, variances in demand in the construction sector and spare capacitywithin professional businesses.

ConclusionsMore comprehensive and robust data on supply and demand, including a regional dimension, is neededto support the development of policies and solutions.

THE WAY FORWARDCh

apter

4

Credit: English Regional Development Agencies

4.1 We have concluded that action is needed on anumber of fronts to address skills needs. Inthis chapter we make recommendations to:

● encourage people into built environmentprofessions and other core occupations;

● address gateway educational needs byworking with employers, professional andacademic institutions;

● address professional development needs;● enable continuous development and

review; and● manage knowledge for those in associated

and wider public groups.

4.2 We also consider a mechanism for delivery.

ENCOURAGING ENTRANTS INTOCORE OCCUPATIONS4.3 We believe there is an urgent need to raise

further the profile of core occupations, andtheir role in the sustainable communitiesagenda, in order to encourage more entrants.

4.4 We think that the business of planning,delivering and maintaining sustainablecommunities ought to be an attractive careeroption for young people and also forexperienced people seeking a career change.But to persuade them of this, we need to helpthem make the link between a vibrantcommunity and the occupations that help tocreate and sustain it.

4.5 We believe that an awareness raisingcampaign is needed to increaseunderstanding about the importance tosociety of this agenda, and highlight theessential role that the core occupations playin delivering it. This needs to build on existingcampaigns that also aim to raise the profilesof particular occupations29 and should:

● draw attention to opportunities to ‘makea real difference’ in communities;

● highlight the attractiveness of coreoccupations in terms of job satisfactionand status;

● articulate the challenge in resolving thecompeting demands of different groups;

● set out potential financial rewards andopportunities for cross occupation careerdevelopment; and

29 For example, ConstructionSkills Positive Image campaign promotes construction as an exciting and challenging career option for all young people, andtargets graduate and craft recruits, women and ethnic minorities; and the Construction Industry Council’s video Building Visions - creative careers inthe construction professions targets 14-18 year olds.

64


Cred

it: E

nglis

h Pa

rtne

rshi

ps

65

Chapter 4 The Way Forward

● clarify entry routes and career paths andwhere to get further information. (Theseare not always immediately obvious to thewider public.)

4.6 Any campaign should also seek to maximiseopportunities to raise awareness throughparts of the School Curriculum. Improvingyoung people’s understanding of theimportance of this agenda can be helpful ininitiating them into the complex decisionmaking processes around planning,delivering and maintaining sustainablecommunities, and through this understandingthey are more likely to want to ‘participate’.So awareness raising amongst school pupilsshould be seen as in investment in the futureof sustainable communities.

4.7 Working with different partners and agencieswithin the education sector will be one wayof building knowledge about sustainablecommunities into the school curriculum.ODPM has already worked with the RoyalGeographical Society to promote planningas a specialist unit alongside tourism andenvironmental management in the reformedGCSE geography curriculum. Other routesmight include working with SubjectAssociations,30 and with institutions who havedirect contact with their local schools, such asSchools of Education within Universities.

4.8 However, even if a campaign is successful inraising awareness, other considerations maystill influence career decisions. Financialreward is often given as a reason for notentering certain core occupations, or forchoosing to work for particular employers.Local authority planning and regenerationdepartments are cited as examples of placeswhere reward packages do not justify thestudent’s investment in initial education.31

Rewards also affect the ability of manydepartments to retain skilled andexperienced staff.

4.9 If people are expected to develop the genericskills throughout their careers, to changejobs, be involved in high profile projects, andwork with multi-disciplinary teams acrossthe public and private sector, they need

30 Examples include the Geographical Association, The Association of Citizenship Teaching, the Design and Technology Association and The Associationof Science Education.

31 Respondents to our public consultation cited low salary, poor public image, low status and lack of awareness in schools as the main reasons forshortages in the supply of planners.

Cred

it: ©

Chr

ista

Sta

dtle

r/Ph

otof

usio

n

66


appropriate and competitive compensation.It is important that the people who develop thehighest levels of skill are not all enticed fromthe public into the private sector. We said inparagraph 2.42 that it was important to makebest use of available skills, and suggestedthat a significant proportion of planningapplications could be dealt with by techniciansrather than highly trained and experiencedplanners. We see this change as one way forlocal authorities to free up resources so theycan pay those who possess high-level genericand technical skills a salary that betterreflects the importance of their contribution tocreating and maintaining sustainablecommunities in their area.

4.10 However, money is rarely the only reason whypeople chose their career paths. Perceptionsabout corporate cultures, employmentprospects and working conditions alsoinfluence choices. In places or occupationswhere high numbers of vacancies areexpected, other financial incentives such asbursaries, paying for conversion courses,and more creative recruitment and retentionpolices (covering childcare, flexible workingetc) may also be required.

4.11 In addition to young people, it is alsoimportant to attract other entrants into thecore occupations. Examples include peoplelooking for career changes, experiencedreturners to the workforce, or early retireesfrom other sectors, many of whom couldalready have a range of the generic skillsfrom previous roles. Groups that aretraditionally under represented in many coreoccupations (particularly built environmentprofessions) such as women, and black andminority ethnic groups (BME), also provide apool of potential new talent.32

4.12 To engage these groups, employers andprofessional institutions will need to considera wide variety of ways of delivering therequisite generic and, specialist/technicalskills. This implies building on and extendingexisting work to improve access to training

32 There are a number of current initiatives aimed at raising the number of entrants from under represented groups. These include:(a) ‘Tomorrow’s Planners’ – a Planning Inspectorate initiative aimed at improving black and minority ethnic representation in planning.

It provides support for BME students to train as planners on a part time basis. (b) The Stephen Lawrence Charitable Trust Bursary Programme encourages those of ethnic minority origins to apply for bursaries in

architectural studies.

Cred

it: K

ent A

rchi

tect

ure

Cent

re

67


through flexible entry requirements,accrediting prior learning, and distancelearning. It also includes consideration of on-line learning, delivering courses inmodules which can fit around other lifecommitments, in-service training, informallearning opportunities, and where possibleencouraging take up of these opportunitiesthough the provision of bursaries.33

4.13 We recommend that the Governmentshould work with professionalinstitutions, local authorities, educationinstitutions, Sector Skills Councils andRegional Centres of Excellence to developprofessional campaigns that willraise the profile of core occupationsand understanding of their role insustainable communities, and in turnencourage entrants into theseoccupations.

4.14 Employers should examine the employmentpackages they offer to maximise recruitmentand retention of people in core occupations.Employers, education and professionalinstitutions should maximise flexibility oftraining provision to attract a wider rangeof entrants than is currently the norm.

GATEWAY EDUCATION4.15 We said earlier that some formal education

courses for core occupations (in particularbuilt environment professions) were beginningto address the development of generic skills,and that we wanted this to become morewidespread. At present we do not believe thatthere is a single occupation that providestraining in all of the generic skills required, atevery stage of development – and we considerthat this shortfall must be addressed.

4.16 We have looked at how training in genericskills might best be provided. We think thatformal training at undergraduate and

33 The RTPI recommends this approach in their Education Commission Final Report (2003).

Cred

it: ©

Jea

n A

ttree

/Pho

tofu

sion

postgraduate levels for all built environmentprofessions should include an introductionto generic skills. In most cases it wouldbe inappropriate to provide anything otherthan an introduction at this stage, but it isessential that the introduction is made. Thiscould take the form of projects that involveother occupations and students from otherdisciplines to enable reflection on the wholesustainable communities agenda. This willensure that new professionals start with anunderstanding of how their contribution to thedevelopment process sits alongside that ofthe other occupations with which they will bein regular contact throughout their career. Inturn this will lead to a greater degree ofcross-sector working.

4.17 There is a debate about whether individual

built environment professions shouldcontinue to have their own separate trainingand accreditation systems leading to specificformal professional/technical qualifications.There is some concern that thesecompartmentalise responsibilities for thebuilt environment. This debate includesconsideration of the pros and cons of acommon foundation course, and evenwhether there is a role for a new cross-cutting professional such as ‘urbanist’.It seems to us that the debates are finelybalanced, particularly with regards to acommon foundation course. We did not havetime to probe these arguments in detail, butin our view it is an important debate and wewant to see it continued with a priority focuson the quality of outcomes for communities,rather than on professional demarcation.Whatever happens, our very real concern isthat any changes must address effectivecross-sector working and the currentabsence of generic skills. If separation ofprofessional training is to be maintained forthe longer term, then we believe eachprofession must integrate training in genericskills for sustainable communities into theircourses as a matter of urgency.

4.18 We recommend that the Governmentshould work with education providers,professional institutions, employers,Sector Skills Councils and RegionalCentres of Excellence to ensure that anintroduction to the generic skills forms


68

69


part of existing formal training coursesfor built environment professions; andthat cross-sector working is introducedat an early stage. Inclusion of training ingeneric skills should be a requirementfor accreditation purposes. We recognisethat this is already the case with someprofessional training, but want to seethis approach more widely adopted.

4.19 There are other core occupations where itwould also be appropriate to introducetraining in generic skills and sustainablecommunities at the gateway educationstage, eg environmental managers, andmanagers of housing and social services.We hope that those who provide educationfor these groups will take the above

recommendation on board. But somecore occupations, particularly those in civilservice departments, and local/regionalgovernment, can come from a wide varietyof backgrounds, frequently with initialtraining entirely unrelated to sustainablecommunities. These individuals will needan introduction to generic skills and a broadunderstanding of sustainable communitiesas part of the initial training provide by theiremployer. This can be built on and developedthroughout their subsequent career, as weoutline below.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT4.20 As well as introducing training in generic

skills for new entrants, there is a real needto look at ways of ensuring that thosealready working in core occupations can alsoacquire and build on generic skills. Indeedwe believe that influencing the existingworkforce will have most impact onsustainable communities in the shortterm, and must be seen as a priority.

4.21 We believe that for those already working incore occupations, development of the genericskills required to ensure the success of oursustainable communities will take placeprimarily on the job. While generic skillscan be introduced through some formalclassroom training, we believe that more thaneighty per cent of generic skills developmentmust be honed, practised and enhanced by

70


working in a variety of projects, in a variety ofjobs, within multi-disciplinary teams, in thepublic and private sectors with people whoalready demonstrate some or all of the skills.

4.22 To make this happen, employees will needsupport and encouragement from linemanagers who recognise the longer termbenefits of developing generic skills, andwho acknowledge this experience andlearning via performance managementsystems. Employers in government, localauthorities and the private sector will needto adopt pro-active approaches to on the joblearning including:

● promoting secondments to successful teams(in the public and private sectors) with atrack record of delivering projects. Thereis potential for the Regional Centres ofExcellence to play a brokering role; and

● using members of successful teams asmentors to instil a team working and crossdisciplinary approach.

4.23 That said, we consider that where continuousprofessional development (CPD) trainingalready exists, it also has an important role toplay. We want to see professional institutionsrevisiting their criteria for CPD to ensurethis fully recognises the importance of theintegrated sustainable communities conceptand the generic skills, and promotesinvolvement in the cross disciplinary teamapproach that we believe is crucial forfuture success.

4.24 We recommend that:

● employers of people working in coreoccupations commit to developing andimplementing measures that delivercomprehensive and continual on thejob training opportunities to developcompetencies in generic skills forsustainable communities;

● employers should make CPD trainingin generic skills compulsory for staffworking in core occupations ratherthan an optional extra; and

● where CPD is accredited byprofessional institutions werecommend that employers work withthose institutions to consider how bestto accredit on the job training in genericskills and interdisciplinary working.

CONTINUOUS DEVELOPMENTAND REVIEW4.25 People in core occupations will have the

range of skills, behaviours and knowledgeset out in Box Eight to different levels andvarying degrees. It will be important to themand the communities they serve that theycontinue to build on their portfolio ofgeneric skills throughout the time of theirinvolvement. We believe that a culture oflifelong learning must be embedded withinthese occupations, so that all involvedtake responsibility for working with theiremployers to develop skills throughout

71


their lives, for keeping up to date with newdevelopments, for approaching change withenthusiasm, and for identifying opportunitiesto learn new things.

4.26 For this to become reality, there needs to be amechanism that allows individuals to assesstheir current level of skills and experienceagainst a benchmark for their particularoccupation, and to identify what gaps existand ways in which these might be filled.

4.27 National Occupations Standards (NOSs) gosomeway to meeting this in that they identifycompetencies for some core occupations.But they do not extend across the wholegroup, and will not necessarily cover all ofthe skills, behaviour and knowledge weidentify in Box Eight.

4.28 We recommend that employers of thosein core occupations (local authorities,government, private sector consultanciesand developers etc) should work with thekey professional institutions, SectorSkills Councils, and other skills bodies todevelop occupational benchmarks forcore occupations (or enhance existingbenchmarks where these exist) thatreflect their sustainable communitiesrole. The feasibility of an on-linebenchmarking and assessment toolshould be considered.

72


SKILLS MANAGEMENT FORASSOCIATED OCCUPATIONSAND THE WIDER PUBLIC4.29 As we have noted in Chapter Three, many

occupations have occasional involvementin aspects of sustainable communities.

4.30 One of the respondents to our consultationnoted that we should not just assume thatpeople who work in fields like education,health or the police have the skills tocontribute to more holistic, collaborativeapproaches to sustainable communitiessimply because this is now the preferredmodel, because often they do not.

4.31 For those in associated occupations, trainingin generic skills such as team working andproject management will, in many cases,already be provided as part of professionaldevelopment. We consider that such trainingshould include project working with othersfrom the core and associated occupations toincrease understanding of the roles andresponsibilities of all those engaged in thesustainable communities agenda.

4.32 We also believe that associated occupationsneed on-going access to information aboutsustainable communities, and in particular toexamples of best practice. This could take theform of on-line provision, linked to existingweb based sources of evidence based goodpractice. It would have the added benefit,

potentially, of also providing information toour third group – the wider public – who,whether acting as volunteers, residents orsimply engaged citizens, may need accessto information on sustainable communityissues, and details of where to go to obtainfurther advice.34

4.33 We recommend that organisationswith responsibilities for training thosewho work in associated occupations(Chapter Three) review their trainingprogrammes to ensure these includeboth the generic skills and anappreciation of sustainable communities.Joint project working with others fromcore and associated groups will increasecross-occupational understanding andallow good practice to be shared. Ideally,Regional Centres of Excellence shouldhave a role in brokering such projects.

34 www.renewal.net provides a good working example of this approach, receiving several hundred hits each day from all sectors engaged in regeneration.

Cred

it: P

hoto

grap

h, P

eter

Mac

kinv

en

73


4.34 We consider that access to informationabout sustainable communities needs tobe made available to a wide audience toenable them to contribute to deliveringsuch communities. We recommend thata high quality on-line tool should beavailable. We further recommend thatRegional Centres of Excellence shouldhave a role in collating informationabout successful projects.

4.35 In a sense what we have describedis a virtuous circle. If we collectivelyaddress ‘gateway’ education, professionaldevelopment and knowledge management,we will be well on the path to continuousimprovement and review. If standards areraised in this way, more entrants will beencouraged into the core occupations.

DIAGRAM THREE: THE VIRTUOUS CIRCLE

Encourageentrants intoprofessions

Continuousimprovement

and review

Addressprofessionaldevelopment

needs

Address'gateway' education

and trainingneeds

TRAINING FOR ELECTED MEMBERS4.36 The main body of our skills recommendations

have so far been directed at those workingprofessionally in occupations that impact onsustainable communities. However, there isa group working in a voluntary capacity thathas a very significant impact on this agenda,namely elected members of local authorities.We considered the skills required by membersof local planning authorities in adopting localdevelopment frameworks and determiningplanning applications, and debated whetherthey should be required to undergocompulsory training. At present, manyauthorities provide their own in-housetraining, and some make training arequirement of membership of planningcommittees.35 In addition voluntary courseson specific issues, such as urban design,are provided by external organisations.36

4.37 The Task Group was not unanimous on theneed for compulsory training. Some of ourmembers felt that because there areimportant technical and procedural aspectsof planning, compulsory training is essential.Moreover, they believed that since planningdecisions are actually decisions aboutcreating sustainable communities, it isessential that elected members have a wide

appreciation of sustainability, how theirdecisions can shape the community in thelong term and how better outcomes can beachieved. Other members of the Group werereluctant to make training a requirementgiven that members are already giving upsignificant amounts of time to serve thecommunity. The Group also felt that theopportunity to participate in excellent qualitytraining on a voluntary basis would producebetter outcomes than compulsion.

4.38 On balance, we do not supportcompulsory training at present. Insteadwe prefer to encourage elected membersto participate in training throughprovision of excellent courses andexchanges that help them to fulfill theirelected role better. We accept this needsto be kept under review, and compulsorytraining may become necessary if avoluntary approach is unsuccessful.We suggest this is reviewed by theGovernment and the Local GovernmentAssociation in 2006. We are unanimousthat training, whether compulsoryor voluntary, should be broadened toembrace the delivery of sustainablecommunities, and that its usefulnessand effectiveness should be evaluated.

35 Royal Town Planning Institute, with IDeA, LFA and ODPM (2004) Planning Training for Councillors.36 Courses are run by a variety of organisations for example the consortium of ODPM/LGA/IDeA/ Local Government Information Unit, CABE in Urban

Design, and Room at RTPI on planning law and systems.


74

75


DELIVERY MECHANISMS4.39 Having identified a number of actions to

address people and skills gaps, the nextquestion is how to deliver them? We havealready established that the core occupations,and to a lesser extent associated occupations,have a vital role in delivering sustainablecommunities, and that to do this effectivelythey need a stronger perception of commoncause, combined with generic skills,behaviours and knowledge. But the breadthof these occupations, and their separatetraining and accreditation processes, makeit difficult for existing organisations andeducation providers to deliver the requiredskills to everyone involved in an effectiveand consistent way that emphasisescross–occupational learning.

4.40 We have considered trends in other sectorssuch as catering and automotive engineering,and even school and local authorityleadership, where national centres are beingestablished to provide a co-ordinated approachto skills issues. We believe that this sectorwould also benefit from a similar new drivingforce. A national centre for sustainablecommunity skills would provide a new focusand heightened profile to skills developmentfor those working in this agenda throughbringing together and building on the work ofskills providers, education and professionalinstitutions and relevant employers.

4.41 We recommend that the Governmentsets up a national centre for sustainablecommunity skills. Its first task will be totake forward the implementation of muchof this report. The name of the centre willneed to be decided but for workingpurposes at this stage we will refer to itas the National Centre for SustainableCommunity Skills – NCSCS.

4.42 We propose that the overarching aim ofthe NCSCS should be to develop worldclass skill sets amongst all thoseinvolved in planning, delivering andmaintaining sustainable communities.It should seek to achieve this aim by:

● providing a high profile national focusfor sustainable community skillsdevelopment and research;

● working with education providers,employers, professional institutions,relevant Sector Skills Councils,Regional Centres of Excellence andother skills bodies to provide andpromote excellence in sustainablecommunity skills development;

● acting as a catalyst for innovation anda focus for national and internationaldebate on sustainable communityskills issues;

● acting as a resource andcommunications hub for individuals,organisations and communitiesworking in the sustainablecommunities agenda;

76

● working with others to operationalisethe common goal, and ensure itsrelevance to the public’s requirements;and

● researching with other partners thelong term environmental stndards thatsustainable communities should aimfor, and how, in practical terms, theseshould be achieved.

4.43 It is essential that the National Centrepositively engages with other bodies whoseremit is to raise skill levels in specificsectors. Examples of key partners includeprofessional and educational institutions, theLearning and Skills Councils, Sector SkillsCouncils,37 the Local Government Centre forLeadership (LGCL),38 IDeA, CABE, and theRegional Centres of Excellence.

4.44 It is not our intention that the NCSCS shouldreplace or displace existing training providers,many of which already deliver excellentquality. Much time and money could bewasted by reinventing existing good practice.Instead, we want the NCSCS to seek out,build on, and promote existing high qualitytraining that encompasses the genericskills, behaviour and knowledge required forsustainable communities, and ensure that itis made widely available across the rangeof core and associated occupations. Forexample, we believe that developing links

with university business schools could be asmart way of developing modules/informationon generic skills, which could be plugged intoother courses, or made accessible as webbased learning. Where the National Centreidentifies gaps in training provision, it willneed to work with other providers to fillthese, perhaps through establishing jointprogrammes and seminars.

WHO WILL RUN THE NATIONALCENTRE?4.45 We recommend that the Centre should

be led by practitioners who themselvesdemonstrate the generic skills,knowledge and behaviour required tohelp deliver prosperous sustainablecommunities. Members should berecognised leaders in the field ofsustainable communities, with ademonstrable track record of success.Generally this will mean people whohave had varied careers, workedon many different projects, in differentorganisations and places, and whohave had at least one failure fromwhich they have learned valuablelessons. We expect such practitionersto come from across core occupationsincluding built environment

37 Particularly ConstructionSkills and AssetSkills 38 ODPM, Office of Public Services Reform, LGA, IDeA and SOLACE (Society of local authority Chief Executives and Senior Managers) are working together

to establish a virtual Local Government Centre for Leadership. It will cover members, senior officers and middle managers, and is expected to go livein Summer 2004.


77


professionals, regeneration managers,leaders from national, local andregional government and the privatesector, as well as from associatedoccupations. Experienced internationalpractitioners should also be encouragedto participate.

4.46 We believe there are benefits in the Centrebeing led by a high profile, experienced Chairto give it early credibility and impact and toensure widespread cross-sector coverage ofthe skills agenda.

SPECIFIC TASKS FOR THENATIONAL CENTRE4.47 In Box Ten we summarise some specific

tasks that will lead to establishment of theCentre, and tasks that we envisage theNational Centre undertaking. In addition totaking forward the skills recommendations,we consider the centre has vital roles to playin carrying out research into skills provisionand training; building national andinternational networks to promotecollaborative learning and sharing ofinformation, providing coaching and rolemodels for those working on sustainablecommunities projects, and raising the UK’sinternational profile as a leader in deliveringcommunities that work.

RESEARCH4.48 We want to see the Centre working with other

relevant bodies to initiate and disseminatethe findings of high quality research intosustainable community issues, and taking alead in developing and encouraging innovativethinking across this agenda. It will need towork in partnership with practitioners,academic, professional and governmentinstitutions, Sector Skills Councils and otherskills bodies, as well as employers to ensureresearch is relevant to their changing needs,and that data is collected in a consistentformat that allows sensible interpretation.

4.49 In particular, the Centre will need to:

● take forward work to operationalise thecommon goal we set out in Chapter One.It will need to build on the growing body ofevidence about what the public wants fromits communities, and ensure this is madewidely available to key players such asdevelopers, local authorities and builtenvironment professionals so that it caninform their work and decision making;

● work with other partners to makeinformation available on the long-termenvironmental standards that sustainablecommunities should aim to achieve, andhow these standards translate intopractical building standards;

78


● improve data on skills supply, demand,and gaps across the core and associatedoccupations; examine best practice inskills provision, including evidence of whatworks in upskilling our different groups;and

● ensure lessons from particular projectsare analysed and widely disseminated.For examples, the benefits of the cross-departmental approach to the ThamesGateway and Low Demand Pathfindersneed to be captured to provide a modelfor others to work from.

NETWORKS 4.50 We consider it essential that the Centre

works with others to promote collaborativelearning through both physical and virtualnetworks. These will enable practitioners andleaders in core and associated occupations totalk to each other, to question national andinternational experts and policy makers, andto share resources and practical experienceof what works and what does not. Networksmight be national, regional or local, andmight be general or designed to bringtogether members in similar circumstances– for example, a rural network might addressspecific issues that rural communities face inbecoming sustainable; suburban and innercity networks could similarly address theirunique challenges.

4.51 Physical networks have the advantage ofbuilding up face-to-face contacts, and enablemembers to share meetings, study tours,presentations and cutting-edge debates, andto examine innovative approaches andspecific challenges. Virtual or web basednetworks offer wider opportunities to shareknowledge and information, including for thegeneral public.

4.52 We want to see the National Centre setting upa simple to use, virtual knowledge networkfor core and associated occupations, andeventually the wider public. This shouldprovide practical information on dealing withreal challenges, give access to best practiceand evidence of what works, and allow online debate between practitioners and expertsnationally and internationally. It will need tolink to other relevant sites run by localauthorities, professional institutions,universities, government etc.

79


COACHING4.53 A key role for the National Centre will be to

provide coaches for projects and people.We believe that ideally every substantialsustainable community project should haveat least one member of the Centre associatedwith it to bring the benefit of their experience,past mistakes, creativity and processknowledge, and so help to ensure thesuccess of new and regenerateddevelopments. Members will not work fulltime on projects, but will be available to helpset the strategic direction at the outset and tofacilitate next steps when sticking pointsthreaten to delay progress.

4.54 Members should also act as role models foryoung people and career changers, so thatthese groups are inspired to develop therequired skills themselves that will enablethem to work on high profile projects in theUK and abroad.

CATALYST FOR INNOVATION ANDFOCUS FOR NATIONAL ANDINTERNATIONAL DEBATE4.55 To position itself at the forefront of innovative

thinking on sustainable communities skillsdevelopment, the centre will need to captureand build on new approaches and bestpractice from around the world. We expectto see members speaking at conferencesand contributing to international publicationsto enhance our national reputation inthis field. We hope they will showcaseour achievements so that this countrytakes a leading position in this rapidlydeveloping agenda.

80


BOX TEN: NATIONAL CENTRE FOR SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES SKILLS (NCSCS)

RECOMMENDATION ACTION

Structure and aims

Members of the Centre to include:

● National and international practitioners whothemselves demonstrate the generic skills,knowledge and behaviour required to helpdeliver sustainable communities. Must havea track record of success in deliveringsustainable community projects

● Members to act as coaches/mentors for majordevelopment projects, and be role models fornew entrants.

● Make initial Board and executive appointmentsby the end of 2004.

● All appointments should reflect best publicand private practice in terms of openness,competition, and suitability.

● Establish and lead a Steering Group to developthe Centre’s remit, status, organisation, locationoptions, business plan, and financial plan.

● The Centre to be open for business by early2005.

Government to set up a National Centre forSustainable Community Skills (NCSCS)

● To lead on and provide focus for continuousskills development among all occupationsengaged in delivering sustainable communities.

● Initial focus to be on core occupations.

81



Structure and aims

Specific Tasks – Immediate priorities

Address skills gaps for those currentlyworking in core occupations

● Majority of generic skills development (80%) totake place through on the job training andexperience – project working in multi-disciplinary teams, secondments etc.

● Work with key employers including localauthorities, developers, education andprofessional institutions, Sector SkillsCouncils and others to promote generic skillsdevelopment through on the job training.

● Work with regional partners including RCEs tobroker secondments and assist with creation ofcross-disciplinary teams for specific projects.

● Ensure existing CPD is extended to incorporategeneric skills development

● Provide coaches for major developmentprojects.

● Develop physical and virtual networks.

National Centre to operate through a seriesof partnerships, in order to promote linksbetween key organisations resulting in ajoined up approach to skills development.Partners to include:

● RCEs, education providers, professionalinstitutions, industry associations, researchers,Sector Skills Councils, local, regional andnational government.

● Develop a partnership approach with otherorganisations that have specialist competenciesin aspects of sustainable communities andskills develoment.

82




Work with other partners to develop effectivetraining for specific core occupations

● Co-ordinate and build on existing training forlocal authority elected members- to ensuretraining packages are holistic and cover theentire sustainable communities agenda.

● In 2006, work with Government and the LGAto evaluate benefits and take up of training.

Encourage more entrants intocore occupations

● Co-ordinate awareness raising campaigns,aimed at young people and people looking tochange careers, with particular emphasis onunder – represented groups. Campaigns to bea joint initiative with professional institutions,developer organisations, local authorities,Sector Skills Councils and RCEs.

● Develop stronger links to National Curriculumin schools.

Review formal education available for coreoccupations

● Work with education institutions, professionalbodies and Sector Skills Councils to ensurecourses (type, quantum and scope) meetdemand and provide a sound introductionto generic skills and experience of cross-disciplinary working.

● Work with education institutions to ensureeducators are themselves up to speed withthe sustainable communities agenda, and canadjust their courses to take account of genericskills and cross occupational working.

83




Medium Term – within three years

Encourage continuous skills review anddevelopment

● All individuals working in core occupations toassess their skills and experience against abenchmark for their occupation and to identifywhat gaps exist and ways in which these mightbe filled.

● Extend knowledge networks to widercommunities, so that associated occupationsand the wider public can access information,attend meetings and contribute to debate.

● Work with institutions, employers and SectorSkills Councils to develop benchmarks andassessment tools, including on–line facilities.This work should build on National OccupationsStandards where they exist.

● Work with local authorities, NRU and regionalregeneration networks to ensure availability ofrelevant information, linked to national,regional and local sites.

Centre to lead on innovative thinking onsustainable communities developmentthrough research and sharing best practicewith national and international experts

● With partners, set up research programme. Keytasks to include operationalising the ‘commongoal’; work on long term environmentalstandards for sustainable communities, andtheir translation into building standards;improving data on skills supply and demandacross core and associates occupations;disseminating lessons from major projects.

● Develop future thinking

84



Long Term – within three years

Support Government in rewarding exemplarywork in the field of sustainable communities,and ensuring good practice from existinginitiatives is captured to provide a blueprintfor others.

● Work with ODPM, other governmentdepartments and other agencies to ensurelessons from initiatives such as the cross-departmental approach to the Thames Gatewayand Low Demand Pathfinders are captured toprovide a blueprint for others to work from.

Develop generic skills, behaviour andknowledge for associated occupations,and eventually the wider public.

● Develop knowledge facilities and training forthose in associated occupations who havea role to play in developing sustainablecommunities – eg educators, police, healthservice workers, retailers.

● Work with the Neighbourhood Renewal Unit,local authorities and other local partners toenhance the development of knowledgenetworks for communities, linking key playersin the community – eg LA, schools, localemployers, colleges and universities, residentsgroups etc.

85


Priorities for action

4.56 We recommend that the Government’simmediate priority on skills should be toset up and resource the National Centre.This needs to be done quickly if the newcommunities envisaged in the SustainableCommunities Plan are to be deliveredwithin declared timetables. For thisreason we recommend that the Centrebe open for business by early 2005.

4.57 We know this will be demanding, but believethis agenda has sufficient impact of thelives of all our citizens to merit urgentaction on the part of government to ensuresuccessful delivery.

Conclusion

4.58 The Sustainable Communities Planrepresents a unique opportunity to developnew communities of which we can all beproud of, and to revitalise establishedcommunities so that they become moredesirable, sustainable places to live andwork. Ensuring we have the right skills todo this will be essential to the success ofthis objective.

4.59 We believe that in addition to high levelspecialist technical skills, those workingto deliver sustainable communities mustalso have a broad range of generic skillssimilar to those found in successful worldclass organisations, that will enable themto work together to deliver across thiscomplex agenda.

4.60 Delivering these skills is a huge and excitingchallenge for everyone involved. We hope thenew National Centre will lead and co-ordinateaction by all players to develop the skills wehave identified. If we are successful in this,the future for communities across the countryshould be truly sustainable.

86


REFERENCES

Audit Commission (2002) Quality of Life Indicators,Audit Commission, London

Audit Commission/IDeA (2003) Library of LocalPerformance Indicators, Audit Commission(www.local-pi-library.gov.uk/index.)

Audit Commission (2003) Patterns for Improvement– Learning from Comprehensive PerformanceAssessment, Audit Commission, London

Building Research Establishment (2000) BREEAMEco-Homes, London

Commission for Architecture and the BuiltEnvironment (2003) Building SustainableCommunities: Developing the skills we need,CABE, London

Construction Industry Council/Imperial College,London (2003) Design Quality Indicators Online,Construction Industry Council, London

DEFRA (2003) Annual Report 2002 – Achieving abetter quality of life, HMSO

DEFRA (2004) Quality of Life Counts: Indicators fora Strategy for Sustainable Development for theUnited Kingdom, HMSO

Durning, B. and Glasson, J. (2004) Skills Base inthe Planning System Vol 1 Literature Review forLGA, Employers’ Organisation and ODPM

English Partnerships/KPMG/Urban Catalyst (2004)Assessment of Training Needs in UrbanDevelopment and Regeneration, EnglishPartnerships, London

Home Office Community Cohesion Unit with LGA(2002) Guidance on Community Cohesion, HMSO

Kearns, A. and Turok, I. (2003) SustainableCommunities: Dimensions and Challenges, ESRC,Swindon

London Health Observatory (2003) Local basket ofhealth inequalities indicators: Full Report, LHO,London

ODPM (2001) Planning Green Paper Planning:delivering a fundamental change, ODPM, London

ODPM/Core Cities Working Group (2003) Cities,Regions and Competitiveness: Second Report,ODPM, London

ODPM (2003) Guidance on Best Value PerformanceIndicators for 2003/04, ODPM, London

ODPM (2003) Participatory Planning for SustainableCommunities: International Experience inmediation, negotiation and engagement in makingplans, Heriot Watt University, ODPM, London

ODPM (2003) Sustainable communities: building forthe future, ODPM, London

ODPM (2004) Consultation Paper on Planning PolicyStatement 1: Creating Sustainable Communities,ODPM, London

ODPM (2004) Skills Assessment Project – CoreOccupations for delivering sustainablecommunities, ODPM, London

ODPM (2004) Urban Research summary 13:Competitive European cities: Where do the CoreCities Stand? ODPM, London

87


ODPM/Neighbourhood Renewal Unit (2002) TheLearning Curve: Developing Skills and Knowledgefor Neighbourhood Renewal, ODPM/NRU, London

ODPM/Neighbourhood Renewal Unit (2003)Mainstreaming Neighbourhood Renewal LearningProvision ODPM/NRU, London

Parkinson, M. (2004) Competitive European Cities:Where do the Core Cities stand, ODPM, London

Planning Network (2001) Defining the Educationaland Training Needs for the New Urban Agenda,University of Westminster, London

Review of Housing Supply (2004) (The BarkerReview) Delivering Stability: Securing our FutureHousing Needs, HMSO

Richards, M./Transport Planning Skills Initiative(2003) Transport Planning Skills Initiative –Researching the Profession, TPSI, London

Royal Town Planning Institute (2003) EducationCommission Final Report, RTPI, London

Royal Town Planning Institute with IDeA, LGA andODPM (2004) Planning Training for Councillors,RTPI, London

Royal Town Planning Institute (2004) PolicyStatement on Initial Planning Education, RTPI,London

SEEDA (South East England Development Agency)(2003) Sustainability Checklist for Development,SEEDA, Guildford

Urban Task Force (1999) Towards an UrbanRenaissance, DETR, London

8989

ANNEX A: TASK GROUP BIOGRAPHIES 90

ANNEX B: SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES INDICATORS 92

ANNEX C: OCCUPATIONS INVOLVED IN DELIVERINGSUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES 100

ANNEX D: DEFINITIONS OF GENERIC SKILLS 103

ANNEXES

90


Sir John EganChair of the Review

Sir Howard BernsteinChief Executive, ManchesterCity Council

Sir Brian BriscoeChief Executive, Local GovernmentAssociation

Honor ChapmanCBE, BSc MPhil, FRICS, MRTPIChair, London Development Agency

Martin DonohueChief Executive, Westbury Homes

Rebecca GeorgeDirector of UK Government Business,IBM

Ian J HendersonCBE BSc FRICSGroup Chief Executive, Land SecuritiesGroup plc

Peter JohnsonChief Executive, George Wimpey plc

Professor Dan JonesChair, Lean Enterprise Academy

Paul KingCampaign Director, WWF’s One MillionSustainable Homes Campaign

Sir Stuart LiptonChair, CABE

Richard McCarthyDirector General of SustainableCommunities, ODPM

ANNEX A: TASK GROUP BIOGRAPHIES

Annexes

Kevin MurrayBSc DipTP MSc MRTPIDirector, Kevin Murray Associates

Robin NicholsonCBE, RIBA, FRSA, HonFIStructESenior Director, Edward CullinanArchitects

Neil SachdevProperty Director, Tesco Plc

Professor Bob WorcesterChair, MORI

Michael KesztenbaumDirector of Strategic MarketingLearning Skills Council

91

92


Ref Source Indicator Probable subj/no. spatial level obj

OVERARCHING

1 QoL 6/ECR 12 % of population who live in wards that rank within the Ward/ omost deprived 10% and 25% of wards in the country district

2 QoL 18 % of residents surveyed satisfied with their district sneighbourhoods as a place to live

3 Newly % of people who are happy (taking all things together, district srecommended would you say you are very happy, quite happy, not

very happy or not at all happy?

NB: This question is currently used in the World Value Survey and widely used internationally. Please see http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org for further details of the World Value Survey and questionnaire.

4 BPVI Q1/CC03 Key priorities for improving an area – (a) what are district smost important in making somewhere a good place to live (b) what most need improving. Covers air pollution, water pollution activities for teenagers, traffic congestion, affordable decent housing, parks and open spaces, clean streets, public transport, community activities, race relations, cultural facilities, road and pavement repairs, education provision, shopping facilities, facilities for young people, sports and leisure facilities, health services, wage levels and local cost of living, job prospects, crime, none of these, other.

NB: This is a slight variation to BPVI Q1 with splitting of pollution into air and water pollution.

ANNEX B: SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES INDICATORS

93

Annexes


SOCIAL AND CULTURAL

5 BVPI QB Q11/ % of respondents surveyed who feel they ‘belong’ district sCC02 to the neighbourhood (or community)

6 QoL 25 % of people surveyed who feel that their local areas district sare a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together

7 Newly % of people who feel a great deal involved in the district srecommended local community.

NB: Based on an established questions from the MORI People’s Panel 1999 questionnaire. “Overall, how involved do you feel in the local community?” Ranked from a great deal, a fair amount, not very much, not at all or don't know.

8 BV 119/BVPI % of residents satisfied with LA cultural services district sgen Q13 (a) sports and leisure (b) libraries (c) museums

(d) arts activities and venues (e) parks and open spaces

9 BVPI Gen Q25 Extent anti-social behaviour a problem in the area district s

10 BV 126/QoL Domestic burglaries per 1,000 households district o16/T&C V3.08/UK and % detectedSust Dev H8

11 QoL 15/BVPI % of residents surveyed who feel ‘fairly safe’ or district sQB Q36 ‘very safe’ after dark whilst outside in the local

authority area

94



GOVERNANCE

12 BV 3/BVPI % of citizens satisfied with the overall service district sgen Q17 provided by the LA (taking everything into account)

13 CPA Comprehensive Performance Assessment – overall various oservice score to district

14 CPA Comprehensive Performance Assessment – council district oability to improve

15 BVPI Gen Q4 Extent respondents feel the council keeps residents district sinformed about benefits and services it provides

16 QoL 23/BVPI % of adults surveyed who feel they can influence district sQB Q7 decisions affecting their local area

ENVIRONMENTAL

17 LIB058 Household energy use (gas and electricity) per household o

18 LIB057 Household water use per person per day o

19 LIB089 % of local authority owned and managed land, district owithout a nature conservation designation, managed for biodiversity

20 LIB238 % of new dwellings completed during the year which district oare assessed as Good, Very Good or Excellent according to the EcoHomes Environmental Rating for Homes

95

Annexes


ENVIRONMENTAL

21 BV 90/BVPI % of people satisfied with waste recycling facilities district sGen Q5

22 ECR9 (a) (a) previously development land that is unused or district/site omany be available for redevelopment as a % of

And the local authority land area (based on NLUD)BV 106 (b) % of new homes built on previously developed land

23 BV 82a/QoL32/ % of the total tonnage of household waste arisings district oT&C V3.05 which have been recycled

NB: This excludes builder's rubble.

24 QoL 17/BVPI QB3 % of residents surveyed who are concerned about district sdifferent types of noise in their area covering road traffic, aircraft, trains, industrial/commercial premises, road works, construction/demolition, pubs etc, neighbours and animals

25 UK Sus Dev H10 Average number of days where air pollution is site oOR moderate or higher for No2, So2, O3, CO or PM10 (aggregate QoL 27 OR to district)

(a) number of days per year when air pollution is moderate or higher for PM10(b) annual average nitrogen dioxide concentrations (c) for rural sites, number of days per year when air pollution is moderate or high for ozone

96



HOUSING AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

26 BV 184/UK (a) % of LA homes which were non-decent at 1 April district oSus Dev H7 andQoL 14 (b) Number of unfit homes per 1,000 dwellings

(private sector only)

27 BV 199 % of relevant land and highways assessed having district ocombined deposits of litter and detritus (eg sand, silt and other debris) across four categories of cleanliness (clean, light, significant, heavy)

28 BV 89/BVPI % of people satisfied with the cleanliness standard district sgen Q3 in their area

29 ECR8/QoL 13 (a) Average property prices (b) average property district oprice/average earnings

30 Newly % of those interviewed satisfied with their home district srecommended

NB: Based on English House Condition Survey/Survey of English Housing question.

31 BV 183 Average length of stay in temporary accommodation district oof households which are unintentionally homeless and in priority need

32 LIB036 % are of authority's parks and open spaces which site oare accredited with a Green Flag award (aggregate

to district)

NB LA with coastline can also consider Blue Flag award spaces in this indicator.

97

Annexes


HOUSING AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

33 LIB033 % of listed building of Grade I and II* at risk of decay district o

NB: This is a temporary indicator pending scoping work on the feasibility of a ‘public space index’. We would ask ODPM to regularly review the position with a view to replacing this indicator with one public space.

TRANSPORT AND CONNECTIVITY

34 QoL 22/ (a) % of residents surveyed finding it easy to access district sBVPI key local services. QB Q6 (b) % of residents within a distances of 500m

(15 mins walk) of key local services

Key local services are local shop, supermarket, post office, GP, chemist/pharmacy, shop selling fresh produce, local hospital, green space, public transport stop, library, sports/leisure centre,cultural/recreational facility, bank/cashpoint, council/neighbourhood office

35 QoL 36 % of residents surveyed using different modes of district otransport, their reasons for, and distance of, travel

36 BVPI Gen QB % of users satisfied with local authority provided district sQ16 transport services

37 NEW % of dwellings postcode areas with access to district oADSL broadband

NB: The data for this indicator is available through a postcode search of the appropriate postcodes on the British Telecom web-site at www.bt.com/broadband/index.jsp. The indicator is constructed by identifying all the relevant postcodes that cover the district and the number of dwellings in each postcode. The count of all dwellings in postcodes where there is broadband access should be divided by the total number of dwellings in all the relevant postcodes.

98



ECONOMY

38 ECR5 (a) Proportion of adults with literacy and numeracy district oskills at or above level 1(b) % of working age population qualified to NVQ 2 or equivalent(c) % of working age population qualified to NVQ 3 or equivalent

39 QoL1/ECR1 % of people of working age in employment ward/ o(with BME breakdown) district

40 ECR4 average annual earnings for (a) full timers ward/ o(b) full-time males (c) full-time males district

41 ECR9 (b) % satisfaction with the local area as a district sbusiness location

42 UK Sust Dev H1 Regional GDP per Population Regional olevel only

SERVICES

43 BV 194/T&C % of children in schools maintained by the local district oV5.02 education authority achieving level 5 or above in

Key Stage 2 in English and Math (11 year olds)

44 BV 38/QoL 9/ % of 15 year old pupils in schools maintained by district oUK Sus Dev H5 the local education authority achieving five or

more GSCEs at A*-C or equivalent

99

Annexes


SERVICES

45 UK Sus Dev H6 Average life expectancy district o

46 QoL 12 Conception rates among females aged less district othan 18 years

47 Health % of patients waiting more than 3 or 6 months Primary oInequality for treatments CareTrustindicator 8.5 & 8.6

48 Health Number of primary care professionals per Primary oInequality 100,000 population Care Trustindicator 8.1

49 BV 109 % of major planning applications determined district oin 13 weeks and minor & other applications determined in 8 weeks

50 ECR 13 (b) % user satisfaction with town centre district s

Abbreviation Data SourceBV ODPM’s Best Value Performance Indicators – resident’s survey questionBVPI Gen Q ODPM’s Best Value Performance Indicators – general question in resident’s survey BVPI QB ODPM’s Best Value Performance Indicators – question in question bank of optional questions for resident’s surveysCC Home Office’s Indicators for Community CohesionCPA Audit Commission’s Comprehensive Performance Assessment resultsECR Audit Commissions’ Economic Regeneration Performance IndicatorsHealth Inequalities Health Development Agency’s Local Basket of Inequalities IndicatorsLIB Audit Commission’s library of local performance indicatorsQoL Audit Commission’s Quality of Life IndicatorsUK Sust Dev UK Headline Indicators of Sustainable Development (DEFRA)

‘Core’ occupations include people who spendalmost all of their time in activities to do withplanning, delivering and maintaining sustainablecommunities, or their involvement is critical to thesuccess of those communities.39

‘Associated’ occupations includes people whosecontribution is extremely important to successfuldelivery, but who are not involved full time inplanning delivery or maintaining sustainablecommunities.

Some organisations appear more then once.This reflects their different functions.

‘Core’ Occupations

Implementers and Decision Makers

Local authority elected members (particularlyleaders, cabinet, and planning committeemembers)40

Local authority Chief Executives and local authoritystaff

Members of Local Strategic Partnerships

Regional Assembly members and staff

Chief Executives and staff of relevant regionalorganisations eg: RDA’s, Regional HousingBoard members

Infrastructure provider and maintenance managerseg: transport, ICT, water and sewage etc

Regeneration leaders eg: URC’s and other specialpurpose vehicles

Chief Executives and staff of relevant nationalagencies eg: Countryside Agency, EnvironmentAgency, English Partnerships, Highways Agency

MPs and civil servants with relevant policyresponsibility eg: ODPM, Home Office, DEFRA,Transport, DTI, Health, Education, Police, GOR

Built Environment Occupations

Planners eg: urban, rural, highways, transport,environmental

Urban designers

Area masterplanners

Architects eg: architects, architectural technicians,architectural technologists, landscape architects,police architectural liaison officers

Engineers eg: civil, structural, building services,geotechnical, highways, transport, environmental

Surveyors eg: geomatic/land, valuation, quantity,general practice, building, building inspectors

Construction industry managers

ANNEX C: OCCUPATIONS INVOLVED IN PLANNING, DELIVERING ANDMAINTAINING SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES

39 Construction Trades have not been covered by the Egan Review and are not included in this list. 40 In some areas, parish councils and councillors will have an important role to play in contributing to sustainable communities, particularly those

councils that have achieved ‘Quality’ status as part of the Government’s Quality Parish Initiative. Such councils will have demonstrated their ability toengage with all parts of their community and to work in partnership with principal local authorities and other public service agencies to improve localquality of life. Elected members of these bodies may also need access to skills development and information.


100

Environmental Occupations

Environmental officers eg: Conservation, Tree, Play

Environmental advisors eg: English Heritage,Environment Agency, English Nature, CountrysideAgency, Forestry Commission, Transport2000,CPRE

Environmental managers eg: nature conservation,environmental health officers

Social Occupations

Managers of housing and social services

Economic Occupations

Developers eg: housing and commercial.

Investors in property eg: institutional, private andpublic eg: EP and RDAs

Economic development agency managers andofficers

Community Occupations

Professional community and voluntary workers(ie this is their paid employment)

Community/Neighbourhood wardens andCommunity Support Wardens

Cross-Cutting Occupations

Neighbourhood renewal and regenerationpractitioners

‘Associated’ occupations

Broad Community Occupations

Staff in business support organisationseg: Business Links, Chambers of Commerce,Enterprise Agencies, LEA’s etc

Staff in Citizen’s Advice Bureau and other advisoryservices

Teachers eg: primary, secondary, higher, furthereducation etc

Staff in universities and colleges

Faith group leaders including members of ICRC

Built Environment and AssociatedProfessionals

Contamination and reclamation specialists(brownfield)

Recycling and refuse disposal managers

Planning system’s statutory consultee’s eg: Healthand Safety Executive, Environment Agency, BritishWaterways, DEFRA, English Heritage etc

Social Occupations

Health service professionals

Staff in asylum support groups and services

Annexes

101

Environment Occupations

Environmental health officers

Countryside and park rangers

Staff in the national parks

Economic Occupations

Town centre managers

Staff in local businesses including retail, banks,manufacturers, services, insurance companies,managers of corporate social responsibility

Law and Enforcement Occupations

Lawyers

Police officers

Probation officers

Crime support staff eg: Witness Support Service,Women’s Refuge

Staff of drug action teams

Influence Opinion

Staff in NGOs eg: Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth,CPRE etc

Staff of ‘think-tanks’ eg: IPPR, DEMOS

Recreation and Culture

Sport England staff

Regional Arts Board members

Wider Public Group

Community members

Volunteers

Schoolchildren (via citizen agenda)

Sports centre staff

Museum staff

Librarians

National Trust staff

Musicians

Artists

Craftspeople

Arts officers, producers and directors

The Media (eg journalists, editors of local papers)

Careers advisers and vocational guidancespecialists


102

103

Annexes

Inclusive VisioningInnovative thinking and approaches to engagingand including the community. The ability to visiona future state for a community including alldimensions of the community. The ability toarticulate a vision and get buy in from a widevariety of people. Imagining a future state andsimultaneously the implications of getting there.

Project ManagementDefining project objectives and providing thedrive and determination to deliver successful,measurable outcomes. Building a project teamand getting them to work towards delivery of acommon goal. Using project plans and critical pathanalysis to assign tasks and timescales, monitorprogress and quality of outcomes.

Leadership in sustainable communitiesInspiring others at all levels to contribute asmuch as possible in their roles. Leading change,communicating vision, coaching and mentoring,developing future leaders, dealing with poorperformers and poor performance. Inspiringpeople to contribute to their communities tosustain them in the future. Enabling inwardinvestment to support sustainable communities,and managing the finances.

Breakthrough thinking/brokerageCreative thinking, making lateral connections,effective networking. Bringing together unusualcombinations of people, skills and plans toleverage each component and ending up withmuch more than the sum of the parts. Brokering,facilitating, and managing deals between verydifferent stakeholders in all aspects of sustainablecommunities. Thinking outside the box.

Team/partnership working within and betweenteams based on a shared sense of purposeA genuine desire for the team, collectively, to win.A ‘can do’ attitude which looks at problems aschallenges and opportunities, not risks andthreats. The ability to create a networkedenvironment where advice is sought and readilygiven, coaching is rewarded, and teams arecreated with the right skills, as well as the rightpaper qualifications.

Making it happen given constraintsProviding energy and focusing resources to ensureobjectives are reached. Understanding and beingrealistic about constraints, but not acceptingartificial barriers. Challenging unrealistic targetsor timescales. Looking for practical work around,focusing on the ‘vital few not the trivial many’ andusing the 80/20 rule. (Don’t wait for 100 per centperfection but go ahead when you are 80 per centthere). Much of this skill is rooted in project andprogramme management, with an emphasis hereon achieving the sustainable community vision inspite of all the conflicting interests, individual

ANNEX D: DEFINITIONS OF GENERIC SKILLS

104


agendas and adversarial behaviour that inevitablysurrounds such complex situations.

Process Management/Change ManagementMaking sure that processes are managed andcontinuously improved. Understanding theprocesses, and how to improve them. Embracingchange enthusiastically and working to driveout unnecessary processes or find processimprovements.

Financial management and appraisalEnsuring that financial, social and environmentalcosts are fully understood. Ability to create andmanage a business plan and associated contracts.Understanding risk/reward approaches for allstakeholders. Being able to appraise businesscases, proposals and contracts in order to makesound financial decisions. Understanding wherefinance for sustainable communities comes from,how to attract it, and how to construct a businesscase for long term sustainability and prosperityof a community. Specific emphasis needs to beplaced on being able to develop the business casefor ongoing sustainable communities, includingthe economic models which make long termsustainability possible.

Stakeholder managementCommunicating and building relationships withand between relevant stakeholders, understandingtheir relative impact and importance. Knowing thatstakeholder groups change all the time, so keepingpace with the new ones. Being able to bring keypeople and groups with you to retain critical masssupport for the vision and to solve the problems.This skill applies especially to politicians andincludes understanding how political motives drivepeople (including non-politicians) at different timesand for different reasons.

Analysis, decision making, learning frommistakes, evaluationEnsuring that decisions are taken in light ofavailable facts and using relevant past experience.Being able to identify trends and make decisionsbased on them. Analysing data to determineappropriate evidence to support decisions.Encouraging informed risk taking, and notpenalising failure where people are genuinelytrying to do the right thing. Sharing examples ofwhere projects have not worked out, and learningthe lessons so they ca be applied positively in newsituations. Coaching and mentoring to grow theoverall skills of a community, rather than justthose of yourself or your immediate team.

105

Annexes

CommunicationBeing able to communicate in diverse ways to awide range of professionals, the general public,the media, local schools, politicians, and businesspeople. Communicating vision, understanding howto manage information (the right message to theright people using the right media, then do itagain), manage mis-information, rumour andgossip. Being one step ahead.

Conflict resolutionUnderstanding the dynamics of conflict and howto achieve mutual agreement. Demonstrating theethics of good practice, including respect forall parties, tolerance of different people andperspectives, confidentiality and the importanceof honesty. Listening actively to others, andworking to formulate options and solutions.

Customer Awareness and how tosecure feedbackBeing able to identify customers (citizens), toengage in dialogue with them, and build enduringrelationships. Ensuring everyone in yourorganisation sees it as their responsibility to meetcustomer needs. Establishing customer prioritiesand concerns by communicating in a way thatappeals to them so that feedback is genuine.

In April 2003, Sir John Egan was asked by the Deputy PrimeMinister to conduct a review to consider the skills neededto help deliver the vision and aims of the SustainableCommunities Plan.

This report presents the findings of his review and seeks to:

● Clarify what the term ‘sustainable community’ means

● Identify who is responsible for leading the delivery ofsustainable communities

● Recognise the skills necessary to achieve sustainablecommunities

Essential reading for all local authorities, built-environmentprofessionals, learning institutions, developers and relatedinterest groups.

Website: www.odpm.gov.uk/eganreview

Further copies of this publication are available from:

RIBA Enterprises Ltd15 Bonhill StreetLondonEC2P 2EATel: 020 7256 7222Fax: 020 7374 2737E-mail: [email protected]

Website: www.ribabookshops.com

£20

ISBN: 1 85946 142 5

ISBN 1859461425

9 7 8 1 8 5 9 4 6 1 4 2 6

Egan Review Skills for Sustainable Communities

Documents

Transcript of Egan Review Skills for Sustainable Communities