WHAT PRICE DEVELOPMENT?

Increasingly when it comes to development, whether for natural resources (and I include minerals and food produce here) or sustainable energy developments (in Wales, across Europe and around the world) there is an increasing problem of finding the right balance between economic development, the environment, job creation and the impact of development on the local community. In Europe, the problem is as real in the East as it is in the West as it is anywhere else in the world. Romania, an EU member, is one of the Europe’s poorest nations and has high unemployment, yet, is rich in natural resources.

Rosia Montana Gold Mine (Transylvania, Romania)

The case of the town of Rosia Montana (in Transylvania) which has high unemployment yet sits in and on rich mineral deposits of gold. In the communist era the town’s inhabitants paid a high price for with environmental pollution. Now local authorities (and many local people) are desperate for jobs and have understandably jumped at the prospect of investment from foreign investors who want to re-open the town's communist-era gold mine which appears to be a much needed lifeline.

Rosia Montana Gold Corporation (RMGC) the company behind the project, which was first mooted back in the mid-1990s, says that the new mine could benefit the Romanian economy to the tune of $19bn (£12bn) and create thousands of jobs in the process. The proposed mining project by the Canadian company Eldorado Gold Corporation through the Deva Gold Company at Certej, Hunedoara County, has just received the environmental permit from the Regional Environmental Protection Agency of Timisoara.

Not everyone thinks that this proposed development is a good thing, local activists and some residents are seriously concerned about the reopening of the old mine and the use of cyanide in ore processing. They may have a point, especially after leaks of toxic chemicals used in mining processes at Baia Mare (in Romania) in 2000 and more recently in neighbouring Hungry, had a massive impact on local people and the wider environment.

The proposed development aside will destroy some key archaeological sites, where there is archaeological and metallurgical evidence of gold mining from the classical period. Alburnus Maior was founded by the Romans during the rule of Trajan as a mining town, with Illyrian colonists from South Dalmatia. The earliest reference to the town is on a wax tablet dated 6 February AD 131. Archaeologists have discovered houses, necropolises, mine galleries, mining tools, 25 wax tablets and many inscriptions in Greek and Latin, centred around Carpeni Hill much of which will be destroyed if the mining project goes ahead. .

Whether we are talking about communities in the developed world or the developing world the bottom line has to be that that local people should have a significant say or even control over the development process and any community should benefit from the exploitation of local resources. Too many times (here in Wales and elsewhere) we have seen that promises of jobs have not been fulfilled and too many local communities have been left with a toxic environmental legacy and scant long term benefits.

DEVELOPMENT COSTS

The first quarter of the 21st Century may be written up by future Historians as the years when the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) rose to greatness and flexed its muscles on a global if not an imperial scale. Future historians may also note that these were the years when the PRC's influence in sub Saharan Africa grew at an exponential rate. There has been an almost imperial acquisition of resources in the sub-Sahara with one of the most sweeping, bare-knuckled, and bare faced acquisition of resource to feed the PRC's population and it's economy.

The USA (and the West) have been struggling economically and politically with the consequences of the War on Terror and the consequences of the World wide Banking crisis. In barely a few years, the PRC has become one of the more aggressive investor-states in Africa. This admittedly commercial invasion has been (and is) probably the most important economic and political development in the sub-Sahara since the Cold War ended, the economic map of the world has been quietly redrawn.

There are more Chinese citizens resident in Nigeria than there were Brits during the height of their empire. Chinese state-owned and state-linked corporations and small entrepreneurs have roll led across the continent in an almost unstoppable wave. It has been estimated that potentially around a million Chinese citizens are at work in sub-Saharan Africa. The PRC has created collateral economies and population monuments across the continent as it searches for and seeks to develop and control minerals and food resources.

No other world power has come close to showing the same interest (or muscle for that matter) or sought to cosy up to Africa's leaders. Now this is no War on Terror, democracy (flawed or not) is no being encouraged, nurtured or spread by the PRC - this is solely about finding what the PRC needs to feed China (figuratively and literally). Aside for having a political impact and snaffling up increasingly scare resources there has been an impact within the Sub Saharan African nations.

This has been manifested as trade unions begin to fight against some pretty grim (PRC imposed) working conditions (obviously and somewhat ironically the People's Republic of China (a notional communist and pretty repressive state) is obviously no great lover of any real trade union's and any political opposition for that matter. And as indigenous local farmers (and their families) find themselves pushed off their land as governments swayed by the PRC's largess sells  the land form underneath them. Pro and anti Chinese candidates fight elections in those Sub Saharan states where meaningful elections take place that is, and you can guess which ones get the benefits of PRC funding.

ECONOMIC REALITY AND VERBAL ASPIRATION

When it comes to economic development and regeneration providing the best conditions to enable our communities to grow and flourish, a sound planning policy is a key component. We should favour local small to medium sized enterprises and need to have much better thought out and far more consistent planning policies for in, out and edge of town retail developments, before our communities are damaged beyond repair.

Our Local Authorities have been too often tempted as developers offer includes, sweeteners and inducements to ease the passage of proposed developments. They may be advised of the financial consequences of planning applications being taken to appeal if permission is refused - so much for local democracy! Local Authorities periodically fail to have adequately researched retailing policies within their development plans. If retailing needs have not been assessed then it’s difficult to amend or refuse any potentially damaging planning applications from developers, then local small businesses and consumers pay the price.

Despite the talk (or lip service) about improving the vitality and viability of our town centres, many retail developments have consistently undermined this aim, many local authorities have turned a blind eye to the economic and social consequences of out of town or edge of town retail developments. The economic reality has fallen well short of the verbal aspiration, just look at the damage that has been done to Abergavenny, Chepstow and Monmouth within Monmouthshire and elsewhere in Wales.

How can local regeneration schemes work, when the once thriving commercial heart of our high streets has already been seriously damaged by an inability to compete on level terms with the increasingly aggressive tactics of supermarkets and retail chains who are chasing an ever larger market share. More than ever, our planners need to think about the long term economic consequences of planning decisions, to take the longer term view, rather than get fixated on short term financial gains and questionable inducements from developers.

You may have noticed that regeneration comes and goes in phases, in any particular community or town regeneration schemes will have cleaned areas up, built in cycle routes, created transport plans, pedestrianised streets, reopened them to traffic, re-pedestrianised them and made certain streets shared space with both cars and pedestrians (this is not as crazy as it sounds, and actually works) and so on.

We have restricted parking, created parking and removed parking, made it free and charged for it, created bus lanes, removed bus lanes and varied the hours when bus lanes can operate, etc - now this is all well and good and may reflect the latest trend in regeneration and development, but has it made the places where we live, work and shop any better? Has the regeneration process or scheme increased or generated wealth in our communities or provided people opportunities to get jobs, to go into business for themselves or generate wealth?

Regeneration is that often perceived (and sometimes it is) as being driven from the top down i.e. by elected bodies as a process that merely consults after the plans have been drawn up rather than before, during and after - any process run this way runs the risk of becoming deeply flawed. Our communities, towns and cities have over the years has been the recipient of much grant aid, development and redevelopment schemes and initiatives - how can we measure success?

Measuring a regeneration schemes success should be a key factor in the regeneration process. This is the question that needs to be asked - after the cement and the paint has dried, after the regeneration professionals have moved on - have the various schemes made a difference, I mean beyond any immediate physical improvements to the environment, have they made a real difference when it comes to wealth generation in the area affected by the regeneration scheme? If the end result is in reality a makeover, and the targeted community is no better off, save for being bereft of the 'regeneration funds' that have been effectively siphoned off by professional regeneration companies - is this success?

We need to think beyond the tick box list of the regeneration schemes managers? One key component that is often ignored or marginalised is the communities greatest resource - its people. So rather than regeneration and redevelopment professionals moving in and engaging in a token consultation process they should directly talk to and engage with local people and actually find out what they would like to be done, what they actually want for their community and their town.

Regeneration schemes and projects should be directed from the bottom up rather than the top down model that we often seem to pursue. When spending public money, then work it hard and squeeze out every possible benefit and maximise the impact locally of the regeneration process and build local benefits into the tendering process - whether by employing local people, using local resources, local skills and local input. If you are reusing or renovating old buildings then any regeneration scheme needs to ensure that old buildings can make a living after the regeneration scheme is finished.

If we do this rather than merely making a token gesture towards public consultation then any regeneration schemes will, with hard work really begin to deliver tangible benefits to our communities. After all regeneration should be a process rather than an event.