Participle

BIG IDEAS for the next decade:

Participatory Systems, Moving Beyond 20th Century Institutions by Hilary Cottam.

Featured in the Winter 2010 - Vol.XXXI. No 4 - Harvard International Review.

Read the full article here.

Not only is "influential" difficult to measure, but "design" is also nigh on impossible to define neatly... From design thinkers to hands-on design doers in industries from graphics to industrial to auto design, our chosen 27 luminaries represent a diverse cross-section of design disciplines. But all those selected have one thing in common: They are in some way responsible for shaping the world around us. Business Week names Hilary Cottam as one of the World's Most Influential Designers .

This week David Cameron gave his big ‘poverty’ speech. The press are still chewing it over and profoundly disagreeing about its implications. A ‘meaty’ speech, was the verdict of Ben Brogan in the Telegraph. ‘Incoherent’ and ‘utterly duplicitous’, claimed Madeleine Bunting on the left.

From Participle’s perspective, David Cameron’s speech is welcome. Firstly because he has brought centre stage the big social challenges we are focused on. Secondly because he has put his finger on a number of issues that are so evident to the families and communities we work with. Current models of both service delivery and welfare reform are failing to connect to people’s lives in ways that foster and support deep and meaningful change.

That said, there seem to me to be two central flaws in his argument. They matter because the way we frame the problem is likely to determine the solutions proposed.

Cameron writes about the suffocating state, but he is absolutely silent on the rapacious market, to which the New Labour state has been so subservient and so closely connected. It is too simplistic to say that human kindness has been squeezed out by the state. Certainly target driven public services have squeezed out the space and time for human relationships. Their relentless, palliative focus has also forced people to categorise themselves as needy in order to receive support, which can squeeze out resilience and responsibility.

Cameron is also right that feverish social engineering commanded by Westminster will not bring about change, but neither will ‘nudging’ in the context of entrenched poverty and increasing inequality. Ultimately all our current service targets are economic – they support an overarching market objective of economic growth. Human factors – the non-measurable elements of trust, time, friendship, human relationships are squeezed out within this market driven framework, no matter who is responsible for delivery – the state or the private sector.

This brings me to the second problem with Cameron’s thesis – his views on inequality.

Inequality is at the heart of the matter. Cameron approvingly quotes Wilkinson, author of the Spirit Level whose work shows that the more unequal a society, the worse every quality of life indicator. Bizarrely in his speech, Cameron then goes on to discuss how it is about redistribution between the middle and the bottom. But, as Wilkinson himself has commented, in reaction to the speech; ‘Bringing down the top incomes is very important.’ Wilkinson imagines income distribution in society as if we are all points on a piece of elastic, explaining that, if you pull out the top further, then everyone below gets spread further apart.

Longitudinal research shows there is a clear correlation between income inequality and social glue. Britain is one of the most unequal societies in the world. Unless we are willing to talk about and address this disparity, neither a re-imagined state nor an army of social entrepreneurs can build Cameron’s big society.

These are some of the structural issues that Participle seeks to address with our mission statement (Beveridge 4.0) and our work with families and communities across Britain. We have argued for a capabilities approach – a model that would invest in fostering a different value set including relationships. And in our practical work we are learning what it takes to bring this about – often with the most troubled families in the most isolated communities.

In this context we welcome Cameron’s support for social enterprises such as the ones we are growing, but we would like to push him on the framework in which these enterprises are currently expected to operate. We find in our work that the community energy Cameron seeks to foster is alive and well. Circle – our enterprise providing a new form of elder support in London cannot handle the numbers who want to work and volunteer for us. Loops – our new universal youth service has shown in an early pilot stage that businesses and communities are prepared to contribute to providing experiences and reflection sessions for all young people – they have just never been asked before.

To thrive and sustain themselves over time, these and other initiatives across Britain need a different framework in which to operate. Embedding change within communities takes time and cannot only be measured by economic indicators. It is all too easily strangled by expensive bureaucratic frameworks - protection policies for example, that actively work against transparent, caring human inter-action. We need a culture that welcomes a broader set of ideas about problem solving – not a centralised, one solution fits all approach that we have seen over the last 20 years.

It is difficult work and those who support change at the front line need to be properly paid and emotionally supported – not fobbed off with the trappings of ‘professionalisation’. This will not make it more expensive – quite the contrary Participle’s work shows that significant financial savings can be made but resources need to be distributed right to the community level and again we need frameworks that facilitate this.

Ultimately however all these ideas, the efforts of Participle and our activist siblings can only act as sticking plaster in a nation of increasing inequality. Let’s hope that Cameron really is listening to Richard Wilkinson and his colleagues

The government's new public services reforms focus on rights and entitlements, but, argues Charles Leadbeater in the Guardian, supportive relationships are key to tackling social ills

See the full article here

Whilst William Beveridge's pioneering 1948 report on welfare reform asked for "room, opportunity and encouragement for voluntary action in seeking new ways of social advance," current welfare systems manage a 'one way' relationship between the state and individuals in need. Today's Times article mentions Participle's involvement in community based initiatives to 'help people help themselves,' a motto of current Participle project Southwark Circle. Communities do not need to be reduced to simply 'people with needs,' rather that there are individuals who also have skills and knowledge to share. By expanding social networks to facilitate these skills into the community, the state need not expensively intervene, and we can indeed 'help people help themselves.'

See Camilla's full editorial

In 2008, Participle worked with a diverse group of over 200 older people and their families in Westminster and Southwark. We spent time in their homes, going shopping with them, helping with the odd job and introducing them to one another, gaining insight into how individuals and families see themselves, their aspirations, their dreams.

The aim of our work was to ensure a rich third age, one that every citizen, regardless of income level or assets might live: a life less ordinary. Specifically, in Southwark our goal was the design of a new universal service that might be replicated nationally - supporting older people to live in a way of their choosing as they age. In Westminster our work has been more closely focused, we have worked only with those who define themselves as lonely, the majority of whom are over 80 and housebound with the goal of facilitating rich social lives.

This article briefly tells the story of this work, the affordable solutions we have designed and the nascent lessons for how we might re-think a welfare state, its relationship to individuals and most importantly of all to wider social bonds.

To read the article click here

We're launching our mission statement this week, we call it Beveridge 4.0. It is a brief but fundamental critique of the current condition of the UK's welfare state. At Participle, we believe as many others do, that its condition is critical. An outdated system, that cannot solve the problems we now face. A system dominated by large institutions, not the individuals who use them. Things are not going to get better. What hurts the most, is that the man widely regarded as the architect of our welfare state, William Beveridge, in the later part of his life, predicted the situation we now find ourselves in.

And, what a situation we are in. At the time of writing, last week, one of America's largest financial institutions went bust, and another was effectively nationalised. In Britain, similar events were/are unfolding. Global stocks are making record falls, oil prices are rising in unprecedented daily jumps. A financial crisis has unveiled the short falls of capitalism. In the process, capitalism and the state have had an almost unprecedented strain put on their relationship. As we experience the unease of watching apparently solid institutional foundations all too easily turn liquid, we're revisiting our faith in the state. In times of trouble, we look to the state for support, from heavy intervention to new regulations. But, for many of us, our faith in the state took a similar bashing some years ago. For Britain's growing inequality and social recession have revealed the short falls in our welfare state. Shortfalls that have not been met by introducing elements of the market, or by trying to make the state more 'personal'. What is needed we argue is a very different set of arrangements which start from a local perspective with individuals and families, building a new set of capabilities, drawing on a wider set of resources and supported by very different institutions.

Participle runs large scale projects that address the big social issues of our time, while demonstrating how a new welfare settlement might operate. Our work has made a big difference in some communities, but Participle is a small group of designers, policy analysts, social scientists and entrepreneurs based in South London. We need the help of others to inform our thinking, and doing. This document draws on our work with and for the public at the community level - it is in this broadest sense collaborative, and it will evolve collaboratively. Therefore, this document is written with an Open Source process in mind. It is just version 1. In 2009, we will launch Version 2, including all the relevant opinions, suggestions and contributions from people like you. This is the spirit of Beveridge 4.0. This document outlines a starting point, no more. Be part of this journey. We will be developing different ways to canvas involvement in Beveridge 4.0. For now, we ask you to comment on this blog. We promise to collate all comments, and where relevant develop them as themes in Version 2.

The size of the task seems daunting, but at Participle, we see the giant Capitalism evolving before us, and see no reason why a similar transformation cannot take place within the welfare state. It's not unbelievable.

Download Beveridge 4.0 here.