« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
Planning and Community Involvement in Scotland
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report explores the extent to which planning decisions in Scotland are based on an accurate assessment of the views' of the affected local people. It considers: -
- whether those that are involved in the planning process represent the broader population;
- whether opposition to planning applications is evident when a balanced cross section of a local population are questioned; and
- explores the effectiveness of current public consultation on planning applications.
Three planning applications in three authorities were studied during February and March 2004. Interviews were conducted with planning officers and councillors to gauge their perceptions of local opinion, people who had written to the council on the planning applications were surveyed to ascertain what type of people volunteer their views; and in each authority two focus groups were held to test opinion on the application among a group broadly compatible with the socio economic make up of the local community.
MAIN FINDINGS
We found that those who volunteered views to the local authority came from a particular cross section of the community dominated by the middle aged and the elderly. People under 35 are largely absent from the process. Retired people dominate the responses. White Caucasians dominated the responses to all three planning applications.
Evidence was unclear but it appears that people in full time employment are also under- represented among respondents. Further investigation is required on this point.
Opponents to planning applications are far more motivated than those who support a scheme and their opposition is more deep-rooted.
Women are slightly more likely than men to become involved in the planning process, but significantly more likely to oppose an application.
In only one of our three study areas was the over-whelming opposition expressed in letters to planning authorities reflected when views were sought from a balanced sample of the local community. We feel that this is an area worthy of further research.
Planning officers and councillors were poor at interpreting the local views. On all three applications, the planning officers' or the councillor's interpretation of local sentiment was at odds with what we found when we tested it.
There was a complete mismatch by authority one between how the planning officer and the ward councillor interpreted public sentiment and the public view established in this research.
Even in authority two where the planning authority had the most effective consultation programme the planning officer misjudged local views. There may therefore be a question mark over the consultation techniques the council employed.
In the third authority, the local ward member seems to have been out of touch with the views of his local community. The ward member believed that the mood of the village was overwhelmingly negative towards the application. In fact the sentiments expressed in the focus groups show that grudging acceptance was a more accurate assessment of the situation - few people cared either way about the application.
CONCLUSIONS
It is clear that, with the exception of authority two, most people feel completely disconnected from the planning process. Local authorities and developers were judged to be poor at both providing clear and timely information and consulting about planning applications. Furthermore the postal surveys show that people perceive councils to be less good at consulting on planning matters than on other matters.
As a result, information could only be obtained through the local media, from friends and neighbours and the rumour mill. This vacuum allows the NIMBYs and small issue objectors to dominate the consultation and information agendas to the exclusion of the rest of the community.
There is a very low level of knowledge about the 'local plan/planning policy process', with most people believing it starts and finishes with planning applications.
The focus group discussions suggest strongly that if local authorities were prepared to try and engage local communities in a more transparent and timely manner, then local people, particularly those judged to be hard to reach groups, would be more inclined to get involved.
In terms of what consultation techniques should be used, the groups were supportive of the more traditional types of activities (leaflets, letters, meetings, media etc), rather than the use of the Internet and e-mail. People seem to want methods of consultation which allows interaction in small groups (focus groups or small meetings).
« Previous | Contents | Next »