Is ‘co-creation’ the way to change the narrative?

Developments bring jobs, prosperity and tangible benefits to communities – yet conversations around them are often negative. Is ‘co-creation’ the way to change the narrative?

“But the school is overflowing already!” “I can’t get a doctor’s appointment as it is!” What about all the extra traffic?”

Wherever there is a proposed development – especially one at any scale – we hear these same concerns. Legitimate worries that need to be addressed. Yet all too often, communities will hear the same answers: “We have a report”, or “We will make contributions to improve local facilities”. Of course, they’ve all heard it all before. It’s the way the system works.

But does anyone think this is enough? Stakeholder scrutiny, whatever industry you’re in, has changed massively in the last few years. Just ask the Super League football clubs…

Like it or not, trust in the development industry is poor and, when proposals come forward, the conversation is often a negative one, fuelled by media headlines and a mindset of perceived problems with development.

So should we carry on as we are or should we push for something different? In my view there has to be a better way to help communities recognise the benefits that development can bring. I believe that getting them involved from the start – a process we call co-creation – is the answer.

We need to talk about what’s in it for existing communities from the outset

With any scheme the list of financial contributions, the range of community benefits, the investment brought alongside new development, are all significant. Parks, biodiversity gains, community facilities, new schools, better public transport, homes for those that can’t afford their own… these are essential elements of the package of benefits development always brings.

That’s before we mention the local jobs, the added value into the local economy from the construction supply chain and income expenditure from residents - there are frequently planning requirements to use local supply chains and provide apprenticeships.

What other industry manufactures a product which provides such extensive benefits? All of this has a value, a social value. Take for example the value of green space to our health and wellbeing which can be assessed using tools such as Greenkeeper; or the value of a school, a community facility, local jobs etc. And, more importantly, why are we so shy about talking about these benefits?

Let’s be bold about the good that we do

If a policy says we have to provide a school, we provide it, even if the residents only make up a portion of the classrooms. When we provide parks and playing fields, other people beyond the development get to enjoy them too. When we make financial contributions toward a new leisure centre, others get to use the new facility too.

Yet who knows? Who tells people it was that developer that paid for this? The role of the developer/financier can go missing in action even though that new community facility only exists because the developer paid for it.

In years gone by, industrialists such as Titus Salt or George Cadbury built homes for their workers, alongside providing schools and parks. Philanthropists? Yes, no doubt. But their motive for doing so was to improve the health and wellbeing of their workforce, to the benefit of everyone.

Are things that different today? Maybe the only difference is that Salt and Cadbury volunteered to do it, and made it clear that it was them that did so.

I will never forget speaking to a class of nine-year-olds at a school near to a large regeneration scheme we were delivering. After an hour of Pritt-stick and colouring in plans, I thought I had won them all over. Then in front of the whole class, one otherwise quiet boy stood up and simply asked: “Why don’t you go and build somewhere else?”.

It taught me that explaining how development can bring social benefits needs to be done in ways people will understand – not just once, but regularly and through ongoing conversations.  Once is never enough.

We also won’t understand the value brought by development unless we measure it. We can’t measure it unless we monetise it. We can’t demonstrate that value unless we communicate it – not just once, but on an ongoing basis. And that means engaging communities from the start. There is a whole new conversation about ‘social value’ and, irrespective of the risk of more jargon from the development industry, this is real because people care about what development brings. If you can’t answer their questions or stand up your claims about the good that your scheme brings, the wheels come off.

The social value way to co-creation

I’ve been talking a lot about co-creation recently – a proven way we can work more effectively with local communities, which requires trust-building, transparency and working around the table with a host of different people. In other words, we agree what everyone wants and needs out of it – and then we hand over the pen. 

But to get there, we have to understand what people want, and what they will and won’t accept. Find common ground.

With an open conversation, it is often easier than we expect - it’s as simple as talking.

The same applies to demonstrating social value. How would it feel to a local resident if a developer bragged about how much value is being brought from a nearby development, but that developer had never tried to understand what is important to the area? They would probably shrug it off! What a missed opportunity! But we see this so often.

So, we firstly have to understand what the local issues are – the drivers, the problems – and then set out to see how we can address them. And we can only do that by engaging with the community.

Isn’t this all expensive to achieve?

The developer is in a different world, with different objectives, right? And if we commit to maximising social value, won’t that cost more?

Actually, no. My own experience on schemes like Royal Clarence Yard, Blandford, Ford and many others, is that when you have open conversations, what starts as a small scheme can often grow to something much bigger when everyone wants something more. Early conversations at Ford started with just a few hundred homes but Ford has now become one of the largest Neighbourhood Plan allocations in the UK – all with the community’s blessing.

“There is a huge misunderstanding which says that somehow delivering social value involves foregoing a commercial return – that somehow being socially useful or economically useful is a zero-sum game.   This is complete nonsense: the two go hand-in-hand and are mutually reinforcing over any reasonable period of time, and the economically sustainable business is the one that has a relevant, socially useful mission or purpose”

Nigel Wilson, Chief Executive Legal & General Group, National Social Value Conference 2020

There’s nothing new in saying that good engagement and meaningful conversations with communities lead to better planning outcomes. Those principles are established and well known.

What I’m saying is there’s an important fresh approach which I’m seeing working even better.

That starts with doing a 180 degree flip and looking at a site and its potential from the point of view of the existing community before you even start to bring forward a design concept. Yes, have the use in mind and, of course, know where you see the potential. But before you go further, start the conversation with the community.

By doing that and by building a shared understanding of what the community can gain from the development too, everyone can align around a vision and a set of goals. Everyone can see what success looks like for them and recognise it as mutual. Everyone can understand that to get this bit, you need that bit. The whole comes together informed by the individual constituent parts that people care about – and is better for it.

Understanding your stakeholders is a required precursor to any strategy or plan.  Co-creation is a way to achieve it in development and placemaking.

Ignore your stakeholders and you are well on your way to scoring an own goal.  Just ask ‘the Super League six’.

Robin Shepherd