The document presents a framework for measuring social sustainability in community developments, focusing on the relationship between the built environment and residents' well-being. It emphasizes the importance of community engagement and the assessment of quality of life through various indicators, which were tested across multiple housing projects. The findings suggest that new developments can foster strong communities and a sense of belonging among residents.

1. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
The
Berkeley
Group
social
sustainability
measurement
framework
Nicola
Bacon
&
Professor
Tim
Dixon
28th
September
2012

2. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
DESIGN FOR
The
team
SOCIAL
S U S TA I N A B I L I T Y
A framework for creating thriving
new communities
What
we’re
going
to
talk
about
Saffron Woodcraft with Tricia Hackett & Lucia Caistor-Arendar
Foreword by Sir Peter Hall
• Context
• How
we
developed
the
framework
• TesCng
the
framework
• ImplicaCons

3. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
Where
have
we
come
from
since
2011?
• Social
sustainability
maHers…but
• Need
to
define
what
we
mean
• Need
to
develop
beHer
framework
for
assessment

4. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
What’s
changed
in
the
policy
landscape?
• Localism
• Planning
• Well-­‐being
• Housing
&
growth
package

5. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
Our
definiCon
“Social
sustainability
describes
the
way
a
neighbourhood
supports
individual
and
collecCve
wellbeing.
It
is
about
people’s
quality
of
life.
Social
sustainability
combines
design
of
the
physical
environment
with
a
focus
on
how
the
people
who
live
in
and
use
a
space
relate
to
each
other
and
funcCon
as
a
community.
It
is
enhanced
by
development
which
provides
the
right
infrastructure
to
support
a
strong
social
and
cultural
life,
opportuniCes
for
people
to
get
involved,
and
scope
for
the
place
and
the
community
to
evolve.”

6. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
What
happens
in
communiCes
is
complex

7. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
Community
strengths
and
vulnerabiliCes
co-­‐exist:
this
is
the
starCng
point
for
social
sustainability

8. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
Our
results
show
that
the
social
sustainability
-­‐
the
strength
of
a
community
and
the
quality
of
life
of
residents
-­‐
can
be
assessed.
And
that
new
housing
developments
can
rapidly
become
strong
communiCes
that
provide
a
good
quality
of
life.

9. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
Our
brief:
to
produce
a
measurement
framework
for
the
Berkeley
Group
that
could
be
mainstreamed
across
their
whole
business

10. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
Could
other
frameworks
we
be
used?

11. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
When
to
measure?

12. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
The
key
elements
of
the
framework
• The
starCng
point
was
an
exisCng
framework
• Tailored
to
Berkeley
Group’s
developments
• Acknowledging
the
relaConship
with
wider
neighbourhoods
• Making
best
use
of
exisCng
data
• Minimising
primary
data
collecCon
• Scoring
by
range,
not
absolute
number.

13. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
The
framework

14. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
The
indicators
• Three
dimensions,
13
indicators,
underpinned
by
45
quesCons
• Majority
of
quesCons
from
naConally
recognised
surveys
or
industry
frameworks
• Small
number
created

15. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
Benchmarking
The
Hamptons
OAC
categories
Results
benchmarking
against
comparable
local
areas
using
well
established
psycho-­‐
geographic
categorisaCons:
-­‐ OAC
first
choice
-­‐ IMD
where
OAC
not
possible.

16. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
Data
analysis
• Data
from
residents
survey
benchmarked
against
naConal
data,
z
scores
then
staCsCcally
tested
• Only
results
that
had
staCsCcal
significance
reported
• Site
survey
data
assessed
against
industry
standards
• Created
quesCons
assessed
separately

17. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
TesCng
the
framework
Residents
survey:
598
interviews
across
four
developments
Analysis
of
naConal
data
Site
survey
Contextual
interviews

18. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
The
headline
results
When
residents
survey
responses
were
compared
to
benchmarks
for
comparable
places:
• They
feel
they
belong
• They
regularly
talk
to
their
neighbours
• They
plan
to
stay
in
the
community
• They
report
greater
feelings
of
safety
walking
alone
during
the
day
and
the
night.
Results
are
based
on
598
residents
interviews,
a
site
survey,
analysis
of
naConal
data
plus
corroboraCng
interviews
with
local
stakeholders.

19. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
Empire
Square,
Bermondsey
Planning
consent
2002
Completed
2007
567
homes,
30%
affordable
Former
warehouses

20. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
Empire
Square

21. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
Empire
Square:
what
residents
value?

22. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
• Pic
and
v
short
descripCon
Imperial
Wharf,
Fulham
Outline
permission
2000
To
be
completed
2013
1,428
homes,
47%
affordable
Former
gas
works

23. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
Imperial
Wharf

24. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
Imperial
Wharf:
what
residents
value?

25. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
The
Hamptons,
Worcester
Park
Outline
planning
2002,
final
phase
2009
Completed
2012
645
homes,
33%
affordable
Former
sewage
works

26. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
The
Hamptons

27. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
The
Hamptons:
what
residents
value?

28. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
Knowle
• Pic
and
v
short
descripCon
Knowle
Village,
Hampshire
Planning
consent
2003
Completed
2010
701
homes,
31%
affordable
Former
warehouses

29. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
Knowle
Village

30. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
Knowle
Village:
what
residents
value?

31. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
The
inner
city
developments
• Broadly
similar
responses
between
the
two
inner
city
sites
• Strikingly
similar
results
for
feelings
of
safety,
posiCve
contact
with
neighbours
and
residents’
ability
to
influence
• Safety
possibly
linked
to
stronger
social
networks
and
trust?

32. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
What
we
learnt
and
the
limitaCons
• Contextual
interviews
helpful
• Snapshot
approach
can
be
powerful
• ExisCng
data
has
gaps
• Need
to
review
some
indicators
• Methodology
needs
development
• This
is
a
bespoke
framework.

33. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
• We
can
measure
social
sustainability
relaCvely
easily
• There
is
potenCal
to
develop
this
framework
• New
housing
developments
can
thrive
relaCvely
quickly
• New
housing
developments
can
feel
safe
in
areas
that
don’t.

34. CAN WE BUILD PLACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER?
ImplicaCons
• ContribuCng
to
our
understanding
of
sustainability
• PracCcal
lessons
in
creaCng
communiCes
that
work
• Shiiing
thinking
about
placemaking
to
long
term
stewardship
• Intangibles,
lived
experience,
as
important
as
hard
infrastructure.