Wednesday, 22 June 2005

Neighbourhood governance: closing in on some issues

Yesterday in Bath, David Wilcox and I ran a workshop game on neighbourhood governance at a Quest networking event. Nbhd_govnce_game_bath David will surely post something about the technique and process in due course on his blog. Meantime here are some issues that emerged in the conversations that we stimulated.

The whole neighbourhood governance agenda makes an assumption that people will connect to their locality. We know that people will come together in the face of adversity, but why do we suppose that they will come together just because government wants them to? This assumption was immediately challenged by one of our groups.

People have lots of different interests, and their allegiance and commitment may be stronger to interest groups than to their locality. This implies that you might not get enough strength of commitment if you assume that we’re solely or mainly bound together by locality. People will cluster around their interests if they find them in their neighbourhood, but is that enough to sustain democratic forums at the most local level? One of our workshop groups, playing the storyline of a fictitious neighbourhood forum, felt the solution was to establish sub-groups around interests; but then they ran up against the challenge of representation because insufficient numbers were turning up to meetings. Well they tried to solve that by saying 'we don't have meetings, we have events'...  Which is fine, but we're talking about a decision-making forum of some kind here...

And then there's the question of community 'leaders' or dominant activists. My hunch is that this will feature less in the neighbourhood governance agenda than is anticipated, but here's how one participant expressed it:

“However democratic you try and make it, you’ll get the big mouths, and others won’t put themselves forward.”

We're looking to develop the game as a way of surfacing issues in this agenda, so if you're interested please get in touch.

22 Jun 2005 08:43:33 | Citizenship and democracy, Governance and participation

The comments to this entry are closed.

NEXT POST
Park this way sir Interesting essay on reconciling parking strategies with public spaces strategies, by Ethan Kent, here in the Making places newsletter from Project for Public Spaces. "...people don't come to an area for the parking, they come for what’s distinct and special about that place."
PREVIOUS POST
Lockable space Here's a curious story about car parking in Istanbul. In part of the city the local authority sought to address the congestion problem by installing steel barriers on the kerbs, to stop cars parking half on the pavement, causing inconvenience and making the streets less safe and less inviting. Apparently, as the municipal engineers moved out at one end of the street, the metalworkers moved in at the other end. They cut through the base of the barriers, welded-on flanges, and sold padlocks to the residents. Who now have a removable barrier and hence their own parking space. It sounds like a triumph of practical enterprise over (a) lack of consultation and (b) lack of imagination. Unfortunately it privatises public space, so it's hardly an ideal solution. It will be interesting to find out what the authority's next move is. I heard this story from English journalist Steve Bryant a few weeks ago, who lives in the neighbourhood in question, and while I was there I came across this example.

Kevin Harris

Search

My Other Accounts

Recent Comments