realisedevelopment.net

Just another WordPress site

Community, economic and social development…

by

While Pittsburgh’s government and business leaders pressed for big-government solutions – new stadiums and convention centers – the city’s real turn- around was driven by community groups and citizen-led initiatives. Community groups, local foundations, and nonprofits – not city hall or business-led economic development groups – drove its transformation, playing a key role in stabilizing and strengthening neighborhoods, building green, and spurring the development of the waterfront and re- development around the universities. Many of Pittsburgh’s best neighborhoods, such as its South Side, are ones that were somehow spared from the wrath of urban renewal. Others, such as East Liberty, have benefited from community initiatives designed to remedy the damage done by large-scale urban renewal efforts that left vacant lots in place of functioning neighborhoods and built soulless public housing high-rise towers. That neighborhood is now home to several new community development projects, including a Whole Foods Market, which provides local jobs as well as serving as an anchor for the surrounding community. This kind of bottom-up process takes considerable time and perseverance. In Pittsburgh’s case, it took the better part of a generation to achieve stability and the potential for longer-term revival.

The Great Reset copyright © 2010 Richard Florida (emphases are mine)

Read more

If this IS true, and could also be true of Leeds, then what does it mean for the focus of community development workers in the city?

Transformation at Tower Works – Grass Roots or Astroturf?

by

Seems ironic that I should pick up on this on a day when I have been quoting Barack Obama on real change being a grass-roots phenomena.

It seems that someone has decided that the ‘regeneration’ that is underway at Tower Works in Leeds needs to catch the eye a little more.  So why not install a grass mosaic spelling out TRANSFORM so as to be visible from the top of nearby local landmark the Candle Building.  Why not indeed?  Such metaphorical power…..

I am surprised that they did not use Astroturf.  At least it has no pretence at being grass-roots and can be laid quite happily on concrete.  The grass-roots here are destined to whither.

Regeneration is not about buildings and developers.  It is about people, passion, skills and aspirations.  It is about community, networks and creativity.  In s

Community Engagement – Getting to the Heart of the Matter

by

This site from Australia shows how a council is using online forums to engage with at least some of their constituents on a range of matters including:

  • plans for varying local rates
  • council strategy for trees and
  • the development of community and cultural facilities

This particular council has a resident population of around 74 000 and participation on the forums is relatively low.  Unsurprisingly perhaps, rate variations has got by far the most traffic almost certainly because of its direct impact on the self interest of local people.

There is no doubt that the forums have surfaced a wide range of opinions that may not otherwise have been heard – and some clearly offer clues to the council on areas where its own performance may benefit from a review.  The forums provide an interesting case study in the potential and limitations of such online engagement tools for informing decision making and policy.

However the point I wish to make is not about the medium of engagement (in this case online) but on the content of engagement.  In this case we have rates, trees, community and cultural facilities, a planning application and integrated planning strategy as the topics for engagement.

My question is this.

Of the 74 000 residents of this council, how many have their own progress genuinely held in check by any of these issues?

How many people cannot make progress in their own lives until the council sorts out its strategy on trees? Or integrated planning?  Or even business rates?

The answer is very few.  In most cases perhaps none.  These are examples of what I call lowest common denominator issues.  Most people will agree that they matter and need thinking about.   They are also impersonal enough to be safe topics for discussion.  But for next to nobody will they be the really critical issues that hold back individual talent or community potential.

Many of those 74 000 people will have ideas about how they could make a better life for themselves, their families and the community.  And most of them will have a pretty good idea about what is stopping them.  Instead of engaging local people in the somewhat ‘removed’ priorities of the council, the council could design engagement processes that enable people to engage with each other, the council and other stakeholders, in their real priorities for making a better life.  To uncover the real issues that act as barriers to real people making progress in real lives.

If people are to be open and honest about what is stopping them from making progress we need to have a relationship with them that is trusted, confidential, competent and compassionate.  I suspect that such relationships cannot generally develop entirely online.  That they still demand an element of face to face conversation.  That they will need real people working in the community with good engagement and development skills.  They may also need additional reserves of social capital, community networks and ‘brains trusts’ that can be accessed to provide support and expertise as and when it is needed.

Until we start to engage large numbers of individuals and groups on the real issues that they feel are preventing them from pursuing their aspirations then we will not get to heart of the matter.

Perhaps we should stop seeking to engage the people in our strategies and plans, but instead seek to engage ourselves in theirs?

Lessons from Bogota for Leeds?

by

Great film showing the impact of cycle routes, public spaces and other aspects of the ‘public realm’ on the development of the city.  Benefits accrue in all sorts of areas including:

  • inclusion and access
  • health
  • economy and
  • social capital

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGycx75mqRk]

Could it work in Leeds with our weather and hills?  The investment would certainly create jobs.

You can read more about the development of Bogota, a city being developed with happiness as a central theme, here http://shareable.net/blog/can-we-design-cities-for-happiness

The Future of a Community…

by

What determines the future of a community?  Whether it becomes a place where most of its members live happy and fulfilled lives or ones that are full of misery and fear?

Does it depend on the decisions made by planners and politicians in national and local government? On what we might call ‘the planners paradigm’ where architects, planners, policy makers and property developers shape the places in which we live.

Or, does it depend on which entrepreneurs decide to operate in the community? On whether ‘Big Business’ comes to town or not?  On whether we can encourage enough of the creative class to join our community?  On what we might call ‘the entrepreneurial paradigm’ where the presence of many vibrant and creative entrepreneurs (that special breed) provide employment, products and services for those of us somehow less gifted?  Who create the wealth and taxes that provide the rest of us with our livelihoods and public services.

Or does it depend on the extent to which everyone is supported to recognise their passions and develop their capability to act in ways that make things better for themselves, their families, their community and the planet as a whole?  On the extent to which people are valued by others in the community and able to use the resources of knowledge and experience available to them to make progress?  What we might call ‘the capability paradigm’.

Of course all of these things have an impact.  If the planners provide poor infrastructure, or if big business hoovers up money from the community and filters it back to distant shareholders then it may be more difficult to develop a sustainable and vibrant community. But not impossible.

I believe that communities which learn how to respond to and support individuals and groups within their ranks who are seeking to make progress; who learn how to access, harness and develop capabilities and potentials will steadily become both more cohesive and harmonious.  That ‘the capability paradigm’ holds the most effective key to building great communities.  Communities that embrace it, and learn to master it, will be reported by those living in them as good places to be.  They will start to become wealthier and healthier than their more fragmented, less connected counterparts.

But most importantly they will become more fulfilling places to live.