Weaknesses
You can distil one major systematic weakness to the phrase, "We've always done it this way".
Inflexibility in the planning system arises from short-term thinking. Consultation processes fail to offer meaningful engagement.
Inflexibility in the planning system arises from short-term thinking. Consultation processes fail to offer meaningful engagement.
Then there are competing agendas that inevitably lead to the dilution of ideas and concepts and a system that frequently shuts out smaller developers.
Meanwhile, as the local government funding crisis deepens, local and national governments keep clashing over building new homes. There's an ongoing power struggle between centralisation and devolution with the built environment caught somewhere in the middle.
Opportunities
The same imperfect system may offer ways for placemakers to increase their influence and get their voices heard. Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) has become mandatory for developments. It has the potential to provide evidence-based support for placemakers.
As already mentioned under strengths, the quality of landscape development offers an entry point for better placemaking.
Placemaking's adaptability and flexibility could give its practitioners and advocates more ways of influencing change.
Placemaking's adaptability and flexibility could give its practitioners and advocates more ways of influencing change.
It’s also worth noting that placemaking’s value is ongoing, extending beyond project development lifecycles to help ensure places continue to evolve.
Threats
Our discussion focused on a general sense of institutional averseness to liability.
Everyone wants to avoid the possibility of blame should schemes not turn out how they were envisioned.
Everyone wants to avoid the possibility of blame should schemes not turn out how they were envisioned.
This averseness works against adventurous or unusual ideas about place. Plus, non-professionals tend to find the whole process intimidating and off-putting, which mitigates against deeper community involvement in placemaking.
People have a general lack of trust in the system and established consultation and planning processes reinforce this.
Conclusion: Method before process
Placemaking represents a principled approach to development but it doesn't encompass a set approach.
Rather, it’s a collection of different methodologies, some offering significant challenges to orthodox thinking in the built environment.
This lack of uniformity may in fact be a placemaking super-power, avoiding the confines of process-driven approaches to improving the built environment.
This lack of uniformity may in fact be a placemaking super-power, avoiding the confines of process-driven approaches to improving the built environment.
Instead, placemakers prioritise individual methods over catch-all processes.
