Written evidence submitted by English
Heritage
English Heritage is the Government's statutory adviser
on all matters relating to the historic environment in England.
We are a non-departmental public body established under the National
Heritage Act 1983 to help protect England's historic environment
and promote awareness, understanding and enjoyment of it.
English Heritage has extensive experience of regeneration
programmes, both through our own area-based grant schemes, those
of the Heritage Lottery Fund with whom we work closely, and through
the expertise and guidance we offer to local authorities and other
stakeholders involved in regeneration projects involving historic
buildings and areas.
KEY POINTS
— Heritage-led
regeneration has proven effectiveness in terms of its economic[74]
and social[75]
impact—it has benefits in terms of establishing a "virtuous
circle" of economic activity as a result of added confidence
in localities.
— It
reflects local issues and engages local communities.
— Assessment
criteria governing bids to the Regional Growth Fund should be
widened, and the £1 million threshold for bids lowered in
future rounds.
— Pressure
on local authority resources and capacity needs to be addressed
if they are to maximise their contribution to regeneration activity.
— The
impact of regeneration schemes (including heritage-led regeneration)
is often to be seen in the long term, and this factor needs to
inform future strategy.
— Relatively
small scale funding can be critical in creating the right kind
of conditions for larger scale investors to become involved.
— There
is a role for "arms-length" Government agencies to offer
their knowledge and skills in particular types of regeneration
to local authorities and other bodies with the support and endorsement
of Government.
— Government
needs to continue to take a coordinating role to regeneration
activity and to commit the necessary funding when circumstances
allow—both to ensure that activity and resources are directed
to the areas most in need and to take advantage of "multiplier"
and synergy effects of complementary projects.
— Flexibility
and ability to react to changing circumstances must be built into
the Government's approach.
Q. How effective is the Government's approach
to regeneration likely to be? What benefits is the new approach
likely to bring?
It is worth noting that the approach set out by the
Government in Regeneration to Enable Growth takes a very
wide definition of what constitutes regeneration, and examines
almost everything that is currently being done with the objective
of driving economic growth nationally. It also has a significant
emphasis on the areas of decentralisation of decision making and
reform of the frameworks within which regeneration operates, particularly
planning and local government. This is not the same as the more
widely understood definition of regeneration, which more often
includes projects and programmes specifically intended to revitalise
economically under-performing geographic areas and industries
and equalise economic disparities between regions. While each
of the areas set out by the Government for action clearly contributes
to core regeneration objectives of economic, social and environmental
improvements, it is when the totality of initiatives and projects
are coordinated that the regeneration benefits greatly exceed
the sum of investment.
The interest of English Heritage in the regeneration
sector lies primarily in the long-term advantages that flow from
heritage-led regeneration: those that benefit the historic environment
(the refurbishment and reuse of historic buildings and areas as
part of wider regeneration projects) and those that benefit the
local community (the economic, social and environmental impact
of such projects). Nevertheless, there are now a significant number
of other benefits from such projects that are well understood
and which often form part of regeneration strategies—in
areas such as sustainability, tourism, local distinctiveness and
sense of community around a place. There are significant economic
impacts, both in terms of the economic value of work undertaken
and the leverage effects of funding secured.[76]
Attractive local environments and quality of place
are also important elements in investor confidence and public
perceptions of quality of place and liveability—careful
intervention in the form of heritage led regeneration can help
create a virtuous circle of increased confidence, investment,
economic vitality and care for the local environment. Research
for English Heritage in 2009 demonstrated the positive and significant
relationship between the historic environment and sense of place.[77]
Any analysis of the regeneration sector and the strategies
that will be put in place over the next few years needs to be
considered against the realities of likely funding. It is clear
that physical regeneration activity will be much reduced as a
result of overall public spending reductions, although much of
the need for such projects remains in the form of under-performing
areas of the country and continuing pockets of deprivation.
In this respect, heritage-led regeneration represents
a neat fit with the current emphasis on localism and decisions
being made at the closest level possible to those areas and communities
involved. Viewed from this perspective, heritage-led regeneration
represents a "micro" level of regeneration as against
the "macro" level of nationwide strategies and policies.
Projects that place individual heritage assets and historic areas
at their centre almost always reflect local issues. These small
scale schemes ensure a viable use for important elements of our
heritage that have significant community value.
Within this context, there are a number of comments
that English Heritage would wish to make.
— Given
current funding constraints, the emphasis within the Government's
approach on economic growth and the reform of the regulatory framework
is understandable. Nevertheless, it will be important not to overlook
the importance of physical regeneration schemes and the role that
they can play. Environmental, economic and social regeneration
of underperforming areas are all closely interlinked, and it is
doubtful if a strategy that focuses on one of the three strands
to the exclusion of the others will be entirely successful.
— RDA
funding has been hugely important in recent years in regeneration
terms, and has played a highly significant role in some of the
most successful examples of heritage-led regeneration, including:
— Grainger
Town in Newcastle;
— Chatham
Historic Dockyard;
— Ancoats
and New Islington in Manchester; and
— Liverpool
waterfront.
— The
level of resources available from the Regional Growth Fund, while
providing a route to funding for some regeneration activity, will
not be able to adequately fill this gap. While we have been encouraged
to learn that some of the bids to the fund in Round 1 have contained
proposals with an historic environment element, it remains to
be seen if they will be successful. As above, the emphasis in
the assessment criteria on the creation of private sector jobs
and economic growth is understandable in the context of current
economic circumstances. Nevertheless, we would strongly argue
that these criteria should be made more flexible and allow greater
scope and encouragement for bids relating to environmental improvements
and place-based projects in later rounds. We would also hope that
the £1 million threshold for bids would be relaxed, to enable
a greater number of small scale and locally focused projects to
receive support. This would allow for a much more rounded approach
to the many problems apparent in those areas of the country in
need of regeneration.
— RDAs
also played a role along with the Homes & Communities Agency
(HCA) in site assembly and remediation of contaminated land to
create sites attractive to developers—in effect, "derisking"
them. There is no certainty that the HCA will continue this role
even if it is asked to take on some of the more problematic RDA
assets. Government needs to consider how it can encourage partnerships
between the public and private sectors to continue this derisking
task on brownfield sites. We believe there is a role for English
Heritage expertise to assist in finding solutions on those sites
that contain heritage assets.
— Tax
Increment Financing, as referenced in the CLG document, may offer
an alternative source of funding for local authorities although
much of the detail remains to be confirmed. If TIF systems are
to be established, we would propose that local authorities should
be enabled to spend the funds collected on environmental improvements
(including heritage assets) where appropriate.
— There
can be no doubt that the reality in terms of funding for regeneration
schemes for the next few years is very clear. This issue is further
exacerbated by the fact that at the same time as available funding
is becoming much scarcer and harder to secure, local authorities
are also losing much-needed capacity and expertise through reductions
in staff with a consequent impact on their ability to prepare
for and undertake regeneration programmes. Measures to mitigate
this issue are urgently required if it is not to have a major
impact on local outcomes, particularly in the light of the localism
agenda.
— Similarly,
funding from local authorities to third sector organisations have
either been reduced or will be reduced in the coming financial
year. This is having a significant impact on the ability of these
organisations to carry out locally based and highly responsive
regeneration work.
— The
role of the Homes & Community Agency (HCA) over the immediate
future remains to be defined. While it would appear that the HCA
is likely to focus on housing supply, this has yet to be made
explicit and there are no details in Regeneration to Enable
Growth. Clarification on the future programme for the HCA,
including its asset disposal role for its existing estate and
any sites owned by RDAs, would be welcome.
— It
remains to be seen if the New Homes Bonus will be successful in
incentivising local authorities to approve greater numbers of
developments. If it were to be, we believe there should be some
mechanism to ensure that it results in high quality development,
given the implications for local character and distinctiveness.
Consideration should also be given to the use of funds generated
on environmental improvements, including investment in the historic
environment.
Q. Will it ensure that the progress made by
past regeneration projects is not lost, and can, where appropriate,
be built on?
— It
is important that the outputs and achievements of regeneration
activity over the last 20 years are recognised—and in so
doing the opportunities created by that investment are exploited
to the full. HCA research submitted as part of the 2010 CSR included
evidence on the achievements of regeneration projects going back
over two decades.[78]
— There
is now a significant body of evidence regarding the benefits of
heritage-led regeneration demonstrating that investment in historic
buildings and areas affects both area perceptions and economic
activity. Research has found that one in four businesses in historic
areas considered that investment in the historic environment had
directly led to an increase in business turnover, and agreed or
strongly agreed that the heritage setting was an important factor
in their decision to locate in an area. It has been estimated
that, on average, for every £1 invested in the historic environment
an additional £1.60 has been generated in local economies
over a ten year period.[79]
— The
historic environment is also a significant driver of tourism.
Over 50% of inbound tourists plan to visit historic sites. The
tourism activity in the UK (from both domestic and international
visitors) which can be attributed to heritage (including landscape
heritage, and cultural heritage) directly generates £7.4
billion of GDP per annum and supports employment for 195,000 people.[80]
— This
economic activity is important to local communities. It is estimated
that, on average, over half the jobs created by historic visitor
attractions are not on the sites themselves, but in the wider
local economy, such as shops, restaurants and hotels.[81]
— While
accepting that regeneration activity is going to be much less
than in recent years, there is a very real concern that the significant
amount of experience and expertise gained in a huge range of projects,
particularly those involving place based work and environmental
improvements, is at risk of being lost in the immediate future.
For example, the West Midlands RDA has withdrawn its offer of
over £2 million of funding towards the £4.33 million
Townscape Heritage Initiative scheme in Dudley, potentially putting
at risk the entire scheme and the expenditure and resources already
committed towards it since its inception in November 2008.
— Additionally,
mechanisms such as the Regional Growth Fund are likely to mean
that heritage-led regeneration schemes, at least in the short-term,
will find it harder to secure funding and will become rarer due
to the existing assessment criteria. While we would hope that
an economic upturn and increased confidence in the property market
in the medium term will enable this type of project to be possible
again, there is further risk of experience, knowledge and practical
benefits for local communities being lost.
— New
and emerging models of decision making and planning are likely
to place greater emphasis on the importance of both local authorities
and communities together with greater autonomy to decide what
is best for their area. It will be crucial that in such a scenario
that people and organisations are able to work with information
that clearly indicates what has worked (and not worked) in similar
circumstances. To this end, we would recommend that CLG issues,
or perhaps works with stakeholders to produce, clear guidance
and information on this area. Archiving of research, documentation
and data from recent and ongoing physical regeneration projects
and their accessibility will be important in this respect.
Q. Will it ensure that sufficient public funds
are made available for future major town and city regeneration
projects as well as for more localised projects?
— As
above, it has to be accepted that in the short term there will
be insufficient funding to meet regeneration need—bids for
Round 1 of the Regional Growth Fund were oversubscribed against
available funding by a ratio of ten to one.[82]
The focus of the Government's approach is on changing the institutional
framework within which regeneration happens—this is not
likely to provide the scale of funding required to undertake large-scale
physical regeneration projects, at least in the immediate future.
— Local
Economic Partnerships (LEPs) are now expected to lead on economic
growth for their areas, including via bids to the Regional Growth
Fund. However, there is a concern that the thin structure of LEPs
is such that they will lack capacity to undertake a variety of
projects simultaneously—this may mean in certain cases they
focus on what are perceived to be more straightforward or conventional
projects involving job creation or training and at the expense
of projects involving environmental improvements. We would reiterate
our point about greater flexibility for the assessment criteria
for bids to the RGF.
— In
terms of heritage-led regeneration, the approach as set out in
Regeneration to Enable Growth, when coupled with the current
financial climate and the decreasing ability of English Heritage
and other organisations to offer grants is likely to lead to greater
pressure for Heritage Lottery Fund grants. Given the point above
about the loss of skills and resources in local authorities (vital
partners in almost all heritage-led regeneration schemes), this
could lead to problems in terms of the HLF's own capacity and
resources.
Q. What lessons should be learnt from past
and existing regeneration projects to apply to the Government's
new approach?
— For
a number of years, the total amount of money English Heritage
has been able to give as area-based regeneration grants has been
in decline due to reductions in our overall funding. Nevertheless,
our experience has demonstrated that even relatively small amounts
of money can be invaluable as "pump-priming" for very
large regeneration schemes. It can allow for master planning and
project briefs to be drawn up, or can ensure that heritage assets
and historic areas are protected while further funding for wider
schemes is secured. Similarly, small scale investment and projects
can often demonstrate that regeneration in a particular area is
viable and create confidence among other public sector bodies
and potential investors. The importance and impact of this kind
of funding should not be overlooked.
— Evaluation
of heritage-led regeneration projects tends to support the theory
that their economic impact is greater over the long term. Evaluation
of HLF Townscape Heritage Initiative projects demonstrated that
much of the economic impact is over a ten year period.[83]
Given that the sector is changing rapidly, it is important that
this factor (together with the long term benefits of other regeneration
programmes) is not disregarded as organisations and individuals
adapt to the new framework.
— As
indicated elsewhere in this response, the focus on economic growth
in the Government's approach is logical at this point. However,
a continued focus on this area over the medium to long term is
likely to overlook the inter-relationship in many areas of the
country between economic, social and environmental factors. Investment
in the local environment, public realm and historic environment
can be crucial in addressing perceptions of quality and creating
confidence and needs to play a role in regeneration activity as
soon as is possible.
What actions should the Government be taking to
attract money from (a) public and (b) private sources into regeneration
schemes?
— Regeneration
schemes for economically underperforming and deprived areas are
required, by definition, because of market failure. Without any
intervention at all by Government or other public sector bodies,
it is unlikely (at least in the short to medium term) that economic
underperformance and inequality or the environmental and social
issues that come with it will be corrected. Lack of confidence
in the local economic base, or concern about the level of investment
required to make a site suitable for development can prevent funding
being secured. Some form of coordination role on the part of central
Government, if not funding, is required to create the circumstances
whereby private sector funding is attracted to these areas. Without
this framework it is difficult to see how or why private sector
funding would be forthcoming for such areas on any meaningful
scale. Government needs to analyse regeneration need and put in
place frameworks and strategies to address the issues, including
the necessary funding, when circumstances allow.
— English
Heritage is currently undertaking a survey of the development
industry, in order to assess a series of potential policy changes
that could encourage developers to invest in historic buildings.
In addition, it will examine the factors that facilitate the successful
reuse of historic industrial buildings. The project is due to
be completed by the end of May, and could potentially have some
useful recommendations from the perspective of removing barriers
and incentivising the development industry.
How should the success of the Government's approach
be assessed in future?
Circumstances largely dictate what is possible at
the moment, but flexibility in approach is key. We would hope
that CLG will allow for changes to the current approach, when
circumstances allow, so enabling a much wider focus to regeneration
and ensuring that social and environmental benefits are taken
into account. Furthermore, it is important that greater resources
for place based projects are allocated as and when the economic
situation and Government finances improve.
March 2011
74 Amion Locum (2010), "Impact of Historic Environment
Regeneration". Back
75
Architectural Heritage Fund-Social Impact of Heritage Led Regeneration-
http://www.ahfund.org.uk/docs/Report%20Social%20Impacts%20of%20Heritage-led%20Regeneration.pdf Back
76
Heritage Counts 2010-http://hc.english-heritage.org.uk/HC-Economic-Impact/ Back
77
Heritage Counts 2009-www.hc.english-heritage.org.uk Back
78
Homes & Communities Agency 2010 Lessons for Regeneration
Policy & Practice Back
79
Amion Locum (2010), "Impact of Historic Environment Regeneration". Back
80
HLF (2010), "Investing in Success, Heritage and the UK Tourism
economy". Back
81
GHK (2010), "Impact of Historic Visitor Attractions". Back
82
http://www.bis.gov.uk/policies/economic-development/regional-growth-fund Back
83
Evaluation of HLF Townscape Heritage Initiative funding-http://www.hlf.org.uk/aboutus/howwework/Documents/THI_five_year_final_report_1_Aug.pdf Back
| 
