Tapping into community support for walkable local neighbourhoods

There’s often more support for walkable, liveable local neighbourhod proposals than the results of community engagement might suggest. This has been called a ‘visibility gap’. ¹

Public comments can sometimes misrepresent the level of community support and give the impression that there’s greater opposition to policies and projects for more walkable, liveable neighbourhoods than there actually is. Engagement methods can amplify the voices of a minority of people who oppose a proposal, skewing political and public perception of broader community sentiment. ² It has been found that those who engage with online consultations in particular are more likely to voice extreme views than the broader community. ¹

Given the opportunity to self-select or opt-in to community engagement, people are more likely to do so in opposition to something rather than to provide support. ³ It can be harder to motivate and mobilise community members who support a proposal and it can be even harder again to mobilise those who are neutral. ³

We’ve developed resources to help overcome this:

https://www.healthyactivebydesign.com.au/community-walkability

Participants of community engagement typically tend to be those who have the time and energy. Often, it’s those who have the most to gain – people who are marginalised or vulnerable within society – who are the least represented in community engagement activities. ⁴ Vulnerable community members tend to have more barriers to participation. ^{4 5 6} Barriers can include lack of motivation, limited trust in government, limited capacity, lower literacy levels, cultural norms and inaccessible engagement approaches, among others. ⁵

Adopting a range of engagement methods can help to ensure representation from different community groups – the young (children and adolescents), the elderly, people living with disability, people experiencing low socioeconomic advantage, First Nations people, people from a culturally and linguistically diverse background, young parents and others.

It’s worth making the time and effort to ensure a wide representation of voices is heard. Empowering a range of groups can make it harder for a vocal minority to unduly influence the outcomes of community engagement. ⁷

The results of our 2025 What Australia Wants Neighbourhood Design survey demonstrate that, overwhelmingly, people across Australia want to live in neighbourhoods that support them to be physically active. ⁸

Despite this support, proposed neighbourhood change can still be met with opposition. Opposition can result from fear or uncertainty. ⁷ Improved community understanding about a proposal can help overcome this. This can include information about how a local level change supports neighbourhood liveability and can improve a person’s life. ⁹ Improving the community’s understanding about a proposal can also help distinguish between someone who just doesn’t want change versus someone who has a legitimate concern about a proposal.

Generally, communities don't like to feel that outcomes are forced upon them. There’s a need to bring people on the journey, inspiring them about the future, while also taking the time to listen to and understand local contexts, lived experience and connection to place. Involving communities early can help them to not only better understand a proposal, but also to understand their role and ability to influence positive neighbourhood outcomes. ⁶

As subject matter experts, council staff and industry practitioners hold a powerful position to be able to paint a picture about how good things can be and to inspire the community, elected leaders and decision makers. Sometimes, it can be easy to forget that the community doesn’t necessarily have our understanding about the benefits of change, what’s required to deliver improved liveability, and the long timeframes that might be needed.

There’s mutual obligation to communicate subject matter expertise for improved neighbourhood outcomes, while being respectful to the community’s lived experience.

Find out more about our support to help you build positive long-term relationships with the local community: https://www.healthyactivebydesign.com.au/community-walkability

Chat to us to see how we might be able to collaborate for success: healthyactivebydesign@heartfoundation.org.au

References:

1.         Oswald L, Schulz WS, Lorenz-Spreen P. Disentangling participation in online political discussions with a collective field experiment. Science Advances. 11(50):eady8022. doi:10.1126/sciadv.ady8022

2.         Einstein K L. PM, Glick D.,. Who Participates in Local Government? Evidence from Meeting Minutes. 2017. Accessed 17 March 2026. https://sites.bu.edu/kleinstein/files/2017/09/EinsteinPalmerGlick_ZoningPartic.pdf

3.         Network GC. This is the real reason we can't have the cities we dream of. Features. United Kingdom2026. p. 24:58.

4.         Rong T, Ristevski E, Carroll M. Exploring community engagement in place-based approaches in areas of poor health and disadvantage: A scoping review. Health & Place. 2023/05/01/ 2023;81:103026. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2023.103026

5.         Geekiyanage D, Fernando T, Keraminiyage K. Assessing the state of the art in community engagement for participatory decision-making in disaster risk-sensitive urban development. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct. Dec 2020;51:101847. doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101847

6.         Landa-Oregi I, Gonzalez-Ochoantesana I, Anaya-Rodriguez M. Understanding the engagement of citizens in the regeneration of urban spaces through human-centered design: A systematic literature review. Cities. 2026/01/01/ 2026;168:106414. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2025.106414