The recent second annual Summit of London’s Business Improvement Districts revealed that BIDs and Civil Society organisations are more likely bedfellows than you may think . . .
The government’s civil society strategy, published in August of last year, argues that there are five foundations necessary to build thriving communities – the social sector; the public sector; people; places and business.
The changing expectation of the role of business in civil society is indicative of how boundaries between the private, public and voluntary sectors are becoming increasingly porous, and how many of today’s social challenges demand not just partnership working, but cross-sector solutions. As their name implies, Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) fuse two of the fundamental elements of civil society by engaging businesses in places.
The increasing significance of place as a focus of social programmes and economic policy [PDF] provided the backdrop to the London BIDs’ summit held at City Hall last month. One round table discussion on civil society and BIDs explored their potential:
- as agents of community development and social integration alongside their place-shaping roles;
- as brokers of business engagement in their local community (by connecting with local voluntary and community organisations and social enterprises);
- as sources of place-based investment (through grants, volunteering – including pro bono expertise – as well as support in kind);
- as partners with other stakeholders in developing place-based programmes and local initiatives.
A recent report for the Greater London Authority (GLA), Harnessing the Capital’s Giving – what is the role of the Mayor and the GLA in enabling civic philanthropy? [PDF] also highlights the importance of place as a focus for local giving (of money and time) and the role of business as partners in London’s civil society.
The report refers to the work of the sixty BIDs in the capital [PDF], several of which provide proxy Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) programmes for members to channel resources and employee-volunteering into their local area, as well as to the Place-based Giving models which are a growing feature of London boroughs’ civil society infrastructure, and which a number of BIDs are also now partnering.
Harnessing the Capital’s Giving argues that the Mayor’s “good growth” agenda is likely to elicit more sustained investment and “social value” than occasional charitable contributions from businesses’ Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) programmes.
The Mayor’s introduction of the Good Work Standard alongside his commitment to responsible procurement [PDF] provides tools to back the kind of “purpose-led businesses” identified in the Civil Society Strategy. “Inclusive growth” is also the overarching theme of the proposed London Industrial Strategy which aims to ensure “all of London’s places, people and communities can contribute to and benefit from the city’s growth.”
Do BIDs have a role in the changing infrastructure which supports London’s civil society?
- Unsurprisingly, London’s BIDs have varied levels and types of interaction and involvement with civil society in their different localities; this tends to reflect the characteristics of each place, the different profile of the business community and level of resources available to each BID. Most recognise the role that BIDs have as partners in local civil society, and as conduits between businesses and the community;
- In outer London BIDs, this tends to be more traditional volunteering – eg providing reading partners in schools; donating to foodbanks; employee team-days supporting the local community.
- Some of the larger, inner London BIDs have developed potentially higher-impact initiatives, including 3 year-long partnering of businesses with local voluntary organisations (Bankside); tackling rough sleeping (Heart of London); creating an age-friendly business district (Angel) etc.
- BIDs in many areas are “closer to the ground” than the local authority; as such they can be invaluable sources of data and intelligence. This enables them to raise awareness of local needs and signpost businesses which are interested in tackling community priorities e.g. SE1 BIDs working with Southwark and Lambeth collectively on local employment initiatives (recruitment; retention and “good work” practices) and the accessibility of affordable space for charitable organisations and community groups.
- Ongoing devolution and localism (e.g. in the form of Neighbourhood Plans) and the “reinvention” of many high streets may see civil society issues rising further up BID agendas in future eg promoting meanwhile uses/pop-ups and social enterprises; community representation on BID boards/ governance; re-imagining the town centre as a cultural/community nexus.
Challenges to overcome if BIDs are to be reliable partners of a modern civil society
- Marking the case – many businesses view the BID levy as part of their community investment/CSR, so asking for additional contributions to the local community needs to have a clear justification and purpose.
- BIDs would welcome greater clarity on relevant (local) policy priorities along with frameworks and clear metrics to help define and measure community investment so that it is both more strategic, and garners as much impact as possible.
- “Good growth” can sound a bit “motherhood and apple pie.” BIDs’ members need a clear sense of what this means at a local level; that the market/local economy works for the common good and not just exclusive sectional interests.
- A corollary of further devolution and place-based responses to social needs could see more representation of businesses in local democratic structures, including area committees/ neighbourhood forums if not local authorities themselves.
- The localisation of business rates potentially creates a conflict for local authorities in meeting the twin aims of maximising the tax take from local commerce, whilst also nurturing local civil society organisations.
Whether London’s BIDs interpret their place-shaping role to include investing in local civil society is rather a moot point. Once the business community in an area votes to establish a BID, it is almost guaranteed to remain a permanent fixture; very few BIDs are disestablished or lose their electoral mandate.
BIDs are relatively “new kids on the municipal block,” and are growing rapidly in number; it remains largely up to community partners to make the case for harnessing their potential as enablers of local civil society.
John Griffiths is a Director of Rocket Science UK Ltd and the co-author of The Evolution of London’s BIDs (2016) [PDF]
