Research capacity development
Decision making in the planning appeals system for hot food takeaways
Fuse researchers explored the decision making processes of the National Planning Inspectorate, which upholds or dismisses planning appeal cases, and whether preventing obesity was a factor in the decisions. Public health practitioners with experience in the Hot Food Takeaway (HFT) appeals process contributed to the research design.
Fuse Associate Claire O’Malley was employed on a NIHR School for Public Health Research (SPHR) capacity building post to help write up the work which is now informing the SPHR Places and Communities project: Understanding the barriers and facilitators to implementing regulatory mechanisms to restrict hot food takeaway outlets, led by Fuse Associate Director Prof Amelia Lake.
The research found that, while acknowledging the complexities of decision making for Inspectors, the reasons and decisions for upholding some appeals were unclear. Inspectors also felt they had insufficient evidence concerning HFT and the health impacts on which to base their decision. Read more about the themes and assumptions that emerged from both upheld and dismissed appeals in this Fuse research brief.
The study also recommends that researchers work closely with Inspectors to ensure that evidence informs the appeals process. In particular, health evidence needs to be tailored to the local level, and it would be useful to provide feedback to local authorities on upheld appeals.
Research brief:
Decision making in the planning appeals system for hot food takeaways
SPHR website:
Linked SPHR themes/programmes:
Places & communities programme
Image: "Station Street, Birmingham - opening soon - Tarana" (33510099710_d44de7a552_z.jpg) by Elliott Brown via Flickr.com, copyright © 2017: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ell-r-brown/33510099710 (CC BY-SA 2.0)
Last modified: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 12:22:17 GMT
