1. Neighbourliness + Empowerment = Wellbeing is there a formula for happy communities?

2. The Neighbourhoods Strand ‘N+E=W’ explores the relationship between neighbourhood and community empowerment and wellbeing Evidence base comes from growing body of domestic and international academic research Three hypotheses are tested against 12 case studies from Manchester, Hertfordshire and South Tyneside’s existing empowerment initiatives Focus on both subjective wellbeing (perceptions of control) as well as objective wellbeing ( opportunities and participation in decision making) Report was published in June 2008 and disseminated via the IDeA and Young Foundation website

3. International Evidence From Switzerland - Bruno Frey showed the relationship between direct democracy and greater happiness: where there are more direct democratic initiatives and referendums, residents are happier Robert Putnam’s work on social capital – ‘Bowling Alone’ Robert Sampson’s work on collective efficacy in Chicago

4. Evidence from the U.K British Household Panel Survey: shows relationship between wellbeing and social capital; particularly strong relationship between talking regularly to neighbours and wellbeing Neighbourhood management pathfinder evaluation: overall residents are more satisfied with their local areas, more inclined to think their areas are improving, and more likely to think that local crime and environmental problems have been dealt with. The number of residents who feel they can influence local decisions has increased (modestly). Home Office Crime and Disorder survey: collective efficacy established as an inhibitor of crime and disorder; and people with high perceptions of anti social behaviour are less likely to enjoy living in their area

5. From this we explored… Three hypotheses 1.That wellbeing is higher in areas where residents can influence decisions affecting their neighbourhood 2.That wellbeing is higher amongst people who have regular contact with their neighbours 3.That wellbeing is higher in areas where residents have the confidence to exercise control over local circumstances

6. Our Findings

7. Influencing Decisions Case Study - South Tyneside’s Democratic Services Team Going out into communities: schools, youth clubs, resident groups, festivals and events Learning how to use community development practice to communicate and improve knowledge of how local democracy works Encouraging civic responsibility by, for example, increasing voter registration and promoting a clear process for petitions Petitions have increased, LPSA target for young voter registration exceeded by 9 %

8. Case Study – Hertfordshire’s Youth Advocates Scheme Training young people from each of the county’s ten districts to represent their peers Giving young people the skills, knowledge and confidence to engage with complex service providers Case Study – Manchester 100 Days Campaign Residents and service providers taking joint responsibility, working together to make a visible difference Focus is on action Influencing Decisions cont…

9. Regular contact between neighbours Case Study – Manchester in Bloom In Hulme, 200 residents got together to help with the neighbourhoods In Bloom bid – meeting in a local car park Some residents involved in Monaco Drive’s entry have even been away on holiday together In some neighbourhoods, Manchester in Bloom – an action focused initiative - has helped develop social networks

10. Taking Control Over Local Circumstances Case Study – Mancunian Agreement, Friends of Blackley Forest Friends have been active for years, but lacked the resources to achieved their aspirations for the Forest e.g. higher usage, sense of safety, more local ownership and responsibility Mancunian Agreement matched much needed resources with local knowledge, passion and vision for change Since the agreement, Forest usage is up, new infrastructure is in place and undamaged, people are reporting ASB and feel safer Capacity and support of local authority and partner organisations essential – and is often provided by a few key individuals

11. Some practical suggestions… Contact between neighbours – programme of street parties, dog socialising classes Involvement in decision making – new technology and e- democracy, clear process for petitions, devolved budgets Control over local circumstances – local action focused groups e.g. gardening action where residents help maintain front gardens of elderly or disabled residents

12. Is power a zero-sum game? Empowerment can be about residents realising their own potential to create change It can also be about a redistribution of power (where appropriate) and opening up opportunities to residents to realise potential this can create tension amongst local councillors However, the benefits that involving more people in decision making should not be seen as a threat: - People want their councillors engaging more with the community - Councillors will broaden their local intelligence base - Communities can become more self sufficient - Decisions will be more in line with the broader wishes of the community

13. “Local councillors make a real effort to listen to the views of local people” % Agree% Disagree Councillors Officers Public Base: 198 Members, 113 Officers, c600 members of the public

14. % Disagree Councillors “We/the Council make decisions that are in touch with local views” Base: 198 Members, 113 Officers, c600 members of the public % Agree Officers Public

15. Key Messages Building social networks and encouraging neighbourly contact should be valued and resourced Knowledge of how local democracy works is often limited and needs to be improved Is the ‘offer’ to local people - what they are being asked to be involved in - appealing? For most residents, being empowered requires barriers to be broken between them and ‘distant’ decision makers Continuous dialogue and keeping people informed is crucial to building trust

16. Final thought - Everyday Democracy Everyday democracy is the extent to which democracy extends beyond the ballot box into our everyday lives e.g. our communities, families and public services. Source : ‘Everyday Democracy Index’, Demos, 2008.