community ownership of alternative energy resources

QUARTERLY MAGAZINE OF THE

THE VOICE OF THE MEMBERSHIP NO. 287, 2012 ISSUE 3

Issn: 1367-3882

COMMUNITY OWNERSHIP OF ALTERNATIVE ENERGY RESOURCES

r


$PNNVOJUZ
BTTFUT
TPDJBM
DBQJUBM
BOE
SFOFXBCMF
FOFSHZ

r


3FHJPOBM
%FWFMPQNFOU
JO
5VSLFZ

Comment and Debate, pp. 4-5

Regions No 287 Autumn 2012

THE CASE FOR HS2 FROM A REGIONAL, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVE: DEBATE IN A UK PARLIAMENTARY SEMINAR Chia-Lin Chen, University College London, University of London, UK Introduction line is troublesome and costly” (Chen Mega-transport projects as significant as high-speed trains (hereafter HST) involving huge investment are unavoidably c o n t r ove r s i a l . Despite the January announcement of a ‘go-ahead’ for phase one of High Speed Two (hereafter HS2), the February seminar in Parliament was emblematic of the uncertain nature of mega-transport projects. The debate was chaired by MP Louise Ellman and joined by Professor Iain Docherty, Mr Michael Ward, Professor Roger Vickerman, and Professor Henry Overman to examine evidence from the social sciences which could contribute to debates on the future of HST in the UK. The whole debate vividly reflected the complex issue of the HST investment. This paper discusses how three key interwoven aspects- policy, theory, and practice for the HS2 case in the UK - were contested in the debate.

Policy: HS2 – uncertainty or opportunity? Prior to the arrival of High-Speed 1 (the Channel Tunnel Rail Link), the UK was well-known for its incremental approach to upgrading key main lines in contrast to the approach of its French neighbour which has implemented new dedicated HST lines. The stillfresh experience of modernising the West Coast Main Line has proved that “resolving constraints on an existing

Professor Roger Vickerman, Professor Iain Docherty, Louise Ellman MP, Michael Ward and Professor Henry Overman. ©RGS-IBG 4

and Wray, 2011). Due to the rejection by the UK government of investment in additional motorways and the expansion of the third runway at Heathrow, it would appear natural to see cross-party support for HS2. However, on whether it is the correct decision to make this move, the debate manifested a fundamental difference in judgment on HS2: does it represent u ncer t a i nt y or a n oppor t u n it y ? Those who judge it with uncertainty more than as an opportunit y tend to be sceptical. Professor Overman insisted on his strong suspicion of the HS2 project on all counts: providing uncertain direct benefi t (the value of time saving, passenger numbers, costs, revenues), the exacerbation of regional imbalance, and modest or even negative environmental impacts. He stressed that, to the best of his knowledge, no one had assessed how HST could deliver a critical mass of wider impacts. Therefore, he remained unconvinced that this was the best way for the government to spend money. Instead, he argued that the opportunity costs of HS2 were so large that alternative schemes would more effectively tackle congestion and with better returns. On the other hand, the judgement wh ich perceived H S2 to be a n opportunity, despite the unavoidable uncertaint y, tended to ask how to achieve the objective and what is lacking. As Professor Docherty stated clearly at the outset, “in the UK we’re not building new roads, we don’t want to expand Heathrow, but there is a feeling that something has to be done. That something is HS2.” However, the question is whether in the way that HS2 has been developed, will it eventually ach ieve it s cla imed object ives to address the North / South divide or alternatively just prove to be a costly white elephant? Professor Docherty argued that “the real issues are about the extent to which we can achieve Sir Rod Eddington’s prescription to move regional demand and activity to where it needs to be. But this takes a lot more than transport infrastructure in itself.” Similarly, Mr Ward reported the fi ndings of his co-authored work

Professor Iain Docherty ©RGS-IBG ‘High Speed Rail: Is ever yone on board ? ’ to argue that the cur rent HS2 project is not a satisfactory case because the concern has been stressed on measurable cost and benefits without an overarching national strategy. HS2 should be planned together with the constraint of airport capacity, economic development, spatial planning, and the environment.

Theory and evidence: Transport versus social, economic, and regional changes When the debate is centred around uncertainty and an unsatisfactory case currently developed for HS2, Professor Vickerman brought theoretical discussion in: how transport relates to social and economic changes. Socially, he emphasised the current scattered pattern of family settlement. Economically, he stressed the importance of face-toface contact to negotiate and fi nalise a significant deal, which could not be replaced by advanced information and communication technology. This point has been well-proven by Graham and Marvin (1996) that the growth of telecommunications has approximately been parallel with face-to-face business contact over time. Hence, the time-space shrinkage of HST could potentially assist regional cities to enjoy fast inter-city connectivity with the national capital without the need

In Depth for relocation, and reduce regional inequality. Yet, the econom ic a nd socia l restructuring in post-industrial society has been concurrent with a widening reg iona l inequa l it y. Doubts have been cast upon HST investments for addressing regional polarisation. Professor Docherty indicated that “the overall academic record has shown very little hard evidence about the impact of transport development.” Intriguingly, two approaches were disputed. One approach argued that the diminished transport cost will expand markets and imperfect competition to favour places with large scale economies. Professor Overman cited the work of “new economic geography” pioneered by Paul Krugman to argue that “reducing transport costs between ‘core’ (the South) and ‘periphery’ (the North) may actually increase disparities, not reduce them.” Another approach with empirical evidence has, on the contrary, shown some positive agglomeration effects for large regional cities. Professor Vickerman adduced the experience from mainland Europe to argue that HST has not been particularly centralising towards capital cities; instead, regional concentration towards provincial cities occurred in Lyon and Lille. Likewise, a recent empirical study of the British Inter-City 125/225 has concluded that HST boosted provincial cities within 2 hours to and from London, but the effects are not universal or automatic in particular for post-industrial towns (Chen and Hall, 2011a). A warning is needed here. The oversimplified argument of centralisation and decentralisation should be interpreted carefully. Professor Vickerman stressed that there is a complex restructuring process; one aspect is the increase of centralisation within the region as has occurred in Lille and Lyon; the other aspect is the decentralisation of specific functions within a company to a regional branch rather than relocation. This pattern brings about a largely neglected and challenging issue of regional inequality within a region. An intra-regional comparative study has demonstrated that both regional capitals, Manchester and Lille, were enhanced and revived with the arrival of HST but not necessarily were their nearby subregions (Chen and Hall, 2011b).

Practice: The need for intervention mechanism, the connection of HST hub, and the intra-regional network Despite the disagreement concerning the wider economic impacts, it is widely agreed that the achievement of wider economic benefits needs more than HST by itself. Three aspects need to be improved for the future of HS2. Fi r st ly, a n i nclusive approach is needed. It goes without saying that though HS2 represents a great opportunity, transport itself is not enough to transform a regional economy. The need for an inclusive intervention mechanism to maximize the growth opportunities is crucial. As Michael Ward stressed, “What is almost certainly true, however, is that economic benefits are unlikely to accrue to the Northern regions as a whole without some positive efforts to steer and encourage them.” Secondly, the connection to a regional super-hub is important. Professor Sir Peter Hall, one of the seminar participants, drew attention to a lack of connection for the new HST station in Birmingham Curzon Street: “the puzzle is that it has been planned in a silo” because Curzon Street Birmingham is 800 metres away from New Street Station and there is no integration. The Lille experience provides a relevant lesson: the 400 metre distance between Lille Flandres and Lille Europe stations was carefully designed to make the transition as smooth as possible, though it is not perfect. Thirdly, intra-regional connectivity is important too, but was not discussed in the debate. How the benefits could be spread out from regional capitals into the wider region is a critical issue. The fi ndings from the Nord-Pas-de-Calais region in France demonstrated that the new TGV-Nord line was exploited by the region through funding electrification of existing conventional lines to serve the region as widely as possible. The regional transformation proved to be slow but positive (Chen and Hall, 2011b). This provides key implications for Northern England. The existing West Coast Main Line, the Lancashire electrification expected to be completed by 2016, and the planned HS2 will need to be integrated in order to remove the long-lasting North/South inter-regional unequal structure. Hall and Wray (2011) have proposed a detailed scheme to serve major centres in North West England.

Conclusion The existing evidence is contested and the final verdict on HS2 is still yet to come. However, one thing is clear. It is that HST will not automatically deliver desirable results or necessarily bring negative impacts. Instead, the challenge depends on far-seeing interventions which are made to achieve the maximum synergy of transport investment with other conditions. This raises the question ‘what is a mega-transport project’, discussed by Professor Nick Tyler in a recent talk at University College London: whether have we been constrained by the value pervasively pursed in the UK in projects: ‘on time, on budget, and value for money’ and, thus, blur wider benefits beyond the transport projects which could potentially exist? From the standpoint of a trainee-planner, I would argue that a strategic network and structure need to be developed soon to exploit HS2 widely in order to achieve its wider social, economic, and regional ambitions. Acknowledgement: I would like to thank Professor Sir Peter Hall for his great generosity in proof-reading my draft.

References Chen, C.-L. & Hall, P. (2011a) “The impacts of high-speed trains on British economic geography: a study of the UK’s InterCity 125/225 and its effects,” Journal of Transport Geography, 19, pp. 689-704. Chen, C.-L. & Hall, P. (2011b) “The wider spatial-economic impacts of high-speed trains: a comparative case study of Manchester and Lille subregions,” Journal of Transport Geography, doi:10:1016/j.jtrangeo.2011.09.002. Chen, C.-L. & Wray, I. (2011) “Can highspeed rail save the regions?,” Town and Country Planning, 80, pp. 119-27. Graham, S. and Marvin, S. (1996) Telecommunications and the City: Electronic Spaces, Urban Places, London, Routledge. Ha ll, P. and Wray, I. (2011) “High-speed gateways?,” Town and Country Planning, 80, pp. 322-7.

Chia-Lin Chen is currently a PhD student at the Bartlett School of Planning at University College London. Her research interests include the issues around regional and urban uneven development, urban regeneration and regional transformation, the relationship between transport investment and urban dynamism. [email protected]

5

Association News

Regions No 287 Autumn 2012

Regions THE VOICE OF THE MEMBERSHIP

‘Global warming’ is a classic case of a global problem which requires ‘local’ solutions. The papers in the Regional Survey of this issue, attempt to explore the possibilities of such solutions. Our Guest Editors (Geoff Whittam and George Callaghan) draw together five summary papers that were delivered at the RSA Research Network, Acquiring Community Assets, the Role of Social Capital and Establishment of Alternative Energy Resources, hosted at the Gigha Hotel on the community-owned isle of Gigha off the coast of Argyll in Scotland, in March 2012. The context for the workshop and indeed the Research Network can be found in the growing emphasis being placed on the development of alternative energy systems by policy-makers as ‘global warming’ continues to move to the top of political agendas. What is increasingly apparent is that whilst the majority of people support alternative energy systems, the introduction of such schemes is not without opposition. It would appear that this opposition is somewhat diminished when the ‘community’ has a stake in the alternative energy resource. The common theme amongst the papers is to highlight differing approaches to community involvement with alternative energy schemes. There are contributions from researchers and practitioners from around Europe and North America. Our ‘In Depth’ article by Arda Akbulut, RSA Ambassador in Turkey, looks at the background to regional development in Turkey and the establishment of RDA’s. This issue also contains articles that provoke debate on controversial subjects, including the regional benefits (and costs) associated with ‘mega-transport projects’ such as the high-speed trains investment announced in the UK; and the potential economic impacts of gambling casinos and their possible negative social consequences.

Regional Studies Association, PO Box 2058, Seaford, East Sussex BN25 4QU, UK Tel: 00 44 (0)1323 899 698, Fax: 00 44 (0)1323 899 798 [email protected], www.regionalstudies.org Registered Charity No: 1084165 Registered Company, Limited By Guarantee In England No: 4116288 28

Typesetting and Printing by Sussex Living Ltd 128 High Street, Hurstpierpoint, West Sussex BN6 9PX. Tel: 01273 835355 Email: [email protected]