Category Archives: Regeneration, Renewal And Resilience
City Centres For Young People, Suburbs For Older People: Ageist Planning For Homes?
The city centres of England, we are told, are populated mainly by young singles; but at the same time there is an increase in the number of older people who have supported independent living. So how do these two facets of modern life fit together?
The ‘conveyor belt effect’ is a new one on me. Apparently it refers to the idea that city centres tend to be populated by single 18-34’s, who then move out to the suburbs.
A new report by the Institute of Public Policy Research (IPPR) City People: City Centre Living in the UK
But where do older people live?
It’s an interesting contrast that, in the same Guardian reporting column (11 January 2006) that I read about the IPPR study, there’s a piece on independent living for older people.
Apparently there has been a rise in the proportion of older people in England who live independently at home, rather than in residential care (30.1% in 2003/4; 32% in 2004-5); but it’s uneven by region. The Health and Social Care Information Centre (report, PP 6 10) found wide regional variations, with 44.7% for inner London and only 27.7% in unitary authorities.
It would be interesting to know more about where these older, independently housed people live. Are some of them in the city centres too? Or are they on they periphery, having ‘moved out’ when they had their families? Or were housing patterns when they were young quite different anyway, with the ‘extended family’ arrangements reported for instance in London’s Bethnal Green, by Willmott and Young all those years ago?
Do housing plans actually meet need?
In an earlier piece I suggested that there’s a need to incorporate accommodation in small blocks in all sorts of housing areas. City centres must be made much more friendly for families and older people; and the suburbs (and that strange ‘donut’ around city centres) needs to have much more flexible and helpful housing units too. And this applies to towns and villages at least as much as it does to cities, as perhaps the NHS / HSCIC data indicate.
When there’s a real mix, there’s more chance of support for everyone, and a real community – and that’s where I’d love the planners and builders really to get a grip.
Read the discussion of this article which follows the book E-store….
Official: Community Engagement Can Stress You Out
The RENEW Northwest Intelligence Report just published (January 2006) on ‘Making a difference: Participation and wellbeing’ marks an important step forward in our notions of volunteering and its outcomes. Professor Carolyn Kagan suggests that community activists often find their ‘work’ stressful and unrewarding.
It is indeed time we re-examined the notion of ‘putting something back’; but we shouldn’t assume that only those who live in difficult circumstances can share common cause in regeneration and renewal. People with professional skills who themselves become involved as volunteers can also find the going very hard – as any regeneration professionals taking Prof. Kagan’s advice to ‘practise what they preach’ might well discover.
Given that work-related stress has long been known to be related to powerlessness and / or impossible demands, I’m surprised it’s taken so long… but now we have the official acknowledgement that community engagement by volunteers can be as stressful as it can be rewarding.
In her report Making a difference: Participation and wellbeing (Renew Northwest, 2006) Professor Carolyn Kagan from Manchester Metropolitan University suggests that, ‘far from being a source of wellbeing, participation can actually increase stress.’ Community activists, she has found, work ‘under unrelenting pressure: isolated, without supervision, coping with local conflict, without time off – and without pay.’
‘Consulting residents about a regeneration project,’ we are told, ‘is a top-down system which can often result in local needs being defined by the professionals, with little ‘ownership’ by residents.’ (This worries me a bit; isn’t it helpful that there be professionally experienced people genuinely embedded in all communities, so that issues wider than the parocial are also ‘stakeheld’ by all concerned?)
Who are the ‘community activists’?
Nonetheless, Prof. Kagan has a very valid point. You only have to become a little involved to see that the people who are most active in ‘communities’ are also often those who are least impressed by what is being achieved around them, and that despondency is often the name of the game.
And you can also fairly quickly see that the powers-that-be, probably without conscious intent, often play their own games in this, favouring some groups and individuals against others, hoovering up ideas and regurgitating them as ‘policy’ to be ‘explained’ to the hapless people who first thought of it, and generally bureaucratising whatever they touch. (Of course some degree of bureaucracy is essential; but some of it is also rather convenient in terms of how officialdom chooses to engage with the punter.)
But there is another question too: why should be assumed that ‘community activists’ are necessarily ‘tenants’ or ‘residents’ or always themselves live in a ‘community’ (whatever that means) which itself struggles? Sometimes this specific sort of engagement is the only legitimate way forward, but many other issues which need addressing are wider than that.
‘Activists’ come in all shapes and sizes
Is there no commonality between all the sorts of people who work voluntarily to gain benefit for different ‘communities’? Aren’t local political parties and, say, religious leaders and charitable organisations all run on the basis of very little financial reward for a lot of hard slog?
The people involved in these organisations may well be articulate, easily able to make their case and very committed to involving everyone – but they are often just as stressed by the response of officialdom as anyone else. In fact, it could be thought that they are even less well received by regeneration bureacrats than are those with fewer recognised and assets, precisely because they are seen by the powers-that-be as more of a challenge or ‘threat’.
Engagement by professionals is a difficult issue
The un-welcome which articulate and professionally qualified people sometimes experience when they try to work as volunteeers for the larger community interest is very significant. Prof. Kagan suggests that if regeneration professionals are serious about accepting and supporting the role of ‘community activists’, they should take on this role in their ‘own home and work communities’… or presumably anywhere where they feel there is – and here perhaps we get to the real underlying issue – legitimate common cause?
If my observations are anything to go by, the regeneration professionals are in for a shock if they actually follow Prof. Kagan’s advice. They could find that they are vulnerable on all fronts… the ‘community’ wonders what they’re up to, their co-professionals feel uncomfortable, and the powers-that-be actively resist their involvement.
It takes forward looking, positive and confident practitioners to accept their peers as ‘volunteer’ stakeholders with legitimate engagement in the regeneration and renewal process; and confident practitioners, happy and able to share, and comfortable in their skins, are sadly not exactly what’s to be found in some of these programmes.
How Will We Know That Liverpool 2007 & 2008 Were Successful?
The 800th Anniversary of Liverpool in 2007, and the Liverpool European Capital of Culture Year in 2008, are hugely important milestones for the city. So how are we, citizens of the city or of Europe and the world, going to measure the success of these years, once we reach 2009?
Your suggested responses and answers to this question are most welcome….
Much has already been written, on this weblog and elsewhere, about Liverpool’s 800th Anniversary in 2007, and the 2008 European Capital of Culture Year.
I don’t intend just now to extend that debate – it seems to be developing all on its own… and please do continue to add your contributions on this weblog. But I would like to ask one special question, to which I would also really appreciate answers (please use the Response space below):
By what criteria will, or should, we be able to evaluate the success of Liverpool 2007 / 8?
I’m sure many people will have many ideas on the criteria we should use – or perhaps are already using?
Indeed, it would be helpful to know whether there actually are already sol
Devolution, Regionalism, County Councils And Politics
Despite the reluctance of voters to accept that ‘the new localism’ also means significant change, English devolution is almost certainly upon us; but it’s unlikely to surface in the ways some imagine. Rather, the likelihood is that it will slowly become a part of the wider political landscape, as people seek ways to address specific problems.
Call it what you will – devolution, regionalism / decentralisation, ‘the new localism’, ‘the trend towards ‘city-regions’ or whatever – there is a strongly discernable move towards debate about empowering communities locally as such, and away from national ‘handed down’ political decision-making. Thus, for instance, we can expect the Lyons report on the future of local government cum the Summer.
This has been going on for quite a while now and is, we are told, the basis on which policy and delivery for schools, hospitals and many other organisations such as the intended children’s centres are to be determined. So far, so good…. but maybe, just maybe, we’re also learning a few wider political lessons along the way.
Voters want everything!
It’s interesting that at last modes of delivery are being examined before, not simply after, decisions about big changes are to be made.
According to this week’s New Start magazine there are now various warnings that speedy implementation of devolvement could produce perhaps as many problems as it ‘solves’. This is unsurprising to those of us who watched the orginal proposals for regional government go up in smoke for exactly the same reasons that the new localism will have to ease itself in.. the power and fears of county councils.
Voters may indeed want local powers (though there is always a danger that ‘power’ can mean ‘comfort zone’ if nobody is vigilant….) but many of them also like the established ways of doing things. They want: change without cost; no reduction in the structures already in place; less ‘red tape’; and a fully localised version of services and provision. In other words, they have hopelessly unrealistic expectations.
Sometimes, it can seem, politicians are perceived to be not only ‘power-mad’, and ‘in for what they can get’, but also miracle workers on behalf of their constituents.
Getting real
This is the fundamental dilemma of any politicians who seeks to bring about change. If it’s going to take a long time it won’t happen before they are up for re-election – with the risk of accusations of breaking promises – and if it will be a significant change it will upset people who may want ‘improvements’, but also like the status quo.
This is where responsible journalism (yes, yes) and proper, carefully thought out political education come in. Perhaps there’s a case for a sort-of Sim City game which requires young students of politics and government to make decisions as though a politician against a backdrop, not of physical regeneration and development, but of constant hypothetical re-election.
Such a ‘game’ might help us all to realise there’s no such thing as a free lunch, even in the singular role of voter. What’s the point of demanding the politically impossible, when the real question for voters should be, what is possible, and at what opportunity-cost?
Things happen
There again, perhaps much of the devolution which we are undoubtedly going to see will occur almost invisibly. Politicians may be unable to deliver as they wish – or may indeed be working actively to stop things happening – but often it’s ‘needs must’ which brings change about. There’s no non-collaborative way to secure plans and funding for a major piece of infrastucture, massive funding in a science park or research programme, or a strategy for foreign industrial investment.
As the members of the Northern Way, amongst others, have seen, only joint effort will achieve changes having any significant impact on an area. And it’s these incremental alliances, I suspect, which will in the end bring about the more difficult-to-deliver underlying devolutionary shifts in the political landscape.
Time scales are another problem
The judgement that overt English devolution will have to move fairly slowly if it is to be implemented effectively is probably sound. The only problem is… if a week is a long time in politics, however long in political terms is a decade? Suffice to say that the drive to devolution will need to be really well grounded if it is to survive and have impact on the extended time-scale (a decade or two?) now by some envisaged.
There are plenty of ideas which have taken centuries rather than decades to come to fruition; maybe with modern, technological ways of sharing ideas and cultural shifts we shan’t have to wait that long. But my bet is still that, whatever we see in the end, it won’t be exactly what we think we’re looking at now.
The Tesco Effect And ‘Clone Town’ Britain
The ‘Tesco effect’ is a matter of serious concern for everyone, from the All-Party Parliamentary Small Shops Group to people on abandoned and insular housing estates. What is needed now is more thought for how the future could look, and what can best be done to serve the interests of consumers – and businesses and employees – across the board.
The MPs looking at supermarket dominance have, we gather, been quite clear that the future does not bode well. Leaks from the High Street Britain 2015 report suggest that food wholesalers and independent newsagents may soon be freezed out by supermarkets.
This debate is on-going, on this site and in many other places and is significant for us all – hence my returning to the theme yet again.
Contexts change over time
I do understand why people are concerned about supermarkets. There is a fear that supply chains will be / are being distorted, and that suppliers, especially small suppliers, will be squeezed out in favour of the big boys. Such concerns are both real and legitimate; though we must wait until the Office of Fair Trading reports back on its current enquiries before we come to clear conclusions about the current state of things.
And I’m sure, too, that the all-party parliamentary small shops group, which will issue its formal report on High Street Britain 2015 soon, is thinking hard about the future as well as the present and the past. Nonetheless, I am surprised at the apparent lack of debate (at least as reported in the press) in terms of some of the fundamentals of the issue.
Some basic questions for the future
Amongst the questions which come to my mind every time the ‘Tesco effect’ comes up as a topic are these:
1. Is it the role of local planning officers to offer ‘protection’ to small shop-keepers? And, if so, under what rationale, and do they have a framework in which to do it? (They may well have, but I’d be astonished if I’m the only person who doesn’t know what it is.)
2. Is it reasonable to suppose that supply chains are strengthened when suppliers, especially small ones, collaborate – in of course legal ways? What work has been undertaken to establish vulnerabilities and strengths here?
3. What do we know about the ways that local independent traders can work together to protect their patch, and to offer a quality, forward-looking employment experience to local people?
4. Are there ways in which the energy and other resources put into transporting and other handling of goods – especially foodstuffs? – can be shared more overtly with the customer, so that the purchaser can choose ‘environmentally friendly’ products, as they might well prefer to in local markets?
5. Why is there so little debate about the socio-economic contexts of supermarkets? One size may well not fit all, despite the strength of e.g. the ‘Clone Town’ arguments coming from the new economics foundation and others. In run-down places supermarkets may well be the only employer in the whole area which is big enough to provide stable employment and proper training. In wealthier localtions there may be many other employers who can provide training and career routes for everyone who seeks these. Surely this context makes a difference to ‘value-added’ in terms of supermarkets? So what do we know about the ‘career progressions’ of supermarket workers in various contexts?
6. And finally, who is thinking about the appalling service provision gaps in housing estates throughout the country? In terms of supermarkets they may well be ‘food deserts’, but aren’t there niches here for (social?) enterprises such as farmers’ shops, local bread shops and all sorts? These are not necessarily day-dreams, they could with the right support (and security measures) actually happen; and they could also offer training in trades and retail to local people. So, again, what research has been done to test feasibility, and what work has been done to encourage such efforts?
The questions continue…
We could ask a lot more questions like this. There are indeed many issues about which we need to know more as the ‘Tesco effect’ is debated; but it would be good if such questions could be asked in the context of changes for the future, and of small trader / supplier empowerment, rather than sometimes simply because of nostalgia or of fear of the big supermarkets, whatever.
Newcastle on Tyne: The Bridge And The Sage
The renaissance of Britain’s northern cities is a strong feature of our contemporary society. Nowhere is this more evident than in Newcastle on Tyne, where the new reality is reflected physically in the emergent profile of the Gateshead – Newcastle riversides.
Distinctive Economics And U.K. People Migration Between The North And South
Making housing even cheaper than at present is not the way to keep professional workers in the north, whatever the short term arguments about attracting inward investment and skills. Professional workers in the north as much as the south need easy mobility, if they are to increase their experience and value both to themselves and to their employers.
An arfticle in this Wednesday’s Business Week has business writer Bill Gleeson pondering the demise of a well-known Liverpool restaurant.
From this Bill Gleeson moves on to consider the need for ‘policies that will allow real points of difference to emerge between the north and the south, the sorts of difference that can work in our [the north’s] favour.’ One of these ways, it is proposed, might be for the Government to introduce policies which make the cost of housing up north fall.
This move would, it is suggested, attract more workers from the south because the quality of life would be better. But how, I wonder, would it make the quality of life of those currently in the north better as well?
Internal U.K. migration needs to be more, not less, equitable
For those of us who live in the north, but have interests and skills which are applicable across most parts of the nation, anything which restricts our mobility is definitely a minus, not a plus. It would be difficult to persuade me that lessening even further the value of my northern (and only) property would be for the common good, let alone in my own financial interests.
On several occasions in the past year or two I have heard speakers say that it’s imperative to keep wages and prices down in the north ‘to attract investment’.
In the short-term there may be an argument of sorts for this position; but as a rule of thumb for inward business it’s surely not only a weak position, but also in many ways downright against the interests of the employment economy and directly antagonistic to those of go-ahead workers already in the north.
Skilled workers need to be mobile
If anyone is serious about developing their skills they need to operate in a free market, at least within their own country. Experience and connections across the nation are invaluable, both to the people directly concerned and to their employers.
Seeking to reduce the mobility of those already in the north is not only detrimental to their personal interests, but will also act as a longer-term deterent to workers from the south who might otherwise be willing to consider northern migration.
Tesco And The Objectors Both Win Their Points
Tesco has won its appeal to expand a store in South Liverpool (Allerton) by 50%. Some – though not all – local people are very worried by this. But the retail giant has also offered to set up consultation with residents to see how developments can be made to have the most positive impact. This offer must be taken up.
I see (front page of today’s Daily Post) that Tesco’s appeal for their South Liverpool development has been successful.
It’s been interesting that so many people have read and / or responded to my postings on Tesco and the environment. This is clearly a matter about which a lot of people have strong feelings, one way or the other. My own view however is that the debate, whilst it’s probably now come to an end legally – unless there’s a challenge? – has been beneficial whichever view one takes.
The community has gained influence
Perhaps those members of the local community who were and are against the development of the South Liverpool (Allerton) site – and by no means all local people took this view – are currently despondent about the outcome of Tesco’s appeal. I’m not so sure that they should be.
Yes, Tesco has the go-ahead to enlarge their store very considerably, but there have been serious efforts made to reduce the ‘green impact’ of the development as far as possible, and the University is pleased they can confirm they will go ahead with their own sports proposals. Also, of course, the promised money from Tesco will now be forthcoming for the public realm work along the Allerton shopping corridor.
But that’s not the only positive outcome. The most recently evident one is that Tesco is striving to show itself in very publicly ‘listening’ mode. They want to set up a residents’ committee to work on the local impact of their development, and they have acknowledged the significance of the concerns expressed. The opportunity is therefore now available to take Tesco up on these offers and see if the promises of consultation etc are kept.
The ball is now firmly in the objectors’ court. I hope, to continue the sporting reference, that those who protested will choose to pick that ball up and run with it. Tesco has offered to work and liaise with local people. Let’s respond in kind and see if and in what ways the offer is meaningful.
English Regions or City-Regions?
Protagonists for City-Regions are often much less sympathetic to the rationale for the English Regions as such. But perhaps it’s all a matter of differential scales. City Regions could well choose, to their mutual benefit and that of their hinter-lands, to collaborate on some of the much bigger strategic things without fear of damage to historic and local identities.
The debate about City-Regions vs. English Regions shows no signs of resolving. The recent launch of a campaign for an Elected Mayor in Liverpool (and some other towns and cities) has if anything exacerbated the differences between those who support regionalism as such, and those who support city-regions within England, or presumably, come to that, anywhere else.
Whilst there are obviously some areas where people may not ever agree, I do however believe there are a number of areas of common cause between the protagonists for each ‘side’, if the issues are looked at in a particular light.
The meaning of ‘regionalism’
For those who take a strongly anti-regional line the main problem seems to be that they perceive this as inevitably favouring one stronger city over other cities in the region… indeed, they may even take the view that there is no such thing as a region, as a way to circumvent such a perspective entirely.
In this view the real issue is the power of one place over others, and the expectation that, given half a chance, this place will take unfair advantage, at significant cost to other towns and cities nearby.
On the other hand, to at least some people who would support a regional persepctive alongside a city-focused one (and there are few regionalists who don’t also favour the healthy growth of cities per se), the underlying issue is connectivity. Who will make the case for, e.g., good road and rail connections between different cities within the region and, even more importantly, the way that very large centres of population – especially the metropolis – connect with the region at all?
Taking this perspective, there may be surprising commonalities even with towns and cities in other regions. For instance, Birmingham shares with the northern cities the issue of getting traffic up and down the country – and has in fact begun exploring solutions to this problem with them.
Size is the basic issue
Evidence elsewhere in Europe suggests that a population of between 7 and 10 million can be effectively self-sustaining in terms of producing all the requirements for modern society. But no U.K. city outside London is of this size – which means that English cities must necessarily be inter-dependent in some respects. For instance, (genuinely) Big Science can never happen just with the resources of one city, any more than can ‘Big Medicine / Technology’ and so forth. There are plenty of win-wins in inter-city collaboration for science and industry, just as there are endless reasons why the more ambitious aspects of tourism are often best promoted on at least a regional basis (see quote in New Start magazine from the English Regional Development Agencies).
But what the size issue doesn’t mean is that cities have to lose their identities, or that there must be ‘regional centre’ cities wicih will effectively dictate to all the other places in a region what they may and may not do. This maintenance of identity and self-determination provides one of the strongest cases for elected mayors or similar – provided always (a big proviso) that such leaders are well-informed, brave and sensible….
Unique identities, shared strengths
This is a rather optimistic view, but maybe there will come a time when people generally can see that there is indeed strength in commonality when it comes to the big things (massive inward investment, the knowledge economy, large-scale infrastructure etc.), but that with this does not need to come loss of identity for individual places and smaller areas within a geographical location such as a ‘region’ of England. Rather the opposite.
Perhaps it’s a matter of confidence. When we, smaller-city citizens across the nation, are confident that our own patch is well-recognised and well-defined, it will be easier to agree with our neighbours on shared strategies for the bigger things. But how to develop that confidence from where we’re at now is, however you look at it, a challenge and a half.
An Elected Mayor for Liverpool?
A new campaign has been launched by local figure Liam Fogarty today for an Elected Mayor in Liverpool. If nothing else, such a move will perhaps encourage a healthy debate about the democratic process and accountability, and perhaps more.
Today has seen the emergence of a campaign for Liverpool to have an Elected Mayor. The first step if this campaign is to succeed is to obtain enough signatures to trigger a referendum on the matter – no small challenge in itself.
The campaign, headed by ex-BBC presenter Liam Fogarty, claims that in Liverpool ‘too many decisions are taken by invisible committees and un-elected officials. Important projects fail to materialise, yet no-one takes responsibility.’
‘Only an Elected Mayor can provide the vision and leadership needs at this crucial time in the City’s history,’ we are told. This, of course, is a reference to the much-trumpeted events in Liverpool of 2007 and 2008, which certainly require great cultural leadership, skill and planning if they are to succeed.
The democratic deficit
But it is also claimed that an Elected Mayor would re-involve people in democratic process. They would be more likely to vote and become engaged in local decision-making if there were such a person. Perhaps this is true.
Whatever, there is a serious case for any sort of initiative which takes local political involvement more into the community. It would probably be worth a try – though interestingly, so far only 12 towns and cities of those which have considered having an Elected Mayor have actually gone along that option in the end.
Previous mayoral campaigns
This is not however the first time that there has been a campaign for an Elected Mayor. In 2000 the media group Aurora took up the cudgels, publishing with other organisations a book entitled Manifesto for a New Liverpool [see also ‘cultural leadership’, above], in which the case was made for such a civic leader.
Only time will tell whether this is an enduring and positive initiative. This time as far as I can see there is a strong pro-cities but anti-regional sentiment there too, and that second position (pro-cities is fine, anti-region in my books isn’t) convinces me less than does the case for democracy at grass roots.
But for the time being I suppose it’s enough to feel heartened that people are energised to do what they believe is best for Liverpool, putting heads above parapets and saying what they think. Now that really is democarcy in action.
Dreaming Realist 