New finance for regenerating Malmö
October 2013
Social Life‟s aim is to put people at the heart of
placemaking, we work in the UK and
internationally.
The Social Life of Cities
A partnership between Cisco, Social Life and
the Young Foundation.
Our aspiration is to accelerate urban
innovation and reshape the way that city
leaders and urban planners think about
creating and shaping thriving and
sustainable places.
With the City of Malmö we are developing a
new placemaking model for their “million
homes areas”, and exploring how this can
be supported by new sources of finance.
3
Our first TelePresence, September 26th
Placemaking for disadvantaged housing estates in
Malmö
Social investment in places:
this presentation
1 Introducing Malmö
2 Introducing Lindängen and the placemaking model
4 Financing placemaking
5 Meeting the need for investment
6 Our questions
Building on the best of what we know about making places thrive;
and the best of what we know about innovation to meet social need
in local areas.
5
1 Introducing Malmö
Malmö
Strong links to
Denmark & Europe
Over 40% of
population first or
second generation
immigrants
Highest child poverty
level out of all
Swedish municipalities
Lower employment
and higher welfare
dependency than most
of Sweden.
7
1 Prompts
2 Proposals
3 Prototypes
4 Sustaining
5 Scaling
6 Systemic
change
Disengaged communities,
poor education, high
levels of disadvantage
Consensus about need for
new approach
Data/studies
on social need
External inspiration, social
design principles, co-design
solutions with participants
Learn from success of
environmental
sustainability programmes
Malmo is famous
for innovative
sustainable
design, but
also for urban
problems
Malmö’s innovation story
3 Introducing Lindängen & the placemaking model
Over 1 million apartments built in Sweden 1965-
75, a third of apartments in existence today
were built in this period
Lindängen
Lindängen:
Employment
(2009)
12
Lindängen:
working age
population, actua
l &
trends
until 2015
13
40%
45%
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Andel
År
Gymnasiebehörighet
avser endast Lindängenskolan
Lindängen:
number of pupils
leaving
elementary
school with
qualifications
2007-2011
14
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Year 2003*
Year 2011***
Lindängen:
Change in
numbers of
people saying
they feel
unsafe outside
in the evening
2003-2011
15
How can we put people in the centre
of placemaking in Lindängen?
What we know …
New Deal for
Communities
England (2000 –
10)
Promise
Neighbourhoods,
US (2010 on)
Communities
that care, US &
UK (early „90s on)
Four key learning points
1. Build the capacity of individuals
and - their wellbeing, resilience
and – as well as tackling deficits
2. How people feel about places –
their attachment – is critical
3. Building on the assets of local
communities – and take time to
identify these
4. Avoid silos & over rigid processes.
Knight
Foundation, Soul
of the
Community, US
(2010 on)
17
Understand Imagine Prototype Implement
Ideation cycles
Feedback loops between
stages
A placemaking model for Malmö:
the starting point
An incremental model based on what we
know about how local areas innovate
18
3 Financing placemaking
Across Malmö, €65,000
investment need per home to
meet physical and
environmental standards, and
to fund programme of social
renewal.
€110m investment need for
regeneration dialogue in
Lindängen.
The costs of
disadvantage in
Lindängen
Direct costs for each unemployed adult:
€75,000 each year
Income support paid by city (2012): €110
million
350 unemployed (2009) ≈ €26
million/year, €130 million/five years
Two Swedish economists, Ingvar Nilsson
and Anders Wadeskog have estimated
the costs of social exclusion in
Lindängen.
Nilsson & Wadeskog estimate that a reduction
in the costs of social exclusion, equivalent to
the €60m needed to comprehensively
regenerate Lindängen(without sharp increases
in rent), could be generated if 138 people
currently dependant on welfare become fully
employed for eight years, without needing
state support.
22
Average direct costs for unemployment in
Lindängen divided between agencies
Source: Ingvar Nilsson
Costs of unemployment
Source: Ingvar Nilsson
4 Meeting the need for investment
What does the City of
Malmö want?
More investment available in total for
deprived areas
To mainstream their new approach
New structures that break down silos and
rigid ways of working.
Less than half of the costs – €50m - of the
programme can be funded through rent
increases - the public sector cannot fill
the remaining gap.
Some questions
Who are the potential investors?
Who is the target of a new programme?
How to measure impact?
How to invest in innovation?
… how can savings be cashed?
… how can savings be shared?
Global picture ignores complexity of people’s lives: need
to identify the high cost individuals/families, then analyse
use of services to find the key intervention points where
costs of failure can be released.
Institutions: Scandanavian insurance
companies, pension fund managers and equity
investors who are looking at broadening their
base eg SBP (Norwegian owned pension
fund), Skandia, Swedbank
Public sector City of Malmö: regional health
trust and national employment agencies, other
national actors
Property owners
Crowdfunding
1 Who are the
potential investors?
280 people in
full-time
work, partially
dependent on
welfare
560 people on
apprenticeships &
training
800 families supported to
tackle wider problems
200 people invited to join wider social
programmes
Whole population of Lindängen given
opportunity to take part in new programmes
that build community and promote
environmental sustainability
138 people no
longer dependent
on state welfare
programmes
NOTE: all the
figures are
hypothetical
138 people have
families and
broader social
connections…
2 Who are the target
group?
280 people in
full-time
work, partially
dependent on
welfare
560 people on
apprenticeships &
training
800 families supported to
tackle wider problems
2000 people invited to join wider
social programmes
Whole population of Lindängen given
opportunity to take part in new programmes
that build community and promote
environmental sustainability
138 people no
longer dependent
on state welfare
programmes
Issue #2: who to focus
on?
2 Who are the target
group?
280 people in
full-time
work, partially
dependent on
welfare
560 people on
apprenticeships &
training
800 families supported to
tackle wider problems
2000 people invited to join wider
social programmes
Whole population of Lindängen given
opportunity to take part in new programmes
that build community and promote
environmental sustainability
Hard outcomes &
outputs: numbers in
work, training
places, participation
rates.
Soft outcomes &
outputs:
confidence, resilience
, sense of
purpose, trust, comm
unity capacity and
cohesion.
138 people no
longer dependent
on state welfare
programmes
How can we
measure success?
Issue #2: who to focus
on?
Is it possible to build a model with such complex multiple outcomes?
Is a focus on a particular group – eg schoools – more realistic? Or on green energy?
2 Who are the target
group?
Understand Imagine Prototype Implement
Ideation cycles
Feedback loops between
stages
How can a new investment fund be developed to support
innovations that will not have an evidence base, or track record?
3 Investing in innovation?
One investment model
Step 1:
Identify
problem or
challenge (eg
welfare
dependency)
Step 2:
Expand
interventions
that already
work
Step 3:
Imagine and
test new
interventions
Step 4:
Measure and
expand
successful
interventions
Step 5:
Establish
pooled
budget for
large
investments
Upfront investment
Upfront investment +
savings
Pool
resources
Time
Investment
3 Investing in innovation?
Need for some initial investment, with further
investment part-funded by savings.
Possibilities…
#1 New programmes/initiatives, supported by social
investment (acting as traditional investors or providing
working capital)
#2 Payment by results with up front costs funded through
social investment
#3 Social impact bond/pay for success bond
#5 Creation of new innovation fund to support new
programme of action, part funded by public sector &
investors?
5 Our questions
What should be the balance between
small and large scale; simple and
complex?
36
Is small, and incremental the best strategy to engage
new forms of investment, or is starting at scale better?
Is a SIB/Pay for Success model over ambitious, or could
the complexity and difficulty starting this be
outweighed by real benefits in the long term?
What advice would you give to Malmö?
social-life.co
nicola.bacon@social-life.cosaffron.woodcraft@social-
life.co

Social Life of Cities: Social investment & placemaking

  • 1.
    New finance forregenerating Malmö October 2013
  • 2.
    Social Life‟s aimis to put people at the heart of placemaking, we work in the UK and internationally.
  • 3.
    The Social Lifeof Cities A partnership between Cisco, Social Life and the Young Foundation. Our aspiration is to accelerate urban innovation and reshape the way that city leaders and urban planners think about creating and shaping thriving and sustainable places. With the City of Malmö we are developing a new placemaking model for their “million homes areas”, and exploring how this can be supported by new sources of finance. 3
  • 4.
    Our first TelePresence,September 26th Placemaking for disadvantaged housing estates in Malmö
  • 5.
    Social investment inplaces: this presentation 1 Introducing Malmö 2 Introducing Lindängen and the placemaking model 4 Financing placemaking 5 Meeting the need for investment 6 Our questions Building on the best of what we know about making places thrive; and the best of what we know about innovation to meet social need in local areas. 5
  • 6.
  • 7.
    Malmö Strong links to Denmark& Europe Over 40% of population first or second generation immigrants Highest child poverty level out of all Swedish municipalities Lower employment and higher welfare dependency than most of Sweden. 7
  • 8.
    1 Prompts 2 Proposals 3Prototypes 4 Sustaining 5 Scaling 6 Systemic change Disengaged communities, poor education, high levels of disadvantage Consensus about need for new approach Data/studies on social need External inspiration, social design principles, co-design solutions with participants Learn from success of environmental sustainability programmes Malmo is famous for innovative sustainable design, but also for urban problems Malmö’s innovation story
  • 9.
    3 Introducing Lindängen& the placemaking model
  • 10.
    Over 1 millionapartments built in Sweden 1965- 75, a third of apartments in existence today were built in this period
  • 11.
  • 12.
  • 13.
  • 14.
    40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 2007 2008 20092010 2011 Andel År Gymnasiebehörighet avser endast Lindängenskolan Lindängen: number of pupils leaving elementary school with qualifications 2007-2011 14
  • 15.
    0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Year 2003* Year 2011*** Lindängen: Changein numbers of people saying they feel unsafe outside in the evening 2003-2011 15
  • 16.
    How can weput people in the centre of placemaking in Lindängen?
  • 17.
    What we know… New Deal for Communities England (2000 – 10) Promise Neighbourhoods, US (2010 on) Communities that care, US & UK (early „90s on) Four key learning points 1. Build the capacity of individuals and - their wellbeing, resilience and – as well as tackling deficits 2. How people feel about places – their attachment – is critical 3. Building on the assets of local communities – and take time to identify these 4. Avoid silos & over rigid processes. Knight Foundation, Soul of the Community, US (2010 on) 17
  • 18.
    Understand Imagine PrototypeImplement Ideation cycles Feedback loops between stages A placemaking model for Malmö: the starting point An incremental model based on what we know about how local areas innovate 18
  • 19.
  • 20.
    Across Malmö, €65,000 investmentneed per home to meet physical and environmental standards, and to fund programme of social renewal. €110m investment need for regeneration dialogue in Lindängen.
  • 21.
    The costs of disadvantagein Lindängen Direct costs for each unemployed adult: €75,000 each year Income support paid by city (2012): €110 million 350 unemployed (2009) ≈ €26 million/year, €130 million/five years Two Swedish economists, Ingvar Nilsson and Anders Wadeskog have estimated the costs of social exclusion in Lindängen.
  • 22.
    Nilsson & Wadeskogestimate that a reduction in the costs of social exclusion, equivalent to the €60m needed to comprehensively regenerate Lindängen(without sharp increases in rent), could be generated if 138 people currently dependant on welfare become fully employed for eight years, without needing state support. 22
  • 23.
    Average direct costsfor unemployment in Lindängen divided between agencies Source: Ingvar Nilsson
  • 24.
  • 25.
    4 Meeting theneed for investment
  • 26.
    What does theCity of Malmö want? More investment available in total for deprived areas To mainstream their new approach New structures that break down silos and rigid ways of working. Less than half of the costs – €50m - of the programme can be funded through rent increases - the public sector cannot fill the remaining gap.
  • 27.
    Some questions Who arethe potential investors? Who is the target of a new programme? How to measure impact? How to invest in innovation? … how can savings be cashed? … how can savings be shared? Global picture ignores complexity of people’s lives: need to identify the high cost individuals/families, then analyse use of services to find the key intervention points where costs of failure can be released.
  • 28.
    Institutions: Scandanavian insurance companies,pension fund managers and equity investors who are looking at broadening their base eg SBP (Norwegian owned pension fund), Skandia, Swedbank Public sector City of Malmö: regional health trust and national employment agencies, other national actors Property owners Crowdfunding 1 Who are the potential investors?
  • 29.
    280 people in full-time work,partially dependent on welfare 560 people on apprenticeships & training 800 families supported to tackle wider problems 200 people invited to join wider social programmes Whole population of Lindängen given opportunity to take part in new programmes that build community and promote environmental sustainability 138 people no longer dependent on state welfare programmes NOTE: all the figures are hypothetical 138 people have families and broader social connections… 2 Who are the target group?
  • 30.
    280 people in full-time work,partially dependent on welfare 560 people on apprenticeships & training 800 families supported to tackle wider problems 2000 people invited to join wider social programmes Whole population of Lindängen given opportunity to take part in new programmes that build community and promote environmental sustainability 138 people no longer dependent on state welfare programmes Issue #2: who to focus on? 2 Who are the target group?
  • 31.
    280 people in full-time work,partially dependent on welfare 560 people on apprenticeships & training 800 families supported to tackle wider problems 2000 people invited to join wider social programmes Whole population of Lindängen given opportunity to take part in new programmes that build community and promote environmental sustainability Hard outcomes & outputs: numbers in work, training places, participation rates. Soft outcomes & outputs: confidence, resilience , sense of purpose, trust, comm unity capacity and cohesion. 138 people no longer dependent on state welfare programmes How can we measure success? Issue #2: who to focus on? Is it possible to build a model with such complex multiple outcomes? Is a focus on a particular group – eg schoools – more realistic? Or on green energy? 2 Who are the target group?
  • 32.
    Understand Imagine PrototypeImplement Ideation cycles Feedback loops between stages How can a new investment fund be developed to support innovations that will not have an evidence base, or track record? 3 Investing in innovation?
  • 33.
    One investment model Step1: Identify problem or challenge (eg welfare dependency) Step 2: Expand interventions that already work Step 3: Imagine and test new interventions Step 4: Measure and expand successful interventions Step 5: Establish pooled budget for large investments Upfront investment Upfront investment + savings Pool resources Time Investment 3 Investing in innovation? Need for some initial investment, with further investment part-funded by savings.
  • 34.
    Possibilities… #1 New programmes/initiatives,supported by social investment (acting as traditional investors or providing working capital) #2 Payment by results with up front costs funded through social investment #3 Social impact bond/pay for success bond #5 Creation of new innovation fund to support new programme of action, part funded by public sector & investors?
  • 35.
  • 36.
    What should bethe balance between small and large scale; simple and complex? 36
  • 37.
    Is small, andincremental the best strategy to engage new forms of investment, or is starting at scale better? Is a SIB/Pay for Success model over ambitious, or could the complexity and difficulty starting this be outweighed by real benefits in the long term? What advice would you give to Malmö?
  • 38.

Editor's Notes

  • #3 Social life set up by YFNew venture building on YF’s 50 plus years history of exploring dynamics of communityMichael Young –failure of post war planning etc
  • #12 6,700 population2,600 apartments (1,700 in project)Housing charcterised by lack of maintenance, overcrowding, high energy costsSome of housing has recent changed handsThree main property owners: big companies (Stena Fastigheter & Första AP-fonden, a pension fund) & local company (Trianon).
  • #17 There is a pressing need for new approaches and modelsThere is a need to better understand the lived experience of all residents… and to work with the strengths and assets within the local populationWe need to bring together what we know about how to drive local social innovation, and how to make places thrive
  • #18 Knight foundation work highlights connections between attachment and gdp. Need to optimise place
  • #29 Foundations less likely… housing at centre, gives income stream, is fixed asset, increases attraction to investors
  • #30 This involves intervening across people’s lives: the problems that trap individuals into dependency on welfare systems are complex and individualised: mental health problems, drug and alcohol abuse, low self esteem and low resilience and capacity to changeThese issues can be amplified within familiesFamily life is affected by what happens in wider communities, how neighbourhoods affect life choices and opportunities, and social normsSo delivery needs to focus on three dimensions: the whole community, families and individuals