Neighbourhoods

Tailoring streets for people

Does one street fit all? Tailoring streets for people
Living Streets conference
Tuesday 20 November 2007
Central London EC1V 2TT

Topics include:
• Shopping streets: redressing the balance for people on foot
• Destination places: rejuvenating Manchester’s Chinatown
• Save our Streets Campaign
• Playing streets
• Slower speed initiatives
• Shared space, shared surfaces
• Building sustainable city centres and more.

'Dog breaks ice'

For its thirtieth anniversay, Community Links is publishing Making links: fifteen visions of community, which contains an engaging mix of views and comments 'on our communities and the way we interact.'

I prepared a light something about the sociability of dog walking, which was fun to do and fits snugly between Michael Wojas's chapter on 'A members' club for outsiders' and Russell Davies writing about online community. But don't take my word for it, place yer order (£10.99).

Press release.

Social capital in neighbourhoods: two recent reports

CASE, the Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, recently published a short report by Anne Power and Helen Willmot on Social capital within the neighbourhood.

It's based on seven rounds of interviews with the main carer (or most present parent) in families with children, in two case study areas: a large council estate, and an inner city mixed-tenure area. The material comes from CASE's eight year longitudinal study tracking 200 families in four representative low-income areas.

The researchers look at bonding capital, in terms of family and friendship networks; and bridging capital, in which they include the role of neighbours (something continues to bother me about the equation of weak neighbourly relations with 'bridging' capital...):

In Kirkside East 70% of the respondents, and in The Valley 68%, explained that there are one or more people with whom they actually exchange favours. Furthermore, approximately a fifth of the respondents in both of the neighbourhoods (18% in Kirkside East and 20% in The Valley) explained that there are more than four such people in their lives. Favours exchanged encompassed immediate, momentary ones and more long-term, longstanding arrangements, including the giving of time as well as other resources.

The report goes on to note that:

A dominant theme in the respondents’ narratives on friends and family was the importance not so much of the actual support received from them, as knowing it is there to draw on when ever it is needed

- although this is not extended to neighbours.

The researchers conclude by echoing calls for policy makers 'to recognise, and then not damage or destroy, existing social capital.'

Around the same time, a report by Marilyn Taylor from an action learning set on Making social capital count was published as part of the national evaluation of neighbourhood management pathfinders.

The report is based on conversations (aha) among residents and agency representatives in Manton, north Nottinghamshire, exploring how a focus on social capital could contribute to change in their area. The content of the pdf is protected (there may be some reason for that, which I'm unable to grasp) which hardly encourages me to offer the findings.

But I do note the remark: 'The beauty of this approach is that it is simple - even obvious.' Indeed.

Older people and isolation from neighbours

Help the Aged has launched a new fundraising campaign which aims to help end isolation and loneliness among older people. This follows a survey which claims that 1.4 million older people in the UK feel 'socially isolated' and nearly 300,000 have gone a full month in the last year 'without speaking to any family or neighbours.'

Had they spoken to any friends, in that time, you want to ask. Unfortunately Help the Aged don't seem to offer a link to a report of the research, although I suppose it must be somewhere. [While I'm at it, and without wishing to seem to be picking on this organisation, why is this contemptuous attitude towards readers so widespread?]

Press release.

Conversation: everyone's talking about it

Yesterday we held what's thought to be the the first practical experience of 'living library' in the UK. The idea of Living Library is that you can get direct access to experience or knowledge by borrowing a person, for a conversation about some aspect of their lives, personality or role.

It was a tentative start - a gathering of interested folk at CILIP (formerly the Library Association) with a presentation by Martin Field from New South Wales about how the scheme has been run at Lismore Library: followed by an experimental practical session in which participants volunteered to be 'books' or 'borrowed' someone. So we had nine or ten books, from the recently bereaved, the new grandparent, a person of faith, a vegetarian, a refugee, a gardener, living in a village in Nigeria, and so on.

There was unanimous satisfaction with the exercise and a lot of discussion about how it fits into efforts to contribute to community cohesion and contemporary calls for a more conversational democracy. There seems no reason why living library could not be run in places other than a public library (although I think being in the public realm will help to make it work); and it could be organised around a specific theme (such as a child health issue or wartime reminiscences) as well as being general. In a way it reminds me of telephone conferences, being a simple but effective communication device for achieving certain ends, celebrated by those who've tried it but curiously not widely adopted.

Neighbouring, parenting and poverty

This is the kind of stuff that gives income inequalities a bad name. A new report from the Family and Parenting Institute confirms that 'Income is a strong factor in families’ experience of their neighbourhood.' The poorer a family is, the more likely they are to feel unsafe after dark, the less likely they are to feel that their neighbours would help out in a crisis, and the less likely they are to have well-maintained green spaces nearby.

The report is based on an online survey of over 2,000 parents in England with a child or children under the age of 16.

While 70% say that their neighbours would help them out in a crisis (eg look after their children if they had to go to hospital for a few hours), the researchers suggest that this masks significant differences in terms of wealth. Only half of those with incomes below £10,000 think that their neighbours would help them out in a crisis.

On the other hand, there's not a great deal of expressed concern about informal social control. Most parents would not worry about talking to their neighbours’ children if they were being unruly. Some 77% said that they would speak to their neighbours’ children if they were misbehaving in the neighbourhood, or would consider doing so, with only 18 per cent saying they would definitely not do so.

Social network gap?

Three and a half years ago I wrote: 'We're all going to have to wait a while for Keith Hampton's definitive report on the e-neighbors project in Boston.' Well yer tiz and worth the wait of course.  It's published in a UK journal, Information, communication and society, in a special issue on 'e-Relationships'.

The three-year e-Neighbors study involved detailed social network surveys in four localities, in three of which residents were provided with a neighbourhood email discussion list and a website. The paper focuses mostly on the take-up and use in a suburban neighbourhood. The great majority of ties formed as a result of people being given access to the list, were weak ties. Hampton claims that the internet does not isolate people from the parochial realm of the neighborhood:

'Internet use over extended periods appears to be an antidote to privatism – it affords the formation of local social networks.'

Of interest in this write-up is the consideration of a 'social network gap'. I've always disliked the notion of a 'digital divide' (why digital? why divide?) and Keith wisely skirts this, raising questions which get us a little closer to the issues. We know that social inclusion is not just about access to stuff but also about social connections, especially weak ties. And some kinds of neighbourhood offer greater potential for establishing ties than do others.

So here's the problem as he puts it to us:

'Those without the technology, and those in neighborhoods without an existing propensity towards local tie formation, are structurally disadvantaged twice over; they are unlikely to build local community with or without the use of information and communication technologies.'

I've always admired the measured clarity of Keith's thought and writing, and it was a privilege to have the chance to contribute some thoughts to the project at an early stage. As it happens, this paper fits nicely onto stuff I've been babbling lately about weak ties and local networks. It's time to get some decent work done on this in the UK: where, for instance, is the housing association that's building or encouraging simple email lists on estates?

Keith Hampton's site.

Previously: On Keith Hampton's 2004 London presentation.

'Social exclusion, social capital, and local online centres.'

The global and the local

The other day my neighbour and I were dealing with a tree slumped across the boundary of our properties, and in conversation I took the opportunity to apologise for the fact that the volume on our television had been (I'd discovered belatedly) cranked up to a whopping 40 last Saturday eve. She said she'd not heard anything - 'didn't you hear us stomping and banging the floor...?' No, I said, not a sound.

It's not that we're all hard of hearing, but this was the occasion of a distinguished performance by the England rugby team in a world cup semi-final and I had taken up the time-honoured tradition of shouting at the TV, and turning up the volume in order to drown out my own shouting. Something about the hermetic 'participation' in the experience, though, is not quite satisfactory. Maybe we should have a neighbourhood large-screen for tomorrow's final. (That, my son believes, is what pubs are for).

Communication and the 'vacuum of responsibility'

To Kings Lynn, to give a short talk about information and communication, at a workshop run as part of a Young Foundation neighbourhood action network project. I made a few points about how the perceived decline of neighbourliness, and weak local social networks, leave what I call a 'vacuum of responsibility' for the neighbourhood.

How does the vacuum get filled? By formal agencies, such as the extended family of policing? With political and media emphasis on individual behaviours and parenting? Investment in skilled intervention, such as youth and community workers, perhaps? Or by investing in something vague and unpredictable which we call 'community'? Who's doing the thinking?

Participants comprised residents and staff from the Fairstead area, and the Young Foundation research had surfaced plenty of evidence of information and communication problems. There was a strong sense that information doesn’t circulate sufficiently at local level. It's a common perception which suggests that there may be too few conversations taking place.

I don't think the answer is to invest energy and resources into two-dimensional, direct forms of information – characterised by the glossified newsletter or bulletin, the unread and unloved subject of so much disinterest. One reason these products keep appearing is that they fit into the accounting framework of public spending: identifiable budget, manageable process of production and delivery, all subject to numbers which are somehow taken to stand for outcomes.

We'd make more difference by stimulating more conversations at local level, and for the representatives of agencies to be participating in them and drawing from them. That becomes a critical role for regeneration agencies - how to maximise the communication that goes on at the school gates, at leisure centres and the footie at the weekend, in the post office queue and the pub and so on; to contribute to it and ensure that local people benefit from it. No, I don't know how we'd evaluate it convincingly either. So let's get started on that too.

It seems to me that street reps could be an essential part of this mix, if sensibly supported. The role also represents the idea of local people occupying the vaccum of responsibility.

Doors

Here's a tap at the back door, my neighbour's asking for a witness to count the money and sign, it was her turn to do the cancer charity envelope collection in the street this year. No worries, see you later. An hour later, here she is at the front door. Just did a crumble for you, hold the edges mind, it's hot. Images from Dickens flicker in the steam as I scurry it through to the kitchen.

As it happens I'd just been writing something about doors, including reference to this voice from a study of Bengali elders in London:

‘In Bangladesh we spend time outside and we keep our doors open. We enjoy the fresh air and see our relatives and neighbours and chat together. Here if I go next door, the doors are always closed.’ (Respondent quoted by Katy Gardner, Age, narrative and migration, 2002)

Disrespecting childhoods

Plenty in the news this morning about the Community soundings report, which describes high anxiety among 7-11 year olds concerning exams, friendships, and the world they're growing into. It refers to a 'loss of childhood.'

Many expressed concern about climate change, global warming and pollution, the gulf between rich and poor, and terrorism.

"Some were also worried by the gloomy tenor of 'what you hear on the news' or by a generalised fear of strangers, burglars and street violence," the report said.

Are we surprised? As Hugh Cunningham notes in the BBC report, 'unequal societies have the most stressed children.'

And on the theme of pupil tests, a nicely understated remark by the report's author could serve very well as an epitaph for New Labour: "Standards may have been too readily equated with quality."

Guardian. Times.

Community cohesion and affordable housing

On the back of the recent report of the Integration and Cohesion Commission, the Housing Corporation has published its community cohesion strategy, Shared places.

The document takes a lead and gives a strong steer for affordable housing providers, particularly in:

• giving impetus to the principle of 'mixed communities', with a view to avoiding the concentration of deprivation, and
• emphasising the requirement for all stakeholders in affordable housing to assess the impact of measures and decisions on cohesion and integration.

That second point comes across as a little dull and won't make headlines, but I fancy it could have quite a significant effect.

There should be an accompanying good practice guide, published by the Chartered Insitutute of Housing, available soon.

Frog at the door

I popped out for a run in heavy rain this morning, and when I got back there was a frog on the doorstep, as if waiting to be let it in.

Frogs wanting shelter from the rain? Must be climate change. What next, SUV owners deciding to walk?

Not in your back yard: neighbours and development

'Ten years of in-fighting have culminated in residents - desperate to stop a housing development interrupting their view - suing neighbours for six-figure damages.

'The row has already seen some residents of Upper Batley, West Yorkshire, clubbing together to pay £40,000 for a strategic piece of scrubland in a bid to thwart development plans.

'But Brian Gavaghan, who is in the midst of building five new houses on land behind his home, has retorted by demolishing part of his own living room to make way for an access route...'

Planning Resource.

Cohesion and civic participation

Communities and Local Government last week published some headline findings from the first quarter of the 2007-08 Citizenship Survey, covering April-June 2007.

From which I note:

• As in the last survey (2003), 81% of people agreed that their local area is a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together.
• Among those aged 16-24, the proportion of people who agree that people from different backgrounds get on well together in their area has increased from 73% to 82% since 2003.
• In April-June 2007, 77% of people felt that they 'strongly belonged to their neighbourhood.' Figures were higher among some ethnic groups - Pakistani (85%), Bangladeshi (83%) and Indian (83%).
• In April-June 2007, 37% of people in England agreed that they could influence decisions in their local area. In 2001 the proportion was 44%.

Respect Taskforce dissed

The Respect Taskforce has been disbanded, with its work on preventing and tackling anti-social behaviour among young people to continue under a new 'Youth Taskforce,' established by the Department for Children, Schools and Families.

"The new Youth Taskforce will play a lead role in supporting local youth support services to focus more on preventing teenagers from experiencing serious problems - such as being drawn into youth crime and anti-social behaviour and disengaging from school."

According to the press release, policy on tackling anti-social behaviour is to continue with specialist teams in the Home Office and other Departments. At DCSF, a close working relationship between the Youth Directorate (and Taskforce) and the Families Group, with its network of Family Intervention Projects, makes sense.

It's not clear what difference it will make separating anti-social behaviour policy by age, but the overall message is a double one: a more rounded supportive approach to working with troubled young people, and taking the hsyteria out of ASB generally.

Previously -

• Respect agenda dissolves in self-parody
• Posturing and preening about respect
• Respect with a capital R
• Respect in the neighbourhood

Poundbury lecture and tour: 'Removing the roadblocks'

This lecture and tour explains how Poundbury 'looked away from conventional highways thinking to successfully establish safe, inviting streetscapes that promote modes of transport other than the car and contribute to effective community living.'

Wednesday 14th November 2007, 10.30am - 3.30pm
Brownsword Hall, 13 Moraston Street
Pummery Square, Poundbury, DT1 3RG

More here.

Some video tours here, which show the surprisingly broad streets, unexpected in-yer-face garage doors and house walls, and the scarcity of pedestrians.

Social exclusion, social capital, and local online centres

Yesterday to the Oxford Internet Institute for a session on 'digital disengagement' and social exclusion, where I learned the following from one reported study: 11% of those whose experience of exclusion is most entrenched (ie identified on several measures, not just one or two) are 'internet users.'

Without the source I can't unpack this stat, but I'd like to see more case studies to find out more about what people in this category are doing when they are connected, and what difference it makes to their lives. It happens that I'm involved in the evaluation of a 'social impact demonstrator' at a couple of UK online centres, so may be able to contribute in due course. And Citizens Online's Everybody Online projects should provide some insights.

As it turned out, the need for more qualitative research, to get at some subtleties that were not emerging from survey material, was a lesson for the OII from the seminar. One of the nuances that concerns me is the point that, irrespective of communication technologies, we don't know enough about the extent to which people who experience exclusion are strategic in their approach to weak ties.

People of all ages and classes and backgrounds can be strategic about their need for and approach to connections and friendships, without necessarily being cynically so. Is such behaviour as likely to be found among those whose experience of exclusion is most profound? Whether it tends to be or not will influence people's attitudes to the communication technologies, for example in recognising that mobiles are brilliant for strong ties but maybe not so good for establishing weak ties.

If your personal social network is sparse, then strong ties might be the ones you crave or seem to have most need for. Perhaps also you lack opportunities or skills (or both) to establish weak ties - these tend to require some basic cultural, social or economic capital to start with. But from the early work with UK online centres in low-income areas that I was involved in years ago, it was apparent that some people were establishing weak ties with remote others online, and gaining confidence and skills from that experience.

And right on cue, here's a paper by Sara Ferlander and Duncan Timms, which contrasts users' experience of a 'local net' in a low-income area, and in an 'IT-café'.

The paper examines the extent to which use of the Internet is associated with an enhancement of social participation, social trust and local identity in the area. The Local Net appears to have had limited success in meeting its goals; the IT-Café was more successful...

The IT-Café provided a physical meeting place which facilitated social networking, especially the development of weak ties bridging different local groups, and led to decreased tensions between them. The physical aspect of the IT-Café had positive impacts upon local ties and bonding social capital. Nonetheless, visitors to the Café, in common with the users of the Local Net, mainly used the Internet for non-local networking (bridging and linking social capital) including the creation and/or maintenance of both weak and strong, and interest-specific (bonding) ties. The Internet was used for the maintenance of non-local strong bonding social capital, with many visitors using the Internet to keep in touch with family and friends outside the local community.

It's not an either/or issue of course. And as I understand it (although this is only quietly mentioned) the two resources were sequential, the café established as the Local Net failed, and the latter seems to have been on far too large a scale, so there are all sorts of reasons why the comparison is speculative. It's highly likely that many of those who used the café were already blessed with sufficient confidence and social capital to take advantage of what was on offer. Indeed the authors accept that causal priorities are hard to establish, but 'the evidence suggests that an IT-Café, combining physical with virtual and the local with the global, may be especially well suited to build social capital and a sense of local community in a disadvantaged area.'

In my view this in no way discredits neighbourhood networks, but it does put a nice big tick in the Third Place box. And it sweetly reinforces what some of us were saying 10 years ago (The net result) about the need for local resource centres; or a few years later for example in a paper to government which I co-wrote in 2002:

• Access centres function best as part of wider generic community resources that attract local people for a range of activities. It is not realistic to expect them to become financially self-sustaining without distorting their roles, although they do tend to add value to whatever funding they receive;
• Where they are part of generic community resources, access centres fulfil fundamental social roles that contribute to government objectives on community cohesion, social capital, and community capacity building. They reach parts that other agencies cannot reach, and seen in this context they justify public funding. Such funding would need to reflect recognition of their role as community sector resources rather than as centres of formal learning.

Regrettably, government lost its nerve at about that time, and funding for the centres came with badly-misconceived requirements for formal learning, wholly inappropriate for the policy objective. Now they're wondering where the social inclusion results are going to come from.

When the time comes

Mrs T tries round the back, it's locked, calls out, no effect, clops round the front and flutters the knocker.

Crossley's not concentrating on work but the tapping surprises, it takes a second for the sound to make sense. He creaks to the door.

Would he run them up to the club, you know by the roundabout, Mr T with this heart trouble now, it's alright coming back down, but he can't go up so well, with the hill.

Of course, how soon. Saying it slowly, perhaps he'd been dozing. Now if you can. And Crossley's not poured himself a glass yet, slips on his shoes, grasps unglancing for the keys. Mrs T careful now getting in the back. Are you sure you're ok for getting home.

Just here, we can cross. Thanks thanks. And isn't that reassuring, and Mr T with his heart, to feel she can ask any time, in case.

And how good is that, now he knows, with the old feller having this trouble, that she'll call straight away, I won't be sat there fearful that they'd not call. How would it be if something happened, to have been sat there, and not asked.

Tenant groups' telephone conferences

Sarah Bird has come up with another enticing autumn programme of telephone conferences for residents and tenants.

I've long been a fan of this format - the events are accessible and rewarding. Highlights from the programme include:

• Empowering older people, 19 October 2007, 11:00 - 12:00
• Clean streets and public places: tackling failure, 29 October 2007, 13:00 - 14:00.

There are also sessions on time banks, and on avoiding activist burnout. Check the programme for more information.