Search results

Bristol City Council has received national and international recognition for its local e‐democracy work. This paper seeks to tell the story of three phases of development of local e‐democracy in Bristol. In summarising findings from the national evaluation of the Local E‐democracy Project, the paper also aims to consider stage four – where Bristol's e‐democracy programme is headed next.

Bristol acted as a lead authority on the evaluation of the Local E‐democracy National Project. This was a large multi‐method academic study, which set out to examine the aspirations and experiences of a variety of “actors” involved in more than 20 e‐democracy pilot projects across England. Professors Stephen Coleman of the Oxford Internet Institute and Ann Macintosh of the International Tele‐democracy Centre at Napier University undertook the evaluation, working with Bristol City Council as part of an E‐democracy Experts Group.

Findings from the national evaluation have been published in reports covering “top‐down” (authority‐led) and “ground‐up” (community‐led) approaches to local e‐democracy. This paper applies evaluation findings to Bristol City Council's experiences. It highlights how authorities can use e‐democracy to move between information sharing and consultation and then to creating space and conditions for ground‐up participation.

The paper focuses on common themes, rather than an in‐depth account of all of the national evaluation findings as they relate to each project that was considered. As a case study, this paper concerns the particular experiences of Bristol City Council.

The study offers insight aimed at local authority e‐democracy practitioners.

Over the past five years, Bristol City Council has accumulated considerable practical experience of local e‐democracy. The authority has benefited from a close association with leading academic experts, leaving it perhaps uniquely positioned to share learning from critical self‐reflection.

Why, despite clear economic incentives, did eighteenth-century slave traders fail to defend their business interests against the abolition campaign? We focus on the outport of Bristol as a case in point. Our main argument is that slave traders lacked an organizational basis to translate their economic interests into political influence. Supporting evidence from merchant networks over the 1698–1807 period shows that the Society of Merchant Venturers offered such an organizational site for collective political action. Members of this chartered company controlled much of Bristol’s seaborne commerce and held chief elective offices in the municipal government. However, the Society evolved into an organization that represented the interests of a closed elite. High barriers to entry prevented the slave traders from using the Society as a vehicle for political mobilization. Social cohesion among slave traders outside the chartered company hinged on centrally positioned brokers. Yet the broker positions were held by the few merchants who became members of the Society, and who eventually ceased their engagement in slave trading. The result was a fragmented network that undermined the slave traders’ concerted efforts to mobilize against the political pressure of the abolitionist movement.

The purpose of this paper is to present a case study tracking the development and engagement of a group of experts by experience (The Independent Futures (IF) Group) who provided a lived experience voice to the Bristol Golden Key (GK) partnership within the Fulfilling Lives programme. The case study reports the genesis and impact of the group, as well as the facilitators of impact and experiences of the group members and those they worked in partnership with.

The research adopted an iterative approach drawing on multiple data sources over an eight-year period. An inductive ethnographic analysis of stakeholder and partnership meetings was combined with documentary analysis and thematic analysis of interviews with experts by experience and service providers.

The voice of lived experience provided by the IF group contributed to the GK partnership through various channels. Evidence of this contribution and its impact was found at programme, city-wide and national levels of the service ecosystem. Furthermore, IF members recognised the value of the group in contributing to systems change and service improvement, but also for themselves.

This case study serves to illustrate the impact of the lived experience voice on services and systems change, specifically the provision of that voice from a formalised advisory group. The successes and challenges of the group and the experiences of its members are reported with a view to sharing learning that may influence future co-production initiatives with experts by experience and service provision for those experiencing multiple disadvantage.

The insights provided by the longitudinal observation of the group as it was formed and evolved, coupled with insights provided by the experts by experience, have important implications for facilitating and supporting sustainable lived experience input.

The project – AskingBristol – uses university students to connect third sector organizations with particular “asks” to organizations which might be able to respond with “offers”. The authors describe the task of the experiment as being an attempt to embed students and their universities within the cities that they are based in, but are often not really very connected to.

This reflective report on practice describes an initiative aimed at producing a piece of “social infrastructure”. Written by the four people involved, the authors theorize and evaluate what we have done so far and what we hope to do in future.

Over two phases, it has had some success, and we think represents a concrete approach to thinking about how “civic” ideas might gain traction within universities. Using ideas about social networks, boundary objects and infrastructure the authors explore the opportunities and problems of such a project, stressing that it allows co-ordination between a wide variety of people and organizations that do not necessarily share common interests.

This is one “experiment”, in one city, but it demonstrates the possibilities of getting “civic” universities engaged with local third sector organizations.

If it became a piece of social infrastructure, such a project could embed ideas about “civic”, “impact”, “engagement” and so on into the routines of the city and the university.

Though Asking Bristol cannot solve the problems of the city, it shows that we can transfer resources, time, skills and space to where they are needed.

The authors do not think anything like this has been attempted before, and hope that sharing it will stimulate some comparisons, and perhaps some dissemination of the idea.

The purpose of this paper is to present insights into the way in which system change can be activated around the provision of services and support for people experiencing multiple disadvantages in an urban setting.

This paper is informed by a thematic analysis of reflections, reports, learning logs, interviews and experiences of those “activating” system change in the Golden Key partnership in Bristol between 2014 and 2021.

Four themes are identified, including “creating the conditions for change”, “framing your involvement”, “investing in relationships” and “reflective practice and learning”. For each of these, an illustrative vignette is provided.

Practical recommendations and reflective questions are provided with suggestions of further considerations for applying this approach in different contexts.

This paper describes an original approach of activating and supporting people to do system change to improve the lives of people facing multiple disadvantages.

Around 400,000 working days per year are lost in the construction industry due to stress, depression or anxiety, but a large proportion of the industry – those primarily not based “on-site” – is not included in these statistics. Little research has been conducted in this group about their experiences of occupational stress. The authors explored how stress was experienced and managed by construction professionals and its perceived impact on health.

The authors interviewed 32 construction professionals in a British construction company, with varying levels of seniority and years in the industry. Interviews were transcribed, coded and analysed thematically.

Stress was viewed an inevitable and increasing part of the construction industry, exacerbated by recent economic challenges. Participants talked about a culture of stress and overwork but often felt unable to challenge it due to job insecurity. Senior management acknowledged stress was a problem within the industry and something that potentially threatened company productivity. Company-wide initiatives had been implemented to address stress levels (e.g. Mental Health First Aiders), but were criticised for ignoring underlying issues. Informal means of managing stress were identified, such as careful consideration of team dynamics, which allowed employees to form close bonds and using “banter” and camaraderie to relieve stress. However, the persistence of a macho male image meant some participants were reluctant to talk about their feelings at work. Participants described individual coping strategies, such as exercise, but these were hard to prioritise in challenging times.

There is growing recognition that health and well-being must be given greater priority in the construction industry. Industry pressures and competitive practices undermine efforts to improve staff well-being. Action must be taken at senior levels to address this conflict, while building on existing informal mechanisms of support and stress relief.

The background leading up to the estblishment of a library and information (LIS) school by a consortium of university libraries in the Bristol area is described. Course development and structure are examined. Practical consequences of the course and issues arising from the school’s establishment and operation are discussed within a broader professional context. These include the use of practitioners as lecturers and implications for research; and developments in the professional curriculum including the place of generic skills and specialisms.

UNIVERSITY libraries may be thought of both as general libraries and as agglomerations of special libraries, and, since even those which concentrate their collections in a single building have certain specialized subdivisions, each will be found to display both characteristics in greater or lesser degree. The problem of the University Librarian is not so much to reconcile these two points of view as to extract the greatest possible benefit from the divergence of technique which each connotes. Most librarians would be glad enough, if only for administrative reasons, to abolish their departmental libraries, each of which is of course in its own way a special library; but nearly all of us have them and it so happens that the University of Bristol has them in large numbers. Since Bristol is to have the honour of welcoming the Aslib Conference next autumn, a brief description of the library system of the University may be of interest to special librarians; and if this article says much about the past, something of the future, and but little of the present, the reason is that from some indication of what it has done and what it hopes to do some opinion may be formed of the value of what it is doing now—and that is a thing which all who attend the conference will be able to see and judge for themselves if they so desire.

The purpose of this paper is to chart the development of research data management services within the University of Bristol, from the initial Jisc-funded project, through to pilot service and planned core funding of the service.

The paper provides a case study of the approach of the University of Bristol Library service to develop a sustainable Research Data Service.

It outlines the services developed during the project and pilot phases of the service. In particular it focuses on the sustainability planning to ensure that research data management is embedded as a core university service.

The case study provides practical advice and valuable insights into the issues and experiences of ensuring that research data management is properly valued and supported within universities.

International attention is increasingly turning to the challenge of creating age-friendly environments. This study aims to examine the application of asset-based approaches in undertaking community development projects with older people. The paper intends to share the learning that may be useful when designing community development projects for older people in the future.

This study followed a multiple project case study design, with a focus on project delivery practices. It was undertaken as a co-production exercise involving university researchers and trained older volunteer community researchers (CRs). Over 18–24 months of qualitative research was conducted in relation to six area-based urban projects between 2018 and 2020.

There were five leading themes as follows: mapping and building on assets in highly localised settings; creating governance and direction through steering groups; developing activities with diverse groups of older people; reaching isolated and lonely older people; building local capacity to embed sustainability.

The effectiveness of assets-based approaches in promoting age-friendly agendas appears to be contingent on the values, skills, capacity and resourcing of delivery agencies, alongside wider public sector investment in communities. Diversity and inequalities amongst older people need to be taken into account and community development that specifically focuses on older people needs to be balanced with the whole population and intergenerational practice.

This paper provides an empirical account of the practical application of assets practices specifically in the context of the age-friendly community agenda. The co-production method brings together insights from academic and volunteer older CRs.