Hoxie, C; Berkebile, R and Todd, J A (2012) Stimulating regenerative development through community dialogue. Building Research & Information, 40(1), pp. 65-80. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Definitions of regenerative design, regenerative development and regenerative thinking differ, but community engagement is an integral component of these definitions. A critical aspect in regenerative approaches is the focus on the uniqueness of place and the creation of a story of the place, with the local community playing a crucial role in developing this story. Practitioners have found that engaging communities in these efforts requires a different approach, one that is designed to elicit and clarify aspirations and values and which enables the community to recognize and feel its connections to the natural systems of which they are a part. An approach to community engagement is presented that has been developed, tested and refined over the past two decades. Its basis is founded on establishing honest, deep and ongoing dialogue within the community and between the community and the project team. As the case studies presented in this paper indicate, one of the most important benefits of a process of dialogue is a community that has developed shared goals and leaders to ensure progress toward those goals over time. Wider implications for design and planning professionals include the potential to redefine their processes and services, examining responsibilities to the local community and working with the research community to develop a wider evidence base.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | built environment; community dialogue; community engagement; place; planning; regenerative design; stakeholders; sustainability |
| Index terms: | regenerative design, case study, community engagement, built environment, practitioner, evidence, project team |
| Subjects: | infrastructure and transport systems, project delivery, sustainability and energy, practitioner, community and social dimensions, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Design Practice, Project Management, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here