Governance & management: What can and should the role of government, business and communities be in the place-keeping of open space? Lessons from MP4 Green Growth: New Shoots 10 th May 2012 Harry Smith Heriot-Watt University

Place- keeping: Place Process Product

Governance – What is it? Governance of open space is key to its quality and its contribution to society, but what is it? – the sphere of relations between government and other actors in civil society or non-governmental sectors – including the private sector & community; – the processes of interaction between these in defining their roles and relationships. Government does not work in isolation but through these types of relations. In MP4, focus on the local community.

What affects governance? Outcome of any open space place-making project and/or place-keeping activity is the result of the combination: – purpose of the project or activity; – setting (large park, small square, etc.); – people involved; – process to involve these. People and process are what governance is about.

Benefits of inclusive governance Traditionally a technocratic approach in PK, but benefits of community involvement include: – Local knowledge – Community understanding – Legitimacy and ‘buy-in’ – Improved relationship between policymakers and the community – Community empowerment & social cohesion – Active citizenship &social justice – More appropriate services

Issues in inclusive governance But wider engagement also raises issues: – Range of community members involved – Timescales & nature of public sector processes – Nature of PK of open space – Issues of power (in both inclusive and technocratic approaches)

Several approaches in governance: MP4 pilots & model agreements Pilot/model agreement Sector/actor GovernmentBusinessCommunityIntermediary Sheffield Sheaf Valley, UK Professional steering group Urban SplashFriends of Park Gothenburg, SECoordinated administrative levels Flemish Land Agency (VLM), BE Regional agencyFarmers / landowners Steilshoop NID, Hamburg, DE Property owners BIDs, Hamburg, DEPublic authority approval Property owners Firth Park, Sheffield, UK Local authority Friends of Park Emmen Revisited, NLMunicipality & other govt. bodies Local businessesLocal community representative bodies Municipal facilitator organisation GetMove, Hamburg, DE Youth Association Supporting NGO (Lawaetz Foundation)

Key findings from MP4 (1) Respect and dialogue local ownership & responsibility Public participation possibilities & limitations need to be clear from the start Engagement in projects depends on prospect of mutual benefits & trust in the lead organisation. Who may be engaged, how they may benefit and what they may contribute need to be considered. Scale & nature of the open space will affect the scope for community involvement in PK.

Key findings from MP4 (2) Tendency to think that PK is the responsibility of the public sector. Wider engagement in PK through formal or informal agreements. Community engagement in PM processes can help establish trust & working practices for continuing involvement in PK. Uncertainty within the public sector can be barrier to wider engagement in PK or can increase the length of the process.

Back to the question So, what can and should the role of government, business and communities be in the place-keeping of open space? – There are many possibilities, and opportunities should be created to explore these and give them a chance to develop. – But there are also limitations, and expectations from the various stakeholders should be realistic. – Depends on the context. Context is not everything, but it is a lot! An example: Barger-Compascuum and Emmen Revisited, The Netherlands.