From GPG

One of the biggest changes in thinking between managing ROW through a ROWIP is that the authority must look at other routes, not only those on the definitive map. This has been termed the wider network approach, or whole network approach.

The text below describes how two of the exemplar authorities addressed the wider network.

Whole network approach (WNA)

The whole network approach (or Whole Network Analysis) is an extension of the aggregate access map that was developed in a research study undertaken for the City of York Council by Stephen Jenkinson. In it, the wider access network that is used in practice for informal recreation by the public in and around York was identified and a sample of the network surveyed in a series of case studies case studies 1-2 and 3-4).This included identifying the body responsible for managing the land and assessing its use by the public, its accessibility, and the degree (if any) to which the land was promoted or managed for recreation and its integration with the right of way network.

The study highlighted the large amount of land that is used by the public for informal recreation in and around York, the wide range of activities that the land supports and the potential advantages of coordinating its management with that of the path network. The key study findings include:

• Significant amounts of wider public access exist in and around York but it is generally not integrated with the rights of way network and is managed in isolation by public and private bodies.
• Surveys of a sample of this linear and open access showed it was often of high actual or potential public value and frequently gave access to valuable areas such as green spaces in urban areas, traffic-free routes between communities and attractive areas for landscape and wildlife.
• Information about this wider access and responsibility for its management is spread across a wide variety of individuals and organisations; over 30 organisations were approached in the pilot study area alone. This makes it difficult for access managers to integrate different forms of access, and consequently it is hard for the public to use this access a coordinated way.
• Much of the wider access has been developed in isolation, with differing standards and approaches to information, signposting and management; this, too, hinders a coordinated approach.
• Much of this wider access could potentially be open to people with a range of mobility and visual impairments. However, a current lack of awareness and inappropriate management by some access managers means that restrictive access furniture and a lack of information needlessly reduce overall accessibility.
• The solution to making better use of this wider access rests with improving communication and liaison between access providers, users, managers and other local, regional and national bodies.
• A GIS based register of all these wider access opportunities is essential to ensure such integration begins to occur and to avoid duplication of effort. A proactive, impartial source of professional advice for access providers would help improve awareness of different access users' needs and the potential for integration.
• Detailed consideration needs to be given to delivering clearer public information, along the lines of "Where can I go, what can I do?" on wider access, both on-site and when planning a visit.

The study report also contains a series of good practice recommendations for identifying and surveying the wider access network and integrates its management with that of the path network (see the executive summary).

(The way the draft ROWIP described the process is shown in Connectedness of the Network

Surveying and assessing the use being made of the whole access network in this way is unlikely to be realistic (and would also be unnecessarily wasteful of resources) over the whole of a large rural county. But the York study suggests that the approach should be possible - and is likely to give rise to significant benefits - in targeted areas or, in the case of a relatively compact unitary authority, for the whole of the authority's area. If necessary, the survey could be carried out in phases over a number of years.

Ideally any such survey should be carried out prior to the completion of an authority's ROWIP so that the findings can be taken into account together with its assessment of use and demand and of the existing path network. Even when this is not possible, however, WNA should be considered as the information obtained will be invaluable in helping to implement the ROWIP, for example enabling the precise areas and routes on which improvements should be targeted to be identified.

Hampshire also carried out mapping research, see the mapping the total access resource report.