Communities

Recommendations

Info

community engagement A robust evaluation framework There are many models available that could be tied to evaluating the outputs that would result from implementing the above suggestions. I’m encouraged by UrbanGrowth’s attempts at evaluation and the fact that they publish their results. If evaluation processes were always formative and not solely summative, UrbanGrowth NSW could tweak its processes as they go without being seen to have ‘failed’. We are all aware that urban renewal is very tricky and there inevitably will be failures along the way. If UrbanGrowth NSW could continue to open itself to formative evaluation processes, everyone would benefit and the capacity of the community would be strengthened, as well as the relationship-building opportunities for informed decision-making. I could imagine Urbansome ideas for UrbanGrowth NSW: Leading-practice community engagement Community engagement sits at the heart of planning and it is important that engagement practice be continually assessed to ensure that we really do achieve leading-practice outcomes. Wendy Sarkissian reflects on her experience in community engagement in planning to provide some suggestions for engagement by UrbanGrowth NSW and Planning and Environment NSW more broadly. was encouraged by the article, “UrbanGrowth NSW: Participation a key I to city transformation” by Abbi Jeffs on behalf of UrbanGrowth NSW. It’s heartening to see a reflective practitioner working in government setting out the parameters and it’s a valuable contribution. To know that Urban- Growth is following IAP2 and National Centre for Dialogue and Deliberation’s guidance is also encouraging. What concerned me was the lack of reference to a corporate policy, a government policy with guidelines— or even an acknowledgement of the corporate memory of the organisation. I hope I have this wrong, but initially it seemed to me that UrbanGrowth was starting its policy all over again and articulating it in response to a request from this journal, rather than reflecting its corporate learnings and a highlevel policy framework. In living memory, UrbanGrowth NSW was Landcom—they had an engagement policy and guidelines. The document is still on the UrbanGrowth website in the form of the Stakeholder Consultation Workbook. For practitioners like me, that Workbook provided direction and reassurance and it is definitely a good starting point. Updating that outdated document is not enough, however. We need more from UrbanGrowth NSW and the Department of Planning and we need it now. Here are some preliminary ideas on where I believe they need to start. Where to start? A robust policy I believe that the NSW Government and UrbanGrowth NSW need a robust policy with organisational endorsement and high-level political support—preferably one that is worked out with genuine involvement of community representatives. It needs to go well beyond the somewhat stale directives of the IAP2 Spectrum, which is now widely regarded as out-of-date. I suggest that they have a look at the Capire Triangle developed by skilled practitioner, Amy Hubbard, from Capire in Melbourne (diagram opposite). Critically, what is innovative (and appropriate) about the Triangle is the emphasis on relationships. The UrbanGrowth article does not mention relationships. That seems to be missing, in my view. A set of guiding principles that operationalise the policy and make it actionable Guiding engagement principles that go with the policy must also be developed through a consultative process. These principles will help to guide the Urban- Growth NSW and State Government staff and give confidence to them and to developers and community members. They can also provide the basis for an evaluation framework. A co-production model used in the preparation of the guiding principles (which could be taken down to the level of specific guidelines) would allow for shared ownership of the principles. 22 Inner Sydney Voice • Summer 2015/16 • www.innersydneyvoice.org.au
community engagement Growth NSW representatives saying, ‘We are just tweaking things, according to the evaluation framework’s information.’ Moreover, in the community sector, people would perhaps be a bit more understanding. This approach would involve using pilot-tested evaluation questionnaires at every process/ workshop/event, so that all participants could openly track the effectiveness of the Government’s initiatives. This needs to be more than reporting that a certain percentage were happy with a session – it needs to provide transparency on the range of people’s responses and to have opportunities for community members to help UrbanGrowth interpret findings. I want to see successful community renewal in NSW, having seen both good and bad examples in my career. I fear that UrbanGrowth NSW will find that if they keep operating without a policy, principles and guidelines, or an explicit evaluation framework (for all projects and all stages) —they will come unstuck. To me, it’s simple governance: you have to have something by which you measure your effectiveness. And just getting ‘approvals’ is not the only (or best) measure. within government, as well as those working for government as consultants. And developers, of course. In the case of UrbanGrowth NSW, we could start with a thorough review of the Landcom stakeholder consultation document in the light of previous Landcom experience, current Urban- Growth NSW work and leading-practice community engagement—with a view to keeping the parts that work and are still relevant. This is a project that needs an adequate budget but it would not be that difficult to do. 2. A focus on capacity strengthening To explain the complexities of the highly contested realms of urban renewal, we need a capacity-strengthening model that pays attention to community education. We wrote about that at length in chapter 5 of Kitchen Table Four beneficial approaches In this complex space, I believe that the following four approaches would be beneficial: 1. Rediscover and retain a corporate memory Let’s build on years of engagement work by the Government and Landcom—some of which was quite good, resuscitate those old guidelines, update them and make sure that they have high-level support. Put them out for review and consultation—with a view to further tailoring and updating. This approach would help both practitioners working Capire’s Engagement Triangle The Engagement Triangle was created to assist clients of Capire Consulting Group to identify the desired outcomes for their engagement and ensure the maximum benefit for all projects and communities. The Engagement Triangle can also be used to map engagement techniques and stakeholder groups. The Engagement Triangle booklet provides an overview of how to use the tool and provides recommendations about suitable tools and techniques given the intent of the engagement – it can be downloaded from www.capire.com.au/engagement-triangle www.innersydneyvoice.org.au • Summer 2015/16 • Inner Sydney Voice 23
Page 1 and 2: summer 2015/16 • issue 127 Develo
Page 3 and 4: 06 14 10 13 22 Leading-practice com
Page 5 and 6: MYRIAD PRO Lucida Grand Bold MYRIAD
Page 7 and 8: community development (something th
Page 9 and 10: community development People on low
Page 11 and 12: community development The community
Page 13 and 14: community development Strata skills
Page 15 and 16: community development Photos of com
Page 17 and 18: community development right opposit
Page 19 and 20: Community development & community s
Page 21: community engagement The challenge
Page 25 and 26: community engagement to explore the
Page 27 and 28: urban development & health In the s
Page 29 and 30: housing they’ve been coming aroun
Page 31 and 32: from the vault Spring 1995 Vintage

Communities

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?