of a convinced politician
is essential’
A number of innovative approaches have already been adopted in England to access funding from a range of different government departments and agencies. The evidence presented in the previous section related to specific projects in which departments and agencies from the health, environment, justice and social services sectors were all providing some project-based funding towards
investment in green space. To date, these initiatives have mainly been ad hoc in nature and in the initial or pilot stages of development. However, the safer and stronger communities fund (SSCF) could be considered the first step in central government formalising cross-departmental funding streams in England. The following table lists the strengths and weaknesses of multi-agency funding.
Model Multi-agency public sector funding
Strengths – Provides additional sources of finance to
support cross-cutting goals such as better public health, reduced crime and anti-social behaviour, improved environmental infrastructure and the provision of better green space
– Schemes for ex-offenders, for example, can provide labour for the maintenance of green space and help to encourage their integration into the labour market – Can encourage the development of partnership relations
with other sectors and build community capacity.
Weaknesses – In England, many initiatives to access funding from
diverse public sector budgets are in the early stages of development and established funding streams are rare – Competing pressures on public sector budgets (for
example the need to fund police, education and health) may limit funding for green space
– Grant funding from external sources can lead to pressure within local authorities to cut green space budgets.
Given the proven mutual benefits that can be achieved in the areas of health, social services and crime, there are clear opportunities for developing multi- agency funding approaches. The critical factors for success include:
– Identifying and recognising the cross-agency synergies: this requires multi-sectoral stakeholders to recognise that synergies can be created, to understand that different policy and departmental objectives can be achieved by funding good green space, and that cost savings can be realised in the long term.
– Working together on a multi-agency basis: this relates to co-operation at both strategic and operational levels. The strategic level involves providing direction for departmental co-operation, determining goals, targets and common green space programmes, while the operational level requires engagement with a range of interested local stakeholders.
52
Revenue that is ring-fenced for green spaces can be raised from a variety of local taxation initiatives. Some of these schemes have limited transferability from one country to another, since local tax-raising powers are inextricably linked to the national fiscal context. Some taxation initiatives depend on a local mandate or are included as part of local development schemes. The following table discusses the strengths and weaknesses of taxation initiatives.
Model Taxation initiatives
Strengths – Dedicated local taxation can secure reliable and
significant levels of resources
– Local taxation initiatives can ensure that green spaces benefit from any increases in property values that they
help generate78
– In cases where the initiative is directed towards property owners, it can increase self-interested participation – Though not providing funding initially, tax incentives can
provide a mechanism to encourage investment in local areas. Improvements for green space can be linked to the acceptance of the tax incentive.
Weaknesses – Local authorities in the UK do not have the autonomy
to introduce dedicated taxation for green spaces and government is generally unwilling to impose new or additional taxes
– Revenues from property taxes are open to competition for funding other public services
– Neighbourhood taxation is based on a voluntary
scheme, which means that the agreement of businesses and residents is required. Implementation heavily depends on local priorities, as green spaces have to compete with demands for funding other sectors – Tax incentive schemes involve an initial financial outlay
and the return may take time to be realised
– The linkage between green space development and regeneration of an area can be difficult to identify and
quantify, which may inhibit the introduction of the tax.79
The evidence reviewed suggests there are a number of critical factors that underpin good practice in the implementation of this funding approach:
– Convincing local stakeholders of the benefits of green space: local stakeholders have to be encouraged to vote for increased taxes.
– Understanding the regenerative role of green spaces: this is necessary if tax incentives such as a business and/or residential rate reduction period are to be introduced.
– Developing integrated strategies: it is vital to engage with other local stakeholders, maximise synergies with other funding initiatives and show how good-quality green space can improve the commercial and residential environment.
Taxation initiatives
78The value of public space: how high quality parks and public spaces create economic, social and environmental value, CABE Space, 2004.
79Does money grow on trees?CABE Space, 2005.