Studying the Impacts of Regeneration and the 2014 Commonwealth Games

1. Studying the Impacts of Regeneration and the 2014 Commonwealth Games on the Inner East End of Glasgow Ade Kearns and Julie Clark

2. A Guide to GoWell East • The Aims of the study. • The Study Area. • The Challenges Involved. • The Methods Employed. • A Prospective Assessment & Contribution Analysis.

3. Legacy & the Host Community ‘Games for Glasgow, for Scotland and the Commonwealth’ ‘Significant regeneration of the East End of Glasgow, making effective use of otherwise derelict land and creating employment opportunities for local people’

4. Aims of the Study • What are the effects of regeneration and developments and programmes associated with CG 2014 in the East End of Glasgow upon the quality of life and the health and wellbeing of nearby communities? • In which outcome domains are the impacts greatest, and for whom? • How are those impacts brought about? Which programmes & pathways are most effective? • What are the barriers to impacts? • Are there negative effects as well as positive ones?

5. The Study Area • The East End Local Development Strategy Area • Apart from the two most northern parts (Haghill; South Carntyne). • Enacted by GCC in 2008. • Study area: population of 19,000 people in 11,000 dwellings (2012). • Contained 103 hectares of vacant and derelict land in 2006 (16%).

8. The Study Datazones & SIMD 2012 (Source: Scottish Government)

9. Gallowgate Calton Camlachie Parkhead (part) Bridgeton Dalmarnock

10. Challenges • Conducting the research. • Coping with complexity, uncertainty and change. • Considering the issues of attribution. • Providing sufficient evidence. • Staying neutral and objective.

11. Conducting the Research • Research saturation: response rates; encountering other research in the area. • Breadth of the objectives and hence the remit. • Having adequate resources. • Having enough time – longer than some, but not long enough? • Ensuring comparability, yet making the study culturally appropriate. • Dealing with the political and media interest.

12. Complexity and Change • Keeping up with the rate of change in the area…we can’t even find our way around! • Programmes change: title; size and shape; focus; objectives; new ones; & there are a lot of them! • Developments happen, don’t, get delayed etc. • Gathering information on what is happening is an on-going task; and organisations are very busy; information dates quickly. • Getting to know, and maintaining relationships with the actors involved is crucial but time consuming.

13. Difficulties of Attribution • How would we work out the counterfactual? • Could we separate CWG effects from regeneration? • How feasible is a control area? • What are the time limits for intervention, both start and finish? • Stakeholder logic models tend to be either very general (and hence also very broad) or are still emerging. • And then there is this problem…

14. If it moves... badge it as CWG 2014!

15. Sufficient Evidence? • ‘On the balance of probability’ or ‘Beyond reasonable doubt’? Depends who is asking! • Three difficult issues to tackle: • Measuring the opportunity costs. • Assessing the sustainability of outcomes. • Taking into account the attributability of programmes to the CWG: new & attributable; enhanced; accelerated; safeguarded; new, but would have happened anyway. • The ‘known unknown’ – views of hard-to-reach groups in the area.

16. Staying Neutral and Objective • Not rushing to judgement. • Not being overly-supportive nor overly-negative. • We are not asking the question: ‘Should the CWG happen?’ but rather ‘What do the CWG do for people and communities when they do happen?’

17. A Three-stage Longitudinal Survey of a Resident Cohort GoWell East Research Elements A Five-stage longitudinal survey of a Pupil Cohort • A realistic evaluation • Investigation of Interventions and Pathways to Outcomes • Programme context • Mechanisms • Under what circumstances? • Who benefits (or not)? Semi-structured interviews with residents & local organisations Semi-structure interviews and workshops with regeneration & CWG policy stakeholders Monitoring of secondary data for the East End on the physical, social and consumer environments Ecological Analysis of Health and Deprivation Indicators for the East End & Glasgow

18. Quasi-Experimental Design: Main Survey GoEast 2012 GoEast 2014 GoEast 2016 GoWell 2015 GoWell 2011 • 4-6 GoWell Comparison areas in similar deciles on 2012 SIMD. • Comparison indicators: employment; housing; neighbourhood; community; health and wellbeing; physical activity.

19. Quasi-Experimental Design: School Survey • Youth Physical Activity Questionnaire (YPAQ): • Sports activities; travel to school; leisure time activities. • In the past week. • Number of times and total duration.

20. Household • Home • Neighbourhood • Health & Wellbeing (WEMWBS) • Physical Activity (IPAQ) • Sports & Other Activities • Group & Voluntary Activity • Modes of Travel • Commonwealth Games • Sustainable Behaviours • Employment & Training Cohort = 1,015 adults

21. Sub Group Analysis & Report

22. Prospective Assessment Considerations • Prospects: • High • Medium • Low Considerations: 8 Qs in 3 Groups: • People & Place • Programmes • Plausibility • Likelihood of impacts: • Likely • Unlikely • Cannot Tell (yet)

23. 1: People & Place Scope: How much room for improvement is there based on current performance data for the study area, compared with city and national norms? How much interest is expressed by the study communities in the programmes being delivered or in the outcomes being sought? Do the programmes match people’s expressed preferences?

24. 2: Programmes Relevance: Are programmes being delivered which are relevant to producing the outcomes being sought? Are the programmes relevant to the needs and interests of the host community? Scale: Are the programmes of sufficient scale (in terms of money or intended participants/beneficiaries) to have impact within the study area? Targeting: Are the programmes targeted in whole or in part upon the East End community? Or is the East End simply one among many areas that may potentially benefit from the programmes? Feasibility: Are programmes being implemented as planned and are outputs emerging which are necessary for impacts upon outcomes? What causal pathways are providers anticipating?

25. 3: Plausibility Evidence: Does the existing evidence from evaluations of other multi-sport events or from other similar programmes indicate that impact upon the outcomes of interest is likely? Barriers & Linkages: Are there identifiable barriers to the programmes having impact upon the East End community, or upon their intended beneficiaries? Is there evidence that indicates that key linkages or elements for success are present or absent from programmes? What causal pathways would the research evidence suggest might be operative or required? Negative Impacts: Are there plausible or verifiable grounds for thinking that programmes could potentially have adverse, unexpected or negative impacts upon the East End community?

26. Prospective Assessment in Two Parts

27. The Economic Agenda: Prosperous/ Flourishing Prosperous • growing businesses by improving performance • building careers through training and employment • transforming deprived communities by investing in regeneration Flourishing • Increase movement into employment, training and volunteering • Increase growth of Scottish Business • Improve the perceptionof Scotland as a world class destination for business, events and tourism International Inclusive

28. Employment & Employability • It is expected that regeneration in the East End, preparations for the Games and the Games itself may provide either: • Direct Employment through: construction work; working in the new facilities; business supply chain to the Games; in firms locating to new sites and buildings in the area. • Improved Employability through: training opportunities around regeneration and Games construction; volunteering at the Games itself. • To what extent will people in the East End seek or acquire these opportunities?

29. People & Place – Scope?

30. The Complexity of the Situation

31. 2: Programmes Relevance • Unemployment • Training & qualifications • Equality groups (e.g. health & wellbeing, age) Scale • Financial investment • Jobs/ training places • Quality of work • Duration of work Targeting • East End Targeted (EET) • East End Applicable (EE/A) • Glasgow (targeted or applicable) • Scotland [Also international]

32. Prosperous/ Flourishing Legacy Programmes • 35 developments and programmes with economic or employment objectives.

33. Stakeholder analysis/ planning • The research base • Early evidence 3: Plausibility Resources and contexts Activities Short term outcomes Medium term outcomes Long term outcomes

34. 3: Plausibility • Targets being met/ exceeded • Aspirations for employment. • Support for school leavers, graduates, unemployed & older workers • Some use of ‘living wage’. • Consideration of gender • Some evidence of additional funding/ programmes levered • Programmes have built on London 2012 experience and what works elsewhere. Procurement Community Benefit Employer Subsidies Employability Programmes Prosperous/ Flourishing

35. 3: Plausibility Procurement BUT Some ‘jobs’ notional Some (very) low wages Health barriers? Low rates of employment (15%) in our survey among those who had been in training / apprenticeship. A lot of development still to take place. Uncertainty about growth strategy and link to skills development programmes. Community Benefit Employer Subsidies Employability Programmes Prosperous/ Flourishing

36. Going for Gold? Now and next… • Drawing on stakeholder knowledgeand research evidence to understand problem definition andtheorised mechanisms • Develop a prospective assessment of six legacy themes based on : • People & place • Programmes • Plausibility • Evaluate the relative weight of each theme and its importance for the East End