Copy igh © 2017 Vilnius Gediminas Technical Uni e si y (VGTU) P ess
h p://www. and online.com/ pa
1
THE USE OF INDICATORS IN THE EVALUATION OF RETAIL PLANNING:
EVIDENCES FROM ENGLAND
Ped o Po í io Cou inho GUIMARÃES
Cen e o Geog aphical S udies, Ins i u e o Geog aphy and Spa ial Planning,
Uni e sidade de Lisboa, Rua B anca Edmée Ma ques, 1600–216 Lisboa, Po ugal
E-mail: ped oguima [email protected]
Recei ed 17 Augus 2015; accep ed 26 No embe 2015
Abs ac . Re ail planning gained impo ance wi h he in oduc ion o inno a ion in ha sec o , which challenged he i ali y and
iabili y o own cen es. Wi h his e olu ion and he a ise o Town Cen e Fi s in England, he e ail planning key documen s
s a ed o inco po a e indica o s o help and s anda dize he moni o ing o he heal h o own cen es. This a icle aims o analyse
he p ocess o e alua ion and e i y he e olu ion o indica o s sugges ed in he se e al public documen s ha cons i u e e ail
planning in England since 1993. I was based on he e iew o he main documen s es ablished in England since 1993. The esea ch
de eloped in his pape helps o upda e some in o ma ion and is aluable o u ban planne s, p ac i ione s and academics. In his
pape we conclude ha indica o s a e been used bu wi hou been amed in an e alua ion amewo k and he a iabili y o sugges-
ed indica o s may ha e limi ed he analysis o he empo al e olu ion o own cen es. In e ms o esea ch implica ions his pape
helps o, in pa , pa h he way o u u e esea ch in his ield.
Keywo ds: e alua ion, e ail planning, England, indica o s, Planning Policy Guidance, Planning Policy S a emen .
In oduc ion
Re ail is a p i a e ac i i y h ough which goods and
se ices a e sold and, al hough no es ic ed o u ban
a eas, i ’s in hese a eas ha i eaches i s maximum
exp ession. The public egula ion o e ail has gained
impo ance o e he las decades in se e al Wes e n
Eu opean coun ies (as example see: Ne he lands
(Spie ings 2006; E e s 2002); F ance (Colla 2003);
Ge many (Ba h, Ha mann 2003); Sweden (Kä holm
2012)). The changes in his sec o caused a dec ease in
he i ali y and iabili y o own cen es (see Ra ensc o
2000; Schille 1994; URBED 1994). Usually e e ed as
e ail planning, one may conside ed i as he egula-
ion ca ied ou on e ail sec o which e lec , di ec ly
o indi ec ly, he na ional de elopmen s a egy o he
sec o (Guima ães 2016). In he English con ex , among
many o he s, au ho s such as Guy (2007, 2002), Findlay
and Spa ks (2014) ha e wo ked on his subjec . The
egula ion in his coun y has been cha ac e ized by
he de elopmen o Planning Policy Guidance’s and
S a emen s. Associa ed wi h hese documen s is he
p o ision o indica o s o analyse he heal h o own
cen es (Communi ies and Local Go e nmen 2009,
2012; Depa men o he En i onmen 1996). The ole
o p i a e associa ions has also been ele an in his
p ocess, o which one may enhance he Associa ion o
Town & Ci y Managemen ( o me Associa ion o Town
Cen e Managemen ) wi h he elease o epo s and
Town Cen e Heal h Check (Associa ion o own cen e
managemen 2015). Recen ly, a s udy commissioned by
his associa ion and by Coca-S e aniak (Coca-S e aniak
2013) in oduced a new se o indica o s o measu e
own cen e pe o mance.
Ma e ial and me hods
This a icle aims o analyse he p ocess o e alua ion
and e i y he e olu ion o indica o s sugges ed in
he se e al documen s ha cons i u e e ail planning
in England since 1993. This s udy was based on he
analysis o he key documen s ha se he amewo k
o e ail planning o ha coun y. In he ollowing
sec ion we will discuss he p ocess o e alua ion.
Subsequen ly, we will ocus on English e ail planning
and indica o s sugges ed on public documen s. Finally,
jou nal o a CHITECTu E anD u BanISM
ISSn 2029-7955 / eISSn 2029-7947
2017 Volume 41(1): 1–8
doi: 10.3846/20297955.2016.1182877
P. P. C. Guima ães. The use o indica o s in he e alua ion o e ail planning: e idences om England
2
some concluding ema ks will be made. Al hough
he e is some esea ch on his opic (Hogg e al. 2001,
2004; Pal, Sande s 1997; Cen e o Ad anced Spa ial
Analysis 2000, Ra ensc o 2000) he e is a need o
upda e i . E en hough he e is some backg ound o
p i a e commissioned epo s (see o example Coca-
S e aniak 2013; BIS 2010, 2011) a some poin s his
analysis has a desc ip i e na u e because he e is s ill
a lack o ecen scien i ic discussion on he use o in-
dica o s in e ail planning, gap ha his a icle ies
o o e come and cons i u es, a same ime, pa o he
no el y o his a icle and he eason why his esea ch
may be o in e es o esea che s, u ban planne s and
p ac i ione s.
The p ocess o e alua ion
E alua ion is a e y inclusi e p ocess used in a wide
a ay o con ex s and a di e en s ages: ex-an e, on-
going o ex-pos . The ex-an e e alua ion means ha i
will be analysed he p ojec ed impac s o he subjec
o e alua ion be o e i is implemen ed. The ongoing is
done du ing he implemen a ion o he p og amme
and usually i ’s used o s ill make some amendmen s.
Finally, acco ding o Alexande (2006:7), he ex-pos
e alua ion “in ol es measu ing o assessing he im-
pac s and e ec s o he subjec unde aking– policy,
plan, p og am o p ojec .”
Among many o he con ex s, i can be applied in an
en ep eneu ial en i onmen , aiming he e alua ion o
cus ome sa is ac ion o o he e alua ion o ou is ’s
sa is ac ion ega ding a pa icula ou is ic des ina ion.
I also can be used in he con ex o de elopmen p o-
g ams, egene a ion p ojec s o public policies. In his
case, he impo ance o e alua ion a ises om he need
o in o m s akeholde s such as agencies o unding in-
s i u ions, local au ho i ies, planning o ice s, e aile s
and axpaye s i he p og am o which con ibu ed,
managed o achie e he desi ed impac (G eene 2009:
216). Mo e han in o ma ion abou he amoun spen is
c ucial o know he achie ed impac s. As a complemen ,
he e alua ion p ocess can be use ul o suppo policy
decisions o imp o e he pe o mance o ongoing and
u u e p og ams (Wholey 2010:652). While ocusing
on public sec o p oduc i i y, Ha y (1978: 28) used a
spo s analogy ha also sui s his esea ch: “Unless you
a e keeping sco e, i is di icul o know whe he you a e
winning o losing”. The e alua ion exe cise should be
an impo an sou ce o lea ning and social inno a ion,
especially o hose esponsible o he ins umen un-
de assessmen , o ins i u ions and ac o s wi h whom
hey come in o in e ac ion in his con ex , and o he
gene al public (Fe ão, Mou a o 2010: 21). Focusing on
u ban planning, Oli ei a and Pinho (2009: 36) con-
side ha e alua ion imp o es i s p ac ice, legi ima e
hese p ocesses o ci izens, help policy planne s and de-
cision-making and allows he cons uc ion o a p ac ical
planning based on con inuous lea ning p ocess. Despi e
he acknowledged impo ance, i ’s usual he exis ence o
gaps in hese p ocesses. Dhaliwal and Tulloch (2011: 18)
ocusing on social policies explains hem clea ly:
“Billions o dolla s a e spen e e y yea on
de elopmen policies and p og ams, bu he e
is ela i ely li le igo ous e idence on he ue
impac hese p og ams ha e on he li es o he
poo . […] This sca ci y o igo ous e idence
on p og am impac , and he echnical
language in which he li le e idence ha
does exis is p esen ed, makes i inaccessible
o policymake s, many o whom hen ely on
in ui ion and anecdo al e idence in deciding
which p og ams o und and implemen ”.
E alua ion: amewo ks and me hods
The e alua ion o policies and/o p og ammes is usually
amed in a concep ual amewo k and subsequen ly is
ealized h ough di e en me hods. In he Eu opean
con ex , he wo k o he Eu opean Commission
s ands ou . In o de o e alua e he applica ion o he
S uc u al Funds wo s udies o highe impo ance
we e de eloped: MEANS (Means o e alua ing ac-
ions o a s uc u al na u e) and he guide EVALSED
(The esou ce o he e alua ion o Socio-Economic
De elopmen ). The i s consis s o six olumes and was
p epa ed by he Eu opean Commission in 1999, aiming
o p esen a cohe en se o me hods o espond o he
p oblems encoun e ed du ing he e alua ion o in e -
en ions suppo ed by he S uc u al Funds (Eu opean
Commission 1999: 5). Following imp o emen s in
he ield o e alua ion, new expe iences in Eu opean
policies, he inc easing numbe o EU membe s and
he need o a mo e s a egic app oach in he e alu-
a ion o S uc u al Funds, i became necessa y o up-
da e his publica ion. In his con ex , in 2008, he s udy
EVALSED was eleased, comp ising a suppo guide
and h ee books: E alua ion app oaches o pa icula
hemes and policy a eas; E alua ion me hods and ech-
niques; Resou ce ma e ial on e alua ion capaci y build-
ing. This is a gene al s udy and assumed he di icul y
o b inging oge he he ideal condi ions o ca y ou an
e alua ion, ei he o he lack o da a, he limi a ion o
ime, he a ailabili y o ools o he abili y o pe o m i
(Eu opean Commission 2008: 5).
The amewo k de eloped in his guide is desc ibed
in he Figu e 1. I conside ed necessa y o analyse he
objec i es, inpu s, ou pu s and esul s in o de o
ob ain he speci ic impac s o a ce ain p og amme.
Depending on he dep h o analysis, his guide also
Jou nal o A chi ec u e and U banism, 2017, 41(1): 1–8 3
iden i ies ou e alua ion ca ego ies ha ela es o he
ele ance o he p og am, wi h i s e iciency, e ec i e-
ness and u ili y (Eu opean Commission 2008: 41).
This guide (Eu opean Commission 2008: 42) explains
wha is mean by each o he ca ego ies. So, ele ance
“ e e s o he app op ia eness o he explici objec i es o
he p og amme in ela ion o he socio-economic p ob-
lems i is supposed o add ess”; e ec i eness “conce ns
whe he he objec i es o mula ed in he p og amme
a e being achie ed, wha he successes and di icul ies
ha e been, and how app op ia e he solu ions chosen
ha e been and wha is he in luence o ex e nal ac o s”;
“e iciency is assessed by compa ing he esul s ob ained
o , p e e ably, he impac s p oduced, and he esou ces
mobilized” and u ili y “judges he impac s ob ained by
he p og amme in ela ion o b oade socie al and eco-
nomic needs”. This s udy also e e s o sus ainabili y,
e alua ion p ocess ha examine he du a ion o impac s.
In his espec i mus be examined wha ealis ic expec -
a ions one may conside .
O he amewo ks ha e been de eloped, like he
one p esen ed by Moo e and Spi es (2000: 219, based
on he wo k o PACEC 1999), which p esen ed a con-
cep ual amewo k ocused on he ex-pos e alua ion
o u ban egene a ion p og ammes. Al hough he e
a e some simila i ies wi h he E alsed guide ame-
wo k, especially ega ding he ou lined concep s,
hese a e displayed in a mo e in eg a ed way, which
makes i easie o unde s and. In his amewo k i ’s
enhanced he s a egic objec i es o he p og ammes,
inpu s, ac i i y measu es, syne gy, ou pu s and ou -
comes measu es, g oss impac s and he Ne impac s
on u ban a eas. Coca-S e aniak (2013) pe o mance
amewo k is ano he example and is ancho ed on ou
hemes: people and oo all; di e si y and i ali y o
place; consume and business pe cep ions; economic
cha ac e is ics. Al hough speci ically de eloped o
own cen es his is a amewo k based on an ongoing
e alua ion p ocess and, he e o e, wi h limi a ions as
o he dep h o he pe o med analysis.
Unde lying he di e en e alua ion amewo ks is
he use o di e se kind o me hods, like Impo ance-
pe o mance analysis (see Ri iezzo e al. 2009; Musa
e al. 2010), Analy ical Hie a chy P ocess (Pineda-
Henson e al. 2002; Saa y, Va gas 2013), Cos –bene-
i analysis (Nybo g 2014), Mul i-c i e ia analysis
(Macha is, Be na dini 2015), among many o he s.
The use o indica o s in English e ail planning
Re ail planning in England was, un il he mid-1990s,
cha ac e ized by he educed es ic ion o he appea -
ance o new comme cial o ma s and hei deploymen
ou side he es ablished adi ional cen es o com-
me ce. A e ha pe iod he e was an in e sion wi h
he ise o Town Cen e Fi s policy, whose i s ap-
p oach was in 1993, h ough Planning Policy Guidance
6 (PPG6). In his pe iod, we also wa ch he use o e ail
as a c ucial elemen o se e al u ban egene a ion p o-
jec s, mainly h ough he deploymen o shopping cen-
e s in cen al a eas (see Lowe 2005, 2007; Jayne 2006)
and he eme gence and dissemina ion o own cen e
managemen schemes. Agains his backg ound, he
English go e nmen s a ed o inco po a e a se o in-
dica o s in he main key documen s o e ail planning.
These indica o s, en i led Key Pe o mance Indica o s
(KPI) (Hogg e al. 2004) ha e been sugges ed in se e al
ig.1. Selec ing p io i y e alua ion ques ions
Sou ce: Eu opean Commission (2008).
P. P. C. Guima ães. The use o indica o s in he e alua ion o e ail planning: e idences om England
4
pieces o legisla ion o ha coun y (Planning Policy
Guidance (PPG) and Planning Policy S a emen (PPS)).
The main objec i e is o measu e he heal h o own
cen es. I is accep ed as ele an he use o indica o s
o his pu pose because i allows he pe iodic moni -
o ing o he own cen e and o co ec some aspec
in which he cen e is no wo king p ope ly. The use
o he e m “heal h” in his con ex has been widely
sp ead in he li e a u e ha uses English case s udies
and he se o indica o s used o measu e i is called
Town Cen e Heal h Check. Alongside, i also allows
he jus i ica ion o he in es men made by de elope s
in wo s ages. In he i s , in o ms in es o s abou he
ele ance o he pe o med in e en ion. In he second
s age, se es o a ac new de elope s, by demons a -
ing he e u n o he in es men made by he al eady
es ablished in es o s.
In England, al hough he collec ion o indica o s is
no manda o y bu only ecommended, i should be done
sys ema ically, allowing o ace he egula e olu ion o
he a ea. The indica o s p esen ed in Table1 began o be
sugges ed in he e ision o he documen ha guided
he de elopmen o e ail, he e ised Planning Policy
Guidance 6 (PPG6) o 1993. In his documen only
se en indica o s we e sugges ed. In he ollowing yea ,
wi h URBED epo “Vi al and Viable Towns Cen es:
Mee ing he Challenge” (URBED 1994), his numbe
emained unchanged al hough e aile ep esen a ion
was eplaced by he S a e o own cen e en i onmen al
quali y. This epo also poin ed ou he impo ance o
i ali y and iabili y in he analysis o he heal h o own
cen e. O he indica o s we e indica ed, bu ha e been
ega ded as o ma ginal impo ance.
A e 1994 h ee o he documen s we e p oduced,
all o hem inco po a ing indica o s conside ed ele -
an o measu e he i ali y and iabili y o own cen es.
Wi h he sugges ion o indica o s, h ough documen s
wi h na ional co e age, i is in ended ha hei collec-
ion become s anda dized, allowing he compa ison
be ween di e en a eas.
The 1996 e ision o PPG6 ex ended he numbe
o indica o s o ele en. The in oduc ion o new docu-
Table1. Indica o s used in he documen s ela ing o e ail planning in England
Indica o s PPG6
(1993) u BED epo
(1994) PPG6
(1996) PPS6
(2005) PPS4
(2009) nPP
(2012)
Di e si y o uses X X X X X
e aile ep esen a ion X X X X
e aile demand (plans o change) X X X X X
Shopping en s X X X
P opo ion o acan s ee le el p ope y X X X X X
Comme cial yields on non-domes ic p ope y X X X X X
Pedes ian lows X X X X X
accessibili y X X X
Cus ome iews and beha iou X X X
Pe cep ion o sa e y & occu ence o c ime X X X
S a e o own cen e en i onmen al quali y X X X X
Physical s uc u e o he cen e X X
The amoun o e ail, leisu e and o ice loo
space in edge-o -cen e and ou -o -cen e
loca ions; X X
Po en ial capaci y o g ow h o change o
cen es in he ne wo k X X
land alues and he leng h o ime key si es
ha e emained unde eloped X
o he indica o s Demand om e ail mul iples; anking o mul iples
p esence; space in use; p o ile o e aile s; acancy
a es; quali y o he cen e.
Sou ce: Cen e o ad anced Spa ial analysis (2000); u BED (1994); Depa men o he en i onmen (1996);
o ice o he Depu y P ime Minis e (2005); Communi ies and local go e nmen (2009, 2012).
Jou nal o A chi ec u e and U banism, 2017, 41(1): 1–8 5
men s in 2005 and 2009 u he b oadened his numbe
o hi een and ou een, espec i ely.
The las e ail planning documen – Na ional
Planning Policy F amewo k (Depa men o
Communi ies and Local Go e nmen 2012) – edi ed
in 2012 is he i s , since PPG6 o 1993, o no inco -
po a e any indica o s. Only i e indica o s emained
du ing he 16 yea s and i e key documen s: di e si y o
uses, e aile demand, p opo ion o acan s ee le el
p ope y, comme cial yields on non-domes ic p ope y
and pedes ian lows. The emaining indica o s we e
only sugges ed in ewe cases, b eaking he con inui y
ha should cha ac e ize e alua ion.
As new egula ions we e eleased, new indica o s
we e inco po a ed, such as accessibili y, cus ome
iews and beha iou , pe cep ions o sa e y and occu -
ence o c ime, among o he s. Assuming he di icul y
o collec hem, i was p obably expec ed ha inc eas-
ing he numbe o sugges ed indica o s would posi -
i ely in luence he numbe o hose which was going
o be e ec i ely collec ed.
The use o hese and/o o he indica o s is op ional.
In u ban a eas, he ga he ing o indica o s has gene -
ally been done h ough Town Cen e Heal h Check,
an analogy made o he measu emen o he heal h o
own cen es. I is a ailable online a wide ange o such
s udies. Fo example, in he coun y o Fi e, Sco land,
se e al Town Cen e Heal h Check we e unde aken,
ocusing on di e en aspec s: (1) analysis o consume
pe cep ions o ou cen es– Glen o hes, Ki kcaldy;
S And ews and Dun e mline. These s udies we e con-
side ed c ucial o iden i y he necessa y in e en ions
o main aining he iabili y and i ali y o hose a eas
(Fi e Council 2009, 2011); (2) in 2012 ano he s udy was
p epa ed on he pe cep ion o he quali y o exis ing
co e a eas, o which isi o s and po en ial in es o s
we e in e iewed, wi h he pu pose o p oceeding o
he c ea ion o a ma ke ing s a egy o ien ed o an ex-
e nal audience (Thinkingplace 2012); (3) cha ac e iz-
a ion o he e ail sec o in his a ea, se ing as suppo
o he a ious municipal de elopmen plans (Rode ick
MacLean Associa es L d 2012). In o he case, in he
heal h check d awn o he cen e o Su on (London
Bu ough o Su on 2010), i was decided o collec he
indica o s sugges ed in PPS4.
The use o indica o s, whe he by o mal heal h
check lis s o o he mo e in o mal ways can be done by
bo h public and p i a e sec o . In he i s case, he ci y
council acqui es a p ominen posi ion. In he second
case, he own cen e managemen schemes and, mo e
ecen ly, business imp o emen dis ic s a e inc eas-
ingly assuming a leading ole.
Some cons ain s in he e alua ion p ocess
Some p oblems a ise om he e alua ion app oach
used in English e ail planning. Wi h a ocus in
u ban own cen es, one should ake in conside a-
ion ha hese a eas a e e y likely o change, making
i di icul o co ec alloca e he esponsibili y o a
ce ain measu e o policy. Ano he e e yday aspec s
in oduces di icul ies o he e alua ion and da a col-
lec ion mechanisms: (i) some imes hose esponsible
o he implemen a ion o p og ammes, policies o
p ojec s a e mo e conce ned wi h managing he daily
wo k; (ii) some necessa y da a o e alua ion may no
be easy o ge . Fo example, da a ela ing o he i-
abili y o he a ea, such as e enue and he numbe
o unoccupied s o es and da a ela ing o i ali y, as
he pedes ian low a e no a ailable and a e e y ex-
pensi e o ob ain. The alloca ion o human esou ces
o he collec ion o da a is, mos o he imes, ha d
o achie e, ega dless whe he i will be collec ed by
public local au ho i ies o p i a e schemes o asso-
cia ions. In addi ion o hese di icul ies, in o de o
unde s and he e olu ion o he a eas, i is necessa y
ha bo h he i ali y- ela ed da a and hose ela ing
o he iabili y would be collec ed pe iodically, which
usually discou age hei ga he ing and makes i an
un easible p ocess. Some imes, as Hogg e al. (2004:
313) a es ed e en i a ce ain indica o is conside ed
ele an by a p ojec manage , i s ill may no be used,
which will in oduce limi a ions o he compa abili y
o di e en a eas. These p oblems a e no es ic ed
o he English, B i ish o e en he Eu opean con ex .
Mullin and Ko al (2003: 11) iden i ied hese di i-
cul ies in he No h Ame ican con ex . Acco ding o
hese au ho s, al hough mos cen al a eas e i aliza-
ion p ojec s in end o inc ease he i ali y, iabili y
and sus ainabili y o a ge ed a eas, ac ually end up
no es ablishing any c i e ia o he e alua ion o p o-
jec s. The e alua ion o p ojec s e en ually alls back
on he in ui ion o local public au ho i ies.
I has also been a p oblem in e ms o scale and
compa abili y o da a. In he English na ional con-
ex , he ange o in e ened a eas by egene a ion
p ojec s has been e y wide. E alua ions, especially
hose based exclusi ely on he collec ion o indica o s,
can ha dly inco po a e local speci ici ies o dis u bed
a eas. Apa om hese ea u es, he p esence o some
p oac i e s akeholde s can be a decisi e ac o in he
success o he p ojec . As iden i ied in he li e a u e,
he p esence o hese local leade s (Fo sbe g e al.
1999; Pu due e al. 2000; Hamble on 2003; Hamble on
e al. 2001) can decisi ely in luence he success o ail-
u e o a p ojec .

P. P. C. Guima ães. The use o indica o s in he e alua ion o e ail planning: e idences om England
6
Conclusions
While i is isible an e o o ca y ou e alua ion p o-
cesses in English e ail planning, h ough he sugges-
ion o indica o s o allow he analysis o he heal h
o own cen es, he e is no in eg a ed in o ma ion
enabling an assessmen o impac s, a leas one ha
would be app oxima ed o a amewo k like he ones
de eloped by he Eu opean Commission and PACEC.
Wha we ound in he key documen s is a se o indic-
a o s, whose a iabili y be ween documen s doesn’ a-
cili a e he compa ison o he analysis o he empo al
e olu ion. Al hough he e a e some p i a e epo s
(Coca-S e aniak 2013; BIS 2011, 2010) hey e lec he
unding associa ion poin o iew, which may be di -
e en han he one he na ional go e nmen may ha e.
One may conclude ha indica o s used in English
e ail planning documen s a e un amed and should
be in a amewo k ha would jus i y i s use by he
di e en s akeholde s, which he e o e, could ecog-
nize i s impo ance. We conclude ha a smalle se o
well-es ablished indica o s ha may pe sis o e ime
would be he be e solu ion. The e o e, i would allow
he empo al compa ison o he same a ea and he e -
i o ial compa ison be ween di e en own cen es o
in e ened a eas. Thus, we ecommend o look back o
p e ious and cu en public documen s (Table1) and
gi e p io i y o he indica o s ha we e sugges ed in all
o he majo i y o he documen s. Hence, ega dless o
he limi a ions, ha se o indica o s would s ill gi e an
o e iew o he e olu ion o a ce ain own cen e, in-
s ead o he pho og aphic iew ha indica o s collec ed
only once ( empo al dimension) gi e. E en hough i
was no he aim pu sued in his a icle, wi h his e-
sea ch we ha e somehow pa h he way and demons a e
he necessi y o a esea ch ha would es ablish such
a se o indica o s. In p ac ical e ms, he cons ain s
ound in he English con ex a e impo an o u ban
planne s, p ac i ione s and academics because i may
p o ide some assis ance in he de ini ion o u u e e al-
ua ion indica o s and concep ual amewo ks, no only
in England bu also in o he coun ies.
Acknowledgemen s
This wo k was suppo ed by he Po uguese na ional
unding agency o science, esea ch and echnology.
We wish o hank he Cen e o Geog aphical S udies
om Lisbon Uni e si y, he edi o s o his jou nal and
he wo anonymous e iewe s o hei commen s on
he p e ious e sion o he pape .
Re e ences
Alexande , E. 2006. E olu ion and s a us: whe e is plan-
ning-e alua ion oday and how did i ge he e? In E.
Alexande (Ed.). E alua ion in planning– e olu ion and
p ospec s. Hampshi e: Rou ledge, 3–15.
Associa ion o own cen e managemen 2015. Town Cen e
Heal h Check [online], [ci ed Oc obe 2015]. A ailable om
In e ne h p://www. owncen eheal hcheck.o g.uk/
Ba h,K.; Ha mann, M. 2003. Ge many, in S. Howe (Ed.).
Re ailing in he Eu opean Union: s uc u es, compe i ion
and pe o mance. London: Rou ledge, 56–80.
BIS. 2011. Unde s anding High S ee Pe o mance [on-
line], [ci ed 23 Oc obe 2015]. Depa men o Business,
Inno a ion and Skills, UK. A ailable om In e ne :
h ps://www.go .uk/go e nmen /uploads/sys em/up-
loads/a achmen _da a/ ile/31823/11–1402-unde s and-
ing-high-s ee -pe o mance.pd
BIS. 2010. Heal hy High S ee ? A Heal hcheck o High S ee s
and Town Cen es [online], [ci ed 23 Oc obe 2015].
Depa men o Business, Inno a ion and Skills, UK.
A ailable om In e ne : h ps://www.a cm.o g/ own-
eamuploads/1183-aheal hckech o high s ee sbis
Cen e o Ad anced Spa ial Analysis. 2000. Town cen e i-
ali y & iabili y: a e iew o he heal h check me hodology:
pilo s udy. A epo o he na ional e ail planning o um.
London.
Coca-S e aniak, A. 2013. Success ul own cen es: de eloping
e ec i e s a egies. Technical epo . Associa ion o Town
& Ci y Managemen , UK.
Colla, E. 2003. F ance, in S. Howe (Ed.). Re ailing in he
Eu opean Union: s uc u es, compe i ion and pe o mance.
London: Rou ledge, 23–55.
Communi ies and Local Go e nmen (CLG). 2012. Na ional
planning policy amewo k. Communi ies and Local
Go e nmen , UK.
Communi ies and Local Go e nmen (CLG). 2009. PPS 4–
planning o sus ainable g ow h. Communi ies and Local
Go e nmen , UK.
Depa men o Communi ies and Local Go e nmen 2012.
Na ional Planning Policy F amewo k. Depa men o
Communi ies and Local Go e nmen , London.
Depa men o he En i onmen (DOE). 1996. Re ised PPG6.
Depa men o he En i onmen , UK.
Dhaliwal,I.; Tulloch, C. 2011. Pa 4: Using impac e alua ions
o in o m policy, in E idence o social policy and p ac ice:
pe spec i es on how esea ch and e idence can in luence
decision making in public se ices. Nes a, London, 18–23
[online], [ci ed 05 Janua y 2015]. A ailable om In e ne :
h p://www.nes a.o g.uk/si es/de aul / iles/e idence_ o _
social_policy_and_p ac ice.pd
Eu opean Commission. 2008. EVALSED: The esou ce o he
e alua ion o socio-economic de elopmen . Luxembou g
[online], [ci ed 04 Augus 2011]. A ailable om In e ne :
h p://ec.eu opa.eu/ egional_policy/sou ces/docgene /
guides/cos /guide2008_e alsed.pd
Eu opean Commission. 1999. MEANS collec ion, e alua ing
socio-economic p og ammes. Eu opean Commission, I aly.
E e s, D. 2002. The ise (and all?) o na ional e ail planning,
Tijdsch i oo Economische en Sociale Geog a ie 93(1):
107–113. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/1467–9663.00186
Fe ão,J.; Mou a o, J. 2010. A a aliação de polí icas públicas
como ac o de ap endizagem, ino ação ins i ucional e cid-
Jou nal o A chi ec u e and U banism, 2017, 41(1): 1–8 7
adania, Re is a B asilei a de Es udos U banos e Regionais
12(1): 9–28.
Fi e Council. 2011. Town Cen e pe cep ion s udy 2009 [online],
[ci ed 20 No embe 2014]. Fi e Council. A ailable om
In e ne : h p://www. i edi ec .o g.uk/publica ions/index.
c m? useac ion= publica ion.pop&pubid= 936CE011–
012B-F11C-F2ECCC3F3F706C40
Fi e Council 2009. Town Cen e pe cep ion s udy 2008 [online],
[ci ed 20 No embe 2014]. Fi e Council. A ailable om
In e ne :. h p://www. i edi ec .o g.uk/publica ions/index.
c m? useac ion= publica ion.pop&pubid= 91D505EF-
F1E9-EAFE-0A9A5BBF4226EFAE
Findlay,A.; Spa ks, L. 2014. High S ee s and own cen es
policy, in N. W igley, E. B ookes (Eds.). E ol ing High
S ee s: esilience & ein en ion. Economic and Social
Resea ch Council (ESRC), 12–15 [online], [ci ed 24
Oc obe 2015]. A ailable om in e ne : h p://www. iben.
o g.uk/Clus e _publica ions_&_media/Opinion_Pieces_
Sou hamp on_No _2014.pd
Fo sbe g,H.; Medway,D.; Wa naby, G. 1999. Town Cen e
Managemen by co-ope a ion– e idence om Sweden,
Ci ies 16(5): 315–322.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/S0264–2751(99)00029–3
G eene, F. 2009. Assessing he impac o policy in e en ions:
he in luence o e alua ion me hodology, En i onmen and
Planning C: Go e nmen and Policy 27: 216–29.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1068/c07103b
Guima ães, P. 2016. Re isi ing e ail planning policies in coun-
ies o es ain o Wes e n Eu ope, In e na ional Jou nal
o U ban Sciences 20(3): 361–380.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/12265934.2016.1194225
Guy, C. 2007. Planning o e ail de elopmen , a c i ical iew o
he B i ish expe ience. Oxon: Rou ledge.
Guy, C. 2002. Is e ail planning policy e ec i e? The case o
e y la ge s o e de elopmen in he UK, Planning Theo y
and P ac ice 3(3): 319–330.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/1464935022000019554
Hamble on, R. 2003. Ci y leade ship and he new public
managemen – a c oss na ional analysis, in Pape o he
Na ional Public Managemen Resea ch Con e ence, 9–11
Oc obe 2003, Washing on DC: Geo ge own Uni e si y
[online], [ci ed 05 Augus 2014]. A ailable om In e ne :
h p://www.pm ane .o g/con e ences/geo ge ownpape s/
Hamble on.pd
Hamble on,R.; S ewa ,M.; Swee ing,D.; Huxham,C.; Vangen,
S. 2001. Leade ship in u ban go e nance: he mobilisa ion
o collabo a i e ad an age. Full Resea ch Repo . Economic
and Social Resea ch Council (ESRC), B is ol [online],
[ci ed 05 Augus 2014]. A ailable om In e ne : h ps://
s3-eu-wes -1.amazonaws.com/es c- iles/ou pu s/47IUix- -
k6njZ8IQYi-iA/oxFKCJsZ1Uq jc9FcbdAg.pd
Ha y, H. 1978. The S a us o P oduc i i y Measu emen in he
Public Sec o , Public Adminis a ion Re iew 38(1): 28–33.
h ps://doi.o g/10.2307/975407
Hogg,S.; Medway,D.; Wa naby, G. 2004. Town cen e man-
agemen schemes in he UK: ma ke ing and pe o mance
indica o s, In e na ional Jou nal o Nonp o i and Volun a y
Sec o Ma ke ing 9(4): 309–319.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/n sm.256
Hogg,S.; Medway,D.; Wa naby, G. 2001. Towa ds a ypology
o ma ke ing own cen e managemen schemes h ough
he use o KPIs. Wo king Pape WP01/11. Manches e
Me opoli an Uni e si y Business School Wo king Pape
Se ies, Manches e .
Jayne, M. 2006. Ci ies and consump ion. New Yo k: Rou ledge.
h ps://doi.o g/10.4324/9780203358733
Kä holm, M. 2012. Re ailising space– a chi ec u e, e ail and
he e i o ialisa ion o public space. Su ey: Ashga e.
London Bu ough o Su on. 2010. Su on Town cen e heal h
check. London [online], [ci ed 17 No embe 2014]. A ailable
om In e ne : h ps://www.su on.go .uk/download/down-
loads/id/1601/ inal_s c_heal h_check_jan_2010.pd
Lowe, M. 2007. Re hinking Sou hamp on and own cen e
u u es, In e na ional Jou nal o e ail & Dis ibu ion
Managemen 35(8): 639–464.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/09590550710758621
Lowe, M. 2005 Re i alizing inne ci y e ail?: The impac o he
Wes Quay de elopmen on Sou hamp on, In e na ional
Jou nal o Re ail & Dis ibu ion Managemen 33(9): 658–668.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/09590550510611850
Macha is,C.; Be na dini, A. 2015. Re iewing he use o mul i-c i-
e ia decision analysis o he e alua ion o anspo p ojec s:
ime o a mul i-ac o app oach, T anspo Policy 37: 177–186.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j. anpol.2014.11.002
Moo e,B.; Spi es, R. 2000. Moni o ing and e alua ion, in
Robe s, P., Sykes, H. (Eds.). U ban Regene a ion– a hand-
book. Uni ed Kingdom: SAGE Publica ions, 203–227.
Mullin,J.; Ko al, Z. 2003. Measu ing he e ec i eness o down-
own e i aliza ion s a egies, in Landscape A chi ec u e
& Regional Planning Facul y Publica ion Se ies. Pape 23
[online], [ci ed 22 Decembe 2014]. A ailable om In e ne :
h p://schola wo ks.umass.edu/la p_ acul y_pubs/23/
Musa,R.; Pallis e ,J.; Robson,M.; Daud, N. 2010. Applica ion
o impo ance-pe o mance analysis (IPA) o o mula e
cus ome sa is ac ion s a egies in he di ec sales in-
dus y in Malaysia, Business S a egy Se ies 11(5): 277–285.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/17515631011080687
Nybo g, K. 2014. P ojec e alua ion wi h democ a ic de-
cision-making: wha does cos –bene i analysis eally meas-
u e?, Ecological Economics 106: 124–131.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.07.009
O ice o he Depu y P ime Minis e (ODPM). 2005. Planning
Policy S a emen 6: Planning o Town Cen es (PPS6). UK
[online], [ci ed 26 No embe 2014]. A ailable om In e ne :
h p://weba chi e.na ionala chi es.go .uk/20120919132719/
www.communi ies.go .uk/publica ions/planningandbuild-
ing/planningpolicys a emen 11
Oli ei a,V.; Pinho, P. 2009. E alua ing plans, p ocesses and
esul s, Planning Theo y & P ac ice 10 (1): 35–63.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/14649350802661741
Pal,J.; Sande s, E. 1997. Measu ing he e ec i eness o own
cen e managemen schemes, In e na ional Jou nal o Re ail
& Dis ibu ion Managemen 25(2): 70–77.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/09590559710160364
Pineda-Henson,R.; Culaba, A. and Mendoza, G. 2002.
E alua ing en i onmen al pe o mance o pulp and pape
manu ac u ing using he analy ic hie a chy p ocess and
li e-cycle assessmen , Jou nal o Indus ial Ecology 6(1):
15–28. h ps://doi.o g/10.1162/108819802320971614
Pu due,D.; Razzaque,K.; Hamble on,R.; S ewa , M. 2000.
Communi y leade ship in a ea egene a ion. B is ol: The
Policy P ess [online], [ci ed 05 Augus 2014]. A ailable
om In e ne : h ps://www.j .o g.uk/ ile/36412/download
? oken= d_DegPU
Ra ensc o , N. 2000. The i ali y and iabili y o own cen es,
U ban S udies 37(13): 2533–2549.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/00420980020080681
P. P. C. Guima ães. The use o indica o s in he e alua ion o e ail planning: e idences om England
8
Ri iezzo,A.; Nisco,A.; Napoli ano, M. 2009. Impo ance-
pe o mance analysis as a ool in e alua ing own cen e
managemen e ec i eness, In e na ional Jou nal o Re ail
& Dis ibu ion Managemen 37(9): 748–764.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/09590550910975808
Rode ick Maclean Associa es L d. 2012. FIFE e ail capaci y
s udy. Fi e [online], [ci ed 18 Augus 2014]. A ailable om
In e ne :
h p://www. i edi ec .o g.uk/publica ions/index.c m?-
useac ion = publica ion.pop&pubid= A5B1650F-C81F-
3203–039BCB59B898C799
Saa y,T.; Va gas, L. 2013. Decision making wi h he analy ic ne -
wo k p ocess– economic, poli ical, social and echnological
applica ions wi h bene i s, oppo uni ies, cos s and isks. 2nd
ed. New Yo k: Sp inge .
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/978–1-4614–7279–7
Schille , R. 1994. Vi ali y and iabili y: challenge o he own
cen e, In e na ional Jou nal o Re ail & Dis ibu ion
Managemen 22(6): 46–50.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/09590559410070321
Spie ings, B. 2006. Window on he Ne he lands– he e u n
o egula ion in he shopping landscape? Re lec ing on he
pe sis en powe o ci y cen e p ese a ion wi hin shi ing
e ail planning ideologies, Tijdsch i oo Economische en
Sociale Geog a ie 97(5): 602–609.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1467–9663.2006.00366.x
Thinkingplace 2012. Fi e Pe cep ion S udy– Final Repo . Fi e
[online], [ci ed 15 Ap il 2013]. A ailable om In e ne :
h p://www.welcome o i e.com
URBED. 1994. Vi al and iable owns cen es: mee ing he chal-
lenge. London: DOE.
Wholey, J. 2010. Use o e alua ion in go e nmen : he poli ics
o e alua ion, in J. Wholey, H. Ha y, K. Newcome (Eds).
Handbook o P ac ical P og am E alua ion. 3 d ed. San
F ancisco, 651–667.
PEDRO PORFÍRIO COUTINHO GUIMARÃES
PhD. E ec i e Reseache in he Cen e o Geog aphical
S udies, Ins i u e o Geog aphy and Spa ial Planning, Lisbon
Uni e si y. His ield o esea ch e ol e a ound u ban s udies,
wi h a specializa ion in he Eu opean e ail planning policies.