- Email: [email protected]
Nature's keepers: The new science of nature management
Book reviews listic, intransigent and difficult-tomanage direct labour. The local authority's role changes to one of determining policy, setting standards, monitoring performance and financial control. This has led to a new kind of professionalism in local government. The old-style departmentalism, with large in-house staffs presided over (though seldom effectively managed) by lofty professional Chief Officers, has been replaced by better integrated and more flexible structures where managerial and financial skills rather than specialist professional qualifications are required. Changes on these lines were already taking place in the more progressive local authorities before the Thatcher revolution erupted and it is a tribute to the new professionalism of local government, and its capacity for creative change, that these reforms are now becoming well established. Likewise there have been changes in the way in which local authorities operate at the political level in Council chambers and committee rooms; although the extent and nature of these changes are far less easily discerned than at the managerial level. The present authors recognize these changes and the book provides the most up-to-date and coherent account of them that is available at present. As the editors say, however, "There is no doubt that the role of local government is changing but in what way and how the process will be played out remain open questions". It is certainly unclear whether the public perception of local government has changed and whether it will attract greater public interest and support in future. Withbut that support, it may well continue to decline in political significance and influence. If that happens it will diminish the quality of democracy in this country. None of the present authors offers a clear or coherent vision of the future of local government. John Stewart and George Jones in their concluding chapter suggest a concept of "community government", but it is a hazy picture and it is not clear how it would differ from what exists now. Possibly a new role will emerge in which local authorities acquire a measure of re-
sponsibility for the oversight of the multiplicity of non-elected bodies that now run local services. That at least might restore a democratic element. In addition, local authorities have acquired important new functions in the fields of community care , environmental protection and traffic management. Land-use planning remains a key function and cannot be privatized (or, at least, not sensibly). It cannot be assumed that the arrival of a New Labour Government will necessarily result in a new lease of life for local government. Desmond King makes the point that the decline in the scope of local government dates from the nationalization policies of the post-war Labour government. There has been a constant tendency for British governments to resent and wish to curtail the power and influence of local government. Mr Blair's New Labour, as in so much else, has not yet clarified its attitude to local government beyond bland generalities. The offer of some form of regional government may not be a good thing for local government. But there can be no return to the municipal socialism of yesteryear. New Labour could begin by endorsing the European Charter of Local Self-Government, which all other EC governments have adopted and which some have begun to implement (and which, surprisingly, is not referred to in this volume). It is a hopeful sign that the subject of local government continues to attract the high quality of academic work represented by the contributors to this book.
John Delafons Visiting Professor University of Reading, UK
Nature's Keepers: The New Science of Nature Management Stephen Budiansky
Weidenfeld and Nicholson London (1995) £20 (in UK) The natural environment should not be thought of as a product of 'natural' forces. To do so is to adopt a myth that is inconsistent with the evidence
47 from natural environments around the world and is dangerous in that it implies that there is no need to manage 'natural' areas. It encourages the idea that it is appropriate simply to withdraw human influence and allow 'nature' to return the areas to their 'natural' state. Budiansky argues persuasively that the concept of climax in ecology is unhelpful in identifying appropriate management for the natural environment; a point well accepted by ecologists themselves but not widely recognized by environmentalists, especially those advocating preservationist approaches. In practice all areas are subject to relatively frequent upheavel and change. It is rarely possible for particular biological systems to operate in a stable context for a 'climax' to develop and to be maintained. Indeed instability is a source of vigour in many wildlife populations. Human influence is pervasive, even in areas thought to have been relatively untouched. The influence of fire on the prairies, deliberately used by North American Indians is adopted in detail to illustrate the argument. "The truth is that thousands of years of human history have effectively blotted out the very meaning of "artificial" and "natural". We cling to these terms at the cost of endless confusion and muddled thinking" (p 126). Budiansky is critical of alternative views and draws on a rich blend of hitory, experimental results and argument to make his case. He also makes use of many respected authorities whom we may have been expected to be in the other camp. Leopold in particular is used in support. He recognized the pervasive influence of humans on wildlife and the inevitability of human management. But where do such arguments lead? Human intervention is necessary in order to direct the pattern of environmental change. The science of nature management must play a central role and it is developing its own techniques for this. But the fear must be that to accept the argument that there is no single, superior goal for a natural environment, lays us open to the argument that any goal will do. And from that, to the one that advocates the
Book reviews
48 goal that maximizes (short-term) human advantage. Budiansky is aware of the problem. In order to search for criteria for the selection of objectives in nature management, Budiansky turns to economics. The argument here seems less secure. There is an extended analysis of grouse moor management in Scotland and northern England and of the successful role of research and analysis in identifying appropriate management. However, there will be many other circumstances where objectives and constraints, and hence management prescriptions, are less clear. But the nature management problem is inevitable; we will have to identify our human objectives for the 'natural' environment, to support ecosystem functions and to meet aesthetic and other demands, and then develop approaches to management that can support these. In the absence of this, we will not get the environments that we require.
lan Hodge Department of Land Economy University of Cambridge Cambridge CB3 9EP, UK
Planning, the Market and Private Housebuilding Glen Bramley, Will Bartlett Christine Lambert
and
UCL London (1995) 263 pp £12.95 (paperback) This is a book by three experienced housing researchers that draws together existing research on housing regulation and market interactions from a wide range of methodological standpoints to produce a heuristic model of the dynamics of private sector supply in Britain. Specifically focussed on the supply response of housebuilders to changes in demand at local level, the model attempts to predict the behavioural responses of builders and landowners to different regulatory inputs. With its pantheoretical approach drawing on the urban economics literature in North America, the economic modelling of British housing markets, and hedonic modelling to explain individual prefer-
ences, it represents an important contribution to the current debate on the effect and efficacy of market intervention. The authors' aim is to build a model capable of explaining the differences in house price and dwelling outputs between local authority districts, using factors of location, employment and social structure as proxies for demand, and construction costs, land availability, planning policies and profit constraints as the supply side factors. In determining the relationships between these factors, the authors first review academic work on market response to housing demand, developing and then testing hypotheses in model pilot runs. The initial assumption that local housing markets based on district boundaries are sufficiently separate and open on the demand side, was found on testing not to be a valid assumption. Assumptions that a demand shift would lead to a lagged response from suppliers but a quick response in price were more robust. Two fairly crude measures for expressing the responsiveness of land use planning to market forces were employed. The first measure was a 'restrictive' or 'very restrictive' categorization of County Structure Plans on the basis of their policies. The second proxy was the percentage of successful planning applications awarded by the districts. The authors use their model to test some of the myths about the restrictive effect of land use planning on both the price and supply of land for housing. Doubling the amount of housing land released over a 10 yr period through the planning system, using different assumptions about the time taken to exhaust the land, did not increase the supply of land onto the market for housing by more than 28% in any of the scenarios tested. The model suggested that as land supply increases, dwelling prices reduce to some extent, causing the profitability of housebuilding and the supply of land to fall. The additional land coming onto the market will be greater in high demand areas and lower in industrial and rural areas. Two conclusions are reached from these model runs. First, that the restriction of land supply through plan-
ning policies does raise house prices to some extent which redistributes in favour of existing owners and against tenants and new buyers. The authors are optimistic though that these increases are compensated by the affordable dwellings negotiated through planning agreements. The second conclusion is that housing supply is very inelastic in Britain both in terms of response to increased demand for new build and for conversions. They were able to demonstrate that even where the planning system allocates large quantities of land, housing supply is not highly elastic. This contrasts with the prodevelopment lobby argument that more land released will reduce prices and increase access to housing affordability in general. It appears that landowners derive more benefit from occupation than current market value, and that the highest value is retained by waiting for future gains. The model unfortunately doesn't throw any light either on housebuilder response to the increased primacy of the development plan or to demographic trends for smaller households. Housebuilders have always relied on flexibility in the planning system bringing forward sites in response to market pressure during periods of high demand. Housebuilders' land acquisition policies will now have to be tied more closely to local authority preferences for spatial growth and sustainable development. This increases their degree of uncertainty about future outputs and profits, and comes at a time when they are expected to contribute to infrastructure and social housing and when demand itself is more volatile. The authors recognize the important influence of urban land market on the policy options open to central and local government regulators. They demonstrate that because the housing land market is very inelastic in response to increased demand subsidies for owner occupation become capitalized in house prices rather than increasing housing output. The model therefore supports the governments' reduction in mortgage interest tax relief, which should help to reduce house prices. More sophisticated housing require-
sponsibility for the oversight of the multiplicity of non-elected bodies that now run local services. That at least might restore a democratic element. In addition, local authorities have acquired important new functions in the fields of community care , environmental protection and traffic management. Land-use planning remains a key function and cannot be privatized (or, at least, not sensibly). It cannot be assumed that the arrival of a New Labour Government will necessarily result in a new lease of life for local government. Desmond King makes the point that the decline in the scope of local government dates from the nationalization policies of the post-war Labour government. There has been a constant tendency for British governments to resent and wish to curtail the power and influence of local government. Mr Blair's New Labour, as in so much else, has not yet clarified its attitude to local government beyond bland generalities. The offer of some form of regional government may not be a good thing for local government. But there can be no return to the municipal socialism of yesteryear. New Labour could begin by endorsing the European Charter of Local Self-Government, which all other EC governments have adopted and which some have begun to implement (and which, surprisingly, is not referred to in this volume). It is a hopeful sign that the subject of local government continues to attract the high quality of academic work represented by the contributors to this book.
John Delafons Visiting Professor University of Reading, UK
Nature's Keepers: The New Science of Nature Management Stephen Budiansky
Weidenfeld and Nicholson London (1995) £20 (in UK) The natural environment should not be thought of as a product of 'natural' forces. To do so is to adopt a myth that is inconsistent with the evidence
47 from natural environments around the world and is dangerous in that it implies that there is no need to manage 'natural' areas. It encourages the idea that it is appropriate simply to withdraw human influence and allow 'nature' to return the areas to their 'natural' state. Budiansky argues persuasively that the concept of climax in ecology is unhelpful in identifying appropriate management for the natural environment; a point well accepted by ecologists themselves but not widely recognized by environmentalists, especially those advocating preservationist approaches. In practice all areas are subject to relatively frequent upheavel and change. It is rarely possible for particular biological systems to operate in a stable context for a 'climax' to develop and to be maintained. Indeed instability is a source of vigour in many wildlife populations. Human influence is pervasive, even in areas thought to have been relatively untouched. The influence of fire on the prairies, deliberately used by North American Indians is adopted in detail to illustrate the argument. "The truth is that thousands of years of human history have effectively blotted out the very meaning of "artificial" and "natural". We cling to these terms at the cost of endless confusion and muddled thinking" (p 126). Budiansky is critical of alternative views and draws on a rich blend of hitory, experimental results and argument to make his case. He also makes use of many respected authorities whom we may have been expected to be in the other camp. Leopold in particular is used in support. He recognized the pervasive influence of humans on wildlife and the inevitability of human management. But where do such arguments lead? Human intervention is necessary in order to direct the pattern of environmental change. The science of nature management must play a central role and it is developing its own techniques for this. But the fear must be that to accept the argument that there is no single, superior goal for a natural environment, lays us open to the argument that any goal will do. And from that, to the one that advocates the
Book reviews
48 goal that maximizes (short-term) human advantage. Budiansky is aware of the problem. In order to search for criteria for the selection of objectives in nature management, Budiansky turns to economics. The argument here seems less secure. There is an extended analysis of grouse moor management in Scotland and northern England and of the successful role of research and analysis in identifying appropriate management. However, there will be many other circumstances where objectives and constraints, and hence management prescriptions, are less clear. But the nature management problem is inevitable; we will have to identify our human objectives for the 'natural' environment, to support ecosystem functions and to meet aesthetic and other demands, and then develop approaches to management that can support these. In the absence of this, we will not get the environments that we require.
lan Hodge Department of Land Economy University of Cambridge Cambridge CB3 9EP, UK
Planning, the Market and Private Housebuilding Glen Bramley, Will Bartlett Christine Lambert
and
UCL London (1995) 263 pp £12.95 (paperback) This is a book by three experienced housing researchers that draws together existing research on housing regulation and market interactions from a wide range of methodological standpoints to produce a heuristic model of the dynamics of private sector supply in Britain. Specifically focussed on the supply response of housebuilders to changes in demand at local level, the model attempts to predict the behavioural responses of builders and landowners to different regulatory inputs. With its pantheoretical approach drawing on the urban economics literature in North America, the economic modelling of British housing markets, and hedonic modelling to explain individual prefer-
ences, it represents an important contribution to the current debate on the effect and efficacy of market intervention. The authors' aim is to build a model capable of explaining the differences in house price and dwelling outputs between local authority districts, using factors of location, employment and social structure as proxies for demand, and construction costs, land availability, planning policies and profit constraints as the supply side factors. In determining the relationships between these factors, the authors first review academic work on market response to housing demand, developing and then testing hypotheses in model pilot runs. The initial assumption that local housing markets based on district boundaries are sufficiently separate and open on the demand side, was found on testing not to be a valid assumption. Assumptions that a demand shift would lead to a lagged response from suppliers but a quick response in price were more robust. Two fairly crude measures for expressing the responsiveness of land use planning to market forces were employed. The first measure was a 'restrictive' or 'very restrictive' categorization of County Structure Plans on the basis of their policies. The second proxy was the percentage of successful planning applications awarded by the districts. The authors use their model to test some of the myths about the restrictive effect of land use planning on both the price and supply of land for housing. Doubling the amount of housing land released over a 10 yr period through the planning system, using different assumptions about the time taken to exhaust the land, did not increase the supply of land onto the market for housing by more than 28% in any of the scenarios tested. The model suggested that as land supply increases, dwelling prices reduce to some extent, causing the profitability of housebuilding and the supply of land to fall. The additional land coming onto the market will be greater in high demand areas and lower in industrial and rural areas. Two conclusions are reached from these model runs. First, that the restriction of land supply through plan-
ning policies does raise house prices to some extent which redistributes in favour of existing owners and against tenants and new buyers. The authors are optimistic though that these increases are compensated by the affordable dwellings negotiated through planning agreements. The second conclusion is that housing supply is very inelastic in Britain both in terms of response to increased demand for new build and for conversions. They were able to demonstrate that even where the planning system allocates large quantities of land, housing supply is not highly elastic. This contrasts with the prodevelopment lobby argument that more land released will reduce prices and increase access to housing affordability in general. It appears that landowners derive more benefit from occupation than current market value, and that the highest value is retained by waiting for future gains. The model unfortunately doesn't throw any light either on housebuilder response to the increased primacy of the development plan or to demographic trends for smaller households. Housebuilders have always relied on flexibility in the planning system bringing forward sites in response to market pressure during periods of high demand. Housebuilders' land acquisition policies will now have to be tied more closely to local authority preferences for spatial growth and sustainable development. This increases their degree of uncertainty about future outputs and profits, and comes at a time when they are expected to contribute to infrastructure and social housing and when demand itself is more volatile. The authors recognize the important influence of urban land market on the policy options open to central and local government regulators. They demonstrate that because the housing land market is very inelastic in response to increased demand subsidies for owner occupation become capitalized in house prices rather than increasing housing output. The model therefore supports the governments' reduction in mortgage interest tax relief, which should help to reduce house prices. More sophisticated housing require-