This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mgslee(talk | contribs) at 22:04, 13 February 2018(Added observations about the Different approaches and History sections.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.Revision as of 22:04, 13 February 2018 by Mgslee(talk | contribs)(Added observations about the Different approaches and History sections.)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Urban studies and planning, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Urban studies and planning on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Urban studies and planningWikipedia:WikiProject Urban studies and planningTemplate:WikiProject Urban studies and planningUrban studies and planning
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Community, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CommunityWikipedia:WikiProject CommunityTemplate:WikiProject CommunityCommunity
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
This section seems to be UK oriented. In the US many cities have city departments called Community Development. These departments are not advocacy departments for neighbors. Often they are quite involved in the economic development of the city. Planning and zoning departments are often also part of community development departments. I am also aware of the use of the word Development to mean bringing in funds... Can someone help include this here or put a disambiguation in for these uses? Thanks 98.207.230.186 (talk) 00:43, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
An argument for merging community building could be made (although I am much more inclined to keep it as a separate article). However, community organizing ('co') is a very distinct thing from community development ('cd'). In cd, the goal is developing community. In co, the goal could be pretty much anything, but the tool is organizing communities. So, the cd article is about a goal and the co article is a bout a tool (or perhaps a methodology or practice). —GrantNeufeld09:55, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Community building is a field of practices directed toward the creation or enhancement of community between individuals within a regional area (such as a neighbourhood) or with a common interest. It is sometimes encompassed under the field of community development.
A wide variety of practices can be utilized for community building, ranging from simple events like potlucks and small book clubs, to larger–scale efforts such as mass festivals and building construction projects that involve local participants rather than outside contractors.
Activists engaged in community building efforts in industrialized nations see the apparent loss of community in these societies as a key cause of social disintegration and the emergence of many harmful behaviors. They may see building community as a means to increase social justice, individual well-being and reduce negative impacts of otherwise disconnected individuals.
Community organizing is a process by which people are brought together to act in common self-interest. While organizing describes any activity involving people interacting with one another in a formal manner, much community organizing is in the pursuit of a common agenda. Many groups seek populist goals and the ideal of participatory democracy. Community organizers create social movements by building a base of concerned people, mobilizing these community members to act, and developing leadership from and relationships among the people involved.
Fair use rationale for Image:Arise detroit logo.gif
Image:Arise detroit logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot19:32, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rationale for deleting section "Faith-Based Community Development"
Since I'd imagine someone put this stuff up here for a reason I wanted to outline why I think it doesn't belong:
"Faith-based _____" does not typically refer to performing an action because of underlying beliefs. For example, right now I am editing wikipedia because of a basic belief that a community-produced encyclopedia is valuable and worth improving, but I would not describe what I am doing as "faith-based wikipedia editing". Almost all actions are based on the belief that successful outcomes are possible, but that's not really what's meant by "faith-based".
In almost every field of human activity, people who were members of organized religion have occupied places. Historically, almost everyone has belonged to a religion. That's not a fact worth mentioning any more than an article on the history bridge-building in America should mention that 90% of people who crossed a bridge in America betwen 1800 and 1900 identified as Christian. It's just not relevant.
None of the people whose faith is mentioned is mentioned anywhere else in the article. Gandhi was a great leader but the article does not suggest that his primary contribution was to community development. Likewise Martin Buber and Dave Andrews. Discussing the faith of folks mentioned elsewhere in the article might be relevant, but this might as well be a list of leaders who belong to religions. (p.s. where is Martin Luther King Jr?!)
These one-sentence paragraphs don't really contribute anything to an understanding of how these people's faith informed their work or the relationship between faith and community development -- a topic that would be actually really interesting to see explored. Black churches in the US have a great role in community development as do Catholic charities. These one-off lists of affiliations, though, just doesn't add much to the discussion.
All community development is Faith-based Community Development in the sense that it proceeds from a basic belief in the possibility of meaningful community development.
Many of the great traditions in community development have been shaped by devotees of the major religions like Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Islam and Christianity.
Martin Buber drew on Judaism to give community development a framework of Ich und Du (‘I-Thou’) relationships.
Joanna Macy drew on Buddhism to give community development processes of empowerment.[2]
Mahatma Gandhi drew on Hinduism to give community development Satyagraha and Sarvodaya.
Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan drew on Islam to give community development the option of the Khudai Khidmatgar ("Servants of God").[3]
Dave Andrews drew on Christianity to give community development the principles and practices of compassionate community work.[4]
As the editor of an earlier section on Faith Based Community Development, I feel this section is important to distinguish those that come to community development as a secular vocation (the majority), and those that are motivated in their community development work as a result of a specific adherence to a particular faith. (I feel including Martin Luther King in this group is an excellent suggestion). I propose re-inserting the deletion, with these additions. What do you think? John D. Croft01:43, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have a strong objection to the logic in the first line of the quoted text. How does 'a belief in the possibility of meaningful community development' make it faith based? this makes little sense to me.
Much of the community development work I have seen has been Marxist or humanist based, so I find the opening line about 'all community development is faith based' untrue- and since you state that the majority come to community development as a secular vocation, I guess you agree. or am I missing something?WotherspoonSmith03:39, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have proposed that the article Community mobilization be merged into this one.
Judging by the discussion above, and the history over at talk:Community organizing, it seems that many different terms are used internationally to mean similar things, often without absolute clarity to distinguish them. On reflection, though, it seems to me that these two terms are referring to the same thing, possibly only differentiated by their common usage in different countries.
I'm happy to be persuaded otherwise by those who disagree. Thoughts, anyone? WotherspoonSmith (talk) 14:25, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree as there are important differences (some of which are referred to in the discussion above) that would be lost if merged. Community Development is distinct, as a values-based process that aims for positive social change[1]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.70.132.46 (talk) 12:45, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Evaluation of the article
Although there was an in-text citation in paragraph 2, it should still be cited appropriately. Paragraph 3 needs citation, the section "Different Approraches" are missing citations, and the section "History" is also missing citations. Links to several words and organizations could be added and some of the current links are not working. The facts are referenced from recent, peer-reviewed Journals, and credible organizations but as stated before, several facts are missing references. Hsrkim (talk) 23:29, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Community development. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
I have read over this article and noticed several things that I would like to change. Please let me know if you have thoughts for or against my observations.
Different approaches: I would like to add information about worker collaboratives and others about local organizing from the GPP readings. There is a list here of the different approaches, but I would like to add scholarly critiques about the different kinds. This section discusses how these methods work, but does not mention how they do not work.
History: Expand on the history of how community development began. There are some grammatical issues with the first paragraph. Describe how the key people have influenced the making of community development. The mentioning of the Dragon Dreaming Project
Management techniques seems out of place and without sufficient context. Further research can be done for the history of community development in the Global North. There is very little information on current undertakings for community development. Most of the description is focused on the 1970s and 80s. For the portion on the Global South, I could add a section specific to Southeast Asia. The last sentence of the second paragraph is vague and grammatically incorrect. This entire section could be split into types of initiatives, like health, education, etc. There are many definitions of poverty that can be added to the end of this section.
