Injecting a Natural Capital Planning Tool into Green-Blue Infrastructure Management The UK Natural Environment White Paper called for better delivery and management of green-blue infrastructure (GBI). Specifically: "Planning has a key role in securing a sustainable future. However, the current system is failing to achieve the kind of integrated and informed decision-making that is needed to support sustainable land use." (HM Government 2011:21). In Biodiversity 2020 Strategy Defra states: "Through reforms of the planning system, we will take a strategic approach to planning for nature. We will retain the protection and improvement of the natural environment as core objectives of the planning system." (Defra 2011:6). The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) concludes that "Local planning authorities should set out a strategic approach in their Local Plans, planning positively for the creation, protection, enhancement and management of networks of biodiversity and green infrastructure" (DCLG 2012:25). To meet these objectives for better assessment and management of GBI values a pilot Natural Capital Planning Tool (NCPT) was developed (2014), using the lens of Natural Capital (NC), allowing the indicative but systematic assessment of GBI values for planning procedures but without demanding specific ecological expertise by the tool user; The tool is available in a demo version but has not been live tested or undergone a peer-review process. This project aims to improve the incorporation and appreciation of GBI value and benefits within UK planning policy and decision making in terms of holistically and systematically assessing its NC and ESS. The end-users engaged in all stages of the project can include 7 case study partners (CSP's) covering both, governmental authorities and industry partners: Birmingham City Council, Central Bedfordshire Council, Southampton City Council, South Downs National Park Authority, Skanska, Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council and Tarmac. Additionally there are other end-users: Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS), Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) and Natural England. To deliver the project we have created 3 Work Packages (WPs). In WP1 the NCPT will be tested at several case study sites covering different GBI settings from rural to urban and different stages of the planning process from local to strategic. The NCPT application will enable end-users to establish more sustainable plans and designs and will also inform the development of the NCPT. WP2 emphasises translation via the running of 2 end-user engagement workshops to: (1) unpack and revise the NCPT, (2) assess the industry/planner demand, (3) explore and discuss the barriers, opportunities and requirements for system integration and industry acceptance, and (4) build capacity and new partnerships and networks to further develop and mainstream the NCPT. In addition we will establish a project steering group with representation from all project partners with the purpose to: (1) review and discuss subsequent outputs, (2) oversee the process and project delivery, (3) offer CSP's and other end-users a platform to discuss, exchange ideas, and share good and bad experiences; and to (4) explore the long-term opportunities and barriers for system integration of the NCPT and the value of GBI into planning more generally. Furthermore we will establish a NCPT review and examination group including experts from RTPI, RICS, Natural England and potentially other stakeholders such as IEEM, Defra, industry partners and other end-users. WP3 uses collected feedback to update the then peer-reviewed NCPT which will be published on a web portal making it available to the wider planning/developer community.

Green Infrastructure (GI) is the network of natural, semi-natural and managed green spaces and water features that provide benefits for people and wildlife. This includes woodlands, parks, gardens, playing fields, street trees, grass verges, green roofs, rivers, ponds, wetlands and sustainable urban drainage systems. GI offers a range of benefits, including flood protection, carbon storage, cooling, filtering of air and water pollution, space for recreation, and habitat for biodiversity. There is a wealth of academic research into the benefits of GI and a wide range of assessment tools have been developed by researchers, but many of these tools are not suitable for wider use, and there is no comprehensive guidance to help users choose and apply the best tools to meet their needs. This poses a problem for local planners, who face the challenge of developing effective networks of GI as budgets fall and demand for land for housing and infrastructure grows. This project is driven by the needs of Cherwell District Council, who are responsible for planning GI in Bicester. The town is set to double in size over the next 20 years, which will place pressure on existing GI - already being lost to infill development - but provides opportunities to create large areas of high-quality GI within the new developments, which include the UK's first eco-town in NW Bicester. The council needs tools to help them plan how to link existing GI with the new GI and the wider countryside, creating connected networks for wildlife and people, and how to ensure that the GI network delivers a wide range of benefits in the areas where they are most needed. The University of Oxford is therefore working with Forest Research to compile a toolbox of existing methods that can be used to plan and evaluate GI, and develop clear step-by-step guidance to help users select and apply the best tools to meet their needs. The tools and guidance will allow users to map and assess existing GI, identify opportunities for adding new GI or enhancing existing GI, and evaluate the benefits of these investments. We will work with local planners to apply this approach to developing a GI Plan for Bicester, and we will test the tools and guidance with potential future users in other local authorities to ensure that it can be applied more widely. By enabling planners, developers and green space managers to assess the impact of new developments on GI, and identify well-targeted cost-effective options for improving the GI network, we expect our project to have a significant impact in Bicester and beyond. Improved planning can maximise the benefits delivered by each area of GI and by the network as a whole. Valuation of the benefits delivered by GI can help to make the business case for investment, allowing more GI improvements to be delivered on the ground. A high quality network of well-designed GI can transform an area into a more attractive place to live, work and invest. As well as improving the health, wellbeing and quality of life of residents, this can boost jobs and economic development by creating new commercial opportunities in maintaining GI or running associated businesses (cafés, outdoor exercise classes etc). GI can also provide the most cost-effective way of adapting to climate change impacts by providing flood protection, shading and cooling. It can also provide opportunities for social engagement, local food production and educational activities, as well as protecting biodiversity. Keywords: Green infrastructure; ecosystem services; biodiversity; spatial planning; valuation; connectivity. Stakeholders: Cherwell District Council; Bioregional; Oxfordshire County Council; Oxfordshire Local Enterprise Partnership; Bicester Town Council; Wild Oxfordshire; BBOWT (wildlife trust); A2Dominion (Bicester eco-town developer); Ecosystems Knowledge Network; Green Infrastructure Partnership; Environment Agency; South Downs National Park Authority; Mersey Forest.

Rufopoly is a participatory learning board game enabling players to undertake a journey through a fictitious rural urban fringe called RUFshire, answering questions and making decisions on development challenges and place-making; those answers then inform each player's vision for RUFshire. The encountered questions are determined by the roll of a die and based on primary data collected for a Relu project (2010-2012) about Managing Environmental Change at the Rural Urban Fringe. Rufopoly has been used extensively in early stages of projects and plans such as the pioneering Greater Birmingham and Solihull Local Enterprise Partnership spatial plan and has been used by government, EU project groups, local authorities, business, community groups, universities and schools. It has exposed audiences to issues associated with the delivery and trade-offs associated with planning and environmental issues at the fringe but crucially without the use of complex jargon. We believe that the full potential and impact of Rufopoly has yet to be fully realised. There are several reasons for this: 1. Rufopoly was developed towards the end of our Relu project as an unplanned output for a conference run by Relu in 2011 on 'Who Should run the Countryside?'. Its success prompted its inclusion as an output. 2. There were insufficient funds for it to be successfully tested and integrated with policy and practice communities to maximise its utility as a learning tool as this was never the original intention of the project. 3. It is currently presented as a one size fits all board game of a hypothetical place. More time is needed to explore the potential of Rufopoly to become a generic platform for stakeholders wishing to develop their own versions of the tool to meet their own needs and to fill a widely recognised gap in the effectiveness of participatory tools for improved decsion making. This knowledge exchange project addresses these deficiencies by drawing together the shared knowledge and previous experiences of designers and users of Rufopoly. This informs a series of interactive workshops in Wales, England and Scotland to identify how this kind of game-format can be enhanced into a more effective and multifunctional tool. This will help extend and embed the impact for a range of policy and practice partners in the form of a Rufopoly Resource Kit. By working collaboratively with end users we can identify how Rufopoly can be reconfigured across different user groups and organisations in tune with their agendas and needs. There are four stages to this project: WP1: Review and learn lessons from previous Rufopoly experiences. This involves (1) an assessment of the actual results and findings from past games that were written up and the results analysed. (2) critical assessments of the strengths and weaknesses of Rufopoly from facilitators and core participants. We will draw priamirly from our UK experiences but are also able to secure insights from the international adaptations of Rufopoly from Nebraska (November 2013) and Sweden (2014). WP2: Conduct a series of interactive workshops with different policy and practice audiences. These workshops will be held in England, Scotland and Wales using members of the research team and other participants. The purpose of these workshops is to (1) share results of WP1; (2) assess how the tool could be reconfigured to address the principla needs and challenges facing participants; and (3) prioritise feasible options for a Rufopoly Resource Kit. WP3: Using WP1 and WP2 outcomes, we will design and trial (across our team) the Rufopoly 'Mk2' resource kit and associated materials/guidance. WP4: Launch the Rufopoly Resource Kit and guidance in a live streamed global workshop event. This would; reveal the basic resource kit as co-designed by the team and enable testers of the resource kit to share their experiences maximising knowledge exchange and its range of potential applications.

Not needed for this application