Abstract
This chapter addresses questions of the decision-making processes concerning investment in urban green spaces. It considers how evidence is deployed in processes of governance, and how nuanced understandings of costs and wellbeing benefits are backgrounded as evidence becomes a bargaining chip in a struggle for resources. Calling on empirical research conducted in the city of Sheffield, this chapter examines these issues through the lens of the everyday work of practitioners and professionals. The chapter highlights the importance of logics of action and inaction, revealing the effects of stakeholders’ reasons for choosing not to take actions that strengthen the links between green spaces and mental wellbeing.
Keywords
- Decision-making processes
- Evidence-seeking
- ‘Logics of inaction’
- ‘Myth and ceremony’
- Governance
- Urban green space interventions
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buying options
References
Adams D, Watkins C (2014) The value of planning: RTPI Research Report no. 5. RTPI, London. https://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/1916022/rtpi_research_briefing_-_delivering_the_value_of_planning_20_august_2016.pdf. Accessed 23 Apr 2019
Bagnall A-M, South J, Di Martino S et al (2018) Places, spaces, people and wellbeing: full review. What Works Centre for Wellbeing. https://whatworkswellbeing.org/product/places-spaces-people-and-wellbeing/. Accessed 23 Feb 2019
Barley SR, Tolbert PS (1997) Institutionalization and structuration: studying the links between action and institution. Organ Stud 18(1):93–117
Barton J, Rogerson M (2017) The importance of greenspace for mental health. BJPsych Int 14(4):79–81
Brindley P, Jorgensen A, Maheswaran R (2018) Domestic gardens and self-reported health: a national population study. Int J Health Geogr 17:31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12942-018-0148-6
Bulkeley H (2006) Urban sustainability: learning from the best practice? Environ Plan A 38(6):1029–1044
Centre for Cities (2019) Cities outlook 2019. https://www.centreforcities.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/19-01-28-Cities-Outlook-2019-Full.pdf. Accessed 21 June 2019
Christophers B (2018) The new enclosure: the appropriation of public land in neoliberal Britain. Verso Books, London
Davoudi S, Madanipour A (2015) Reconsidering localism. Routledge, New York, London
Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (2002) Green spaces, better places: final report of the Urban Green Spaces Taskforce. DTLR, London
Dobson J (2018) From contest to context: urban green space and public policy. People Place Policy 12(2):72–83. https://doi.org/10.3351/ppp.2018.3824435278
Dobson J (2019) Reinterpreting urban institutions for sustainability: how epistemic networks shape knowledge and logics. Environ Sci Pol 92:133–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.11.018
Dobson J, Dempsey N (2018) Beyond ‘green is good’ – the policy and practice dilemmas of urban nature and human wellbeing. Town Country Plan 87(12):514–518
Greenspace Scotland (2013) Capturing the changes that count: a review of greenspace scotland’s SROI programmes and projects. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OgWwOlly8bXpV0u4HnrYKcjVfmJqLML9/view. Accessed 10 June 2019
Grin J, Rotmans J, Schot J (2010) Transitions to sustainable development: new directions in the study of long term transformative change. Routledge, Abingdon
Haas PM (1992) Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination. Int Organ 46(1):1–35
Hajer M (1993) Discourse coalitions and the institutionalisation of practice: the case of acid rain in Britain. In: Fischer F, Forester J (eds) The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. UCL Press, London
Handler J (2005) Myth and ceremony in workfare: rights, contracts, and client satisfaction. J Socio-Econ 34(1):101–124
Hastings A, Bailey N, Bramley G et al (2017) Austerity urbanism in England: the ‘regressive redistribution’ of local government services and the impact on the poor and marginalised. Environ Plan A 49(9):2007–2024
Haughton G, Allmendinger P (2016) Think tanks and the pressures for planning reform in England. Environ Plan C 34(8):1676–1692
Healey P (1993) Planning through debate: the communicative turn in planning theory. In: Fischer F, Forester J (eds) The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. UCL Press, London
Heritage Lottery Fund (2016) State of UK public parks 2016. Heritage Lottery Fund, London
HM Government (2017) Press release: government pledges £500,000 for new action group to grow future of public parks. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-pledges-500000-for-new-action-group-to-grow-future-of-public-parks. Accessed 21 June 2019
HM Government (2018) A connected society: a strategy for tackling loneliness. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/a-connected-society-a-strategy-for-tackling-loneliness. Accessed 21 June 2018
House of Commons Communities and Local Government Committee (2017) Public parks: seventh report of session 2016-17. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmcomloc/45/45.pdf. Accessed 21 June 2019
Hulme M (2010) Problems with making and governing global kinds of knowledge. Global Environ Chang 20(4):558–564
Imison C, Curry N, Holder H et al (2017) Shifting the balance of care: great expectations. Research report. Nuffield Trust. https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/files/2017-02/shifting-the-balance-of-care-report-web-final.pdf. Accessed 21 June 2019
Indices of Deprivation (2015) Explorer. http://dclgapps.communities.gov.uk/imd/idmap.html. Accessed 1 June 2019
Institute of Fiscal Studies (2018) Council-level figures on spending cuts and business rates income. https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/8780. Accessed 21 June 2019
Jasanoff S (2010) A new climate for society. Theory Cult Soc 27(2-3):233–253
Kenny C, Rose DC, Hobbs A et al (2017) The role of research in the UK Parliament Volume One, pp. 1–68. https://www.parliament.uk/documents/post/POST_Role of Research in UK Parliament 2017.pdf. Accessed 3 Apr 2019
King M (2005) Epistemic communities and the diffusion of ideas: central bank reform in the United Kingdom. West Eur Polit 28(1):94–123
Lawrence TB, Suddaby R (2006) Institutions and institutional work. In: Clegg SR, Hardy C, Lawrence TB et al (eds) The SAGE handbook of organisation studies. SAGE, London, pp 215–254
Lobao L, Gray M, Cox K et al (2018) The shrinking state? understanding the assault on the public sector. Camb J Reg Econ Soc 11(3):89–408. https://doi-org.sheffield.idm.oclc.org/10.1093/cjres/rsy026
Lowndes V, Gardner A (2016) Local governance under the conservatives: super-austerity, devolution and the ‘smarter state’. Local Gov Stud 42(3):357–375
Lowndes V, Roberts M (2013) Why institutions matter: the new institutionalism in political science. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke
March JG, Olsen JP (1989) Rediscovering institutions: the organizational basis of politics. The Free Press, New York
Mathers A, Dempsey N, Burton M (2012) Open space management – can communities take on long-term responsibility? Town Country Plan 81(12):514–519
May T, Perry B (2017) Knowledge for just urban sustainability. Local Environ 22(sup1):23–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2016.1233527
McCann A (2018) Policy: valuation in practice. Fields in Trust. http://www.fieldsintrust.org/News/policy-valuation-in-practice. Accessed 12 May 2019
McEwan K, Richardson M, Brindley P et al (2019) Shmapped: development of an app to record and promote the well-being benefits of noticing urban nature. Trans Behav Med:ibz027. https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibz027
Meyer JW, Rowan B (1977) Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony. Am J Sociol 83(2):340–363
Muñoz-Erickson TA, Miller CA, Miller TR (2017) How cities think: knowledge co-production for urban sustainability and resilience. Forests 8(6):203
Nam J, Dempsey N (2018) Community food growing in parks? assessing the acceptability and feasibility in Sheffield, UK. Sustainability 10(8):2887. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082887
Nesta (2019) Eight pioneers developing promising and innovative models for parks. https://www.nesta.org.uk/feature/8-pioneers-developing-promising-and-innovative-models-parks/. Accessed 21 June 2019
OECD, EU (2018) Health at a glance: Europe 2018: state of health in the EU cycle. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/health_glance_eur-2018-en. Accessed 21 June 2019
Olsson P, Gunderson LH, Carpenter SR et al (2006) Shooting the rapids: navigating transitions to adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Ecol Soc 11(1):18
Pawson R, Tilley N (1997) Realistic evaluation. SAGE, Thousand Oaks
Peck J (2012) Austerity urbanism. City 16(6):626–655
Raven R, Schot J, Berkhout F (2012) Space and scale in socio-technical transitions. Environ Innov Soc Trans 4(2012):63–78
Rydin Y (2003) Urban and environmental planning in the UK, 2nd edn. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke
Seo M-G, Creed WED (2002) Institutional contradictions, praxis, and institutional change: a dialectical perspective. Acad Manag Rev 27(2):222–247
Shanahan D, Fuller R, Bush R et al (2015) The health benefits of urban nature: how much do we need? Bioscience 65(5):476–485
Sharman A, Perkins R (2017) Post-decisional logics of inaction: the influence of knowledge controversy in climate policy decision-making. Environ Plan A 49(10):2281–2299
TEEB (2010) The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: mainstreaming the economics of nature: a synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. http://www.teebweb.org/our-publications/teeb-study-reports/synthesis-report/. Accessed 18 May 2019
The Parks Alliance (2019) The Parks Action Group. https://www.theparksalliance.org/the-parks-action-group/. Accessed 21 June 2019
Thornton PH, Ocasio W, Lounsbury M (2012) The institutional logics perspective: a new approach to culture, structure, and process. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Vivid Economics (2016) The contribution made by Sheffield’s parks to the wellbeing of the city’s citizens. www.vivideconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Briefing-The-value-of-Sheffields-parks.pdf. Accessed 12 Feb 2019
Wacquant L (2010) Prisoner reentry as myth and ceremony. Dialect Anthropol 34(4):605–620
Ward Thompson C, Aspinall P (2011) Natural environments and their impact on activity, health, and quality of life. Appl Psychol 3(3):230–260
Weber K, Davis G, Lounsbury M (2009) Policy as myth and ceremony? the global spread of stock exchanges. 1980–2005. Acad Manag J 52(6):1319–1347
Wild T, Henneberry J, Gill R (2017) Comprehending the multiple ‘values’ of green infrastructure – valuing nature-based solutions for urban water management from multiple perspectives. Environ Res 158:179–187
WWF (2018) In: Grooten M, Almond REA (eds) Living planet report – 2018: aiming higher. WWF, Gland
Acknowledgements
Improving Wellbeing through Urban Nature is led by the Department of Landscape Architecture at the University of Sheffield. The IWUN project is supported by the Natural Environment Research Council, ESRC, BBSRC, AHRC & Defra [NERC grant NE/N013565/1].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dobson, J., Dempsey, N. (2020). Mind the Gap: Does What We Know About Greenspace and Wellbeing Change What We Do?. In: Dempsey, N., Dobson, J. (eds) Naturally Challenged: Contested Perceptions and Practices in Urban Green Spaces. Cities and Nature. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44480-8_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44480-8_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-44479-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-44480-8
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)