There’s a magic moment in the evolution of a codesign project. Towards the end of a three-hour session with a cohousing group, someone will say something like: “I always really wanted timber boarded walls (or an outdoor hot tub), but actually we should do Rosie’s idea - it’s much better.”

It’s the point at which an individual invests their voice and power in the collective. It’s a rarer moment in a more public codesign process; but in recent years we’ve seen it in projects in Brixton and Redbridge, among others.

If there were more trust in the planning and development process, more people would buy into shaping their neighbourhoods - and in doing so, become a collective with a real voice and agency. And we know from working with residents that the social value of those places is higher when the people who know them best are part this process - whether you call it codesign, coproduction or something else.

In fact, we really need a shared language, and shared systems. Cohousing, in particular, would benefit enormously from a clear, widely understood legal, procurement and financial model that groups could take to landowners, funders and planners.

We’ve been working on this with Owen Jarvis of the UK Cohousing Network for some time. When we have some robust proposals we can test them with lawyers, funders and planners, and then codesign the user experience with some cohousing groups who are at the start of the process. If we can simplify the process, we can multiply the number of groups forming, and amplify the social value they build in.