Consultation Responses



 Academic Papers

 Policy Papers

 Briefing Notes

 Other External Outputs

A-Z of designing and writing better green infrastructure policies with a case study of Englands NPPF

Working with Max Hislop we have developed a new approach to improving the way that policies for green infrastructure are embedded in national, regional, local and neighbourhood plans.   

This works draws heavily on Max Hislops work for the Scottish Government here    pdf_icon_white.png 

So we are pleased to introduce the A-Z of designing and writing new and better policies that cover all the key components of green and blue infrastructure as well as including a key mainstreaming component.   

The story and results of this process are told in the following presentation given to the Valuing Nature Network on 13th November 2018 pdf_icon_white.png

First, there is the A to Z guide of 26 assessment criteria obtained from key research and practice components  pdf_icon_white.png

Second, there are some examples that show how the scoring might be undertaken for GI coverage of the 26 assessment criteriapdf_icon_white.png

Third, there is the assessment undertaken by myself and Max Hislop on the new NPPF . This supersedes a draft assessment I made at a recent presentation on 19th September 2018 to a NERC/TDAG/BIFOR green infrastructure workshop where I introduced a preliminary analysis of the NPPF. This has now been superseded by a much more rigorous assessment (with Max and myself) bundling the paragraphs together across the whole NPPF. The result is captured here xlsx_icon_white.png

The original presentation is here 



All comments are greatly appreciated - please help mainstream green infrastructure by adding to the conversation.

Here are my comments regarding potential areas to improve the New Criteria Vision table

1. Policy Plan Mainstreaming; Policy integration- needs to refer to other environmental policy priorities. This includes meeting global, national, regional and local regulatory and policy commitments, such as regarding protected habitats and species (CBD and Aichi targets, Wildlife Act, NPPF), supporting carbon reduction targets and other sustainability commitments (UNFCCC, UN Sustainable Development Goals)

3. Biodiversity habitats; Biodiversity gain; K:"GI must deliver habitat enhancements to increase biodiversity relevant to site" should insert at the end "and taking into account adjacent biogeography"

4. Physical environment - needs to include soil quality

6. Green Space- consider renaming subheading "Meet user needs" to "Inclusive provision" with the additional wording "GI will be designed to provideinclusive access to green spacerecreational facilities for different users & age groups, including visual amenity"

7. Stewardship- consider adding a new subheading "Monitoring and review" with the assessment critieria "Regular (annual?) site appraisal and review of GI delivery is conducted to improve current practice and enhance future benefits"

Best wishes,


Dr. Rosalie Callway

Project Officer

Partnership for Biodiversity in Planning

By: Dr. Rosalie Callway at: 09 Oct 2018, 12:59:51

A possible missing GI function is also Provisioning or productive GI, with assessment criteria as such "GI is designed to promote local economic and social benefits such as through sustainable food production, agroforestry, urban community farming and allotments, landscape amenity"

By: Dr. Rosalie Callway at: 09 Oct 2018, 13:22:22