OUR STORY

"Our project was very dynamic and experimental. What first interested us about Newham was the People's Plan for the Royal Docks- a community-generated plan for the docklands that was eventually defeated by Thatcher's London Docklands Development Corporation in 1986. We noticed how the lack of community engagement in development was a problem that continued to the present day, evident in the dockland's socially and environmentally toxic morphology and surrounding neighbourhoods' profound deprivation.

During one of our first visits to the site, we noticed a surprising number of children walking and taking the bus home from school. Upon further research, we noticed how many organisations around the docklands were dedicated to youth programming and services. With our interest in community engagement and the evident stigmatisation of Newham's youth in media, we focused our project on the implications of involving Newham's young people in planning.

Working out the ethical and practical details of community engagement remains lengthy and tedious, especially when it concerns minors. Nevertheless, we were determined to hear the voices of a particularly marginalised group in Newham and allow them to speak for themselves on environmental issues in the docklands and climate change broadly. We contacted dozens of organisations without responses before eventually collaborating with Friends of West Ham Park and Earlham Primary School, who generously allowed us into their communities to conduct outreach to Newham's youth.

Interacting with Newham's residents was an experience none of us will forget. During our activity stand at the park, families and young people passionately shared stories and concerns about their neighbourhoods. The students at Earlham Primary pleasantly surprised us with their thoughtfulness, curiosity, and creativity. We discovered that the hands-on, artistic element of our activities allowed even those who struggled to speak English contribute their important, yet oft overlooked, perspectives.

Speaking with people on the ground reminded us of what is morally at stake when we talk about environmental justice, whether it be at the local or global level. Young people in Newham and around the world are calling for action and providing solutions to the environmental ails plaguing their communities. In the end, we realised that the driving question for our project was "What does it mean to truly listen to people typically rendered voiceless?"-- a question at the heart of both our process and interventions, and one for everyone to seriously consider."

INTRODUCTION

The London Borough of Newham (LBN) has experienced interconnected cycles of social and environmental harms spanning multiple generations. This injustice continues to be a consequence of exploitative economic systems and externally imposed, anti-democratic plans that have privileged industry and profits over people and nature. Ecological injustice in and around the Royal Docks has created an urban landscape characterised by dislocated and deprived communities, environmental degradation, as well as physical and mental health problems, the burden of which falls disproportionately upon young and disadvantaged groups. Embedding ideas of intergenerational justice into planning and governance structures is critical for repairing from a history of anti-democratic development and ensuring the welfare of future generations in a time of ecological crisis. Young people in LBN must be part of this larger picture of intergenerational justice. Our grounded experimental methodology hence explores what it might look like for practitioners and governments to truly listen to the marginalised and give voice to those traditionally rendered voiceless. Envisioning a new "infrastructure of engagement", we propose new legislation at the national level along with council-level interventions that empower young people to participate in planning and political processes that shape their neighbourhood and the world.

This report ultimately aims to shift dominant ideological frameworks in planning and governing structures away from "participation in planning" to "participation as planning" and from focusing on short-term profits to prioritising the wellbeing of current and future generations.

Statistical and spatial analysis of LBN and the Royal Docks reveals an area characterised by deprivation, dislocation, and negative health outcomes impacting its youthful population. LBN is among the 10% most deprived authorities in England: the borough has the worst access to housing and local services in the country (MCHLG, 2019), and most of the population lives in overcrowded conditions, with over 30% living in social housing (ONS, 2011). Residents on the whole live shorter lives compared to the London median: males have a 4.1 years lower healthy life expectancy and females have 7.1 years lower healthy life expectancy, the lowest in all of the city (Trust for London, 2021).

LBN is also a relatively young borough: its median age is 32.3 compared to the London average of 40.3, and 37% of LBN's population is below 26, compared with London's 30% (Newham Council, 2021a). There exist numerous health concerns for LBN's young generation: the borough has 38% more underweight new-borns compared with the London average and 200% more youth asthma hospitalizations (Newham Council, 2021a). These social disparities are exacerbated by the observation that the Royal Docks area is characterised by low public transport accessibility for those frequenting nearby schools, community centres, and youth centres (TFL, 2022).

Figure 3.1: Age, health concerns and life expectancy in LBN. Source: Newham Council, 2021a, trust for London, 2021.


Figure 3.2: Transport Accessibility Ptal Map Of The Royal Docks Overlayed With Community Infrastructure Such As Schools, Community Centres, And Youth Centres. (Data Source: Tfl, 2022, Mapping By Authors).

ECOLOGICAL JUSTICE

Environmental issues are too often treated as separate from urban social issues. Human ecology, and man-made urban ecology, are inseparable from the ecology of the natural world. Intertwined like DNA strands, they exist together, and potentially extinguish together.

LIFE AND DEATH OF THE DOCKS

Since the first section of the Royal Docks opened in 1855, power and capital have flowed into and ebbed out of the area, a cycle governed by the dynamics of international capitalism. Workers and families were side-lined as mere observers of other people's plans for their neighbourhoods. In its heyday, the Port of London was the "nexus of empire" (Scheener, 1999: 39) when the spoils of imperial domination passed through its docks and wharfs. But the dockers benefitted little. By the 1880s, the slums of East London were home to a million people (Evans, 1999: 751) living alongside open sewers, "stagnant, filled with refuse of the foulest description" (Dickens, 1855). In 1881 - before the Royal Docks were even complete - more efficient facilities opened downstream at Tilbury. With the advent of container shipping during the 1960s, London's space-constrained facilities were doomed. Their closure in 1981 devastated communities near the docks, which were deemed "the sacrificial lamb of industrial development elsewhere" (Home Office, 1976). One London dockworker powerfully expressed in a testimony to the 1892 Royal Commission on Labour, "There is so much wealth in the country, and [our] share of that wealth is so little" (Scheener, 1999: 46).

Figure 3.3 (TOP): LBN is the most deprived in England for access to housing and local services. Data source: MHCLG, 2019, mapping by authors.
Figure 3.4 (BOTTOM): Most of the borough live in overcrowded conditions, with over 30% living in social housing. Data source: ONS, 2011, mapping by authors.

NEOLIBERAL DOCKLANDS

The Royal Docks today is characterised by a mishmash of dislocated forms, including the new City Hall, London's largest conference centre, an expansive Newham Council office, and the London City Airport. The docks are also the centre of London's only designated Enterprise Zone. The area is promoted as "a commercial and cultural hub... an exciting new waterfront" (Royal Docks Team, 2022). The disjunct morphology of the Royal Docks found its beginnings when the Thatcher government dictated a future for south LBN based on externally imposed capitalist investments. Rejecting the community-generated People's Plan for the Royal Docks that called for free childcare, social housing, and investments in "socially useful production" (Spencer, 2021), the government created the London Docklands Development Corporation (LDDC), which had sweeping powers over redevelopment and land use. The LDDC approved the construction of the controversial London City Airport, an abiding symbol of the government's prioritisation of capitalist growth over local people.

CLIMATE CRISIS

The Greater London Authority (2022a) says climate change is making London's weather more unpredictable and acknowledges that "this is caused by human actions". Nevertheless, the Mayor of London approved the planned Silvertown Tunnel, a major new road under the Thames at LBN that will worsen traffic carbon emissions. Moreover, the borough is especially vulnerable to extreme heat (Klinenberg, 2015). The GLA (2022b) has recognised that this disproportionately impacts the elderly, the young, and those with asthma, mental illness, and disabilities. The borough is also particularly vulnerable to flooding, stemming from its pre-industrial existence as a natural wetland.

Figure 3.5: Protest against the Silvertown tunnel. (Stop the Silvertown tunnel coalition, 2021)

Intergenerational justice explores relations between present and future generations in the pursuit of a fairer world. Caney (2018) argues that the concept of future generations has three different meanings: 1) those not yet born; 2) people not yet citizens (which includes children); and 3) all generations. Barry (1997: 43) combines environmental issues and future generations in a prescient quote: "Those alive at any time are custodians rather than owners of the Planet, and [so] ought to pass it on in at least no worse shape than they found it in." The idea of "custodians" suggests that we are protecting something valuable for the shared benefits of the community. In contrast, the idea of "owners of the Planet" captures the libertarian and neoliberal world we are "trapped" in (Davies et al., 2021).

INTERGENERATIONAL INCLUSION

"Marginalised citizens... are materially and existentially threatened by the decisions and actions of states" (O'Brien et al., 2018: 22). As the future generation, young people are disproportionately impacted by choices made by policy-makers; 24.4% of LBN is under 18 years old (Newham London, 2020). One approach to mitigate this is to revise the nature of democracy for the sake of future generations. Intergenerational justice requires intergenerational inclusion and participation (Young, 1990). The democratic participation of all generations ties together the generational chain in planning for a sustainable future. However, the consequences of environmental issues for children are notably absent from the "forefront of climate change policy, advocacy and research" (Guillemot & Burgess, 2019). This is pertinent in the context of LBN, whose young people are particularly stigmatised, being frequently featured in the media as criminals and outcasts. However, many initiatives have demonstrated how youth have unique, largely untapped insight into solving complex problems in the neighbourhoods in which they live (Open City, 2020; Percy-Smith & Carney, 2011). Intergenerational justice - and its focus on young people and future generations - provides the framework for our methods and interventions. Through our project, we advocate for radically democratic and participatory forms of governance to help repair from an ongoing history of unheard voices and capitalist-centred development, foster a culture of inclusion in a presiding culture of exclusion, and ensure the wellbeing of the future communities in a time of ecological crisis.

COMMUNITY VS. ECONOMY?

The People's Plan for the Royal Docks was a reaction to the imposition of Thatcherite politics on the people of LBN. With the Plan being defeated in 1986, the "ruling class" used their social power to promote a particular vision of justice: one that most benefits them (Plato, 2007). The dominant neoliberal ideology of Thatcher's successors is ever-more powerful. We need to ask: "which theory of justice is the most just?" (Harvey, 1991: 594). Fundamentally different conceptions of justice divide Libertarians, who claim personal choice always trumps the common good; and Communitarians, who believe shared practises glue communities together for the good of all (Kymlicka, 1988; Kymlicka, 2002). The Communitarian spirit of the People's Plan lives on. Current LBN activists see the borough as an "ideological battleground"; where "local people are ignored"; where the People's Plan became the "community bible"; in a fight against "capitalism"; for a world where "equality, inclusiveness, and mutual care are all important." With London operating as a "Capital for Capital" for profit and speculation (Minton, 2017), we need to ask: "What social good is being produced - and who will benefit?" (Mason, 2016: 270).

"THE GRETA EFFECT"

Climate change will most affect "future citizens" (UNICEF UK, 2010). Yet chief executives and world leaders are driven by the "fairy-tale of endless economic growth" (Thunberg, 2019). There exists a tension between people in power, obsessed with the local present, and people out of power, especially children, worried about the global future. Barry (1997: 43) argues that "Sustainability always requires immediate action - which means action NOW!" Holding the power elites of industrialised nations accountable, children worldwide are calling for radical change (Cannon, 2019). They demand we all "safeguard the future living conditions for humankind" (Thunberg, 2019). This shift in global perceptions is in part a manifestation of "The Greta Effect," as her climate strikes "Fridays for Future" went global (Zabarn & Tulloch, 2021) and inspired LBN's own youth to take part in the international movement (King, 2019). How would the world look different if young people were listened to and taken seriously - as future citizens and in their own right?

Figure 3.6 (TOP): Greta Thunberg rallying crowds at a climate protest in Washington DC. (Silbiger/Vox, 2019)
Figure 3.7 (BOTTOM): LBN Young people on climate strike at the Stratford centre. (King, 2019)

METHODOLOGY: EXPERIMENTS INTO INTERVENTIONS

Our project emphasises intergenerational justice in planning and governance by focusing on both institutional change and community empowerment amongst LBN's young people. We seek to shift predominant views in urban planning from "participation in planning" to "participation as planning" (Frediani and Cocina, 2019); from adhering to neoliberal development schemes to prioritising sustainable investment in local communities.

Our interactions with LBN residents are part of a longer-term research process and short-term intervention. In the immediate term, we test the efficacy of various methods from a practitioners' perspective. These questions include: What are the daily experiences and concerns of young people in LBN? How can LBN better meet the needs of young people? What engagement methods encourage LBN's youth to actively reflect on issues of ecological justice at local and global levels?

At the same time, our methodology guides our thinking for more aspirational questions: What does it look like for practitioners to really listen to young people? What engagement methods enable LBN's youth to feel like their voices matter and that they belong in the public realm? What engagement methods cultivate a greater sense of environmental responsibility, political agency, and imagination in children?

Thus, we explore not only what it means for practitioners and governments to really listen to the marginalised, but also ask what it might look like to encourage voice in people who are used to being perceived as voiceless.

As illustrated in our institutional map (Figure 3.8), LBN's young people are implicated in various structural forces that carry the power to shape their life chances and citizenship rights. These forces extend from international ideologies and national policies to planning and development systems. The institutional map attempts to outline various built environment stakeholders and the global processes in which they are entangled. Our grounded, experimental methodology enters the map at the local level, though community-based research has the potential to illuminate opportunities for intervening at higher scales.

The motivation behind our fieldwork is encapsulated by Berman (1984) when he writes, "Unless we know how to recognise people, as they look and feel and experience the world, we'll never be able to help them recognise themselves or change the world. Reading Capital won't help us if we don't also know how to read the signs in the street". If we are to seriously consider how to empower LBN's youth, we must try to see and feel as LBN's young people see and feel and apprehend the world.

Figure 3.8: Institutional map of forces that impact LBN's young people, with emphasis on built environment stakeholders. The green hammers indicates where our experimental methodology is directly intervening. (Authors, 2022)

BACKGROUND: ANALYSIS OF CURRENT ENGAGEMENT

A review of government-led engagements in LBN was necessary to identify strengths and weaknesses in existing systems. Current initiatives are predominantly conducted by Newham Council and the GLA. We examined three engagement programmes.

1. Newham "Local Plan Refresh"

The Newham "Local Plan Refresh" is conducted by the Council to involve citizens in strategic planning. The Council asked residents about the prospect of engaging young people in the planning process. However, some respondents displayed a negative attitude towards youth participation, claiming young people do not have the capability to understand planning and should not be a priority (Pratt, 2019; Newham Council, 2021b). These responses indicate the ongoing neglect of young people's opinions in the planning system, stemming from an intergenerational disconnect between age groups. The respondents also complained about the Council's heavy use of professional jargon and vague questions. They also remarked how online formats and platforms were hard to use, locate, and offered few language options (Newham Council, 2021c). This further reveals the undemocratic and performative nature of current engagement by the Council.

2. Air Quality Audit Programme

The Mayor of London's Air Quality Audit Programme involved detailed site-based research for air pollution mitigation at LBN's Keir Hardie Primary School. It made recommendations for reducing emissions and exposure through air filtration systems and infrastructural improvements for the school. Still, the programme pointed to insufficient funding and policy support from the national government. It also admitted that the realised interventions remain short-term and small-scale (Mayor of London, 2018). The programme demonstrates the current failure of the government to move beyond performative means of engagement, seeking technical fixes for large-scale structural problems.

3. Queen's Market and Green Street

Finally, the Queen's Market and Green Street renovation programme conducted surveys and workshops with LBN residents from different ethnic, cultural, and age groups as part of the planning of public spaces (Newham Council, 2021c). While this programme is the most successful of all the examples, the programme remains limited to one project.

Tokenistic Participation

Although these initiatives are seen as part of participatory planning, little is actually changed at a structural level. The programmes rely on top-down initiatives and flawed governing systems, rather than cultivating bottom-up democratic power and establishing widely accessible channels for people to partake in the design of their neighbourhoods. Citizens are prevented "from confronting and challenging discourse and prevailing orthodoxy about the way the urban ought to be constituted" (Legacy, 2017: 425).

Moreover, there are cultural barriers to participatory governance amongst LBN youth. Evidence shows that young people across the UK struggle to feel a sense of community (Uberoi and Johnston, 2021) and participate increasingly less in democratic processes (Tanner et al., 2021).

A youth coordinator (2021) in LBN shared how young people in the borough "lack ambition and don't see a bright future for themselves". Hence, how to achieve truly participatory governance is not only about policy, but also about bottom-up empowerment: how do we raise the next generation to be active participants in political processes that shape their neighbourhood and the world?

ONLINE SURVEY: THE LIMITATIONS OF DIGITAL OUTREACH

We first attempted to engage with LBN's young people and those who work and/or live with them through an online survey. The survey aimed to compare environmental perceptions between age groups; inspire people to reimagine their surrounding environment; and educate people about LBN's local plan. In these ways, the survey acted as an experiment into one aspect of a broader participatory planning process.

During the course of one month, we received ten responses. This low response rate mirrors the survey used for LBN's "Local Plan Refresh", which received 31 responses over the course of three months (Newham Council, 2021d). Our survey's results, although not substantial, shaped the direction of our subsequent experiments into interventions.

The survey experiment demonstrated the limitations of the online format. Due to the ethical risks of engaging directly with people under 18 years old, we limited respondents to those 18 and above, and distributed the survey through organisational gatekeepers. The survey effectively limited access to those who are digitally literate, have access to the internet, and know English, which is problematic in culturally diverse LBN. The survey format also foreclosed the possibility of having a two-way, dynamic conversation about the lived experience of young people and their opinions on planning and politics.

Figure 3.9 (TOP): Age distribution of respondents
Figure 3.10 (BOTTOM): Have you heard of Newham local plan?


Figure 3.11 (TOP): Have you participated in Newham's local plan?
Figure 3.12 (BOTTOM): Degree of satisfaction towards major infrastructural developments in Newham


Figure 3.13: Proportion of time spent on various transport modes across various age groups


Figure 3.14: Weight of elements influencing the use of various transport modes across various age groups


Figure 3.15: Selected results from online survey. (Authors, 2022)

ACTIVITY STAND: FACE-TO-FACE ENGAGEMENT

Given the limitations of the online survey, we sought more social and inclusive engagement methods. We drew significantly from the approach set forth by Creswell and Clark (2017), who advocate for mixed methods that challenge typical power relations between researchers and subjects in the shared process of honing interventions. We partnered with the community organisation Friends of West Ham Park to hold an outdoor activity stand. Over the course of a weekend, we interacted with around 80 adults and 30 kids. We talked to parents and teenagers over an A0 size map of the borough, asking them to put sticky notes over positive, negative, and ambivalent spaces. Adults frequently came to the park with their children, with whom we were able to connect over crafting activities. Paired with the prompt to "craft your dream neighbourhood," the collaging provided young people an opportunity to reimagine their built environment.

We held the event on a Saturday and Sunday afternoons in front of the park's playground, allowing us to engage with youth ranging from three to fourteen years old. We had prepared collaging materials beforehand, offering pre-cut images of trees, animals, green spaces, transportation options, local landmarks, people, streets, shops, graffiti, and other infrastructure. We also provided coloured pens and stickers. While we asked for permission to take pictures of their collages, the children were able to take their creations home. Many parents expressed appreciation for the event. In particular, one individual shared, "Thank you for giving me and my daughter the opportunity to do this art. It is very important that young people think about their environment, but they do not get the chance to!"

Figure 3.16 (TOP): Friends of west ham park was incredibly helpful in putting up posters around the park to publicise our event. (Authors, 2022)
Figure 3.17 (CENTRE), 3.18 (BOTTOM): Authors at West Ham park. (Authors, 2022)

The mapping activity was very successful in engaging residents in conversations about the built environment and how the council can better meet their needs. Some of the presiding themes that emerged from the activity include negative concerns about the inaccessibility of new developments, crime, noisy and dangerous streets, and the closing of leisure centres; people also expressed positive appreciation of facilities for children, women, and disabled people, events in parks, and culturally diverse communities. Negative comments clustered around the Royal Docks area (e.g., "lack of people"; "lack of light"; "too expensive"), major roads, and sites of criminal activity, while green spaces and recreation centres were frequently marked positively.

Figure 3.19: Map of Newham with green, yellow, and red post-its contributed by various passers-by. (Authors, 2022)

INTERACTIVE TEACHING SESSION: ENGAGEMENT IN THE CLASSROOM

We subsequently partnered with Earlham Primary School, who allowed us to hold a 90-minute teaching session with their student council, a group of eight children ranging from seven to eleven years old.

Figures 3.20, 3.21, 3.22: Earlham Primary School interactive teaching session. (Twitter- @earlhamps, 2022)

The goal of the session was to explore what a potential lesson in a broader civic-oriented curriculum on planning and climate change might look like. The interactive activities in our lesson were partially inspired by property group Grosvenor's (2020) toolkit for engaging young people in planning. The lesson encouraged the students to think about the spatial and sensory aspect of their experiences, involved discussions about intergenerational ecological justice prompted by a video on Greta Thunberg talking with Sir David Attenborough, and included a mini-lesson on sustainable urban planning. We helped structure the students' thinking with a worksheet, asking them to describe their dream public space sensorily, socially, spatially, and temporally (Figure 3.23 and 3.24). We then encouraged them to create a collage of their imagined public space. The collaging materials were mostly the same as the ones we provided for the activity stand, but with the addition of libraries and youth centres based on young people's suggestions. We asked the children how they felt about their creations and visualised their comments in a word cloud (Figure 3.25).

The results from the session might be of relevant interest to practitioners, as they are to the teacher we worked with at the school, who said that it inspired her to adjust her own curriculum. The students responded very positively and engaged eagerly in the activities and discussions. They were evidently excited about the prospect of getting involved in urban design and planning. Ultimately, the session serves as an insight into how education in LBN might play a big role in raising future local and global citizens that seriously care about the environment and want to actively participate in planning and other political processes.

Figures 3.23 and 3.24: Educational materials used for interactive teaching session. (Authors, 2022)


Figure 3.25: This word cloud was generated from the students' summaries of their collages at the end of the session. (Authors, 2022)

RESEARCH SUMMARY: METHODOLOGICAL TAKEAWAYS

Our engagement generated important questions that shaped the trajectory of our proposed interventions. Having contacted 45 different community groups, we have come up against many barriers that contribute to young people being marginalised in research, governance, and planning.

Along with the logistical challenges of engaging people under 18 years old, organisations and schools have limited capacity to accommodate external groups, being severely underfunded and short-staffed due to the neoliberal "roll-back" of the state (Brenner & Theodore, 2002). We had a particularly difficult time reaching teenagers, a difficulty that many other organisations attest to experience. This prompts us to think about what resources would be required to ensure consistent and effective engagement with young people of all ages.

In-person, interactive activities were dramatically more effective in drawing residents than other methods like an online survey or plain conversation. This encourages us to think about similar activities and how they might be scaled up. Notably, collaging was very effective with youth; children did not need to understand English in order to partake and gain from the experience. Furthermore, we found the park and school to be valuable spatial resources for reaching our target populations.

These realisations along with other lessons we learned from conducting our session at Earlham Primary School inform our thinking about how policies and broader education reform aimed at cultivating environmental responsibility, political agency, and imagination might look like.

Our fieldwork shows how, when given the opportunity, both the young and old in LBN are enthusiastic about grappling with issues of intergenerational justice. During our conversations at the park, parents often contemplated their own childhood in LBN and the futures of their children. Some contrasted their time visiting youth centres with the lack of such centres now. Parents in this way unknowingly carry on the communitarian spirit of the People's Plan by reflecting on the need to repair intergenerational injustices in their neighbourhoods.

During our teaching session, when asked what environmental justice is, one student replied, "It is to make the environment better for everyone!" Another passionately commented how "no one did anything for the last 30 years!" when asked what stood out to them from the video where "Greta meets David Attenborough". We were particularly struck by the artistic expression of young people at Earlham Primary and West Ham Park and the frequent depth of meaning in their creations.

COLLAGES

Almost all of the collages included green space, suggesting its importance in children's perception of an ideal neighbourhood. Moreover, the inclusion of local landmarks demonstrates how the existing local environment has a significant impact on children's imaginations.

The children's collages embody the powerful aesthetic and politics of Naïve Art, whose frankness and rawness shock audiences into imagining different futures (Khanare & de Lange, 2017). Such art might appear irrelevant and playful. But, without being restricted by "conventional thinking," children often just believe that anything is possible. Our community-based research uncovers the vast and rich spatial imaginations of LBN's youth and raises the question of how much is lost when governments and practitioners turn a deaf ear to these invaluable voices and perspectives.

Figures 3.26 and 3.27: All these collages were created by visitors to our activity stand and interactive teaching session.

PROPOSED INTERVENTIONS: A NEW "INFRASTRUCTURE OF ENGAGEMENT"

The framework of intergenerational justice along with our interactions with residents on the ground enable us to imagine a new kind of urbanisation: one which reorients stakeholders away from tokenistic engagement and short-term profits to the importance of seriously accounting for young people and future generations.

Envisioning a new "infrastructure of engagement" for LBN (Figure 3.28), we explore what it means for practitioners and governments to truly listen to the marginalised and give voice to those traditionally rendered voiceless, from institutional and interpersonal perspectives.

Our proposed interventions are grounded in a deep and rich understanding of LBN, rooted in multiple approaches to primary research in the borough. We advance a set of multi-scalar interventions that involve new legislation at the national level along with borough-level interventions that re-imagine the way young people are educated, provide safe spaces for cultivating political agency and imagination in youth, and give young people legitimate power in the planning process. These interventions will seek to capitalise on synergies between different scales while building on the extensive work already being performed by organisations in LBN.

Figure 3.28A: Our interventions are a holistic set of proposals implementable at multiple levels. (Authors, 2022)


Figure 3.28B: A shift to a zero or positive discount rate would urge developers to consider future generations, strengthening accountability among stakeholders. The benefits are also exponentially larger than current systems. (Authors, 2022)

NATIONAL INTERVENTIONS: THE FUTURE GENERATIONS ACT

The 2010 Equality Act brought together various legal instruments concerning discrimination and marginalisation. It introduced protected characteristics, including age, disability, pregnancy and maternity, race, sexual orientation, and others. While ideas of intergenerational justice are touched upon by "age", in policy circles, that has typically referred to the elderly. Halford (2010: 3) argues that "there are some significant gaps in this broadened scope, most troublingly around the provision of public services to children".

Nonetheless, the 2010 Equality Act is crucial: it is the first landmark document laying out a Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED). Public authorities are legally obliged to eliminate discrimination, harassment, or victimisation. They must advance equality of opportunity and foster good relationships between people of protected characteristics and others. Sackman (2018, quoted in Dewar, 2018) maintains that "a local planning authority needs to ask itself whether it has discharged the PSED and whether it can show evidence that it has done so... the duty [requiring] a thorough analysis of equalities impacts".

However, a deeper analysis of LBN's planning processes has shown that this "duty" is often assessed at a superficial level. The Planning Inspectorate report of the LBN Local Plan, for example, only elaborates on the PSED in a short paragraph, without due regard for individual characteristics.

The Future Generations Act

Therefore, a new Future Generations Act should be created to institutionalise the need for public and private sectors to account for future generations in processes and decisions (Mazzucato, 2021). The act would introduce a clear new ideological claim recognising how young people are marginalised and disproportionately subjected to injustices. The act would build on momentum catalysed by the Welsh government's creation of a Commissioner for Future Generations (Balch, 2019) and the Today for Tomorrow Campaign's establishment of a UK-wide Future Generations Commission (Geraghty, 2022).

Today, it is severely insufficient to merely ensure any lack of negative consequences. The act would oblige institutions to contribute positively to future generations in order to repair from historic injustices. It would formalise the need to create healthy, safe, and comfortable environments for young people and ensure that these cannot easily be destroyed by budget cuts.

While a new legal act at the national level may seem daunting, it would ambitiously provoke various actors to consider their processes and decisions in radical ways. New developments and other public service provisions would be evaluated on the basis of their impact on future generations, challenging practitioners to better design public spaces, including young people in democratic processes, and building resilience into frameworks.

Appraisals and Evaluations

A key manifestation of the Future Generations Act would be a drastic rethink of how appraisals and evaluations are executed. In the UK, the Green Book (HM Treasury, 2020) is often referred to when cost-benefit analysis is carried out. These analyses are often used to decide whether a project should commence. A discount rate is used to value future benefits to present values. Unfortunately, the present UK discount rate of -3.5% prioritises present benefits rather than future benefits, rendering future generations powerless.

Weitzman (2009) argues that costs and benefits should not be approached from a merely economic standpoint. Economic debates distract policymakers from ethical issues of intergenerational justice (Milner, 2013). This is especially problematic when irreversible losses of ecosystem services and negative social and health consequences are imminent. Ultimately, discounting future generations because they occur later in time indicates a weakness of the imagination (Ramsey, 1928).

The Future Generations Act would compel developers to be transparent about the rising costs of socio-ecological disinvestment. A shift to a zero or positive discount rate (Figure 3.28B) would urge developers to consider future generations and strengthen accountability among public and private sector stakeholders.

Ultimately, the act would have far-reaching implications how money is allocated, helping to repair from historic disinvestment in community assets, organisations, schools, and housing; it would also provide the financial support for infrastructures of engagement. In a world where "the market has captured the State" (Wacquant, 2012), the act would be a significant step towards "[switching] off the neoliberal privatisation machine" (Mason, 2016: 273).

EDUCATIONAL INTERVENTIONS: SCHOOLS FOR DEMOCRATIC EMPOWERMENT

Context

Schools are the primary means through which society can empower young people. We propose using the infrastructure, resources, and talents already embedded in the school system as tools to engage young people in a meaningful and ongoing dialogue about the future of their neighbourhoods.

Studies have shown how young people across the UK are democratically disengaged (Uberoi & Johnson, 2021) and are the least socially attached to their neighbourhood compared to other age-groups (Onward, 2021). Our interviews with residents reveal how LBN's youth in particular feel uncomfortable partaking in democratic planning processes, disempowered about the future, and marginalised in the built environment (Activist 1, 2021; Organisation Leader, 2022).

Inspired by our work with Earlham Primary School, we believe that the education system can play a significant role in cultivating democratic power amongst LBN's youth (Figure 3.29). Indeed, enhanced school curriculums are proven to increase civic engagement amongst young people (Barrett and Pachi, 2019). Critically, to make sure the voices of young people are not lost in the process, school leaders should come together with the borough in a proposed Future Generations Council tasked with advocating for youth and those who will come next.

UPDATING THE CURRICULUM

While examining the GCSE curriculum for Geography, it is clear that many issues are covered by instructors; however, breadth is often prioritised over depth. Given the urgent state of the climate emergency, themes of ecological justice and planning should be given greater weight in the classroom.

In LBN primary schools, all pupils should be educated on urban planning and climate change through a "Sustainable Planning" module. In secondary schools, pupils should partake in a studio project through a "Democratic Design" module, which would allow students to explore local issues on the ground while contextualising them within a global context. This module would create the opportunity for intergenerational dialogue and the participatory design of local spaces. These reforms to school curricula have the opportunity to influence the wider London education system.

Training and Resources

The path to an updated curriculum is not as challenging as one would expect. The Royal Town Planning Institute and Royal Institute of British Architects already have plenty of well-crafted resources for teachers and students. Additionally, with the Department for Education taking the lead, partnerships should be formed between the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, GLA, local authorities, local developers, and local organisations. This comprehensive network of support would allow teachers and students to benefit from wide-ranging expertise.

Future Generations Council

Also, a Future Generations Council should be created. The new Council would consist of community leaders (e.g. headteachers, youth coordinators, social workers) charged with representing the young people they serve. As in all of our proposed interventions, there should be a greater focus on empowering disadvantaged young people who experience intersecting forces of oppression due to their race, socioeconomic class, disability status etc.

Unlike a UK Citizens' Assembly (n.d.), the Council should be allowed not only input on initiatives but also have voting power on development proposals. Community leaders should be offered free access to online training on planning and policy. Tasking adults with representing the young people they are close to assists with the mediation of potentially conflicting views between age groups and helps address problems of selective representation. Over time, students who have embarked on the new curriculum should have the opportunity to join the Future Generations Council, increasing their legitimacy of power.

Updating the Curriculum

REFORM

Instead of creating a completely new curriculum, reform and update an already well-structured and well-resourced curriculum.

RECALIBRATE

Current content guidance is focused on international and economic disparities, failing to stress any local spatial disparities. Thus, we should re-calibrate the focus of geography from an international one to one on the local scale.

INTEGRATE

Create integration with citizenship studies by using youth hubs as an anchor for community involvement, participatory design, and education.

PRIMARY SCHOOL

All primary school students should take courses on urban planning and design principles. This provides them a basic foundation to better understand how the built environment around them came to be.

SECONDARY SCHOOL

All secondary school students should undertake a one-semester studio module with lessons related to participatory governance, climate justice, democracy, and urban management.

Based on our own experimental teaching session, we recommend that lesson plans should generally: 1. Involve hands-on/visual activities that challenge students to think creatively and critically about the built environment 2. Start with informative lessons on environmental issues and urban planning/design that tie the local to global 3. Challenge students to apply what they learn in the classroom to enact positive change in the world 4. Encourage students to draw on their personal experiences 5. Include small group discussions 6. Incorporate visuals, media, current events.

Figure 3.29: Our proposed reforms to the current education curricula. (Authors, 2022)


Figure 3.30: Graphic representation of a new multi-functional youth hub in currently vacant Thames barrier building. (Authors, 2022)

NEIGHBOURHOOD INTERVENTIONS: YOUTH HUBS

Young people have suffered not just exclusion from planning processes, but also various physical and material losses. Austerity contributes to a kind of intergenerational warfare, with 13 of 18 youth centres in LBN having closed in the past decade and existing ones remaining ill-equipped (Haynes, 2022). More youth centres should be brought back to provide young people with a safe place to gather, away from the perceived danger of the streets. Places designed for youth should include both indoor and outdoor spaces like Play Streets and Adventure Playgrounds (London Play Organisation, 2021).

Urban rooms serve as a particular point of inspiration for our imagining new youth spaces. Urban rooms around the world function as exhibition halls, community centres, and/or learning spaces, and aim to encourage citizens to take part in the redesign and rethinking of their city's future. Physical, three-dimensional models of the area frequently help individuals visualise central public spaces and the impact of new design concepts. In the UK, an Urban Rooms Network was created in 2015 to share practices and support for urban rooms across the nation. Unfortunately, many of these rooms have closed due to dwindling funding support.

New youth hubs in LBN should be multi-functional spaces like urban rooms and capitalise on existing community capacities. The Future Generations Act would allow the democratic use of underutilised assets such as vacant buildings and empty high street shops. With the act's support, new youth hubs would function as comfortable spaces for young people to meet; learn about the past, present, and future of LBN; and partake in dialogue with practitioners.

Schools would continue to serve as anchor institutions and help manage these new youth hubs. Inspired by our work with Friends of West Ham Park - a group of local residents who manage the park - we envision a Council of Young People co-managing the new youth hubs and providing relevant programming. The Council would consist of individuals elected across various schools who are fairly compensated, equivalent to the National Minimum Wage. The proposed "Democratic Design" module in LBN's secondary schools would also give students the opportunity to co-design these youth hubs. Allowing young people to oversee such public spaces would boost civic engagement and their sense of community and belonging in the public realm.

In conjunction with the creation of these new spaces, close partnerships should be constructed between community centres, libraries, and youth-focused organisations. These connections would allow the synergistic sharing of resources and knowledge, forming the social foundation for infrastructures of engagement.

URBAN ROOM PRECEDENTS

Regular Planning Engagement

Planning consultation should be reformed to become more inclusive, consistent, and social. Our activity stand event evinces how excited LBN residents are to engage with local and borough-level issues; they are just not given the right opportunity to. Similar activity stands should be held by LBN Council and serve as regular anchors for interactions between residents and practitioners. During non-winter months, these set-ups could roam around the borough's various neighbourhoods to canvass different populations.

Having experienced how time-consuming it is to conduct community-based research with youth, we propose that a full-time paid position called the Community Engagement Officer should be created for LBN Council. Individuals in this position would be tasked with working closely with schools and organisations and forming long-lasting, trusting relationships with young people and the community. They would also be experts in conducting ethical and effective engagement and research with people of all ages.

Figure 3.31: NLA Central London model at kings cross, London features a cafe, seating areas, exhibition panels, and weekly events. (Authors, 2022)


Figure 3.32: In Changsha, China, the urban room features a section on historical development, showcasing the city's growth over centuries. (Authors, 2022)


Figure 3.33: Singapore's city gallery features a model showcasing upcoming projects while incorporating fun and playful ideas from various competitions. (Authors, 2022)

Spatial Implications

While the aforementioned interventions are mostly procedural, we demonstrate some of the spatial implications of our proposals by envisioning new youth hubs at two vacant sites in the Royal Docks area (i.e. Refurbishment of Shipman Youth Zone and the creation of a new Thames Barrier Youth Hub in a vacant space).

The Future Generations Act would legally obligate private developers to contribute a fixed investment to the local community before viability calculations. This investment would be separate from Section 106 agreements, where contributions can be negotiated. The Community Infrastructure Levy is currently undergoing reforms and is often insufficiently equipped to deal with investments in social and community infrastructure.

Figures 3.34 and 3.35: Shipman Youth Zone's frontage is uninviting and land is currently under-utilised. The youth centre can be physically expanded and fences removed to create an inviting space. This extends the youth hub beyond the physical building and allows it to form relationships with other social infrastructure like schools and community centres. (Authors, 2022)

SHIPMAN YOUTH ZONE

• 150sqm of underutilised space
• Located near some major housing developments happening in the vicinity
• Land owned by Newham Council

THAMES BARRIER YOUTH HUB

• 300sqm of vacant space
• Located near many major housing developments happening in the vicinity
• Land owned by the GLA

Figure 3.36: Location of youth hubs and its relationship and spatial connections to surrounding community and social infrastructure. (Authors, 2022)

INTERVENTIONS OVERVIEW: IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE

All in all, our proposed interventions aim to foster democratic intergenerational inclusion, future-conscientious governance, and institutionalised care for the young and marginalised. Here, we briefly outline how we foresee these interventions being enacted across different timelines. We emphasise the importance of reviewing, improving, and sharing successes while building upon networks and systems across space and time.

Figure 3.37: Implementation timeline. It is imperative to recognise that this is an ongoing project, forever reviewing, improving, and sharing success and failures. (Authors, 2022)

NEW INSTITUTIONAL MAP

Zooming back out, we want to reflect on how our interventions have addressed the structural issues our institutional map illustrates. Our proposed infrastructures of engagement would advance intergenerational justice by formalising youth contributions to planning, increasing opportunities for young people to engage with political processes, and fostering in youth a greater sense of community and belonging in the public realm. The Future Generations Act and reformed planning system would reshape predominant ideologies and processes driving development, while new youth hubs, revised education systems, and the Future Generations Council would help cultivate bottom-up democratic power.

Figure 3.38: Our institutional map showcases how our various multi-scalar interventions create new formal, iterative pathways for LBN's youth to participate in planning and democratic processes. (Authors, 2022)

CONCLUSION: A CALL TO RE-IMAGINE

With an abiding focus on intergenerational justice, our project suggests unconventional and important connections between research, democracy, civic education, spatial design, temporality, and positionality for an ecologically just world. We believe such connections should facilitate the mutual transfers of (local and professional) expertise, cultivate political agency and imagination, and promote careful and deliberate listening to the most marginalised.

While we believe spatial interventions are important, alone, they are inadequate. We maintain that reforming the processes behind spatial developments must take precedence. Ecological injustice in LBN has resulted from broken ideologies and systems, which must be amended in light of the sheer weight of historical harms and our moral obligation to communities of the future. Communitarian justice demands greater responsiveness to those voices calling for bolder action on urban inequality and climate change.

It is our conviction that intergenerationally democratic governance is required in order to create neighbourhoods and cities that are truly sustainable - in both environmental and social terms. Our planned and spontaneous interactions with people in the field have paved the way to our envisaging an alternative urbanisation for LBN and London. We recognise how the institutional is just as important as the interpersonal: democracy is a matter not only of creating channels for engagement but also of activating the voices of those accustomed to being silenced.

We believe comprehensive physical and social infrastructure that builds on existing community capacities is required to achieve democratic inclusion at multiple scales. In the end, we hope our project acts as a call to listen hard to the long silences - of the young, the marginalised, and those of the future - and to create openings wherever we can for those unheard voices to finally emerge.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: THANK YOU

Our project would not have been possible without our community partners in LBN, who have been our constant source of motivation and inspiration throughout our research. In interviews and unexpected interactions, LBN residents and those that have dedicated their lives to serving and advocating for them regularly shocked us with their kindness, generosity, and insight. We are particularly grateful to Earlham Primary School and Friends of West Ham Park for allowing us into their communities and providing the necessary supports for our in-person engagement. Both organisations went above and beyond in sharing not only their time and energy, but also their material resources (e.g. gazebo, chairs, tables, tape, scissors, space). We are also grateful to Caramel Rock, Bonny Downs Community Association, and Fresh Paint Newham for helping us distribute the online survey. We deeply thank everyone for their trust and collaboration. We finally pay special regards to our fellow friends and colleagues at the London School of Economics and Political Science. In particular, we would like to thank the Cities programme faculty - David Madden, Suzanne Hall, Julia King, and Fran Tonkiss - for their astute guidance. They continually challenged us as researchers and scholars, helping us hone our methods and frameworks. This section is not to be included in the word count.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Barrett, M. & Pachi, D. (2019) Civic and Political Engagement Among Youth. London: Routledge.

Barry, B. (1997) 'Sustainability and Intergenerational Justice'. Theoria, 45: 43-65.

Brenner, N. & Theodore, N. (2002) 'Cities and the geographies of "actually existing neoliberalism".' Antipode, 34(3): 349-79.

Caney, S. (2018) 'Justice & Future Generations'. The Annual Review of Political Science, 21: 475-493.

Creswell, J. & Plano Clark, V. (2017) Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Third Edition, Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

Davies, A. Jackson, B. & Sutcliffe-Braithwaite, F. (2021) The Neoliberal Age? London: UCL Press.

Dickens, A. (1855) Report to the General Board of Health, in archived history of Canning Town, Stratford Library archives, [Visited on 2 November 2021].

Evans, C. (1999) 'Capital, Labor, and Class in the Victorian City'. Journal of Urban History, 25(5): 745-754.

English Heritage (2014) 'London Borough of Newham'. Archaeological Priority Areas Appraisal. London: English Heritage.

Frediani, A.A. & Cocina, C. (2019) 'Participation as Planning: Strategies from the South to Challenge the Limits of Planning'. Built Environment, 45(2): 143-161.

Guillemot, J. & Burgess, J. (2019) Child rights at risk: the case for joint action on climate change. UNICEF. Online

Halford, J. (2010) The Equality Act and its impact on Planning Law. London: Environment Law Foundation.

Harvey, D. (1991) 'Social Justice, Postmodernism and the City'. Plenary Paper, European Workshop on the Improvement of the Built Environment and Social Integration in Cities, European Foundation.

Home Office (1976) Government Blamed for Decline in London Industrial area, Canning Town Development Project report cited in newspaper clipping, Stratford Library archives, [Visited 2 November 2021].

Khanare, F.P. & de Lange, N. (2017) '"We are never invited": School children using collage to envision care and support in rural schools'. South African Journal of Education, 37(1): article 1271, 11 pages.

Klinenberg, E. (2015) Heat Wave: A Social Autopsy of Disaster in Chicago. Second Edition, Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Kymlicka, W. (1988) 'Liberalism & Communitarianism'. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 18: 181-204.

Kymlicka, W. (2002) Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Introduction. Second Edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Legacy C. (2017) 'Is there a crisis of participatory planning?' Planning Theory, 16(4):425-442.

Mason, P. (2016) Postcapitalism: A Guide to the Future. London: Penguin.

Mayor of London (2018) The Mayor of London's School Air Quality Audit Programme. London: GLA.

Mazzucato, M. (2021) Mission Economy. London: Penguin Books.

Milner, A. (2013) 'On welfare frameworks and catastrophic climate risks'. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 65(2): 310-325.

Minton, A. (2017) Big Capital: Who Is London For? London: Penguin.

O'Brien, K. Selboe, E. & Hayward, B.M. (2018) 'Exploring youth activism on climate change: dutiful, disruptive, and dangerous dissent'. Ecology & Society, 23(3): 42.

Organisation Leader. (2021) Representative from a community organisation. Personal interview with the research team; February 2, 2022.

Percy-Smith, B. & Carney, C. (2011) 'Using art installations as action research to engage children and communities in evaluating and redesigning city centre spaces'. Educational Action Research, 19(1): 23-39.

Parent 1 (2022) Parent at West Ham Park - personal interview with the research team; 2022.

Parent 2 (2022) Parent at West Ham Park - personal interview with the research team; 2022.

Plato (2007) The Republic. London: Penguin Classics.

Pratt, B. (2019) 'Inclusion of Marginalized Groups and Communities in Global Health Research Priority-Setting'. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 14(2): 169-181.

Ramsey, F. (1928) 'A Mathematical Theory of Saving'. The Economic Journal, 38(152): 543-549.

Royal Docks Team (2021) We Make Newham Youth Assembly Event. Findings Report.

Scheener, J. (1999) London 1900. New Haven: Yale University Press

UNICEF UK (2010) A brighter tomorrow: climate change, child rights and intergenerational justice. London: UNICEF.

Wacquant, L. (2012) 'Three steps to a historical anthropology of actually existing neoliberalism'. Social Anthropology, 20: 66-79.

Weitzman, M. (2009) 'On Modelling and Interpreting the Economics of Catastrophic Climate Change.' The Review of Economics and Statistics, 91(1): 1-19.

Young, I.M. (1990) Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Youth Coordinator. (2021), Representative from a community organisation. Personal interview with the research team; November 16, 2021.

Zabarn, L.V. & Tulloch, C.D. (2021) 'Rebel with a cause: the framing of Climate Change and Intergenerational Justice in the German Press treatment of the Fridays for Future protests'. Media, Culture & Society, 43: 23-47.

Internet Sources

Berman, M. (1984) in Marshall Berman: Marshall Berman, The Signs in the Street: A Response to Perry Anderson, NLR I/144, March-April 1984, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Balch, O. (2019): Meet the world's first future generations commissioner. [online] Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/02/meet-the-worlds-first-future-generations-commissioner, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Cannon, S. (2019) Climate strikes: Greta Thunberg calls for 'system change not climate change' - here's what that could look like. [online] Available from: https://theconversation.com/climate-strikes-greta-thunberg-calls-for-system-change-not-climate-change-heres-what-that-could-look-like-112891, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Citizens Assembly, (n.d.) UK Citizens' Assemblies. [online] Available from: https://citizensassembly.co.uk, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Dewar, D. (2018) Why planners need to take notice of duties under equality laws. [online] Available from: https://www.planningresource.co.uk/article/1487667/why-planners-need-notice-duties-equality-laws, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Equality Act 2010 (2010) Chapter 15. [online] Available from: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Geraghty, L. (2022) Big Issue Founder Lord Bird launches UK's first Future Generations Commission. [online] Available from: https://www.bigissue.com/news/big-issue-founder-lord-bird-launches-uks-first-future-generations-commission/, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

GLA (2022a) Climate Change and Weather. [online] Available from: https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/environment/climate-change/climate-change-and-weather, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

GLA (2022b) Climate Adaptation: Heat. [online] Available from: https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/environment/climate-change/climate-adaptation/heat, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Grosvenor (2020) Voice Opportunity Power. A toolkit to involve young people in the making and managing of their neighbourhoods. [online] Available from: https://voiceopportunitypower.com, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Haynes, T. (2022) 'Multi-millionaire Jamie Oliver should personally pay off £80,000 debt the restaurant owes to Newham' says councillor.'. [online] Available from: https://www.mylondon.news/news/east-london-news/multi-millionaire-jamie-oliver-should-22758916 [Accessed 12 February 2022].

HM Treasury (2020) The Green Book. Central Government Guidance on Appraisal and Evaluation. [online] Available from: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment-data/file/938046/The-Green-Book-2020.pdf, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

King, J. (2019) Newham schoolchildren on climate strike call for urgent action to save the planet. [online] Available from: https://www.newhamrecorder.co.uk/news/climate-strike-newham-3232044 [Accessed 12 February 2022].

London Play Organisation (2021) London Plan Organisation. [online] Available from: https://londonplay.org.uk, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Newham Council (2021a) Children and Young People's Joint Strategic Needs Assessment 2021-23. [online] Available from: https://www.newham.gov.uk/children-families/children-young-peoples-jsna-2021-2023 [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Newham Council (2021b) Newham Statement of Community Involvement Consultation Report. [online] Available from: https://newhamco-create.co.uk/uploads/d87b50b5-42d3-4edd-b87b-7597d2f77c77/project-file/file/ce968b62-8b75-48a7-83e3-972b2617f4ec/SCI-Consultation-Report-September-2021-.pdf, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Newham Council (2021c) Queen's Market & Hamara Ghar Investment Strategy Study - Exploring the possibilities together. [online] Available from: https://newhamco-create.co.uk/en/folders/working-group [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Newham Council (2021d) Newham Local Plan Refresh - Issues & Options. [online] Available from: https://newhamco-create.co.uk/en/projects/newham-local-plan-refresh, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Newham London (2020) Newham Facts and Figures. [online] Available from: https://www.newham.info/newham-facts-and-figures/ [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Onward, (2021) Age of Alienation. [online] Available from: https://www.ukonward.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Age-of-Alienation-Onward.pdf [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Open City (2020) podcast; "Would young people design a better London for us all?"; November 2020. [online] Available from: https://open-city.org.uk/blog/public-artworks-for-our-past-and-future-podcast-yr7br-63m4x-szdw7-scs2f [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Royal Docks Team (2022) We Make Newham Youth Assembly Event - Findings Report. [online] Available from: https://royaldocks.london/the-place, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Spencer, J. (2021) The People's Plan for the Royal Docks. [online] Available from: https://era-magazine.com/2021/03/04/the-peoples-plan-for-the-royal-docks/ [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Tanner, W., O'Shaughnessy, J., Krasniqi, F. & Blagden, J. (2021) The State Of Our Social Fabric - Measuring the changing nature of commuinity over time and geography. [online] Available from: https://www.ukonward.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/The-State-of-our-Social-Fabric.pdf [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Thunberg, G. (2019) Our house is on fire. FridaysforFuture.org, Speech: January 25th 2019. [online] Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sy9Wc-rgcd4 [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Uberoi, E. & Johnston, N. (2021) Political disengagement in the UK. [online] Available from: https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7501/CBP-7501.pdf [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Figures

Newham Archives (1935) Newham Archives and Local Studies Library. Available at: https://thamesfestivaltrust.org/whats-on/the-islanders-reminiscing-on-the-royal-docks-4359/ [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Darlington, B. (2019) Silvertown Tunnel Protest [online]. 2019 Available from: https://stopsilvertowntn.com/photo-gallery/ [Accessed 12 February 2022].

King, J. (2019) Newham school children on climate strike: https://www.newhamrecorder.co.uk/news/climate-strike-newham-3232044 [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Eurosport (2021) It is about opening up East London. Available from: https://www.eurosport.co.uk/formula-1/it-is-about-opening-up-east-london-london-set-to-host-f1-race-in-future-according-to-reports-to8622873/story.shtml [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Grimshaw (2021) ExCel London secures approval from Newham Planning Committee for expansion. Available from: https://www.royaldocks.london/articles/excel-london-secures-approval -from-newham-planning-committee-for-expansion [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Twitter @earlhamps (2022) Available from: https://twitter.com/earlhamps/status/1486713684814561296 [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Collages from park stands and teaching sessions (2022) [Photographs] At: authors' archive.

MHCLG (2019) English Indices of Deprivation. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-indices-of-deprivation-2019 [Accessed 12 February 2022].

ONS (2011) 2011 Census. Available from: https://www.ons.gov.uk/census/2011census (Accessed on: 15 Feb 2022)

TFL (2022) WebCAT Planning Tool. Available from: https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for /urban-planning-and-construction/planning-with-webcat/webcat [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Data: Newham Council (2021a) Children and Young People's Join Strategic Needs Assessment. Available from: https://www.newham.gov.uk/children-families/children -young-peoples-jsna-2021-2023 [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Data: Trust for London (2021) Life Expectancy by London Borough. Available at: https://www.trustforlondon.org.uk /data/life-expectancy-borough/ [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Dunn and Leeson (1986) No Airport in Newham. Available from: https://www.peoplesplans.org/home/no-airport-in-newham/ [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Darlington, B. (2019) Silvertown Tunnel Protest [online]. 2019 Available from: https://stopsilvertowntn.com/photo-gallery/ [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Quote of Activist 1, Sue Brownhill quotation (2014) The People's Royal Docks 1984-2014. Available from: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/bartlett/development/peoples-royal-docks-1984-2014, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Quote of Newham Activist 2 (2021). Interview with the research group, 8 Nov 2021.

Quote of Newham Activist (2014). The People's Royal Docks 1984-2014. Available from: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/bartlett/development/peoples-royal-docks-1984-2014, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Quote of Environmental Activist and Journalist, Tasmin Omand quotation (2014) The People's Royal Docks 1984-2014. Available from: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/bartlett/development/peoples-royal-docks-1984-2014, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Quote of Activist 3 Hillary Wainwright (2020). The Economics of Labour: Robin Murray, Industrial Strategy and the Popular Planning Unit. Available from: https://robinmurray.co.uk/glc-ppu [Accessed 12 February 2022].

King, J. (2019) Newham school children on climate strike [online] Available from: https://www.newhamrecorder.co.uk/news/climate-strike-newham-3232044 [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Silbiger/Vox. (2019) Greta Thunberg is leading kids. Available from: https://www.vox.com/2019/9/17/20864740/greta-thunberg-youth-climate-strike-fridays-future [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Quote from youth coordinator. Interview with the research group, 16 Nov 2021

Royal Docks Team (2022) We Make Newham Youth Assembly Event - Findings Report: https://royaldocks.london/the-place, [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Quote from parent 1. Interview with parents at West Ham Park, 22 Jan 2022

Quote from parent 2. Interview with parents at West Ham Park, 22 Jan 2022

Twitter @earlhamps (2022) Available from: https://twitter.com/earlhamps/status/1486713684814561296 [Accessed 12 February 2022].

Word cloud, by authors using content from Earlham Primary School students (2022) [auto-generated digital graphic] At: authors' archive.

Collages by children in West Ham Park, and Earlham Primary School students (2022). [photos] At: authors' archive

Google Maps street view 2022 [Accessed on 12 February 2022].

Google Maps street view 2022 [Accessed on 12 February 2022]. Edited by authors (2022)