Patterns for places

When international teams from Colombia, Canada, India, Peru, and the UK gathered for the Public Design Conference in September 2025, as part of the World Design Congress Design Safari, we found that we have common challenges. 

‘Declining public trust, obstacles to civic participation, and communities feeling unheard

From the outset, we agreed that we needed to move beyond consultation towards genuine co-production, guided by the social model of disability and participatory design.

Developing a pattern 

Our international team was tasked to create a pattern for local places that could be used across the globe.

Building on insights from the London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham Civic Campus Disabled Residents Team, and case studies like Bogotá's citizen response system, we created a one-page pattern framework for inclusive co-production. It is a modular, evidence-based template that any public body can adapt to share power with communities, promote agency, and develop policy and services with lived experience experts.

The pattern includes:

• Positioning users as co-producers, not passive recipients
• Providing training and ongoing opportunities so non-designers can influence and lead projects
• Closing the feedback loop so collaborators see the impact of their input
• Facilitating a gradual transfer of leadership and adaptation over time

Choosing a pattern

Shared motivations and regional needs drive the approach. Technical fixes alone are insufficient without cultural change in how governments involve people in design.

Across all countries, we observed barriers to access, representation, and agency for those furthest from power. Service Canada's client experience standards and Bogotá's civic labs both seek to democratise problem-solving.

Peru's context amplifies this urgency. Institutional trust is at historic lows, widening the divide between authorities and citizens. Services created from a disconnected perspective struggle to gain acceptance and are viewed as unsustainable. In this environment, inclusive co-production is not just one method among others; it is the essential path to lasting effectiveness and legitimacy.

Some places have begun to tackle these issues. At London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham, disabled residents co-develop accessibility solutions for new public buildings. Its Inclusive Design Review Panel trains non-designers to participate in decision-making for the public realm and built environment.

In response, our approach to patterns addresses:

• Narrow consultation: the shift from isolated opinions to shared ownership
• Tick-box fatigue: to foster ongoing involvement with genuine impact
• Skills gaps: to enhance community members' abilities to lead, train, and develop future models
• Low trust: to practice transparency, with clearly define roles, and demonstrate how input influences outcomes

Testing the pattern

We examined where this pattern is making or could make a difference in real-world application:

• Understanding resident priorities: Camden Council's citizens' assemblies on health and climate have influenced policy in line with local realities.
• Deliberate inclusion: Decide Madrid and the Paris Climate Assembly foster open governance that includes diverse voices, which directly inform policy.
• Piloting before scaling: Although our pattern has not yet been tested in India and Peru, experience in both places emphasises the crucial need to pilot new programmes with community partners before expanding, showing that user adaptability and acceptance are vital for successful implementation.

The pattern is adaptable. In the UK, a social model, rights-based accessibility framework can conform to strict legal standards. In India or Peru, participatory practices must be adapted to different resources, informal power structures, and community norms.

When applying the pattern to older adults, service inaccessibility remains a common challenge in Peru and India. The pattern enhances practice at each stage:

• Discovery: surveys and consultations in community centres
• Co-design and co-production: structured discussions to develop solutions based on lived experience
• Implementation and monitoring: user-led groups and interviews to assess impact from their perspective, valuing lived voices alongside data and closing the feedback loop

Internationally usable patterns

Some features that would aid re-use across international borders have emerged from our workshops:

• Flexibility: open toolkits that can be adapted locally, exemplified by our ‘Swiss Army Knife’ style toolkit
• Clear guidance for adaptation: practical prompts rather than rigid checklists
• Participation and accessibility: prioritise local expertise and marginalised perspectives over a single best practice
• Transparent feedback and ownership: showcase contributions that lead to visible change, fostering skills for future leadership

We also recognise the limitations. Legal, cultural, and institutional factors are significant. Co-production may require more initial time and resources, but the long-term benefits in trust, legitimacy, and impact are considerable.

Three pillars for ongoing collaboration

The value of cross-government pattern sharing and aligning our processes have proved transformative. Sharing use cases, pitfalls, and adjustments across regions created a shared vocabulary and fostered mutual respect.

Patterns are not merely technical assets; they serve as cultural bridges that enable designers, policymakers, and residents to see themselves as part of an ongoing, adaptable collective effort. This dynamic approach allows contributors to build, teach, and refine patterns, promoting both sustainability and innovation.

We want to keep working with each other. So to sustain and expand this work internationally, we will concentrate on:

•  Shared Platforms to provide replicable technical infrastructure
•  Shared Terms to develop a common language for collaboration
• Shared Data and Dialogue to transform lessons into global public knowledge

This approach is essential for international contexts. For example, in Latin American contexts, it provides a practical way to rebuild public trust, leading to increased institutional legitimacy and acceptance among citizens. 

By emphasising inclusive co-production and our three pillars, we aim to turn citizen distrust into a continuous and transparent model of global collaboration and co-production.