Community-based research in 2050: Speculative futures on a London estate

Massive dilapidated towers, shrouded in smog. Power cuts, food and water shortages. Drones buzz overhead, dodging the odd flying car, while down below, the streets are owned by invisible gangs, but patrolled (very visibly) by corporate security forces who spend their time moving on the homeless and those not entitled to welfare support. There are no screens now. People wear Augmented Reality lenses. Some have nano-chips embedded in their skulls. With a premium subscription, you can augment your view (blue skies and palm trees) and immerse yourself in the latest personalised entertainment experiences. If you can’t afford it, you can always swap your personal data for access-tokens, or become a peer-consumer-scientist, harvesting intel from family and friends and user-testing products. You’ll have fun too as it’s gamified ‘playbour’ not just boring data-input. Just be sure to sign the ethics waiver against claiming for any negative impact, as some of the data can be triggering… 

Imagining futures: a collaborative workshop 

This dystopian vision of our North London council estate in the year 2050 emerged from a collaborative workshop. Eight resident-researchers from the Campsbourne Community Collective (CCC) presented their research findings on food, housing, and care. We invited residents, service-providers, policymakers, researchers, and funders to imagine the future, if the trends identified by our research continued. 

Since 2020, the CCC has trained community-based researchers and conducted research through a place-based and resident-led approach, framed by long-term, co-produced agendas. We work across a range of resident groups, in close collaboration with local institutions embedded in our estate (schools, sheltered and supported-living accommodation, a migrant centre, food bank, park trust and the council) alongside external partners like universities, to deliver actionable research around housing, food, care, migration, the environment and local history.   

Our programmes are led by experts — whether through qualifications, professional experience, or lived experience. However, experts also participate in the other programmes as learners. This means that ‘knowledge hierarchies’ ² are constantly being rearranged. It also allows us to bring together diverse knowledge from different experiences and subject areas, applying it to real-world problems.  

The Speculative Futures workshop provided a playful, provocative way to collectively explore the implications of our work. Our visions were brought to life through a short, animated film that accompanies this essay. 

Food futures 

Our food systems analysis revealed that food poverty is about more than just a lack of nutrition and affordability - it’s wrapped up with cultural practices, social stigmatisation, the politics of food banks and engagement with the environment, for example community allotments. Our ideas about food are influenced by celebrity chefs and fine dining, whilst the availability of social space can mean the difference between eating alone in a cold dark room and cooking/sharing food communally. From this analysis, we imagined our dystopian future as an exaggeration of the socially alienating and segregating trends we witness today: 

No need to worry about food choice, eating in dirty community halls or queuing outside foodbanks. Your scientifically calculated nutritional rations will be delivered by drone to your window. Ignore the chalky texture of the pills, this is cutting edge research inked to longevity. For those with a preference for real food, it’s just 500 tokens and a higher-earner permit to enjoy the many fine-dining options just across the high street.  

However, our research also unearthed a vision of an alternative utopian food system:  

Allotments expand into urban farms where residents take the lead, linking growing to food redistribution, co-operative food management, community fridges, cooking-on-a-budget classes, multicultural recipe exchange and communal dining. Our community centre, named after a pioneering resident-activist Martha Osamor, is a bright and cheerful hub, free from leaks and mould, catering for a diverse range of residents with different interests and needs. The lease is secure, staff are properly resourced, and long-term planning is sustainable and responsive. 

These futures show that food cannot be separated from housing, migration, the environment and public infrastructure. 

Housing futures 

A similar process was adopted for our housing research. Overcrowding, mould, damp and disrepair are widespread on our estate. Waiting lists for three-bedroom flats exceed 20 years, and so-called ‘affordable’ council rents are unaffordable to many. Partnering with UCL’s Urban Lab and the activist group Haringey Defends Council Housing, we examined the broader context of changing land and property ownership and planning/development policies and processes. The workshop projected some of our findings into this dystopian vision: 

With our basic comms plan, you won’t even have to leave your unit. It may feel small—the one-bedroom flats are optimised for families of three (unless you have opted to pay additional child tax) but once you’ve donned your AR lenses, the walls will expand and the mould will clear. Plus, everyone benefits from these space-saving developments, which support our Local Betterment plan – luxury housing, elite education, cultural facilities. The evidence is robust: higher house prices lead to lower levels of crime, better health and longevity – at least for some of the population. Our Stay-at-Home-to-Study-and-Play package will keep you safe along with the curfews and limited times slots for the park (upgrade your subscription for extra slots and access to VIP areas.)  

In contrast, our utopian future involved challenging current policies geared towards regeneration and commercial development, to think about sustainable planning and improvement of existing buildings for residents: 

Our estate is built to sustain the existing community, not to attract future home-owning residents: varied housing, green space and decent family-sized homes at affordable social rents with secure tenancies. Partnerships with planners and architects identify options for extensions and adaptations to improve existing buildings. A braver council requisitions empty properties from private landlords, knocks through walls to expand units and introduces stricter conditions for developers. Damp, mould and disrepair are delt with systematically through structural investment, not just sticking-plaster repairs to individual flats. With better conditions and long-term security, tenants take pride in their homes, becoming stewards for the next generation of residents.  

Again, this utopian vision suggests the need for more systemic thinking in relation to maintenance of existing buildings, new developments and local planning. It also identifies timescales that extend beyond existing tenancies to future generations and prompts bigger philosophical questions, for instance, should we all be aspiring home-owners? Or should we instead all be social housing tenants, occupying different homes on the basis of need at different stages of our lives? 

Care futures 

Finally, we explored the implications of our research into care. Through a partnership with Birkbeck University, Haringey Council, and local carers and care-recipients, we used art-based methodology to map care practices across the estate, recognising both carer knowledge and skills but also their support needs. In our dystopian vision, health and social care is reduced to a series of medicalised and technological ‘solutions’: 

It may be hard to distinguish our care facilities from neighbouring residential towers. ‘Care in the Community’ policies date back almost half a century, after all, and efficient use of volunteers, smart tech and private providers has all but eradicated waiting lists for the few remaining public institutions. In the comfort of your own unit, your mental and physical health will be catered for through our Big Pharma-sponsored digital diagnostic and prescription programme. Smart wearables track your biomedical data and make tailored recommendations for our (sponsored) treatments. And if you get lonely, a virtual therapist is on call (depending on your subscription package) to advise and prescribe appropriate (sponsored) medication for instant drone delivery. 

This vision contrasts with utopian ideals of ‘care over cure’ through meaningful investment in public infrastructure and care of our carers. Our research into care also revealed strong overlaps with communal food systems (as a cross-cultural ‘language of care’), inclusive housing and reciprocal care of our green and blue spaces as a key dimension of social proscribing:  

Public care facilities are well resourced with staff trained to support a range of needs. A fully funded four-day workweek eases the burden of unpaid care, allowing for voluntary service and intergenerational befriending. Around the estate, accessible hubs offer access to a ‘library of things’ as well as swap-recycle-repair programmes and walking, growing and conservation activities. Elderly and disabled residents and those caring for young children can enjoy welcoming public spaces for socialising, support and learning. Voluntary care work is supplemented with free therapy and while all citizens identify positively as carers (in a society that recognises everyone as former and future, if not current, care-recipients). Children aspire to professional care careers due to the illustrious and highly competitive training programmes, high salaries and public recognition the value the profession now holds. 

Futures of community-based research 

While the workshop focused on our research programmes, it also identified possible futures for community-based research itself, through discussions about data, methods, outputs, ethics and the conceptualisation of community. Our dystopian vision reduced community-engagement to consultation: 

Of course, we value your views and you are free to respond to our public consultations. You may have to pay to access the survey platform (which is outsourced to private providers, so we can’t vouch for accessibility or how the data is analysed). We can, however, guarantee to make best possible use of your data, selling it on to multiple partners. Or if you want a more bespoke form of engagement, you can apply to join an elite group of community reps, working closely with the council and corporate owners of the park, school, health centres, food banks etc. Preference will be given to those with higher-level qualifications (demonstrating intellectual ability, good etiquette and access to the necessary tech and subscription packages.) This is to ensure that dialogue is reasoned and consensus can be reached. We know from experience, the dangers of too many uneducated or troublesome voices. Nobody agrees. Tensions run high. Conflict ensues. And that is why we endeavour to make the best decisions on your behalf.  

This vision exaggerates trends observed today. Despite the rise in council consultations and renewed emphasis on ‘community engagement’, there has been increasing reliance on consultancy firms for short-term projects (rather than investment in in-house capacity and direct links with communities to strengthen relationships). There has also been a preference for bringing individual representatives from communities into policy and research spaces, rather than engaging community groups in their own environments. And research funds are usually held by universities, while reimbursement for resident-researchers (especially those receiving benefits) can be hard to arrange, with payment often taking months to process. At the same time, examples like the BSA’s ‘Ideas Fund’, UKRI’s place-based and infrastructural ‘Community Research Network’ fund, and The Preston Model’s research component all offer ways for funders and policymakers to support sustained place-based co-production and contribute to learning and sharing of lived experience, relationship and trust-building and resident-led agenda development: 

Research continues, but feels almost invisible as it is embedded in our day-to-day community-building and participatory planning. With place-based research partnerships and real-time feedback loops into policy and practice, findings lead to immediate change. Opportunities to share lived experience and contribute ideas exist in all social spaces, while advanced technologies (including AR lenses) facilitate empathy, comms and consensus-building. Community knowledge-hubs empower residents to address local challenges and hold decision-makers to account, using open-access data. Community-currency, akin to the Brixton Pound compensates participants, valuing local knowledge while supporting our local economy. Resident researchers are as diverse as their communities, but conflict is viewed as an asset, a sign of good representation, inclusivity and critical analysis. Tensions are acknowledged and collectively negotiated and this is possible because of the long-term, trust-based relationships that underpin everything.  

Learning from the future to reflect on the present 

So, what can these alternative futures teach is about the changes we need to make today to avoid dystopian scenarios and work towards the utopian? 

First, it is essential to recognise the interdependence between the research systems of the future and social/environmental/political futures. Meaningful community-based research, as with our own housing, food and care programmes, should be grounded in analysis of these broader systems and actively seek to transform them. Working alongside activist campaigns such as Food Justice, Homes for Us, Haringey Defend Council Housing and The Campaign for a National Care, Support and Independent Living Service allows us to explore our research findings in relation to broader policy-focused evidence, and align our actions to national (or even international) campaigns, when change at the local level is not enough. This also involves analysis at multiple scales – both across space and time. How does our hyper-local research relate to less local levels and how can a multi-scalar approach improve its transformative potential? 

Second, research agendas must be place-based and community-led, influencing policy and practice from the bottom-up. That means thinking hard about what, who and where the community is, recognising difference, considering representation and committing to, sometimes uncomfortable, dialogue and consensus-building processes. The CCC’s 3-part training programme ³ starts with personal experience, continues to identify difference/connection, and concludes with collective decision-making in collaboration with our embedded institutions and broader networks. 

Third, place-based and community-owned research does not easily map on to disciplinary or even subject-specific fields. Findings from our food systems analysis had implications for our housing, care, migration and environment programmes. Funders should therefore consider the benefits of supporting holistic community-based research systems by building place-based research infrastructure, rather than funding single projects or limiting funds to specific subject areas. 

Fourth, to manage conflict, relationships are key. Funded time for coordination, trust-building, ongoing communication, shared learning and evaluation must be part of all research investments. It is easiest to build new research into existing community networks. However, communities are always evolving, so new joiners must have support to engage inclusively. And related to this is the importance of securing inclusive physical spaces for sustainable research hubs, as well as community-building and agenda-setting more broadly. 

Finally, learning and sharing community knowledge is crucial for responsive and adaptive research. Communicating findings in multiple ways for multiple audiences should be supported. This speculative essay and the accompanying animated film provide a novel format to tell our story in a playful and (we hope) thought-provoking way. 

A PDF VERSION OF THIS ESSAY IS AVAILABLE HERE

This work is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0  

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this essay are not representative of the views of the British Science Association or UK Research and Innovation.

Footnotes

1. This essay was co-created by Sheilla Atuhaire, Tohura Lily Begum, Aiyesha Deterville, Ellie Dunn, Filiz Erkmen, Jude Fransman, Ronald Kambeja, Burcu Keser and Anna Rognaldsen, with input from Gabriel Ajala who produced the accompanying animated film. The authors would like to thank the participants of the collaborative workshop, which informed this essay: Eniola Akinlabi, Florence Allaway, Safiye Arayan, Lorna Bartley, Merim Baitimbetova, Carolyn Bishop, Teresa Cisneros, Mark Civil, Kim Tracy Greaves, Tonie Grelet, Katherine Harding, Charles Kebba, Jacqeline Lain, Fabio Miccoli, Sandra Morley, Beatrice Murray, Sean O’Donovan, Ayca Onkal, Joe Penny, Vlada Shevelkova, Jade Springer-Best and Dan Taylor. The authors would also like to thank the British Science Association and UK Research and Innovation for the essay grant, which supported six resident-researchers to participate in the co-creation of this essay and Haringey Council’s Policy and Strategy team, who provided match-funding for the workshop and animated film through the Greater London Authority ‘Supporting London Boroughs Engagement Project’ grant.
2. See, for example, Lepore et all 2023 and Crewe and Axelby 2012
   1. Lepore, W., Hall, B. and Tandon, R. (2024). Bridging Knowledge Cultures: Rebalancing Power in the Co-Construction of Knowledge, Brill: Leiden.10.1163/9789004687769. 
   2. Crewe E, Axelby R. (2012). ‘Hierarchies of knowledge’ in Anthropology and Development: Culture, Morality and Politics in a Globalised World. CUP: Cambridge
3. Fransman, J., Abbasalizadeh, H., Atuhaire, S., Deterville, A., Dunn, E., Erkmen, F., Kambeja, R., Onkal, Ay., Rognaldsen, A., Sibanda, S. and Stephens, A. (2022). Campsbourne Community-Based Research: Pilot project report. https://oro.open.ac.uk/86336/1/Campsbourne%20Community%20Research%20Pilot%20Report.pdf