There is no universally agreed definition of urban regeneration. As has been acknowledged elsewhere, however, a useful working definition is: ‘The holistic process of reversing economic, social and physical decay in areas where it has reached a stage where market forces alone will not suffice.’ While this definition might be generally acceptable, there has been uncertainty about the appropriate spatial level to make effective urban regeneration interventions. Over the past 20 years or so, Government regeneration programmes in England have been relatively uniform time limited interventions targeted at local reas/neighbourhoods or parts of towns and cities, out of context from the surrounding economy.5 There are, however, indications that this is changing. Urban regeneration is increasingly being recognised within mainstream policy spatially as a multi-level activity, enabled by recent evidence about how functional economies work in different places.

This paper considers whether ‘place-shaping’, as defined by Lyons, does represent a change in the rationale for urban regeneration by consolidating new evidence about functional economies within regeneration policy. The key affirmative test is whether the flexible design of different solutions for different places, integrating interventions from the functional economy down to the very local, is recognised in national regeneration policy. The least favourable outcome is that ‘place-shaping’ becomes the covering term to describe a framework to regulate cross-organisational programmes imposed in a standardised way across local government.

UK Department of Communities and Local Government
enquiries@communities.gsi.gov.uk
Paul Hildreth

//

29/09/2007

research

Urban Policy > Urban environment

Urban renewal