Larry Yeung
Larry is a designer and community organiser who is a strong advocate for a participatory and community-centric design in Singapore. Since his graduation from the National University of Singapore with a M. Arch, Larry’s portfolio of participatory-based projects include neighbourhood planning, public space design, and community art installations.
Larry has also been recognised as a World Cities Summit Young Leader in 2021, honouring him as one of the change-makers shaping the global urban agenda, as well as a recipient of the BCA-CPG Industrial scholarship and the URA Urban Design prize in 2014.
Larry has also been recognised as a World Cities Summit Young Leader in 2021, honouring him as one of the change-makers shaping the global urban agenda, as well as a recipient of the BCA-CPG Industrial scholarship and the URA Urban Design prize in 2014.
less
Related Authors
Interests
Uploads
Papers by Larry Yeung
These projects have centred on neighbourhood and city planning, public and community space design, community arts, urban mobility, climate resilience, participatory budgeting, and other areas.
In 2022, we embarked on P!D 2.0, an ongoing action research project to review P!D’s roles, positions, and practices in participatory design and planning, and develop more innovative and impactful strategies for the future. This report documents our takeaways from the first phase of this project (research), which we will use to inform the next phase (action).
Participation is meaningful and empowering when it:
1. Includes diverse and neglected voices
2. Gives communities power over the agendas and decisions that affect them
3. Build the capacity of all parties involved.
We need to evaluate current participatory processes based on these 3 pillars, and devleop future strategies to better achieve them.
In this report, we critically assess and reflect on our body of work based on three fundamental pillars of meaningful participation: inclusion and access; influence on agendas and decisions; and capacity building.
We argue that these pillars are easily overlooked when we frame participation as something that is always positive and does not involve power sharing. We then fail to consider the complex power dynamics at play in participatory processes.
These processes may include some people while excluding others. They may allow communities to have more say about the decisions that affect them, or they may be used to maintain the current distribution of decision-making power in society.
To ensure that the participatory process truly empowers local communities, we therefore need to evaluate how far this process fulfils the pillars of inclusion, influence, and capacity building, and develop future strategies to better achieve them.
In short, we need to bring this more critical way of looking at participation back to the forefront of mainstream participatory practice.
These projects have centred on neighbourhood and city planning, public and community space design, community arts, urban mobility, climate resilience, participatory budgeting, and other areas.
In 2022, we embarked on P!D 2.0, an ongoing action research project to review P!D’s roles, positions, and practices in participatory design and planning, and develop more innovative and impactful strategies for the future. This report documents our takeaways from the first phase of this project (research), which we will use to inform the next phase (action).
Participation is meaningful and empowering when it:
1. Includes diverse and neglected voices
2. Gives communities power over the agendas and decisions that affect them
3. Build the capacity of all parties involved.
We need to evaluate current participatory processes based on these 3 pillars, and devleop future strategies to better achieve them.
In this report, we critically assess and reflect on our body of work based on three fundamental pillars of meaningful participation: inclusion and access; influence on agendas and decisions; and capacity building.
We argue that these pillars are easily overlooked when we frame participation as something that is always positive and does not involve power sharing. We then fail to consider the complex power dynamics at play in participatory processes.
These processes may include some people while excluding others. They may allow communities to have more say about the decisions that affect them, or they may be used to maintain the current distribution of decision-making power in society.
To ensure that the participatory process truly empowers local communities, we therefore need to evaluate how far this process fulfils the pillars of inclusion, influence, and capacity building, and develop future strategies to better achieve them.
In short, we need to bring this more critical way of looking at participation back to the forefront of mainstream participatory practice.