Towards a Caring City

Exploring how urban systems, services and public spaces can better support the everyday lives and realities of caregivers.

Everyday care encompasses the labour that sustains individuals, families and communities. It is the often invisible acts that underpin healthy communities and economies. In the UK, informal and unpaid care is often narrowly defined as support for people with long-term physical or mental health conditions, illnesses or age-related needs. This definition excludes childcare and housework and obscures the full scale of unpaid care and the gender inequalities that characterise it.

Care work therefore remains largely invisible and rarely shapes how cities are planned, financed and governed. Making this hidden labour explicit is a precondition for valuing and supporting it. However, substantial geographic variation in unpaid care across the UK highlights how local policies and infrastructure can help address these inequalities.

Towards a Caring City was developed in collaboration with the City Hub and Network for Gender Equity (CHANGE) as part of Equimundo’s MenCare Cities Initiative. This latest phase of Publica’s collaboration with CHANGE invited the Greater Manchester Combined Authority and City of Melbourne to examine how their services and public spaces can better support the everyday realities of care and identify practical opportunities for cities to act.

Caring Cities

A Caring City is one where everyday care is valued, visible and shared — recognised as essential scaffolding that sustains people, communities and societies as a whole. At its heart, a Caring City shifts care from being an individual or private responsibility to a collective endeavour between families, friends, neighbours, communities, civil society, government and the private sector.

Greater Manchester

Publica’s research in Greater Manchester explores how local authorities and voluntary sector organisations can design and manage community spaces and support services to address the challenges faced by caregivers and by those who need support from someone else to access services. The project explores how community spaces can embed the principles of a Caring City in practice and rethink how everyday support is planned, coordinated and designed at a local level to remove barriers that caregivers may face.

Methodology

Between February and May 2026, Publica ran a focused, multi-stage research programme to understand how community spaces can become more inclusive and accessible. The research combined desk-based analysis, stakeholder engagement and fieldwork. This process resulted in a set of recommendations for designing more flexible community spaces, drawing on international precedents from Bogotá, Melbourne, Tokyo, Barcelona, and Buenos Aires to deliver services and support in ways that meet the needs of caregivers.

To ground these ideas, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 29 people, including policymakers, local government officers, voluntary sector organisations, community leaders, facility managers and equality panel members to understand the barriers marginalised groups face to accessing support. We also carried out place audits at three community centres: the Stockroom in Stockport; the Sale West Community Centre; and the Coppice Library and Wellbeing Centre in Sale to explore opportunities for these spaces to consider caregivers and their needs more explicitly when designing their services and spaces.

The entrance to Stockroom includes new additional planting

Stockroom, Stockport

Melbourne

This report begins from a simple proposition: if Melbourne were to systematically apply a “caring cities” lens to its existing strategies, neighbourhoods and services, it could meaningfully improve caregivers’ lives while advancing priorities the city already cares about—liveability, economic participation, equity, safety and belonging.

Unequal responsibility for unpaid care remains one of the most persistent drivers of gender inequality in Australia and globally. A 2025 HILDA survey shows that in couple families in Australia, 78% of the mental load is always or usually carried by the mother, with women taking on around 50% more unpaid domestic labour than their male partners. This imbalance constrains women’s access to secure, well‑paid work. Over 44% of employed women work part‑time compared with 16% of men, and among parents with children under six, 61% of mothers work part‑time versus 7.9% of fathers.

Addressing this imbalance requires not only reducing women’s load, but actively engaging men in care — an area where significant gaps remain.

The purpose of this report is to explore how a co-responsibility lens could be applied in practice, and to set out a series of practical recommendations that can be taken forward.

The dynamics of caring can change over time between the carer and the person receiving the care. Depending on who’s well, who’s not well, who has a disability or who’s aging, that dynamic can change within and between families and it’s never static. Some people will require more care at certain points in time than others.

Workshop participant, Melbourne

Methodology

Publica and CHANGE employed a mixed-method, participatory approach to examine the conditions of care and caregiving in Melbourne, combining desk-based research, stakeholder engagement, spatial engagement, and targeted interviews, followed by a validation phase with local stakeholders.

We mapped existing Melbourne policies, strategies, and programmes related to care, alongside a review of data and secondary literature on caregivers’ needs, constraints, and existing support structures. This established the evidence baseline for subsequent research activities.

Our team also facilitated an exploratory workshop with local government, service providers, and community organisations to explore how caregiving is locally understood, how it manifests in current policies and practices, and to prioritise key thematic areas for further investigation.

 

We undertook two neighbourhood walks, in Kensington and the Central Business District (CBD), to identify and assess local care services and infrastructures, the quality and accessibility of the public realm, and the extent to which these environments meet a diversity of caregiver needs.

We also conducted semi-structured interviews with service providers and community organisations, including Dadfit, Travellers Aid, and RMIT to discuss their Working Together with Men programme. These interviews sought to deepen understandings of the specific challenges these organisations are addressing in relation to care and caregiving, and capture practitioners’ perspectives on systemic barriers, promising practices, and emerging needs.

Established in 1975, Kensington Neighbourhood House works to build community connections, prevent social isolation, and support local public welfare through low-cost adult education, volunteer roles, and social groups.

Kensington Photo Essay

In response to these insights, a set of recommendations are proposed for Greater Manchester following 5 key themes:

1. Co-locate offers

“Organisations are brought together to deliver services, but can they support someone in a way that doesn’t bounce them around between 20 different organisations? Can they collectively set out what the pathway to accessing the services people need looks like? It is about aligning offers, speaking to each other. It’s not about partnership meetings between organisations but real operational connectivity.”

Michelle de Oude – Co Chair of the GM Disabled People’s Panel

2. Deliver offers flexibly

“We’re very flexible; we don’t have a set model, we work with the person and ask them what they want: do they want in person, online, do they want to meet in a park. We even go to some people’s houses and risk assess that if people aren’t comfortable leaving the house. We know our community, and we know that we need to be flexible to be neuro-inclusive.”

Sam Palmer – CEO of Respect for All

3. Timetable support simultaneously

“We used to have a crèche before Covid, but it closed during the pandemic and never re-opened. It worked very well for bringing parents and carers to the space. However, childcare is very expensive to provide, and it was heavily subsidised by ourselves. It worked well to break down barriers and allow parents and carers to access learning or exercise classes.”

Reverend Christine Aspinall – St John’s Centre

4. Connect people to everyday support

“Some of the barriers are just about knowing what’s on, particularly for people who are not digitally aware. Things can get lost a lot more. Traditional media and local newspapers have all stopped pretty much. People feeling like a space isn’t for them is a big barrier to overcome. People being intimidated to come through the threshold the first time, that’s a barrier for any building. Having clear signage and notices outside and opening times. Having a good website and making sure your partners have that information as well. Stakeholder engagement and networking is key.”

Annoushka Deighton – Stretford Hall

5. Set minimum inclusion standards

“Access and inclusion for all communities should not be based on what that locality has available to them. It should be something at the Greater Manchester level where it says, “here’s the key principles that your community centres must adopt, staff must have this training, they must have had this co-production session with people with lived experiences to ensure that services are accessible for a range of people.” That’s the ask: inclusion embedded and not left to the localities. Inclusion is inclusion. It’s not something that can be interpreted differently at a locality level.”

Ben Andrews – Beyond Empower

Our approach emphasises alignment rather than reinvention. Melbourne already has strong, integrated local care infrastructure through community hubs, libraries, neighbourhood houses and other local facilities, but these assets operate in isolation, are incorrectly signposted or are not yet framed as care infrastructure. In response, the report advances a set of recommendations for the City of Melbourne and its partners under four themes:

  1. Coordinating and networking systems, assets and services: so that residents experience a coherent and consistent care system rather than a fragmented patchwork;
  2. Spatial use and infrastructure – proximity: ensuring that services and amenities are tailored to specific needs, co-located and closer to where people live and work to reduce time and cost burdens;
  3. Communications, place and precinct branding and identity: positioning Melbourne as a caring city through clear information, wayfinding and narratives that recognise carers and care workers; and
  4. Public realm, community spaces, transport and accessibility: treating streets, public spaces and community gathering spaces and transport networks as core care infrastructure that supports safe, dignified and efficient care journeys.

Together, these recommendations offer a practical starting point for embedding care as essential social infrastructure and reshaping policies, services and urban spaces so that both paid and unpaid care labour is recognised, reduced and redistributed.