Success of Regeneration
Assessing the Success of Regeneration
Measures to Assess Regeneration:
The success of economic regeneration is evaluated using indicators in three categories:
Social: Examples include life expectancy and demographics.
Economic: Examples include income, poverty, and employment.
Environmental: Examples include pollution and derelict land.
Different areas are compared using these measures to determine the success of regeneration projects.
Economic Measures of Regeneration Success
Economic Aim: To increase income and employment and decrease poverty.
Economic Indicators:
Income: Higher income levels indicate successful regeneration, leading to increased disposable income, spending power, local tax revenues, and economic opportunities.
Poverty: A decrease in the number of people living on low incomes indicates successful regeneration, allowing local authorities to invest in community services.
Employment: Higher employment levels, especially full-time and permanent roles, signify greater economic opportunities, increased spending power, and disposable income.
Change Measurement:
Relative Change: Considers the percentage change from the original number.
Example: Percentage change in employment rates.
Absolute Change: Considers the numerical difference between the original and new numbers.
Example: Total increase in the number of employed people.
Exam Tips for Measuring Impacts of Regeneration:
Timescales: Improvements, such as in educational attainment, may take years to materialize.
Areas Being Compared: Compare areas directly affected by the regeneration scheme or compare a regenerated area versus an undeveloped area.
Multiple Measures: Consider that while economic indicators may show success, social indicators might reveal negative impacts.
Measuring Social Progress
Measurement Methods:
Reductions in inequalities between and within areas.
Improvements in the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD).
Example: A reduction in health deprivation.
Demographic changes such as improved life expectancy and population growth.
Analyzing changes in indicators before and after a regeneration scheme will help measure its success
Social Measures of Regeneration Success
Social Indicators:
Health and Life Expectancy:
Regeneration leads to improved physical and mental health through better health facilities, outdoor spaces, living environments, and employment opportunities.
Signs of success include increased life expectancy, reduced infant mortality, and less risk of premature death.
Demographics:
More economic opportunities attract people, leading to population increases and a larger working-age population.
Access:
Regeneration projects that improve access (e.g., public transport, pedestrianized areas, cycle tracks) encourage people with mobility challenges to access services.
Improved access to affordable housing reduces the number of people receiving housing benefits and homelessness.
Education:
Increased percentage of young people leaving school with qualifications and accessing higher education.
Deprivation:
Analyzing the IMD scores before and after regeneration to show the difference in deprivation.
E.g. reduction in levels of crime
Inequality:
Regeneration can unintentionally create greater inequality as the area regenerated progresses, whilst other areas stagnate
Exam Tip on Subjectivity of Success
Success can be subjective, and improvements may not benefit all residents.
Improvements in the Living Environment
Monitoring Improvements:
Reductions in pollution levels.
Decreased amounts of abandoned and derelict land.
Environmental Measures of Regeneration Success
Environmental Indicators:
Pollution:
Less air pollution improves health.
Renewed habitats through the removal of water and soil pollution.
Example: Clearing 3 km of waterways and planting 4000 trees before the 2012 London Olympics.
Derelict Land:
Regenerating brownfield sites reduces derelict land and removes contaminants.
Green Space:
Creating more green spaces promotes healthier, more active lifestyles.
Worked Example: Regeneration and Improved Living Environment
Regeneration aims to make an area more attractive.
East London Regeneration for 2012 Olympic Games:
The Olympic site was built on 560 acres of brownfield land.
The Olympic Village was converted into modern housing, shops, restaurants, and bars.
Parkland was created and opened to the public.
This created vibrant living conditions and changed perceptions of the area.
Environmental Improvements:
Reducing water, air, and soil pollution renews habitats and encourages wildlife.
During the London Olympics, 4000 trees were planted, and 3 km of waterways were cleared.
The ecosystem flourished, with rare plants and animals returning.
This improved the living environment for both nature and people.
Urban Stakeholders & Regeneration Success
Context: In urban areas with higher population density, regeneration strategies are often judged against social indicators such as resident well-being and reducing inequality.
Example: The regeneration of Salford Quays
Impacts of the Salford Quays’ Regeneration Scheme
Background:
In the 1980s, Salford Docklands was characterized by derelict warehouses.
The name was changed to Salford Quays to shed its industrial image.
Salford Quays is located in Salford (Greater Manchester), near the Manchester Ship Canal.
Housing:
The suburb of Pendleton received investment to modernize 1300 houses, build 1500 new homes, and develop green spaces.
Transport / Facilities:
Improved transport infrastructure, including MetroLink Tram and pedestrianized waterfront areas.
New facilities such as the MGM cinema, Copthorne hotel, water sports center, The Lowry museum, and the Imperial War Museum were built.
Employment:
New, mainly service-based employment opportunities.
Attracted a younger population (median age = 35).
Unemployment nearly halved in 10 years.
153 businesses set up.
Over 23,000 new jobs created.
Other Investment:
£550 million MediaCityUK development, with the BBC relocating there.
Due to the regeneration initiated by Salford City Council (a key stakeholder), Salford Quays has become a desirable residential location with a growing population.
Problems and Conflicts
Almost a third of Salford's existing population live in highly deprived areas.
10,500 people live in places of extreme deprivation, while some neighboring areas have the highest levels of growth.
New housing is not affordable to the majority of locals.
In 2020, two-bedroom apartments in The Lightbox were on sale for £325,000.
The bottom 20% of workers in Salford earn £16,894 per year.
In 2012, only 24 of the 680 new jobs at the BBC in Salford had gone to local people.
In 2013, local historians and residents were upset when two iconic industrial quayside cranes were demolished, which were one of the last icons of Salford's industrial heritage.
The greatest improvement for Salford has been in the health category, from 7th most deprived to 12th.
As part of the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) for Salford (2019), crime has increased – 16th most deprived English local authority out of 317
Differing Views of Stakeholders
Salford City Council may view job creation as successful but be displeased that the IMD ranking worsened.
Existing residents welcome affordable housing but dislike increased traffic and unaffordable housing.
Local businesses welcome wealthier, younger people boosting profits but may suffer if relocation is necessary.
Measuring Changes in Urban Regeneration
Economic: Increasing average incomes and better-paid jobs.
Social: Reducing levels of deprivation.
Demographic Changes: Improving life expectancy and reduced health deprivation.
Environmental: Reducing pollution levels and derelict land.
Consideration of Each Variable
Economic: Often the primary driver, with national benefits sometimes prioritized over local views.
Social: Changes should cater to locals and not exclude or displace them.
Environmental: Even those in poor environments need consideration， and enhancement can attract residents, workers, and visitors.
Demographic Changes: An increase in younger, working-age people suggests improved economic prospects; a decrease in any age group is a negative indicator.
Stakeholder Criteria for Success in Urban Regeneration
A stakeholder’s lived experience of a place can affect their judgement of urban regeneration and whether it has successfully changed the place, as well as the image ofit.
Urban regeneration involves diverse stakeholders with differing expectations.
Locals
Local government
National government
Developers (property, business)
Migrants
Local businesses
Stakeholders’ Perceptions of Urban Regeneration
National governments and planners
Roles - Resolving conflicts over regeneration, Prioritising national goals, Planning permission, Pump priming to start large national developments
Possible Success Measures - Levels of internal and international migration to fill job vacancies, Increased levels of regional gross value added (GVA), Reduced dependency on benefits
Local governments
Roles - Tackling inequality in the communities, Balance out the economic, social and environmental needs of an area, Small or local regeneration schemes, Strategies to help regeneration e.g. alcohol free zones, city centre ambassadors
Possible Success Measures - Census data, IMD data trends, Job creation numbers, Amount of derelict land regenerated
Local residents
Roles - Vote for local and national political parties, Form pressure groups, Lobby councils
Possible Success Measures - Better housing and community facilities, Improved environment, More job opportunities, Rising incomes, Improved health and life expectancy, Increased access to services
Local businesses
Roles - Invest in schemes, Lobby councils
Possible Success Measures - Changes in profit, Hiring rates of new employees, Increased population, especially the young
Developers
Roles - Funding of schemes
Possible Success Measures - Amount of profit made, Value of the shares, Increase in land value, Increase in property prices
Differing Viewpoints Explained
Differing viewpoints arise from diverse social, economic, and environmental expectations.
Developers prioritize economic interests, while local residents prioritize social interests.
Example: Post-2012 London Olympics, the Athletes’ Village was sold to Qatari Diar, transforming it into the East Village with over 2,800 homes.
Properties are now worth £601,000, with rents starting at £1,750 per month.
The East Village is now worth approximately 3 times what the company paid for it.
The environment was improved during the regeneration of Lea Valley, but gentrification increased house prices, making them unaffordable for original residents.
Rural Stakeholders & Regeneration Success
Large-scale developments are less common in rural areas, but these areas have come under pressure from:
Housing developers
Tourists
City-dwellers seeking a country life
Some decisions on rural regeneration and rebranding strategies generate more conflict within local communities than others, such as:
Renewable energy
Developments, such as wind and solar farms, often lead to NIMBYism e.g. local people are for renewable energy but don’t want wind turbines behind their house
Housing developments
Local residents often oppose housing developments, despite knowing more houses are needed:
Air and noise pollution created during construction
The extra traffic congestion created on the roads
Developers attempt to dismiss the concerns of existing residents by calling them NIMBYs
Derelict land
Local people in rural areas welcome nature establishing itself in former industrial sites e.g. quarry pits
Regeneration plans seeking to build on these rural brownfield sites are often met with negative responses from local residents
Conservation
The conservation of natural areas is often an important element of regeneration schemes for locals
There is an expectation that regeneration plans should have a negligible impact on local wildlife and ecosystems.
Local people and conservation groups (e.g. Wildlife Trust, The National Trust) will not support projects which fail to do this
Regeneration along the North Antrim coast
Impacts of regeneration at the Giant’s Causeway
County Antrim is located in the north-east of Northern Ireland
The Giant’s Causeway was designated a World Heritage Site in 1986 because of its unique geology and striking landscape
Attracts over 1 million tourists per year
A fire destroyed the old visitor centre in 2000
The Giant’s causeway visitor centre Provides 75 full-time jobs
Challenges for local communities:
Overtourism (too many visitors)
The money spent on parking etc goes to the National Trust, not the local community
Community access to the site is now limited by the National Trust, despite having had access to it for thousands of year
65% of the community were not involved in the tourist industry, so make little monetary gain or contribute to tourism development
Criteria of success for different stakeholders
National Trust - increased visitor numbers, increased revenue
Moyle District Council - more employment, higher tax revenues
Local community - less disruption due to tourist numbers
Translink (public transport network) - increased demand for services, more profits
Local businesses (e.g. cafes, craft shops, hotel) - more customers, more profit
Conflict created via proposed golf course
Development plans to create the Bushmills Dunes Golf Resort and Spa at Runkerry
Runkerry is 500 metres away from the Giant’s Causeway - a UNESCO World Heritage Site, which led to objections from environmentalists (e.g. the National Trust, UNESCO)
Due to strong opposition and inadequate finances, the golf course did not go ahead
Variables to Measure Changes
As with urban settings, the success of rural regeneration can be judged using four variables:
Economic e.g. increasing average incomes and the number of better, paid jobs
Social e.g. reducing levels of deprivation
Demographic changes e.g. improving life expectancy and reduced health deprivation
Environmental e.g. reducing pollution levels and the amount of derelict land
The Egan Wheel is a useful technique to use when judging the success of rural regeneration strategies
It can also be used in urban settings
Using the Egan Wheel to plan sustainable regeneration schemes
Stakeholder Criteria for Success in Rural Regeneration
Rural regeneration involves diverse stakeholders with differing expectations.
Locals
Local government
National government
Developers (property, business)
Land owners
Local businesses
Farmers
A stakeholder’s lived experience of a place can affect their judgement of rural regeneration and whether it has successfully changed the place, as well as the image of it
Successful rural regeneration may involve:
Better leisure and retail
More jobs
More visitors
Better housing
Higher biodiversity
Rural areas which cause the most amount of conflict are:
National Parks
The Urban-rural fringe
Greenbelts
Stakeholders’ Perceptions on Rural Regeneration
National governments and planners
More likely to have a perceived sense of a rural place rather than a lived experience, so the needs of the local community might not be met
Development plans will be carefully considered due to the government’s responsibility to protect rural areas for future generations (e.g. National Parks)
Local governments
The long-term health of the local economy and the traditions and heritage of the area are more likely to be considered by members of the local government
These members are more likely to have a lived experience of the place they work in
Local residents
Residents may have a lengthy lived experience of a place, with multiple generations having lived there
Some residents will welcome regeneration, especially if they will benefit from it
Some residents will not want the area to change, especially if the regeneration plan is not sympathetic to the character of the area
Local businesses
Will encourage a regeneration scheme that will expand their market and customer base
A new development will be viewed more positively if it involves the local business community in the decision-making process
Local businesses may view a development project negatively if it increases competition in the area
Second home owners and visitors
People who are regular visitors or own a second home in a rural area, will have a different lived experience to the locals
Visitors and holiday home owners are mostly seasonal (over the summer months), so may favour regeneration projects that improve their experience over that time period