Consultation and engagement are key requirements in the UK’s planning system and, crucially, a vital part of development proposals. In this respect, transport infrastructure delivery is not an exception: rather, given the way it impacts – economically, socially and environmentally – on those directly affected and on local communities in general, it represents an even more challenging endeavour. In these circumstances, public consultation becomes crucial at the early stages of the planning process. Pre-application consultation with the public has become a statutory requirement for a wide range of projects in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and for ‘Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects’ in England and Wales.
Rightly so then, Lichfields’ five point plan for
smarter engagement with local stakeholders and communities provides an effective strategy whereby developers can tailor and carry out effective consultation and engagement strategies.
To stress the importance of effective engagement I can provide a case study insight into the side-effects of a poor consultation process. My experience is based on research that I recently conducted for my MA dissertation on the Pedemontana Veneta (‘PVM’), a 100 km motorway being constructed in the north east of Italy. To provide some context, it is probably worth stating at the outset that the project – defined by the public authorities as ‘the most important infrastructure project currently undertaken in the North East’ – is a financially-troubled one with 30 years of debate, 20 of design and 15 of call for tenders. The motorway aims at delivering a strategic objective, that of linking the region’s industrial districts, which for three decades have represented the backbone of the region’s economy.
The project is a highly contested one too, particularly by local residents. What I found out when interviewing them is that opposition is linked, critically, to a lack of effective pre-application consultation. By profiting from a legal void in Italian statutory requirements, the PVM developers had not properly engaged with communities. Even when they did, they had shown a tendency to ‘talk down’ to them.
From the public authorities’ and the developers’ perspective, it may be argued that this lack of public engagement was not cost-effective either. In particular, both had to face costly and time-consuming appeals (a recurring issue in local opposition to new facilities that is usually related to concerns over the decline in property values).
In the context of the inevitable mutual mistrust arising between local residents on the one side and developers on the other, neither the former nor the latter have come out on the winning side. Indeed, local protesters have highlighted a
‘plansplaining’ attitude by the public-private consortium whereas the latter are representing their counterpart’s activism as uncompromising and individualistic NIMBY opposition.
There is also a positive lesson that can be learnt out of the troubled PVM construction story. The lesson deals with the potential benefits resulting from effective public engagement with protest groups. Indeed, one of the most interesting insights unraveled by this case study deals with the contribution that local residents could provide – if properly engaged – to improve the development scheme. Thanks to their understanding of the local area and its socio-economic dynamics (some of the protesters I talked to were also planners, engineers and environmental scientists), residents have the potential to make a real contribution to achieving a successful planning outcome. Far from being radical ecologists campaigning for an uncompromising no, the local communities of the Pedemontana area actually managed to formulate an alternative proposal. Specifically, at the core of their opposition to the existing motorway layout is a project review aiming at completing a financially sustainable infrastructure that should be permeable to the community’s needs.
Everything considered, the central message of the PVM experience is that smarter engagement does matter and, if delivered properly, it can assist in delivering a successful planning outcome and can neutralize potential objections.
