Speaker
Description
This research explores the role and social value of community infrastructure (McShane, 2006; McShane & Coffey, 2022) in regional Victoria, Australia in fostering social connections and place attachment, enhancing community resilience, and promoting psychological well-being. While facilities such as community hubs and recreational facilities serve as vital hubs for social cohesion, their governance models significantly shape their accessibility, inclusivity, and purpose. Urban planners must critically evaluate these spaces beyond their role as public facilities, acknowledging their potential to perpetuate social inequalities or foster community resilience depending on their ownership and operational frameworks. This exploration highlights the need for nuanced planning approaches to balance community needs with governance complexities. It compares community infrastructure facilities operated by not-for-profit organisations, developers, and councils in Torquay and Armstrong Creek in Geelong, with the view for potential expansion to other locations and types of infrastructure.
The study has two main viewpoints: assessing the effectiveness of specific community infrastructure facilities in building social connections among community members and exploring whether social connection was considered as an outcome in the planning and design of these facilities. The research examines facilities delivered by not-for-profit organisations, developers, and a local government. It begins with community recreational facilities in Torquay operated by a not-for-profit model operated by Royal Automobile Club of Victoria (RACV), then compares it with a developer built and operated community centre in Armstrong Creek built by Villawood Properties using a body corporate model, and a council model in the same local government area of City of Greater Geelong. The findings could inform government policy on community infrastructure in growth areas and regional contexts.
The research employs case study methods involving context analysis of the facilities to understand their design and context, semi-structured interviews with community members who use the facilities, and interviews with RACV, Villawood, and council staff (architects, designers, urban planners, and community planners). The interviews explore the levels of social connection developed using the facilities and analyse the importance of these facilities in facilitating this outcome. Additionally, the research analyses the different business models and considerations used by the various community infrastructure providers and explores whether social connection was an explicit outcome in the planning and design of the facilities, considering any implications for policy to improve outcomes.
This research investigates the relationship between community infrastructure, social connection, psychological well-being, and resilience, offering evidence-based recommendations for policymakers and planners. It emphasises the importance of social outcomes in designing and planning such facilities, advocating for investment to strengthen social cohesion and resilience across regional, urban, and growth areas. The comparative approach provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of various strategies, with potential applications in diverse geographic contexts, including urban transformation settings. Additionally, the study highlights the critical role of governance and operational frameworks in ensuring equitable access and inclusivity in community infrastructure.
This study, therefore, not only highlights the significance of community infrastructure in regional Australia but also provides a framework adaptable to other regions and countries, contributing to global discussions on urban planning and community development.
References
MCSHANE, I. 2006. Social Value and the Management of Community Infrastructure. Australian journal of public administration, 65, 82-96.
MCSHANE, I. & COFFEY, B. 2022. Rethinking community hubs: community facilities as critical infrastructure. Current opinion in environmental sustainability, 54, 101149.
| Keywords | Community infrastructure; social connection; place attachment; third places; semi-public spaces |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | No |
