Exploring the critical factors and forces affecting the longevity and resilience of community-scale green infrastructure Thesis submitted in accordance with the requirements of the University of Liverpool for the degree of Doctor in Philosophy By Gemma Jerome September 2016 i AUTHOR’S DECLARATION This thesis is the result of my own work. The material contained in this thesis has not been presented, nor is currently being presented, either in part or wholly for any other degree qualification. I designed this research in conjunction with my supervisors and was solely responsible for data collection, analysis and write-up. i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, I would like to like to offer my gratitude to all of the interview participants who have contributed their rich experiences and perceptions to this thesis; and in particular, to the environmental stewards and volunteers without whom this research would not have been possible. I feel enriched by the experience of witnessing first-hand the diversity of activities made possible through the hard-work, determination, innovation and vision of small groups of individuals and the contributions of imaginative and skilful professionals. This thesis would not have been possible without the consistent and exceptional support of my supervision team, comprising Professor Dave Shaw, Dr Ian Mell and Dr Paul Jones. I would like to thank Dave for his coaching style, and specifically his calm composure and ability to navigate my oftentimes chaotic creative processes; with an abundance of colourful metaphors of course. And Ian, I would like to thank for his substantial kindness, for entertaining my frequent unannounced need for discourse, and for his unending belief that I could do this, and come out of the other side a better individual for it. I would like to thank The Mersey Forest, in particular Paul Nolan, Clare Olver, Jo Sayers and Susannah Gill, whose generous financial and professional support have facilitated a research study which builds on the understandings of practitioners who have engaged in supporting environmental stewards and volunteers for more than two decades, ensuring that this thesis is contributing new information and knowledge, which has both theoretical and practical value. I would like to thank the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) for their financial support over five years of postgraduate training. And finally, I would like to acknowledge the greatest of support and benevolence shown to me by all of my family and friends, especially to Matt, PhD lifeguard extraordinaire; and to my peers at the Universities of Liverpool and Manchester. The well of kindness I have been fortunate enough to draw from over these five years has not only buoyed me too many times to mention, and ensured my success in producing an authentic body of research I can feel proud of; but has inspired me to want to reach out further still in the next chapters of my career and explore in more depth the ways in which my ambitions as academic, activist and community champion may combine harmoniously to find meaningful research, reflect on radical action, and contribute positively to equitable human flourishing. Gemma Jerome, Liverpool, September 2016. ii ABSTRACT In an ongoing period of austerity in the UK, there is a growing assumption that communities will increasingly help deliver what have traditionally been seen as public services. This thesis seeks to explore the extent to which community groups make a significant contribution to the delivery and management of green infrastructure provision within a metropolitan context, using The Mersey Forest as the case study area. Whilst much has been made of the role of communities in managing land for food production the research identified that the range of community groups, and the differences between them in terms of their organisational structures and approaches to membership were in fact more nuanced and varied than much of the original literature suggested. Initially it was possible to create a typology of community-scale green infrastructure from a desk- search of 244 groups active within The Mersey Forest area. This provided a framework for defining, comparing and contrasting volunteer-led groups and projects actively managing sites of ecological or educational interest within their local environment. As a result, three distinct types of group were identified - Formal Group, Informal Group, Formal Project - differentiated according to approaches to governance, membership, funding, support and overall focus. This provided a thematic structure for exploring a number of case studies in more depth. Overall the findings of the qualitative study suggest that although community volunteers are a vital ingredient to the diversity of approaches to local greenspace management and environmental stewardship, the role of external stakeholders and professional bodies from the public and voluntary and community sector providing support and assistance is a crucial ingredient which is increasingly missing. In turn, the capacity of many groups and projects to achieve longevity and resilience in the face of unforeseen circumstance change, such as the end of a funding stream, or the discontinuation of a local authority funded environmental management role, is ultimately limited by the capacity inherent within the group; which in turn, is largely shaped around the experiential knowledge of individual members to capitalise on the skills necessary for land management and governance. From a policy perspective it can therefore be argued that ideological position encapsulated by the rhetoric of ‘The Big Society’ and legislated for within the Localism Act are inherently prejudiced towards groups and projects which can draw on individuals with experience of management, such as retired professionals in more affluent communities. In contrast, communities in less affluent areas are exposed to more risk with an inherently lower capacity for resilience; plus higher demands on existing budgets within these areas due to higher levels of public expenditure within areas of multiple deprivation, exacerbate an already pressurised situation. This finding is significant for the study and for wider decision-making in light of the mounting evidence illustrating the net positive benefits for health and wellbeing through regular access to natural greenspaces, particularly for individuals living in areas with high rates of health inequalities. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS AUTHOR’S DECLARATION ............................................................................................... i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................... ii ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................................... iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................... iv LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES .............................................................................................. x Figures ............................................................................................................................................. x Maps ............................................................................................................................................... xi Tables ............................................................................................................................................. xi CHAPTER ONE .................................................................................................................. 12 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 12 1.1 Political context: The Big Society - an ideological myth ...................................................... 12 1.2 Social context: Environmental stewardship as Community Action ..................................... 14 1.3. Policy context: Green Infrastructure as a mechanism for delivering, managing and maintaining green space at a local level ................................................................................... 17 1.4 Research Aim and Objectives .............................................................................................. 22 1.5 Research Methodology in Summary ................................................................................... 23 1.6 Thesis Structure ................................................................................................................... 24 1.7 ESRC CASE Award collaboration with The Mersey Forest ................................................... 25 CHAPTER TWO ................................................................................................................ 28 2. Defining Community-scale Green Infrastructure ...................................................................... 28 2.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 28 2.2 What is community-scale green infrastructure (CSGI)? ...................................................... 28 2.3 Policy and funding context of CSGI ..................................................................................... 41 2.4 Summary ............................................................................................................................