Breadcrumbs
Partnership Working
LOCAL PARTNERSHIPS
Forming a cohesive and representative partnership has been an essential component of all of the demonstration projects. Where the partnership was thought to be lacking in some element, the project did not progress as well as was hoped. For example, where transport officers or professionals were not originally included in the partnership, engaging the transport sector (vital if wishing to gain funding through Local Transport Plans) proved difficult.
The Barrow "model" is highlighted as a particularly good way of ensuring effective working (small working group involving six organisations) whilst being inclusive and working with all of the relevant partners (wider steering group involving the working group plus over 20 user and interest groups).
The partnerships have taken time to build and maintain, and mutual commitment from all involved has been cited as an important factor. A central, co-ordinating officer has been shown to be very useful, if not essential. Partnerships have seen the demonstration projects through difficult times in terms of political change and authority re-organisation.
VISION
Having a stated vision can help to harness enthusiasm and set a challenge.
A common thread through the individual visions of the six demonstration projects is the aim of creating a network for the non-motorised user. Some, including the South East Dorset Greenlink, go further by hoping for a modal shift away from the car. The Watling Chase Demonstration Project stresses the desire for community involvement, while the Lincoln Demonstration Project states a date (2010) for the realisation of the network.
The individual visions of the demonstration projects do give an early illustration of the potential conflict of interests between recreational use and utility/transport use (where much of the potential public funding lies). This has led to a re-focusing of vision in some cases.
OBJECTIVES
The demonstration projects all focused on people and attempting to provide a resource to meet local demand, and each had a mixture of objectives, covering a variety of areas. These included objectives relating to recreation, transport/utility, health, partnerships, sustainable transport, tourism, safety and economic development. Those of the Lincoln Demonstration Project have a transport/utility bias, because the partnership identified that this is the prime source of funding. Others have a recreational slant, and this has been recognised as a barrier to progress as recreational demand is sometimes treated separately from real travel need. An important objective was that of integration within the wider transport network, including Rights of Way and public transport modes.
The level of achievement towards these objectives has in part depended on how SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time-related) they were. Where objectives were too ambitious from the outset, they have proven difficult to realise.
TIMESCALE
There was consensus that three years is too short a timescale to achieve the implementation of a Greenways network, or any kind of modal shift in people's transport choices. The timescale did not account for committee cycles and organisational change, and there were unexpected events such as Foot and Mouth Disease to contend with. It is recognised that involving the community can be a lengthy process.
Despite this, there have been significant achievements within the 3-year timescale. Good working partnerships have been formed, the profile of the Greenways concept has been raised and potential networks have been identified (and begun to be implemented). Countryside Agency funding secured support from partners to the concept, and has acted as a lever to secure other funding in most of the demonstration project areas.
In many cases the short timescale forced the demonstration projects to be opportunistic in their route creation, rather than adhering to a particular strategy. Having a long-term Strategy, along with an Action Plan setting out objectives over a shorter timescale, has helped to set out a realistic programme of incremental development over the next 5-10 years.
COMMUNICATION
Where present, a co-ordinating project officer has been a vital component of effective communication. Having a central contact to refer to, who chairs meetings, sends out minutes and distributes information, has been very much appreciated by partners. Other methods of communication that were used include websites, conferences and newsletters. Existing Community Forest networks were beneficial in terms of communication, and were extended, especially to include transport officers.
