Abstract
This paper arises from a three year research project examining the development and implementation of a residential community intranet in Melbourne, Australia. At the time of writing, the level of use of the intranet by residents is low, and the paper explores possible reasons why this may be the case. These reasons include: a) the possibility that the aggregation of potential users and content is not appropriate; b) the possibility that the technology is not appropriate; c) the possibility that the conception of community relations on which the intranet is premised is not appropriate; d) the possibility that residents’ perception of efforts to engineer community relations is not appropriate; and e) the possibility that the identity of the intranet as a domestic artefact has not yet been recognised by the residents. A consideration of these five possibilities using the specific case study raises issues concerning both particular community intranets, and more general socio-technical relations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Arnold, M. 2003. Intranets, Community and Social Capital: The Case of Williams Bay’ Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 23 (2): 78–87.
Bell, D. 1973. The Coming of Post-Industrial Society: a Venture in SocialForecasting. New York: Basic Books.
Brown, J. and P. Duguid 1991. ‘Organizational Learning and Communities of Practice.’ Organization Science 2 (1): 40–57.
Castells, M. (1997) The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Castells, M. (2001) The Internet Galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, Business, and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Damsgaard, J. and R. Scheepers 2000. ‘Managing the Stage Crisis in Intranet Implementation: a Stage Model’ Information Systems Journal 10 (2): 131–49.
Dodge, M. and R. Kitchin 2001. Mapping Cyberspace. London, Routledge. Etzioni, A. 1995. Rights and the Common Good: The CommunitarianPerspective. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Fulk, J., A. Flanagin, M. Kalman, P. Monge and T. Ryan 1996. ‘Connective and Communal Public Goods in Interactive Communication Systems’ Communication Theory 6 (1): 60–87.
Graham, S. and S. Marvin 1996. Telecommunications and the City: Electronic Spaces, Urban Places. London: Routledge.
Granovetter, M. 1973. ‘The Strength of Weak Ties’ American Journal of Sociology 78 (6): 1360–80.
Hampton, K. 2003. ‘Grieving for a Lost Network: Collective Action in a Wired Suburb’ The Information Society 19(5): forthcoming.
Hampton, K. and B. Wellman 2000. ‘Examining Community in the Digital Neighbourhood: Early Results from Canada’s Wired Suburb,’ in Digital Cities: Technologies, Experiences and Future Perspectives, edited by T.I.K. Isbister. Berlin: Springer.
Hampton, K. and B. Wellman 2001. ‘Long Distance Community in the Network Society: Contact and Support Beyond Netville.’ American Behavioral Scientist 45 (3): 477–96.
Kavanaugh, A. 1999. ‘The Impact of Computer Networking on Community: A Social Network Analysis Approach.’ Paper presented at the Telecommunications Policy Research Conference, 27–29 September, 1999. http://www.bev.net/aboutlresearch/reports/docs/TPRC.UserStudy.Kavanaugh. pdf Last accessed 11/3/2003.
Kavanaugh, A. and S. Patterson 2001. ‘The Impact of Community: Computer Networks on Social Capital and Community Involvement.’ American Behavioral Scientist 45 (3): 496–509.
Kavanaugh, A. and M. Patterson 2002. ‘The Impact of Community Computer Networks on Social Capital and Community Involvement in Blacksburg,’ in The Internet in Everyday Life, edited by B. Wellman and C. Haythornthwaite Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Kelly, K. 1994. Out of Control: The New Biology of Machines. London: Fourth Estate.
Kitchin, R. and M. Blades 2001. The Cognition of Geographic Space. London: I.B. Tauris.
Mahler, A. and E.M. Rogers 1999. ‘The Diffusion of Interactive Communication Innovations and the Critical Mass: The Adoption of Telecommunications Services by German Banks.’ Telecommunications Policy 23: 719–40.
Marcus, M. 1990. ‘Toward a “Critical Mass” Theory of Interactive Media,’ in Organizations and Communication Technology, edited by J. Fulk and C. Steinfield. London: Sage Publications.
Ostwald, M. 1997. ‘Structuring Virtual Urban Space: Arborescent Schemas,’ in Intelligent Environments: Spatial Aspects of the Information Revolution, edited by P. Droege. Amsterdam: NH Elsevier.
Phillips, D. 1996. ‘Defending the Boundaries: Identifying and Countering Threats in A Usenet Newsgroup.’ Information Society 12 (1): 39–62.
Pigg, K. 2001. ‘Applications of Community Informatics for Building Community and Enhancing Civic Society.’ Information, Communication and Society 4 (4): 507–27.
Putnam, R. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Touchstone.
Reich, R. (1991) The Work of Nations: Preparing Ourselves for the 21st-Century, New York, Random House.
Rheingold, H. 2000. The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Scott, J.C. 1998. Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve theHuman Condition Have Failed. New Haven: Yale University Press. STONEHENGE 1998, J.C. 1998. Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve theHuman Condition Have Failed. New Haven: Yale University Press. STONEHENGE 1998. ‘Integrated Housing: the Integration of Technology in Residential Housing in the Next Millennium.’ Tender Bid, July 1998.
Turkle, S. 1995. Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Walmsley, D. 2000. ‘Community, Place and Cyberspace.’ Australian Geographer 31 (1): 5–19.
Wellman, B. 1988. ‘The Community Question Re-Evaluated,’ in Power, Community and the City, edited by M.P. Smith. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
Wellman, B. 1996. ‘Are Personal Communities Local? A Dumptarian Reconsideration.’ Social Networks 18 (3): 347–54.
Wellman, B. (ed.) 1999. Networks in the Global Village: Life in Contemporary Communities. Colorado: Westview Press.
Wellman, B. and M. Gulia 1999. ‘Net-Surfers Don’t Ride Alone: Virtual Communities as Communities,’ in Communities in Cyberspace, edited by M.A. Smith and P. Kollock. London: Routledge.
Wellman, B. and K. Hampton 2000. ‘Examining Community in the Digital Neighbourhood: Early Results from Canada’s Wired Suburb.’ in Digital Cities: Technologies, Experiences and Future Perspectives, edited by T.I.K. Isbister. Berlin: Springer.
Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wertheim, M. 1999. The Pearly Gates of Cyberspace: A History of Space from Dante to the Internet. Sydney: Doubleday.
Williams, R., R. Slack and J. Stewart 2000. Social Learning in Multimedia: Final Report. Research Centre for Social Sciences, The University of Edinburgh. http://www.ress.ed.ac.uk/research/slim.html Last accessed 14/3/2003.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this paper
Cite this paper
Arnold, M., Gibbs, M.R., Wright, P. (2003). Intranets and Local Community: ‘Yes, an intranet is all very well, but do we still get free beer and a barbeque?’. In: Huysman, M., Wenger, E., Wulf, V. (eds) Communities and Technologies. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0115-0_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0115-0_10
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-6418-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-0115-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive