Are we on the cusp of a renaissance in regional planning for growth?

The UK faces the stubbornly difficult twin challenges of the need to drive productivity growth in a way that closes regional inequality gaps, whilst achieving the major ramping up of housebuilding urgently required to address the affordability crisis. There is growing consensus that a more muscular form of regional or sub-regional planning, backed by more ambitious devolution of powers, offers a major part of the solution. The excellent recently published papers on Britain’s Growing Regional Divides , co-authored by a group brought together by the Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government at the Harvard Kennedy School , provides compelling evidence that "public support currently amplifies, rather than corrects for, regional inequalities." In other words, it is doing the exact opposite of levelling up. With support for a long-term strategic approach also being emphasised by The RSA (The royal society for arts, manufactures and commerce) -led UK Urban Futures Commission, Resolution Foundation , Centre for Cities and others in recent publications, a groundswell of consensus is building to make some bold strategic planning reforms. We need to be able to spatially shape the type and scale of regional growth we want to achieve, informed by robust economic strategy, and to use this to prioritise and direct place-based investment where it is most needed, with strategic place leadership and governance being attuned to support strategic delivery whilst protecting local democratic accountability.

To many observers it seems obvious that spatial and transport planning must relate to the same spatial geography given everything we know about the importance of supporting agglomeration economies and the need to realise the potential for transport to act as a catalyst for growth. And of course this is how city-regions work in practice in the way they are structured around travel-to-work movements or river catchments, for example. Yet our current system leaves spatial planning at the local level and transport planning at the regional or national level. We have an inconsistent and to many an incoherent patchwork of arrangements across the country. Regional planning outside London was abolished in England in 2010 and although Regional Spatial Strategies are still being pursued north of the border, they are non-statutory and do not have a status in planning decisions. With Strategic Development Plans being rolled out for each of the four regions of Wales, backed by an Economic Action Plan, might there be a case for applying an approach akin to this more widely across the UK?

Certainly, there is strong justification for extending the Mayoral Combined Authority model, and going further with responsibilities for setting and implementing integrated spatial strategies, backed by funding, land assembly and other delivery powers. Outside of the main metropolitan areas it is not yet clear what these would look like but a greater consistency of approach would be beneficial. In certain target areas for investment, other delivery mechanisms such as development corporations will be needed to expedite delivery. Beyond integrating major transport, residential and commercial development planning, given the need for decarbonisation and nature-based solutions, there is a strong case for integrating strategic energy, water, social and green infrastructure. But how do we avoid the risks of this next generation regional plans getting ‘over-loaded’ and bogged down with complexity?

Some of our work at 奥雅纳 in recent years provides insights to inform the kind of approach we need to see more widely applied, backed by stronger powers. The Thames Estuary: The 2050 Vision , prepared for the Thames Estuary 2050 Growth Commission, sets a clear, integrated vision for growth. And to the west of London, the Joint Spatial Planning Framework prepared for the Heathrow Strategic Planning Group partnership of local authorities enabled seven councils to look beyond differing views over the merits of expanding Heathrow Airport, to agree a strategic approach to cross-boundary land use and infrastructure planning. This was backed by an Economic Development Vision and Action Plan to maximise the economic productivity, skills, jobs and business development across the area in a coordinated way. Often major rail infrastructure provides the backbone for strategic planning. Ongoing work for East West Rail is looking to optimise the growth potential around each of the proposed Oxford-Cambridge Corridor stations. For each of the HS2 stations we have worked with HS2 Ltd and partners on strategic planning and delivery mechanisms that seek to maximise urban regeneration potential. There also many fantastic examples across mainland Europe, as the METREX - The Network of European Metropolitan Regions and Areas helps to promote.

Whilst each of these examples of regional, sub-regional and pan-regional planning respond to a very different set of challenges and opportunities, they all demonstrate the merits of a strategic partnership-based approach to combining spatial growth and transport planning with economic development strategy. An approach presents a confident vision, aids impactful decision-making and attracts inward investment.

As we look to improve the way the UK planning system functions, we need to need to maximise the value of huge planned investments in upgrading transport, energy, water and digital networks over the coming years. This includes ensuring that strategic infrastructure planning is closely integrated with spatial growth of the right type, that it's in the right place and at the right scale. Given the extent and speed of change required to avert growing socio-economic inequalities whilst addressing environmental and productivity challenges, the case for strong regional planning has never been more apparent. ??