Amongst the many performance measures to be expected in the ‘post-programme findings of the High Streets Task Force’, I was most interested to read and understand the final section titled ‘legacy’. This concluding section of the report published recently by the Institute of Place Management (IPM), presents suggestions for long-term learning and impact by presenting a theory of high street change. It has big aspirations for this theory and states that it is not only relevant for national level policy or programmes but can shape future local interventions.
Theory of Change
Don’t get distracted by reference to ‘Theory of Change’ methodology. My understanding of Theory of Change is that it is a structured series of steps that sets-out how and why an initiative is expected to lead to desired outcomes. It outlines the steps and assumptions about how activities will produce a series of results, ultimately contributing to the intended impacts.
Key elements of a Theory of Change:
- activities: The specific actions or interventions undertaken by the initiative.
- outcomes: The results or changes that are expected to occur as a direct result of the activities.
- assumptions: The underlying beliefs or conditions that must be true for the activities to lead to the expected outcomes.
- impacts: The long-term effects or changes that are anticipated as a result of the initiative.
- indicators: Measurable ways to track the progress and success of the initiative.
I think Theory of Change gives a name to how I instinctively set-about solving complex problems, as in our Revitalising Town Centres Toolkit prepared for the Local Government Association in England.
Overview for theory of high street change
The theory of change for high street regeneration as summarised in the review of learning from the High Streets Task Force, sets-out a simple sequence of four key steps that it is proposed can lead to the transformation of high streets. Before setting-out each of the four key steps in the theory of high street change, I offer some overview observations on what is proposed:
- Focusing on the ‘how’ of regeneration more than the ‘what’ is welcomed, with capacity-building, partnership working and empowerment prominent.
- As a simple and therefore relatable summary, the theory is easy for politicians, policy makers and practitioners to digest. This leaves room for detail to be added between each step. For example, I’d like to see how the IPM’s 4 R’s methodology fits within the theory.
- It is encouraging to see recognition of the importance of the usually understated link between identity, placemaking and civic pride, that can be important in creating momentum for change in town and city centres.
- This core theory probably needs expanding because though it covers people and processes, it does not currently accommodate the levers and systems, that it operates within, for example the political motivation for investing in capacity building of the role in a wider ‘ecosystem’ of economic development and social equity.
- In the current context of devolution and local government reorganisation in England, it is important to think through how the theory might apply to different organisational and geographical scales.
- Despite the brevity of the theory, it manages to appear replicable with separate points covering partnership development and hyper-local governance. This, however, may represent a welcome distinction about the different levels at which strategic partners and local stakeholders need to come together.
- Although written with high streets in mind, it is a theory of change that could apply to places more widely, including town and city centres, neighbourhoods and whole towns. This may be relevant in the context of evolving government place-policy in the U.K.
Four steps in the theory of high street change
Here I set-out each of the four key steps of the proposed theory of high street change, using the words of the IPM report to avoid mis-representation. For each step though, I offer my own interpretation of what is said -and not said.
-
Getting the basics right by investing in place management capacity and capability
Activities: Developing place management skills across officers in ‘place’ roles (e.g. economic development, planning etc.), creating dedicated place management roles, providing (and expecting) continuous professional development.
Outputs: Increased capacity to facilitate high street regeneration effectively across all high streets, improved collaboration across departments, and better coordination of initiatives.
Interpretation: The focus seems to be on increasing the capacity within local authorities to enable them to have a leading role in coordinating what we would refer to as town and city centre revitalisation. Perhaps additional thought needs to go into increasing the capability of community-level organisations including town councils, especially as part of local government reorganisation.
-
Building inclusive partnerships and networks
Activities: Engaging local businesses, community groups, and civic organisations; creating cross-sector partnerships; fostering collaboration between local authorities and stakeholders and improving communication between council and external stakeholders.
Outputs: Diverse stakeholder involvement in decision-making, increased community ownership of regeneration efforts, and stronger partnerships between local businesses, local people, and local government.
Interpretation: Interesting approach to facilitate shared understanding and working relations between organisations as part of networking prior to and as part of partnership development. This may apply at different geographical levels from a town and it centre to the new strategic authority level where issues such as transport strategy will be addressed.
-
Improving the High Street experience and identity
Activities: Implementing quick wins, enhancing the public realm, fostering local events and activities, and improving branding and marketing for the high street, improving communications across all stakeholders, increasing pride and attachment. Providing funding to improve experience and identity.
Outputs: Improved perceptions of the high street, increased footfall, higher business engagement, and more appealing public spaces.
Interpretation: This appears a very broad catch-all for elements of the ‘reinventing’, ‘rebranding’ and parts of the ‘restructuring’ of town centres as part of the “4Rs” methodology prepared by the IPM for the High Streets Task Force. Obviously, a lot of detail behind this, though there is value on focusing on the ‘how’ here as the ‘what’ of revitalisation, usually takes all the attention.
-
Place leadership and hyperlocal governance
Activities: Establishing local leadership structures, developing hyperlocal governance models and devolving funds to build strong, long-term visions for the high street, and aligning national and regional policies with local efforts. Providing funding for long-term regeneration (capital and revenue).
Outputs: Strong leadership, trust, long-term strategic vision for high streets, and resilient governance structures that ensure sustainability.
Interpretation: A distinction seems to be being made here between ‘partnerships’ under point 2 and ‘hyperlocal governance’, which is presumably a difference of scale and strategic role, verses tactical town centre level. Assuming this to be the case, then the detail in making this distinction is helpful.
Intended outcomes from theory of high street change
Here I set-out the intended outcomes as set-out in the IPM’s theory for high street change, as positive changes resulting from actions the actions under each step. As a methodology, Theory of Change places a strong emphasis on the link between intended actions and outcomes.
Short-term outcomes
- Enhanced capacity within local authorities to manage high street projects.
- Stronger, more inclusive partnerships driving collaboration and shared ownership of the regeneration process.
- Quick, visible improvements in high street appearance, increased footfall, and perceptions, fostering community confidence in high street initiatives.
Medium-term outcomes
- Increased community engagement in high street planning and decision-making.
- Higher levels of footfall, lower vacancy rates, and improved business success on high streets.
- Strong local identity, with high streets that reflect the needs and values of their communities.
Long-term outcomes
- Sustainable governance and leadership structures embedded in local areas, ensuring ongoing high street transformation.
- Long-term viability of high streets through adaptive and resilient place leadership and management
- High streets that meet the evolving needs of communities and are central to local life
Impact: Achieving long-term regeneration and sustainability
- High Streets that thrive: Through structured investment in place management, better communication, inclusive partnerships, enhanced public experience, and strong local leadership, high streets become vibrant, resilient, and sustainable places that meet the needs of their communities.
- Empowered communities: Communities are empowered to take ownership of their high streets, driving continued improvements, and ensuring long-term success.
A learning legacy or report footnote
Writing this review of the ‘theory of high street change’, proposed in the ‘post-programme findings of the High Streets Task Force’, I am unsure if it will become the learning legacy it intended to be, or simply a necessary footnote in a programme evaluation. The report’s concluding remarks propose that this theory change should become the standard framework for high street regeneration at different spatial levels; meaning local stakeholders, partnerships and national stakeholders, will be working through a compatible methodology.
To achieve this, the theory of high street change will need to be picked-up by government and championed by the IPM. My suspicion is that if this is to happen, its application may not be limited to high streets though extended, for example, to help strengthen the inter-relationship between city centres and neighbourhoods. For the moment, I welcome it as a methodology that partly corrects the imbalance between the ‘how’ and ‘what’ of revitalisation, for once to favour the former.
Further information
Here at Places & People, we are authors of the Local Government Association’s revitalising town centres toolkit, which seemingly also sets-out a Theory of Change for the ‘how’ and ‘what’ of improving our towns and cities through an evidence-based approach.
Read our recent thinking on creating place partnerships behind plans, including our proposed criteria for success.
You can download a copy of the ‘Post-programme findings of the High Streets Task Force’, published by the Institute of Place Management.
