Point de vue…

LES ACTES
SYMPOSIUM
26 octobre 2009 – Après-midi
Point de vue…
BERTRAND TIERCE
Merci beaucoup Franz Fischler. Mesdames et Messieurs. Nous arrivons au
terme de notre matinée (…)
Mesdames et Messieurs, réjouissez-vous. Pendant que les rapporteurs,
présidents rapporteurs sont en train de rédiger promptement la synthèse de
vos travaux en ateliers. Vous, vous allez partir en voyage. Vous allez partir en
voyage en direction de l’Angleterre avec Monsieur Ian Phillips. Ian Phillips qui
est architecte, paysagiste et urbaniste, conseil indépendant, voilà 25 ans qu’il
travaille auprès des collectivités locales et il est impliqué notamment dans le
projet Ecotown, Ecotown dont il va nous parler. Je vous demande d’accueillir
Ian Phillips.
IAN PHILLIPS
Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. I'd like to say what a privilege it is to
be speaking in such a beautiful and well-equipped building for a
multinational audience.
I'm going to be speaking to you this afternoon. I believe the programme says
you're going to get two points of view from Great Britain. I'm only one person
because Mr Nigel Dunnett was unable to make it, but I will try and give you at
least two points of view about my subject matter. This will be covering green
infrastructure and eco-towns, both of which are related aspects of the
approaches that are being taken in the UK, and in particular in England,
towards sustainable development and which affect landscape most
certainly.
Green infrastructure and eco-towns: the term green infrastructure was first
coined in the USA in the 1990s by Ed McMahon. It's a marketing term primarily
but it has real meaning, especially for landscape architects. Green
infrastructure increasingly is being abbreviated to GI in England, which is
reflecting the common ways in which it is being used increasingly. It highlights
the importance of the landscape in land use planning, emphasising the life
support functions that natural systems provide such as clean water and
healthy soils. It has since expanded, particularly in the UK, to include the
concept of multi-functionality, a term which I've already heard used today.
This embraced the integration of different functions, different services, on the
same area of land and this are of particular importance in a small and very
heavily populated country such as England.
Such functions can include storm auto-management and flood control; water
supply; biodiversity; recreation; transport; and the production of resources
such as fuel, timber or food. Green space, or space made green, is going to
become increasingly important in adapting to climate change, particularly in
urban areas. And it may have a special role to play in existing urban areas
where the biggest challenge is in retrofitting climate change adaptation
measures into existing built-up areas.
The objective of green infrastructure as a term is therefore to raise awareness
of the overall value of green space assets, just as other built infrastructure grey infrastructure, such as transport, utility services and community facilities have traditionally been valued. To be most effective, green infrastructure
needs to be interconnected so that it forms at network that is accessible to, or
provides services to, urban populations and their associated pressures. It
needs therefore to be planned strategically at, at least, a sub-regional level
and scale, although it needs to be delivered at a much more local level.
The illustration at the top of the slide actually covers a very large area east of
London. In fact, an area where the 2012 Olympics will be taking place although I promise not to mention them again in France while I'm here - and
this covers an area which is administered by some 11 local government
authorities. So you can see that it's a very large area and the green areas
highlighted on the map are the outline of a green grid - a green infrastructure
network - that actually crosses many administrative boundaries.
To make best use of the available land and to provide the multiple services
where they're needed therefore needs a very new approach to collaborative
working, often involving many land owning or managing organisations whose
operational objectives have very little traditional concern or awareness of the
landscape or natural systems. For example, I'm thinking here of train
companies: train operators; utility companies: energy distribution companies;
people that use land, who own land, who manage land because it provides
an operational need for them, but have very little concern about its other
performance characteristics or its other uses. Their use of land can be made
far more efficient through GI.
Moving on now to the concepts behind eco-towns, the idea behind these is
to promote new standards of sustainability in newly developed settlements by
making it easy, comfortable and attractive for people to adopt lifestyles with
a much reduced ecological footprint and reduced carbon dioxide emissions.
They've therefore been conceived as a blueprint for future sustainable living,
primarily in response to climate change, but many other pressure either
directly or indirectly associated with that.
The UK Government and other influential bodies wish to see eco-towns
influencing other development by example and in the light of experience
and evidence gathered through new regulatory controls. The proposals here
are to set standards for adapting to climate change; reducing carbon
emissions; managing water more efficiently, both the supply and storm water
run-off. Using renewable energy and improving energy efficiency with new
standards of building; integrating green infrastructure and ecosystem services
into an urban environment; enhancing biodiversity within that green
infrastructure. Reducing dependency on the private car, encouraging
walking, cycling and the use of public transport; improving both personal and
community health. This is the concept.
The pictures here illustrate Bordon, one of the eco-towns that have actually
received final approval from the UK Government. That's the area outlined in
red which you can just see on the slide and the diagram at the bottom
illustrates the green infrastructure proposals for that same settlement. In a
moment, we will look at some of the challenges that face eco-towns, but first
I'll return to green infrastructure and the challenges there.
Green infrastructure, as I said, was primarily a marketing concept. Landscape
architects have always been doing green infrastructure, but now we have a
new flag to fly which will hopefully reach some new markets and persuade
people who've otherwise not been persuaded.
However, there remains significant confusion between the concept of green
infrastructure and that of conventional green open space. The green part is
very well understood in traditional terms, far better than the newly functional,
multifunctional infrastructure concept that goes with it. The long term and the
wider value of green infrastructure has not really been quantified in economic
terms in ways that can compete with traditional built infrastructure: buildings,
services, transport systems. There is a need for more robust evidence and
data on this and for this to be properly counted so that it can be put forward
in the arguments that are needed to promote green infrastructure on an
equal footing with the traditional grey.
UK national and regional policy is very supportive of green infrastructure, but
this is not translated sufficiently into the resources, the funding and the skills
that are needed for sub-regional and local implementation in much of the
UK. This is further threatened by elections - the national elections - that we're
likely to have by the middle of next year where the Conservative Party, who
are currently very far ahead in the polls, have said that they're going to
abolish regional government in the UK and that is going to create a problem
for the further development of green infrastructure, I think.
Planners and landscape architects working at strategic policy levels in
government and national agencies are promoting green infrastructure at a
more local level. Decision makers are far more concerned with resolving
issues such as short-term housing supply, waste disposal anti-social behaviour
and so on, and delivering services on reduced budgets.
Landscape and green space issues are rarely perceived as opportunities.
More, they are seen as areas to remain either protected or exploited for
conventional development or as cost centres that might be capable of being
cut. There are therefore few influential champions for green infrastructure at
the land owning or managing or decision-making levels at sub-regional and
local level.
Green infrastructure therefore needs people who have vision and can
provide leadership to drive it forward. It also required collaborative project
management across agencies, services and boundaries, political boundaries
especially. This is a challenge to traditional silos of decision-making.
Conventional, political, professional and operational boundaries need to be
broken down and communications improved to realise the potential benefits,
especially where there are existing urban infrastructure in place rather than
brand new settlements being built.
It's very difficult also, in terms of funding, to develop strategic green
infrastructure provision without initial public funding for its acquisition,
establishment and ongoing management. Whilst this may well be repaid in
the longer term through contributions from new development and private
developers, the present economic climate the recession are extremely
unhelpful in terms of providing public funds.
The illustrations here really are - they're just to set thoughts going, because
they illustrate some aspects of green infrastructure outside conventional open
space thinking. A very humble green roof, but green roofs are increasingly
common, particularly in Germany and the Netherlands, I think, and
increasingly France, and more and more also in England.
Street trees and back gardens which are evident in the second picture are
an important part of green infrastructure and particularly important in
established urban areas. Street trees are perhaps a prime way of introducing
greenery into the established urban framework. And business parks, an
example of which is at the bottom - a brand new one - which is very
ecologically sound and highly sustainable but which needs to be joined up
with the other parts of the green network so that the whole becomes more
than the sum of its parts.
Here is an example of a current project I'm working on where five local
authorities are working together to implement a sub-regional strategy for
green infrastructure in South East Dorset on the south coast of England. The
towns of Bournemouth, Poole and Christchurch, which you can see in a, sort
of, pink and grey area to the bottom, are earmarked for growth in the near
future. The populations are going to grow by many tens of thousands.
The emerging green infrastructure strategy potentially addresses opportunities
to provide wider access to the countryside; footpath development; linking
and improving open spaces, especially in urban areas; developing the local
economy for tourism and local produce; enhancing biodiversity; and
improving water management.
Political support, resources to manage the project and funding are currently
being explored but are by no means in place yet. The big problem here is
going to be dealing with the existing urban areas and finding spaces and
identifying opportunities to develop green infrastructure in that urban fabric.
The countryside has opportunities which can be exploited relatively easily. The
existing urban area's more of a challenge.
I'll move on now to the challenges facing eco-towns. Now, I said that they
were seen as examples of new high standards and, I suppose, one example
of how they are going to set high standards is that they have started off as 50
schemes being submitted to the Government, by private developers mostly.
Those 50 schemes were reduced to a shortlist of 15 after being looked at to
see if they actually passed tests of sustainability. Those 15 were then
scrutinised much more closely and about three months ago the Government
finally released its final list of four schemes which consist of about 5,000 houses
each. So there are about 5,000 houses in four locations throughout England:
20,000 houses. We have 3 million houses planned to be built by 2025. They're
going to have to set very good examples to influence the other 2.995 million.
This is going to be a problem. The four selected locations are also still going to
need formal approval through the local planning system and they will have to
go through public consultation. They are by no means universally supported
by local communities who already exist. As the four schemes that have got
this far are refined and cost, it is highly likely that the volume house builders
who will be responsible for much of their construction will be seeking to
reduce their cost, maximise their profits and minimise their exposure to risk by
negotiating reduced standards or compromises. It remains to be seen how
robustly the original concepts can be defended.
The Government guidelines for eco-towns require 40 per cent of the total
developed area to be green space, of which half must be public-planned. By
comparison, Hampstead Garden Suburb, a green settlement laid out in 1907
was part of the Garden Cities Movement, has 62 per cent of its area given
over to green space, so it's a mute point as to whether we have moved
forward in 100 years. The locations are also adjacent to existing established
towns. This is going to test the commercial marketability and the sustainability
of the new settlements.
The biggest question of all, however, is whether enough people can be
persuaded to adopt a more sustainable lifestyle without feeling that their
quality of life has been diminished. There will be few financial subsidies and
possibly a premium to be paid so other incentives will need to be very strongly
promoted and, importantly, delivered.
On a slightly more cheerful note, signs of progress are clearly evident. The UK
Government is going to be publishing new national planning guidance on
green infrastructure this autumn. It is expected that this will increase
awareness of the importance of GI provision and strongly influence more and
better provision for the sub-regional and local levels. It is, however, unlikely to
deliver more resources.
Many areas where significant development growth is planned are
incorporating, already, GI into their strategic and site-based planning, and
there is an increasing number of examples of GI being delivered at least in
part as resources permit. Professional bodies, such as the Landscape Institute;
national agencies, such as Natural England, the RSPB: Royal Society for the
Protection of Birds; wildlife trusts; Commission for Architecture and the Built
Environment; and groups of local Government authorities are already
communicating each other increasingly to tackle issues of common interest
under a GI heading. GI projects can and do provide a good focus for
collaboration.
Concerns about climate change are becoming much more widespread and
much more widely accepted and the need for responses is becoming more
accepted in decision-making at all levels. Both GI and eco-towns offer
potentially attractive and achievable approaches to more sustainable
development and lifestyles which may help us to adapt to some of the
effects of climate change.
And finally, commercial organisations are becoming increasingly aware of
the economic and public relations benefits of being seen to go green. This is
affecting not only marketing messages but also a willingness to accept or
even embrace operational change to deliver more sustainable goods and
services.
I will almost leave you here with two quotes which I'll read out for translation
purposes, because they're two views of nature. The first is from Eric Hoffer who
was a US writer. He said "Man's chief goal in life is still to become and stay
human and defend his achievements against the encroachments of nature."
Well, that's one for you. There there's another from Martin H Fisher. "Here's
good advice for practice: go into partnership with nature. She does more
than half the work and asks none of the fee." I think those two quotes taken
together, perhaps, sum up what landscape architects are capable of doing. I
think we can understand both those attitudes and apply ourselves to
exercising both. I hope you can.
Here are some references which are far too small to read, so I will give you
some initials to write down. There are a number of publications, I'm afraid only
in English, because we're not a very multinational country, but if you have a
good command of English these are good references about green
infrastructure in the UK. And if you just look up green infrastructure under
CABE, that's C.A.B.E., and under TCPA and under the Landscape Institute and
under Natural England, then you will find some useful downloadable
publications which cover a lot of aspects of green infrastructure.
I will leave you with some key questions which I hope will stimulate some
debate, if we have time, and which, perhaps, will provide some answers from
the floor for some of the problems that we face in the UK about realising
green infrastructure and eco-towns.
First of all, the difficulties of actually defining GI and marketing it to a political
audience, to the public, to other operational concerns; the need to change
political, professional and public perceptions about green space, about
open space, so that it becomes seen as essential service providing
infrastructure rather than just pretty landscape to have flowers put on. And to
be admired if you can afford to; about changing public lifestyles as well;
about building connectivity; about finding the land to actually join-up in a
crowded country; in about finding the land that can be used multifunctionally for many purposes and still be green space. About encouraging
collaboration, cutting through professional boundaries: landscape architects
working with architects, working with planners. Perhaps most importantly
working with engineers because engineers very often have the biggest
budgets, so they're very useful people to work with; funding for green
infrastructure. Especially finding that money upfront in advance before
development money arrives to kick in; the long-term management and
sustainability of green infrastructure when all the problems have been
resolved and the green infrastructure is delivered. It then has to remain in
place in perpetuity to work. So you need to manage and maintain it like any
landscape. It needs to be looked after, the funding and the resources need
to be available to do that and there probably needs to be some form of
designation protection to make sure it is valued as green infrastructure in the
future.
I've seen some examples from other countries already today. I would
welcome any examples you may have to inform me of in terms of this now.
Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen.
BERTRAND TIERCE
Venez me rejoindre Monsieur Ian Phillips. Merci en tout cas pour cette
évocation des projets Ecotown, et naturellement, Mesdames et Messieurs, Ian
Phillips est prêt à répondre à vos remarques, questions, suggestions, autour de
ces projets. Quelqu'un souhaite-t-il prendre la parole après l’avoir entendu ?
Moi, j’ai déjà beaucoup de questions à lui poser. Mais vous en avez sûrement.
Vous voulez que je vous dise quelques unes des questions que j’ai notées ?
Comment vendre l’infrastructure verte ? Comment changer de perception ?
Comment unir les forces ? Comment gérer à long terme ? Comment se servir
des expériences des autres pays européens pour nourrir le projet ? Mais ça ce
sont quelques unes des questions que vous avez posées vous-mêmes,
Monsieur. J’en ai une autre à vous poser. Est-ce que les quatre projets qui ont
été choisis, quatre projets Ecotown, est-ce que ce sont quatre projets qui ont
été conçus en eux-mêmes, pour eux-mêmes ou est-ce que des relations avec
d’autres démarches développement durable gérées en Grande Bretagne, je
pense par exemple à un quartier comme BedZED, est-ce que ces
démarches, développement durable, en Grande Bretagne, ont rencontré
vos projets Ecotown ? Est-ce qu’il y a des jonctions entre les initiatives ?
IAN PHILLIPS
I will have to answer somewhat cynically. The eco-towns that have come
through, the 4 from the original 50 and the secondary 15, are mostly privately
funded developments on land where developers are perhaps looking for
Greenfield sites to build on, although with some constraints.
There is a pre-disposition in UK planning policy towards developing on brown
field, in other words, previously developed land. Eco-towns have offered the
incentive of potentially offering Greenfield land for development provided
they are ecologically sustainable. Now the foresights that have come through
have passed a lot of tests, but they are independent schemes in effect. Some
of them are actually ex-government land so the government may have had
a hand in influencing the quality and the standard, partly through land
pricing and so on of the schemes that have come forward.
But I think it’s rather sad that only 4 out of 15 out of 50 original schemes have
actually met the sustainability standards that the government itself has set.
Which as a landscape architect, I don’t think are necessarily unduly high, but
they’re certainly too high for most to be able to match.
BERTRAND TIERCE
Ce sont les investisseurs privés, Monsieur ? Ce sont des investisseurs privés,
Monsieur, qui sont aujourd'hui les moteurs d’une démarche de progrès. Et
pour quelle raison est-ce qu’il n’y a eu que quatre projets sur cinquante qui
étaient envisagés ? Qu’est-ce qui explique ce nombre extrêmement petits de
projets lauréats ?
IAN PHILLIPS
Most new development in England is actually carried out by a relatively small
number of very large house builders and certainly in terms of house building,
there are a few very large private house builders. They are under an
obligation to build social housing as part of the delivery and to pay various
sums of money towards public facilities. But essentially they now provide most
of the new building, of new development in the UK. There is very little, if any,
public investment of new settlements. So we’re talking about large
companies with shareholders and profits to earn.
BERTRAND TIERCE
Monsieur, vous souhaitez prendre la parole. Re-bonjour.
Monsieur
Ian I just wanted to ask you on the long-term sustainability question, obviously
plant choice, the choice of plant material is absolutely critical to the longterm sustainability of any scheme, any green infrastructure development. At
the moment I think that the kind of plant which is specified to an extent that
decision is driven by what the nursery stock industry is geared up to provide.
So I think there are a number of questions we need to be asking in terms of
what is appropriate in different situations. How we communicate what we
need to the nursery stock industry and indeed how we get more out of them.
Because at the moment I think that a lot of plant material is provided which is
convenient. It’s cultivated in a way which maximises the return for the grower
and that’s fine, they’re a commercial enterprise. But as a customer, it is a fact
that a nursery is a very caring nurturing place whereas the outside world
beyond the nursery gates is hard and cruel and sometimes it doesn’t rain at
all and sometimes it rains too much. And there are dogs and there are
children and these are all things that don’t happen on the nursery.
So there is, I think, a real need for a very much more active dialogue between
the nursery stock industry and the development of green infrastructure and
the people that are charged with the responsibility for the development of
green infrastructure. Would you agree that there is quite a way to go before
we achieve that kind of partnership and that we have to achieve that if we
are going to deliver this long-term sustainability?
IAN PHILLIPS
I think that’s absolutely the case. It’s been a long time problem in the UK and I
am sure it is elsewhere in much of Europe. Where although high quality
managed landscapes for example in business parks are well maintained, well
looked after, the money is there because the rental income is there, because
the client desire is there to maintain a very high standard. But the landscape
quality perhaps on some of our less good housing estates or in the outlying
suburban areas of towns, even if they’re put into a reasonable standard, they
often leave much to be desired a few years after they’ve been created.
Now I mentioned the importance of management and maintenance as one
of my final questions. This is clearly an issue. If green infrastructure is going in, if
eco-towns are going to have high quality, but possibly semi-natural open
spaces being created, but adjacent to quite dense urban populations who
are likely to put a lot of pressure on those spaces. Then the standards of
maintenance and resources going to those maintenances are going to need
to be high. Equally, it’s going to be important that we get good plant
materials and they are well planted by people who know what they’re doing.
And I would love to see the English nurse …
BERTRAND TIERCE
Y a-t-il encore une question à poser à Ian Phillips ? Alors oui, Madame, vous
avez la parole. Bonjour.
SYLVIE LAURENT-BÉGIN
Bonjour. Sylvie Laurent-Bégin. Je travaille avec Fabienne Giboudeaux
adjointe au Maire de Paris, aux espaces verts. Au-delà même de la résistance
des plantes, vous avez posé la question de l’entretien, c’est un promoteur
privé qui a en charge ce développement. Une fois, bon il y a une partie de
logements sociaux, mais il y a des parties de logements privés. Qui est
responsable de ces 40% d’espaces verts, qui est propriétaire ? Comment,
c’est une propriété privée ? C’est une copropriété ? Et qui est le garant de la
pérennité de ces espaces verts dans le temps, dans ces infrastructures
vertes ?
IAN PHILLIPS
... [Tree 0:00:01] industry rise to the challenge more than it’s been able to
instead of relying very heavily on imports from our friends in France and
Holland and Germany and Italy.
Have I...? That is a very good question; it’s a very good question because the
ownership and therefore the maintenance responsibility is likely to be
mixed. This is one of the areas of concern that I have at a high level in
policy terms that those questions are properly addressed at the same
time that green infrastructure plans are being made and designs are
being sorted out. Because the long term management must form part
of the landscape approach.
Now it is highly likely that a lot of open space will be managed by local
authorities and probably, hopefully, to a good standard. Particularly if
that open space is seen as part of green infrastructure and is providing,
seen to be providing, essential services and therefore valued as such.
However if it falls into the hands of agencies, possibly social housing landlords
and housing associations or transport operators, highway authorities for
example, whose primary concern is not maintaining landscape, then it
is highly likely that the landscape will be seen as a cost item and want
to be cut back at times of cost cutting. And that could prove
problematic, clearly.
FRANÇOISE GAILLARD
Bonjour, Françoise Gaillard. Je suis un peu perplexe. On est aussi en France
comme on a vu ce matin, les communes s’emparent de la problématique,
on a aussi nos lauréats des éco-quartiers. Et puis là, je m’aperçois quand vous
présentez ce projet, j’ai entendu d’ailleurs beaucoup plus parler de produit
que de projet. J’ai entendu « gagner des marchés » et j’ai entendu
« argument vert ». Et je me disais finalement, peut-être qu’en France, on n’est
pas suffisamment commerciaux dans ce sens-là, mais j’ai l’impression que
c’est un produit que vous essayez de vendre, de développer, qu’il va falloir
des bonus pour inciter les populations à y adhérer. Adapter les conditions de
vie des habitants, je ne suis pas totalement dans cette façon de voir les
choses comme un produit et non pas un projet.
IAN PHILLIPS
Yes I think it’s a very different situation in England. As I said at the beginning,
the term green infrastructure has come from America and we know all
about their ability to sell products, or at least once upon a time.
I think one of the differences in England is that a lot of the funding does come
from the private sector. We are also looking here at a lot of landowning
interests, not necessarily being a single local authority. Much of England
over the past 30 years has been privatised. You know many of the
service companies that are still in public ownership in much of mainland
Europe are in private ownership in England, partly as a result of
Margaret Thatcher’s government and the fallout from that.
There are many more interests in England that are focused on delivering
certain services and operations rather than perhaps taking an overview
and local government - I spent 20 years working in local government has relatively limited influence and relatively limited land ownership
itself. It manages some land but there are many other bodies that
manage much of the other green space land within their boundaries.
Therefore it is important to sell a landscape message, to sell a landscape
service message, to sell an eco-system service message, to organisations, to
companies, to individuals, to communities who don’t necessarily have that in
the forefront of their thinking. That’s part of the concept.