• shareshare
  • link
  • cite
  • add
auto_awesome_motion View all 2 versions
Publication . Article . 2009

Understanding success in the context of brownfield greening projects: The requirement for outcome evaluation in urban greenspace success assessment

K.J. Doick; G. Sellers; V. Castan-Broto; T. Silverthorne;
Open Access
Published: 01 Aug 2009 Journal: Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, volume 8, pages 163-178 (issn: 1618-8667, Copyright policy )
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Country: United Kingdom
Many European governments place strong emphasis on integrated land use policies, particularly the re-establishment of public open access greenspaces through brownfield land regeneration. The UK Government considers the regeneration of brownfield land a prime tool for the delivery of regional economic regeneration, neighbourhood renewal and international biodiversity commitments. A number of failed brownfield greening projects question both the sustainability of such undertakings and whether greenspaces are fulfilling the functions they were designed for. Reliance on developer-, funding body- and site owner-centric notions of success in project delivery evaluation, to the exclusion of social and environmental impacts, has failed to highlight revenue requirements for management and maintenance to maintain function and quality. Brownfield greening project aims and objectives can be characterised as inputs, processes, outputs and outcomes using the general organisational ‘logic’ framework model. Applying this framework to six UK case studies, this research demonstrated that most greenspace aims and objectives are in fact ‘outcomes’ delivered in the medium and long terms following regeneration. The model is supportive of integrated, stakeholder inclusive monitoring over short, medium and long time periods. Physicochemical and social data from the case study sites were employed to present a comprehensive evaluation of site success. In each case, a lack of monitoring and evaluation – combined with insufficient supporting revenue funds – failed to highlight site issues, changes in local emphasis and ultimately a lack of success with respect to project aims and site sustainability. This research supports claims that capital funds to regenerate land must be supported by a revenue package for management and maintenance, that monitoring must be a funded activity; and, that monitoring and evaluation in support of the management cycle will promote the long-term sustainability, value and use of a greenspace.
Subjects by Vocabulary

Microsoft Academic Graph classification: Business Brownfield Land use Revenue Sustainability Integrated project delivery Monitoring and evaluation Stakeholder Environmental resource management business.industry Brownfield land


Soil Science, Ecology, Forestry, Greenspace establishment, Logic model, Monitoring, Sustainability.

Related Organizations
Related to Research communities
Rural Digital Europe