pgcert empowering communities sa2

8/9/2019 PGCert Empowering Communities SA2

1/18

Staffordshire University Faculty of Arts, Media & Design

MA / PGCert Performance Coaching & Mentoring

Empowering Communities

Essay 2: Community Practice in Global Context

Q2: To what extent is globalization changing our understanding of community?

Student No: 06908754, February 2008

Introduction: Globalization and the challenge for communities.

In this assignment an attempt will be made to thoroughly explore the role that

globalization plays in our lives and the extent to which it is changing our understanding

and concept of community. The concept of a global social policy / civil society from a

community development viewpoint will also be briefly explored as a possible

community response to the challenges that globalization presents to our overall

understanding of community. Finally, it will be argued that globalization has significantly

changed our understanding and concept of community, to such an extent that community

practitioners are going to have to fundamentally rethink how they assist in helping

communities to regain the strength they will need to counteract the sometimes negative

effects of the globalization process.

1


2/18

Understanding globalization, the driving forces behind it and the concept of

community.

To many commentators, such as Reisch, globalization is one of the key dominant

challenges for community practitioners in the twenty-first century. Indeed, he suggests

that the advent of economic globalization has transformed the environment of community

practice in both developed and developing nations, commenting that, the growing

dominance of market mechanisms and ideologies has affected policy making at the

national and local levels in ways community practitioners are just beginning to

comprehend. (Reisch, 2005; 529). Many long standing assumptions of the notion of

community as being understood through the relationship between the economy, the

state, and social welfare provision have also been challenged. Globalization has meant

that with the emergence of a well-integrated global market, national and local

policymakers are increasingly being controlled, with dramatic implications for the

economic stability and viability of communities in industrialised and developing nations.

(Reisch, 2005; 530).

To try and understand globalization and how it is changing our understanding of

community the ideological arguments surrounding global free-market capitalism, the

motivations of multi- or transnational corporations (MNCs), and the convergence of

global markets at the supra-national level needs to be explored. Only then can we begin

to understand how these powerful forces have impacted nation states, fragmented

communities and led to growing inequalities between the rich and the poor. An

2


3/18

interpretation of what is also meant by the notion of community within the context of

globalization is also required.

It also needs to be understood that as a result of globalization and the powerful forces

behind it community concepts and ideas are enjoying a renewed interest, with Taylor

commenting that, against this background, concern in governments and global

institutions about the persistence and possible effects of poverty and social exclusion has

led to a resurgence of interest in community and a nexus of ideas associated with it.

(Taylor, 2003; 216). For the community practitioner, these ideas incorporating principles

of a global social policy / civil society may be the answer for communities, and the

people within them to regain some of their strength to counteract the negative effects of

globalization.

Understanding globalization.

To try and define globalization purely in terms of economic forces is a mistake, and it

must be seen as a political, technological and cultural process as well (Giddens, 1999;

10), even though free-market capitalism and the MNC play a huge part in this process

that is fundamentally reshaping our lives. From a community practitioner viewpoint

Giddens definition of globalization may be the most relevant, which defines the concept

as, the intensification of worldwide social relations which link distant localities in such a

way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice

versa. (Giddens cited in Kiely and Marfleet, 1998; 3). The key features of the

3


4/18

globalization phenomena, particularly from an economic perspective, are the rapid and

short-term nature of capital flows and investments, the interlocking of national

currencies, the significant power of MNCs which organise production on a global scale,

and the relative weakness of political forces to constrain or control globalized market

forces.

In addition, other factors that are shaping globalization have to be considered, and for our

understanding of community it may be best viewed as a social relations process with,

globalization referring to all those processes by which the peoples of the world are

incorporated into a single world society, global society. (Albrow cited in Baylis and

Smith, 2001; 15). In making the world into a single place globalization has also increased

social networking with, global networking that has welded together previously disparate

and isolated communities on this planet into mutual dependence and unity of one world

. (Richter cited in Baylis and Smith, 2001; 15). While the forces of globalization operate

in varying guises at the global, national and local level, with some countries still

operating under socialist or mixed economic systems, the overall impact on the

community development agenda has been particularly diverse, with some commentators,

such as Reisch arguing that the impacts have been mostly unfavourable.

As Reisch comments with regards to economic factors, The dominant assumptions that

underlie economic globalization and their implications for policy have been particularly

damaging to the poor nations of the world and to low-income or disinvested

communities within the industrialized world. (Reisch, 2005; 533). He then goes on to

4


5/18

argue that the globalization process has had a negative overall effect on human well-

being, particularly in the developing world, and on the ability of nations to respond to

their socioeconomic problems through government or private sector-provision. This has

resulted in a destabilizing of communities with the suggestion that, On a worldwide

scale, economic globalization has produced a growing gap between income and wealth; a

decline in assets held by the majority of people; increased domestic migration and

emigration, with disruptive effects on communities; a rise in negative social indicators;

the destabilization of cultures; growing social conflict; environmental degradation; loss of

confidence in governmental institutions and political systems; and growing alienation and

despair. (Bello, 1994; Bluestone, 1994; Chossudovsky, 1997 cited in Reisch, 2005;

537). Despite this rather scathing critique of the globalization process from an economic

perspective, it is important, especially in trying to assess how it has changed our

understanding of community that we try to adopt a balanced approach concerning its

extent, depth, and consequences.

The concept of community.

Since the globalization process consists of a variety of complex forces, be they economic,

political, technological, cultural, and social it can sometimes be difficult to assess the

impact that it is having on our conceptual understanding of community. Indeed to try

and define the term community is just as complex as trying to define the term

globalization. However if we try to understand community from a sociological

5


6/18

perspective we may begin to understand how globalization has changed our

understanding.

The notion of community from a sociological perspective is best illustrated through the

work of the German theorist, Ferdinand Tonnies. For Tonnies modern day urban

industrialism, which has become an integral feature of our current increasingly globalized

world, has resulted in a loss of community. Contrasting the past with the present

through his concept of Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft allows us to observe from the

outset the idealised and sometimes romantic notion of community, which has been

heavily transformed by the globalization process. As Lee and Newby comment,

Gemeinschaft is usually translated as community and for Tonnies gemeinschaft-like,

or community-type, relationships were characteristic of the pre-industrial world. (Lee

& Newby, 1983; 44). Such historical community relationships were intimate, enduring

and based upon a clear understanding of each individuals position in society.

Subsequently, modern industrialisation, which is a key feature of the globalization

process, has been associated with the rise of Gesellschaft type environments which

refer to the large scale, impersonal, calculative and contractual relationships which,

according to Tonnies, were on the increase in the industrial world at the expense of

Gemeinschaft. (Lee & Newby, 1983; 44). Taking this rural-urban continuum to the

global level it can be argued that the forces behind globalization have transformed our

world into a Gesellschaft type environment, with community from a social

organizational perspective, especially at the localized level in the developed world,

becoming somewhat redundant.

6


7/18

To the extent that globalization has changed our understanding and concept of

community it is also important to view globalization as a complex set of processes that

may operate in a sometimes contradictory way. As Giddens suggests, Most people think

of globalisation as simply pulling away power or influence from local communities and

nations into the global arenaNations do lose some of the economic power they

once had. Yet it also has an opposite effect. Globalisation not only pulls upwards, but

also pushes downwards, creating new pressures for local autonomy. (Giddens, 1999;

13). These new pressures for local autonomy have become expressed in a new form of a

global market democracy and with the emergence of a global civil society there has

been a renewed interest in alternative forms of political community.

As Linklater comments, One response to globalization then is to argue for new forms of

cosmopolitan political community in which members of different societies come together

as cosmopolitan citizens to influence decisions that affect the whole world. (Linklater

cited in Baylis & Smith, 2001; 626). For our understanding of community what has to

be recognised is that the globalization process now means that localized community

issues have also got to be viewed within the context of wider international developments.

Indeed the concept of community, which was previously viewed as being in isolation

from the international environment, has now got to be understood within a much wider

context.

7


8/18

The wider community response to globalization.

The growing global interconnectedness of nation states has brought new challenges for

communities and increased the complexity of what community as a concept actually

now represents. It is evident that there does seem to be a greater sense of the need for

political liberation and an awareness of common causes at many societal levels, set

against a backdrop of greater insecurity, fear and risk. These developments, which are an

outcome of globalization, can be seen through the lens of the term civil society and

what is clear is that as a community concept it does seems to represent a new form of

politics that is emerging. According to writers such as Kaldor there can be five different

meanings for the term, with the activist version being of most relevance to our

understanding of the wider community response to globalization.

As is suggested the activist version of civil society, is perhaps the easiest to transpose to

the global arena; it is viewed as the political or social counterpart of the process of

globalizationIn the absence of a global state, an army of NGOs (non-

governmental organisations) perform the functions necessary to smooth the path of

economic globalization. (Kaldor, 2003; 9). For the activist, civil society is a

philosophy of political transformation, where individuals are to be empowered and

democracy somehow extended and deepened to civilize the globalization process. It is

process where various groups, movements and individuals can work together across

national boundaries for causes such as environmental concerns, human rights issues and

8


9/18

trade justice issues. But what does all of this mean for our understanding of community in

our increasingly globalized world?

Extending the arguments surrounding the functions played by the voluntary/NGO sector

may help us with this understanding. It is suggested that they play a particularly

important role in grassroots localised community developmental approaches within the

globalization process. With globalization creating such massive inequalities between rich

and poor, clearly localised community development projects are seeking to engage in a

type of bottom-up development to try and address the structural reasons for individuals

living within deprived communities in many parts of the world, and the growing poverty

and inequality that they face. What is evident for our understanding of community within

the wider framework of globalization is that there is a great deal of community

development activity going on above or below the national government level. With

globalization creating forces that now run across nation states, community now needs to

be understood as operating within overlapping and interconnected local, national and

international frameworks.

As Craig suggests in his paper on national and international community capacity-

building, we have to understand community and community development within the

context of globalization as, a way of strengthening civil society by prioritising the

actions of communities, and their perspectives in the development of social, economic

and environmental policy. It seeks the empowerment of local communities, taken to mean

9


10/18

both geographical communities, communities of interest or identity and communities

organising around specific themes or policy initiatives. (Craig, 2007; 339).

This brings us onto the notion of community participation and empowerment with

Mayo and Craig commenting that, community participation and empowerment have

become more vital and yet more overtly problematic than ever in the current global

context. In the face of deepening poverty resulting from international recession and

restructuring, international agencies and national and local states have demonstrated

increasing interest in strategies to promote community participation as a means of

enhancing the development process. (Mayo and Craig, 1995; 1).

Within the context of globalization, the concept of community needs to be understood

as operating within a framework that seeks to promote economic, political, social and

cultural transformation. Community now needs to be understood as involving a wide

range of diverse groups and individuals and community practitioners need to espouse the

basic principles of community practice - social justice, self-determination, empowerment,

democratic participation, and leadership development that fully synthesizes global and

local perspectives. (Hardcastle et al, 1996; Simon, 1994 cited in Reisch, 2005; 544).

10


11/18

The globalization process: Towards a deeper understanding and the importance of

community.

To the extent that globalization has fundamentally changed our understanding of

community it is important that community practitioners try to develop a deeper

understanding of the globalization process, the complex forces involved and the role of

community as a future element in the democratization of the global order shaping our

lives. Currently one of the problems in trying to understand the role of community in the

context of globalization is that, there is an increasingly fractious debate among

community practitioners as to how to best respond to the consequences of economic

globalization. Ironically most texts still give scant mention to the effects of global

economic forces on the environment in which community practice occurs. (Reisch,

2005; 540).

However, while many texts overlook these issues the influence of global supra-national

organisations and their impact on communities is clearly well understood. While

community practitioners may have helped to create the pressures for a renewal of local

autonomy at the community level, it is clear that the MNC and the influence of such

global organisations such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and

the World Trade Organization (WTO) can together act as powerful mechanisms to

circumvent any attempt to democratise the globalization process. In addition,

specifically with regards to community development they have historically undermined

this process, creating much confusion in the process. As Craig comments with regards to

11


12/18

one such organisation, the World Bank, Their programmes, better known for fiscal

conservatism than for political and social risk-taking, frequently led, however, to the

undermining of local community social and economic structures whilst appearing to

advocate the importance of community, one example of the confusion that surrounds

this and related terms such as community empowerment. (Craig, 2007; 339).

Craig also argues that community capacity-building, in the context of partnership

working, which is often advocated by NGOs, has also undermined and manipulated

communities. He suggests that, local, regional and national governments and

international bodiesthus buy themselves continuing political space enabling

them to not respond appropriately to the demands of the dispossessed or to obscure the

structural reasons for continuing poverty and inequality. To respond effectively to local

communities demands would mean giving up much of the power that these bodies

enjoy. (Craig, 2007; 354).

In addition, writers such as Petras and Veltmeyer claim that with regards to globalization

and the concept of community, what we are observing are elements of a paradoxical

situation. For example, with regards to the role played by NGOs in the global social

policy / civil society arena they comment that, Social assistance channelled via NGOs to

ameliorate poverty is conditioned on the acceptance of neoliberal macroeconomic

policies and structures. Within the neoliberal politico-economic context, cooperation for

the alleviation of poverty is in reality a means to perpetuate the conditions that create

poverty. (Petras and Veltmeyer, 2001; 122). They go on to argue that there needs to be

12


13/18

rethinking of development from below, coupled with a strategy of development to the

inside where there needs to be a significant shift of the ownership, production and trade

of basic necessities to the impoverished people of the internal market. Only then can we

begin to truly democratize globalization and re-orientate it towards a more community

focused approach. However, Shuman provides a counter argument and comments with

reference to community-based development initiatives, which are often undertaken by

NGOs that, they enable citizens to act on their feelings of global responsibility and

rectify global inequalitiesthey enrich community life by drawing in foreign

cultures and by promoting habits of tolerance, understanding, and empathy for foreigners.

And they enhance political participation by building bridges of cooperation between

citizens and local political institutions. (Shuman, 1994; 6).

For our understanding of community in all of this what is required is nothing short of a

transformation in thinking by community practitioners that, measure the progress of

human beings not simply by possession of material goods, as important as they are, but

also in terms of increased ability to love, care for others and share a common life in

which individuality and privacy are compatible with active participation in community.

(Petras and Veltmeyer, 2001; 127). It is possibly through this lens of a new kind of

socialism that community needs to be understood within the sphere of globalization.

Only then can we construct a more inclusive form of social and economic development

that contributes to healthier, more equitable and sustainable communities.

13


14/18

Conclusion: Rethinking the concept of community.

In conclusion it is evident that globalization has fundamentally challenged and changed

our traditional understanding of community. Globalization, via the classical free market

economic growth agenda has clearly failed many citizens and communities around the

world. We now have to try and understand the concept of community at the global,

national and local level in order to fully appreciate the challenge presented by

globalization.

What is now emerging is a loose network of concerned citizens, NGOs, and community

groups / practitioners that are interested in a new approach to global development.

However, for our understanding of community it is important to recognise that currently

we have a world in which communitarian and liberal principles coexist in varying forms.

As Bhagwati suggests, the important question is not whether we should have one or the

other but whether capitalism and globalization are such an inexorable force that propel

society into a headlong rush away from traditional communitarian values and ways. The

evidence for such an alarmist conclusion is not compelling. (Bhagwati, 2004; 27).

Even so, it is highly probable that community practitioners are going to have engage in a

kind of global-community reformist mode of thinking, and rather than continuing to

engage in critiquing the effects of globalization and its impact on the concept of

community, will need to suggest constructive proposals for moving us forward from the

current malaise we find ourselves in. Our current course is wholly unsustainable and our

14


15/18

future understanding of community, within the context of globalization, must be based on

the development of a transnational civil society that better regulates globalized markets

and gives real power back to communities and the people within them.

(Word-count: 3,272)

15


16/18

Bibliography

Baylis, J & Smith, S (2001) The Globalization of World Politics: An introduction to

international relations, Second Edition, Oxford, UK

Bhagwati, J (2004)In Defense of Globalization, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK

Craig, G (2007) Community capacity-building: Something old, something new? In

Critical Social Policy: A Journal of Theory & Practice in Social Welfare, Issue 92,

Volume 27, August 2007

Craig, G & Mayo, M (1995) Community Empowerment: A Reader in Participation and

Development, Zed Books, London, UK

Giddens, A (1999)Runaway World: How Globalisation is Reshaping Our Lives, Profile

Books Ltd, London, UK

Kaldor, M (2003)Five Meanings of Global Civil Society, Chapter 1 in Global Civil

Society: An Answer to War, Policy Press, UK

Kiely, R & Marfleet, P (1998) Globalisation and the Third World, Routledge, London,

UK

16


17/18

Lee, D & Newby, H (1983) The problem of Sociology: An introduction to the discipline,

Chapter 3: Urbanism as a way of life, Hutchinson, UK

Petras, J & Veltmeyer, H (2001) Globalization Unmasked: Imperialism in the 21st

Century, Zed Books, London, UK

Reisch, M (2005) Community Practice Challenges in the Global Economy, Chapter 29 in

Weil, M The Handbook of Community Practice, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications,

California, USA

Shuman, M (1994) Towards a Global Village: International Community Development

Initiatives, Pluto Press, London, UK

Taylor, M (2003)Public Policy in the Community, Palgrave Macmillan Press Ltd,

Basingstoke, UK

17


18/18

18

pgcert empowering communities sa2

Documents