Regeneration should be measured by what changes for people, not just what gets built

For many years, regeneration has often been judged by the things we can see and count.

New buildings. New homes. New roads. New train stations. New offices. Money invested. Jobs created.

All of these things matter. They show that investment is happening and that a place is changing. But they do not always tell us whether people’s lives are improving.

If we are serious about Good Growth, we need to ask a bigger question. We should not only ask what has been built. We should ask what has changed for the people who live and work there.

Are more local people able to get good jobs? Are local businesses benefiting from the investment? Are communities better connected? Do people feel more positive about where they live? Are skills, health and wider life chances improving? Are the benefits reaching the people and places that need them most?

These are the questions that should sit at the heart of regeneration.

Too often, regeneration is measured by hard numbers. This might include how many jobs have been created, how much money has been invested, how much new business space has been built, or how many homes have been delivered.

These measures are useful, but they only tell part of the story.

A project may create lots of jobs, but who gets those jobs? Are they going to people who live locally, or to people travelling in from elsewhere? Are they helping people who have found it hard to get work? Are they good, secure jobs with fair pay and the chance to progress?

The same applies to infrastructure. A new road, rail link or station may support growth, but does it help local people reach the things they need? Can they get to work more easily? Can they reach childcare, healthcare, training, shops and local services?

It is easier to count buildings, jobs and money spent than it is to measure confidence, wellbeing, pride in place or whether people feel they belong. But those things matter deeply to local communities.

Good Growth should mean growth that is fair, long lasting and shared more widely. It should not only be about how much economic activity is created. It should also be about who benefits from it, how long those benefits last, and whether it helps close the gap between different communities.

That means looking more closely at how many jobs go to local residents, whether people in the most disadvantaged neighbourhoods are benefiting, and whether residents are able to move into better-paid, higher-skilled roles over time.

It also means asking where the money goes. If regeneration is meant to strengthen a local economy, local businesses, contractors, charities, social enterprises and community organisations should have a fair chance to benefit from the work and spending linked to it.

Regeneration should also consider how people feel about their area. Do they feel more confident about the future of their community? Do they feel proud of where they live? Do they feel that change is happening with them, rather than being done to them? Do they feel listened to?

These questions should not be treated as a nice extra. They are central to whether regeneration is trusted and whether it lasts.

One of the biggest gaps is what happens after a project is completed. Too often, success is measured when the building work finishes. We count what has been delivered, write the report and move on.

But the real impact on people’s lives may take years to show.

Have local residents moved into better jobs? Are they still in work several years later? Have they gained new skills? Are they earning more? Are local businesses stronger? Do people feel better about where they live?

These are the questions that tell us whether regeneration has really worked.

Good Growth should encourage us to think differently about success. It should move us away from simply asking whether something has been delivered. Instead, we should ask whether it has made a real difference to people’s lives.

New buildings and infrastructure can be important. They can help unlock growth and bring new confidence to an area.

But they are not the final measure of success.

The real test is whether people have better access to opportunity. Whether local businesses are stronger. Whether communities feel more connected. Whether residents are healthier, more skilled and more confident about the future.

Regeneration should not simply be measured by what gets built.

It should be measured by what changes for people.

Dave Widger is Head of Economics & Economic Development at AECOM and an iED Board Member.

Would you like to write for the iED? As part of iED individual and organisation membership, ALL members have the opportunity to publish articles on our website. We are now seeking ideas for contributions from members, including those in our Early Career Network. These can be around any aspect of economic development, insights on work you are undertaking and project successes you would like to share, or any viewpoint you would like to express. If you have an article proposal please contact: Jac Jordan, Institute of Economic Development PR consultant, Tel: 01706 214 340/  07887 416 182, email: jac@vivapr.co.uk