This blog has evolved from a book of the same name. Rurality is interpreted in many ways depending on individual encounters with rural space and this leads to different ways of conceiving the social and economic challenges that rural communities face. The blog represents the personal views of Professor Gary Bosworth, who is a Visiting Professor of Rural Entrepreneurship in Lincoln International Business School and Professor of Entrepreneurship at Northumbria University.
//In the spirit of collaboration, Bob Newbery and I are pleased to share our conference paper on home-based businesses via the link below. We have mapped 2011 Census data to show the rural urban spread of home-based businesses in England as the basis for ongoing research to better understand their distinct characteristics and challenges.
//Tonight’s debate will feature Professors Nigel Curry and John Shepherd arguing that “the death of the rural” is inevitable. Opposing the motion, we have Prof Peter Somerville and Dr Keith Halfacree and we will have plenty of oppotunities for contributions from the audience. Tea and coffee will be available from 5.30 outside the Book and Latte on the ground floor of the Business School and further refreshments will follow the debate. We look forward to seeing you there.
//An RICS report looking at the inflated price of rural housing: http://www.rics.org/Global/Value_Rural_Amenities_241012_dwl_aj.pdf
They have only looked at two regions, one in the Chilterns and one in the West Midlands so heavily influenced by the urban economy as well as being “idyllic” in appearance so it’s perhaps not surprising that these are showing the most resilient and highest housing prices in England. Nevertheless, good to see that some of the academic literature is filtering into the professional property world.
//The new National Planning Policy Framework has stirred up a lot of controversy, especially among organisations claiming to represent the countryside. I have written before about the dangers of preserving green space at the cost of economic opportunities and I think the new framework offers real opportunities for local areas to take more control of local planning issues.
In its own words, the document “provides a framework within which local people and their accountable councils can produce their own distinctive local and neighbourhood plans, which reflect the needs and priorities of their communities.” This is the carrot, but if local and district councils fail to update their plans or communities do not engage in the process, the presumption in favour of development (sorry…sustainable development!) then kicks in.
Beyond the first couple of pages where the presumption in favour of sustainable development is set out along with the presumption in favour of planning decisions that reflect effective local plans, the remainder is largely guidelines for what local plans should include. In essence, not even 50 pages of “policy” but 10 pages of policy and 40 pages of guidance for those designing local plans.
With this guidance, the key message for the rural economy is on page 27 and states:
“Planning policies should support economic growth in rural areas in order to create jobs and prosperity by taking a positive approach to sustainable new development. To promote a strong rural economy, local and neighbourhood
plans should:
● support the sustainable growth and expansion of all types of business and enterprise in rural areas, both through conversion of existing buildings and well designed new buildings;
● promote the development and diversification of agricultural and other land-based rural businesses;
● support sustainable rural tourism and leisure developments that benefit businesses in rural areas, communities and visitors, and which respect the character of the countryside. This should include supporting the provision and expansion of tourist and visitor facilities in appropriate locations where identified needs are not met by existing facilities in rural service centres; and
● promote the retention and development of local services and community facilities in villages, such as local shops, meeting places, sports venues, cultural buildings, public houses and places of worship.”
Does this reflect the features and qualities of rurality that we understand? Can rural communities achieve these goals through a local planning process or will the power of developers enable them to lay a greater claim to rural England? I guess only time will tell.
//http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/countryside/9125653/Feudal-row-over-cottage-holiday-homes.html
This article in the Telegraph raises some interesting questions about the ownership of rural communities. The three cottages in this Derbyshire village are “owned” in a legal sense by the Duke of Devonshire, but the community have come together to oppose plans to turn them into luxury cottages, arguing that for generations they have been homes for local estate workers. Once the leases expire, the freehold owner has every right to use the buildings as he wishes, subject to planning permission, and could let the cottages to anyone he sees fit. If these were not being turned into holiday cottages, the likelihood of a rural worker being able to afford an open market rent, or worse a purchase price, is negligable. In opposing the planning permission and raising a petition against the Estate, local people are effectively asking the landowner to give up income to which he is entitled in order to preserve “their” community as they see it.
The interesting issue here is that there is big difference in the monetary values placed on the cottages. For local workers, the value of the cottages is determined by their income and the convenience of living on the estate but for tourists or rural in-migrants, their higher incomes combined with their perceptions of an idyllic place to visit or live confers a much higher value on the buildings. As the freehold owner, the Estate can sell or lease to the highest bidder but the outcome is that people from outside of this rural community, drawn to it by picture-postcard imagery, are dictating the changing dynamics of that community. One wonders whether this rural idyll will be so idyllic if the community is divided and rural workers are displaced by decisions of this nature?