Measuring the initial social sustainability impacts of estate regeneration: a case study of Acton Gardens, London

In the context of UK housebuilding this paper explores and critically reviews the initial measurement of social sustainability in the first phase of a new housing project on a large estate regeneration development in South Acton, London (conducted in March–April 2015). The research uses an existing “ex post” social sustainability framework adopted for use in other new UK housing projects and also examines local residents’ attitudes to the first phase of the estate regeneration. The social sustainability assessment framework (created to reflect a UK housebuilder's perspective) is based on the analysis and comparison of a range of national datasets and interviews and survey work with new and existing residents and other stakeholders on the estate, and the surrounding areas. The research shows stronger ratings for a number of physical improvements in the new development, but weaker scores for local identity and links with neighbours. The research also shows a mixed picture in their attitudes towards the urban regeneration. The paper provides a critical discussion of the results and the framework, and concludes by setting out the lessons learned from the research for social sustainability assessment. The research will be useful for practitioners, housebuilders and policy makers involved in housing, and those with a wider interest in community wellbeing

Operationalising a large research programme tackling complex urban and planetary health problems: A case study approach to critical reflections

Addressing increasingly urgent global challenges requires the rapid mobilisation of new research groups that are large in scale, co-produced, and focused explicitly on investigating root causes at a systemic level. This requires new ways of operationalising and funding research programmes to better support effective interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary (ID/TD) partnerships between a wide range of academic disciplines and stakeholder groups. Understanding of the challenges and approaches that teams can follow to overcome them can come through critical reflection on experiences initiating new research programmes of this nature and sharing of these reflections. We aimed to offer a framework for critical reflection and an overview of how we developed it, and to share our reflections on operationalising a newly formed large-scale ID/TD research programme. We present a framework of 10 areas for critical reflection: Systems, Unknowns and Imperfection; ID/TD Understanding; Values; Societal Impact; Context and Stakeholder Knowledge; Project Understanding and Direction; Team Cohesion; Decision-Making; Communications; and Method Development. We reflect on our experience of operationalising the research programme in these areas. Based on this critical examination of our experiences and the processes we adopted, we make recommendations for teams seeking to tackle important and highly complex global challenges, and for those who fund or support such research groups. Our reflections point to an overarching challenge of the structural and institutional barriers for cross-disciplinary research of this nature

Balancing Autonomy and Collaboration in Large-Scale and Disciplinary Diverse Teams for Successful Qualitative Research

Large scale, multi-organisational collaborations between researchers from diverse disciplinary backgrounds are increasingly recognised as important to investigate and tackle complex real-world problems. However differing expectations, epistemologies, and preferences across these teams pose challenges to following best practice for ensuring high-quality and rigorous qualitative research, while maintaining goodwill and team cohesion across team members. This article presents critical reflections from the real-world experiences of a team navigating the challenges of collaborating on a large-scale, cross-disciplinary interview study. Based on these experiences, we extend the literature on large team qualitative collaboration by highlighting the importance of balancing autonomy and collaboration, and propose eight recommendations to support high quality research and team cohesion. We identify how this balance can be achieved at different times: when centralised decision-making should be prioritised, and autonomy can be allowed. We argue that prioritising time to develop shared understandings, build trust, and creating positive environments that accept and support differing researcher perspectives on qualitative methods is paramount. By exploring and reflecting on these differences, teams can identify how and when to support autonomy in decision-making, when to move forward collaboratively, and how to ensure that shared processes reflect the needs of the whole team. The reflexive findings, emanating from practical experience, can inform large research teams undertaking qualitative studies to explore complex issues. We make an original contribution to qualitative methods research by arguing that balancing autonomy and collaboration is the key to promoting high quality research and cohesion in large teams

Balancing Autonomy and Collaboration in Large-Scale and Disciplinary Diverse Teams for Successful Qualitative Research

Large scale, multi-organisational collaborations between researchers from diverse disciplinary backgrounds are increasingly recognised as important to investigate and tackle complex real-world problems. However differing expectations, epistemologies, and preferences across these teams pose challenges to following best practice for ensuring high-quality and rigorous qualitative research, while maintaining goodwill and team cohesion across team members. This article presents critical reflections from the real-world experiences of a team navigating the challenges of collaborating on a large-scale, cross-disciplinary interview study. Based on these experiences, we extend the literature on large team qualitative collaboration by highlighting the importance of balancing autonomy and collaboration, and propose eight recommendations to support high quality research and team cohesion. We identify how this balance can be achieved at different times: when centralised decision-making should be prioritised, and autonomy can be allowed. We argue that prioritising time to develop shared understandings, build trust, and creating positive environments that accept and support differing researcher perspectives on qualitative methods is paramount. By exploring and reflecting on these differences, teams can identify how and when to support autonomy in decision-making, when to move forward collaboratively, and how to ensure that shared processes reflect the needs of the whole team. The reflexive findings, emanating from practical experience, can inform large research teams undertaking qualitative studies to explore complex issues. We make an original contribution to qualitative methods research by arguing that balancing autonomy and collaboration is the key to promoting high quality research and cohesion in large teams

Integrating Health into Local Plans: A Comparative Review of Health Requirements for Urban Development in Seven Local Planning Authorities in England

A local plan is a statutory policy document that supports urban development decisions across a local government area in England. Local plans are reported to need more specific requirements for development proposals regarding wider health determinants to address potential health outcomes and health inequalities. This study reviews the integration of Health in Local Plans of seven local planning authorities through documentary analysis methods. A review framework was formulated based on health and planning literature regarding local plans, health policy and determinants of health and dialogue with a local government partner. The findings identify opportunities to strengthen the consideration of Health in Local Plans, including ensuring that policies are informed by local health priorities and signpost national guidance, strengthening health-related requirements for developers (e.g., indoor air quality, fuel poverty and security of tenure) and improving implementation of requirements for developers (e.g., through adoption of health management plans and community ownership). The study identifies further research needs regarding how policies are interpreted by developers in practice, and on national guidance for Health Impact Assessment. It highlights the benefit of undertaking a comparative review, contrasting local plan policy language and identifying opportunities to share, adapt and strengthen planning requirements regarding health outcomes

Spatial plans as a critical intervention in improving population health. A discourse arising from a health census review of the state of current local planning policy in England

Planning decisions are dependent on the strength of regulatory instruments. The local plan is a public policy document informing decisions on land-use developments that can have impact on health of future populations. The article reports on a census review of local plans (n = 346) in England. Using content analysis, we found limited resilience with only 126 (36.4%) have links to local health needs, 101 (29.2%) have links to local health strategies, and 129 (37.5%) have a health policy. It is a novel approach to identify the current state of local policies as the starting point for projecting future health outcomes