| The research commenced in the light of the apparent paradox that whilst the Snowdonia National Park is recognised on a national basis as being an area of exceptionally high landscape quality, it has over the years been subjected to various developments which have had an adverse impact on the landscape. The research is directed towards an analysis of the importance given to landscape policies and the objective of landscape conservation by various parties seeking to influence development decisions in the Snowdonia National Park. The research commences by examining how the basic National Park philosophy has developed and how it is now interpreted through policies in Snowdonia. A model of power is defined which serves as a means of identifying how the participants in the decision making process exercise power. The main participants are defined under cultural, political and functional headings. Emphasis is given to an analysis of the Welsh/English political dichotomy and the roles and functions of the statutory agencies which operate in Snowdonia. A brief analysis is made of the existing planning policies which are incorporated within the Structure Plans and National Park Plan, with a summary which focuses on the main themes of the policies. The case studies were chosen for analysis on the basis that they were controversial issues involving organised amenity interests. The case studies were also chosen on a generic basis to show how different types of development by different agencies, using various legislative systems are dealt with. These principal case studies are analysed and related to other similar cases to ascertain whether they represent any consistent pattern or identifiable norm. The conclusions show that the National Park Authority gives considerable emphasis to the objective of landscape conservation when legislative powers are available. It is also seen that landscape policies have considerable support from within the community. There are a number of conflicts between various policies, but these only manifest themselves in political terms on a limited number of occasions. The National Park Authority does stand out as a rational and fair arbitrator, but only on those matters which fall within the statutory development control system; beyond those matters the planning system has considerable failings, particularly when dealing with State agencies. |
