Working with communities-of-place: complexities of empowerment

Sarah Skerratt, Artur Steiner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Recent legislative and other policy-related developments seek to enhance local agenda-setting through empowered communities. However, community development is separated from community empowerment, thus implicitly supporting a more uncritical perspective of empowerment processes. In this article we: (1) focus on communities who do not engage; (2) identify in-community sub-groups and differences as the norm rather than exception; (3) recognise the backwards and forwards motion of community development processes; (4) identify the fluidity of in-community interests and powers; and (5) recognise differences between individual and community-level aspirations. We use evidence from a development project which targets communities that do not engage. Based on interviews with the project manager, project officer, and 155 community members, we conclude that: demoting capacity-building betrays an intrinsic and naïve belief in self-fulfilling processes of community empowerment, rather than acknowledgement of complexities; there is a need, therefore, to remain sceptical in order that analyses are sensitive to complexities of empowerment.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)320-338
Number of pages19
JournalLocal Economy
Volume28
Issue number3
Early online date13 Feb 2013
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2013

Fingerprint

Empowerment
Community empowerment
Capacity building
Intrinsic
Aspiration Level
Project manager
Development projects
Development process
Agenda setting
Individual differences

Keywords

  • community empowerment
  • community engagement
  • community resilience

Cite this

Skerratt, Sarah ; Steiner, Artur. / Working with communities-of-place: complexities of empowerment. In: Local Economy. 2013 ; Vol. 28, No. 3. pp. 320-338.
@article{4c951a010ced4af5b0008aa6befe9d18,
title = "Working with communities-of-place: complexities of empowerment",
abstract = "Recent legislative and other policy-related developments seek to enhance local agenda-setting through empowered communities. However, community development is separated from community empowerment, thus implicitly supporting a more uncritical perspective of empowerment processes. In this article we: (1) focus on communities who do not engage; (2) identify in-community sub-groups and differences as the norm rather than exception; (3) recognise the backwards and forwards motion of community development processes; (4) identify the fluidity of in-community interests and powers; and (5) recognise differences between individual and community-level aspirations. We use evidence from a development project which targets communities that do not engage. Based on interviews with the project manager, project officer, and 155 community members, we conclude that: demoting capacity-building betrays an intrinsic and na{\"i}ve belief in self-fulfilling processes of community empowerment, rather than acknowledgement of complexities; there is a need, therefore, to remain sceptical in order that analyses are sensitive to complexities of empowerment.",
keywords = "community empowerment, community engagement, community resilience",
author = "Sarah Skerratt and Artur Steiner",
year = "2013",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1177/0269094212474241",
language = "English",
volume = "28",
pages = "320--338",
journal = "Local Economy",
issn = "0269-0942",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "3",

}

Working with communities-of-place: complexities of empowerment. / Skerratt, Sarah; Steiner, Artur.

In: Local Economy, Vol. 28, No. 3, 05.2013, p. 320-338.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Working with communities-of-place: complexities of empowerment

AU - Skerratt, Sarah

AU - Steiner, Artur

PY - 2013/5

Y1 - 2013/5

N2 - Recent legislative and other policy-related developments seek to enhance local agenda-setting through empowered communities. However, community development is separated from community empowerment, thus implicitly supporting a more uncritical perspective of empowerment processes. In this article we: (1) focus on communities who do not engage; (2) identify in-community sub-groups and differences as the norm rather than exception; (3) recognise the backwards and forwards motion of community development processes; (4) identify the fluidity of in-community interests and powers; and (5) recognise differences between individual and community-level aspirations. We use evidence from a development project which targets communities that do not engage. Based on interviews with the project manager, project officer, and 155 community members, we conclude that: demoting capacity-building betrays an intrinsic and naïve belief in self-fulfilling processes of community empowerment, rather than acknowledgement of complexities; there is a need, therefore, to remain sceptical in order that analyses are sensitive to complexities of empowerment.

AB - Recent legislative and other policy-related developments seek to enhance local agenda-setting through empowered communities. However, community development is separated from community empowerment, thus implicitly supporting a more uncritical perspective of empowerment processes. In this article we: (1) focus on communities who do not engage; (2) identify in-community sub-groups and differences as the norm rather than exception; (3) recognise the backwards and forwards motion of community development processes; (4) identify the fluidity of in-community interests and powers; and (5) recognise differences between individual and community-level aspirations. We use evidence from a development project which targets communities that do not engage. Based on interviews with the project manager, project officer, and 155 community members, we conclude that: demoting capacity-building betrays an intrinsic and naïve belief in self-fulfilling processes of community empowerment, rather than acknowledgement of complexities; there is a need, therefore, to remain sceptical in order that analyses are sensitive to complexities of empowerment.

KW - community empowerment

KW - community engagement

KW - community resilience

U2 - 10.1177/0269094212474241

DO - 10.1177/0269094212474241

M3 - Article

VL - 28

SP - 320

EP - 338

JO - Local Economy

JF - Local Economy

SN - 0269-0942

IS - 3

ER -