Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Navigating Community Engagement

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
M² Models and Methodologies for Community Engagement

Abstract

What it is about community involvement that attracts some professionals to adopt ways of working that embrace the community members as partners? Which aspects make community work rewarding for a professional, and more importantly, successful from a community member’s perspective? The theoretical constructs—community engagement, capacity building, and community empowerment—will be discussed in order to demonstrate how theory and practice are relevant to the development of ways to be involved in communities. A framework that we consider is of value has evolved that enables us to map or describe the attributes of community based projects; that is, an approach which aims to move beyond simply bringing people together from a variety of disciplines, to one which is transdisciplinary and applicable across cultures and genres of projects. Although a transdisciplinary approach is not new in itself, by making it explicit as an aspiration, we highlight the possible limitation of those projects that only bring together differing contributors at core moments for their expertise, without reflecting or planning for the potentially new ways of conceptualizing and of actioning what needs to be done. Such interactions are discussed in relation to participation and engagement. By constructing a project as transdisciplinary, all people—including the community—are ongoing contributors, who are able to wander into others’ discipline-specific arenas and vice versa.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Arnstein, S. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauder, H. (2002) Neighbourhood effects and cultural exclusion. Urban Studies, 39 (2002), 85–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becher, T. (1990). The counter-culture of specialization. European Journal of Education, 25(3), 333–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beeck, S., Smith, D., Lommerse, M., & Metcalfe, P. (2011). An introduction to social sustainability and interior architecture. In D. Smith, M. Lommerse, & P. Metcalfe (Eds.), Life from the inside: Perspectives on social sustainability and interior architecture (pp. 24–57). Perth: Pencil and Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • B Bell 2008 Expanding architecture: design as activism, & K Wakeford (eds), Metropolis Books, New York: Greenwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1979). Distinction: a social critique of the judgement of taste. London: Routledge. Trans. R. Nice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York: Greenwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1990a). In other words: Essays toward a reflexive sociology. (trans: Loïc J. D. Wacquant) Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1990b). The logic of practice (trans: R. Nice). Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1997). The forms of capital. In A. H. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown, & A. S. Wells (Eds.), Education: Culture economy and society (pp. 46–58). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brand, R., & Gaffikin, F. (2007). Collaborative planning in an uncollaborative world. Planning Theory, 6(3), 282–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choguill, G. A. (1996). A ladder of community participation for underdeveloped countries. Habitat International, 20(3), 431–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuff, D. (1989). The ethos and circumstance of design. The Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 6(4). (Winter, 1989):305e320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, C. (2003). Consensus design: Socially inclusive process. Princeton: Architectural Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demirbilek, N., Smith, D., Scott, A., Dawes, L., & Sanders, P. (2007, April). The role of the learning context and designer characteristics challenge and reveal the design process. Paper presented at Dancing with disorder: Design, discourse, & disaster, EAD07 Conference, Izmir, Turkey.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiClemente, R. J., Crosby, R. A., & Kegler, M. C. (Eds.). (2002). Emerging theories in health promotion practice and research: Strategies for improving public health. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiClemente, R. J., Crosby, R. A., & Kegler, M. C. (Eds.). (2009). Emerging theories in health promotion practice and research (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dudley, E. (1993). The critical villager: Beyond community participation. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Eade, D. (2007). Capacity building: Who builds whose capacity? Development in Practice, 17(4/5), 630–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flora, C., & Flora, J. (1993). Entrepreneurial social infrastructure: A necessary ingredient. Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science, 529(1), 48–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gegeo, D. (1998). Indigenous knowledge and empowerment: Rural development examined from within. The Contemporary Pacific, 10(2), 289–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gegeo, D., & Watson-Gegeo, K. (2001). “How we know”: Kwara’ae rural villagers doing indigenous epistemology. The Contemporary Pacific, 13(1), 55–88. doi:10.1353/cp.2001.0004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, M. (2010). Community engagement in South African higher education. Kagisana, 6. Durban, SA: Council on Higher Education. http://ahero.uwc.ac.za/index.php?module=cshe&action=downloadfile&fileid=18409092513316751038744.

  • Healey, P. (1992). Planning through debate: The communicative turn in planning theory. Town Planning Review, 63(2), 143–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership without easy answers. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heylighen, A., & Bianchin, M. (2013). How does inclusive design relate to good design? Designing as a deliberative enterprise. Design Studies, 34(1), 93–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Innes, J., & Booher, D. (1999). Consensus building and complex adaptive syatems: A framework for evaluating collaborative planning. APA Journal, 65(4), 412–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Israel, B. A., Schulz, A. J., Parker, E. A., & Becker, A. B. (1998). Review of community-based research: Assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annual Review of Public Health, 19, 173–202. doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.19.1.173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Israel, B. A., Schulz, A. J., & Parker, E. A. (2001). Community-based participatory research: Policy recommendations for promoting a partnership approach in health research. Education for Health, 14(2), 182–197. http://ejournal.narotama.ac.id/files/Community-BasedParticipatoryResearchPolicy.doc. Accessed 30 Aug 2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kevelson, R. (1987). Charles S. Peirce’s method of methods: Vol. 17. Foundation of semiotics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kimmel, C. E., Hull, R. B., Stephenson, M., Robertson, D., & Cowgill, K. (2012). Building community capacity and social infrastructure through landcare: A case study of land grant engagement. Higher Education, 64(2), 223–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, S. (2005). Community programmes in palliative care: What have we learned? Indian Journal of Palliative Care, 11, 55–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, S., Chen, L. C., Choudhury, M., Ganju, S., Mahajan, V., Sinha, A., et al. (2011). Financing health care for all: Challenges and opportunities. Lancet, 377(9766), 668–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lommerse, M. (2011). Working together: Interior architecture creating the community. In D. Smith, M. Lommerse, & P. Metcalfe (Eds.), Life from the inside: Perspectives on social sustainability and interior architecture (pp. 24–57). Perth: Pencil and Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansbridge, J. (2001). The making of oppositional consciousness. In: J. Mansbridge, A. Morris (Eds.), Oppositional consciousness, University of Chicago Press, Chicago (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  • McManus, P. (2001). One step forward and two steps back: Urban policy and community planning in England since 1979. In O. Yiftachel, J. Little, D. Hedgcock, & I. Alexander (Eds.), The power of planning: Spaces of control and transformation (pp. 45–56). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMurray, A., & Clendon, J. (2011). Community health and wellness: Primary health care in practice (4th ed.). Chatswood: Elsevier Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minkler, M., & Wallerstein, N. (Eds.). (2008). Community-based participatory research for health: From process to outcomes (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mooney, G. (2005). Communitarian claims and community capabilities: Furthering priority setting? Social Science & Medicine, 60(2), 247–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Needham, C. (2008). Realising the potential of coproduction: Negotiating improvements in public services. Social Policy and Society, 7(2), 221–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, W. H. (1992). Academic disciplines and undergraduate interdisciplinary education: Lessons from the school of interdisciplinary studies at Miami University, Ohio. European Journal of Education, 27(3), 211–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, W. H., & Green, W. J. (1982). Defining and teaching interdisciplinary studies. Improving College and University Teaching, 30(1), 23–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nimegeer, A., Farmer, J., West, C., & Currie, M. (2011). Addressing the problem of rural community engagement in healthcare service design. Health & Place, 17(4), 1004–1006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nolan, K. (2012). Everyday decisions. Educational studies in mathematics, 80(1), 201–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pallasmaa, J. (2005). The eyes of the skin: Architecture and the senses (2nd ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, S., & Heapy, J. (2006). The journey to the interface: How public service design can connect users to reform. London: Demos. http://www.demos.co.uk/files/journeytotheinterface.pdf. Accessed 30 Aug 2013.

  • Patel, F., Li, M., & Sooknanan, P. (2011a). Intercultural communication: Building a global community. New Delhi: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781446270318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patel, V., Kumar, A. K. S., Paul, V. K., Rao, K. D., & Reddy, K. S. (2011). Universal health care in India: The time is right. Lancet, 377(9764), 448–449. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62044-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pawar, M. S. (Ed.). (2005). Capacity building for participation: Social workers’ thoughts and reflections. Wagga Wagga: Centre for Rural Social Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pawar, M. S. (2009). Community development in Asia and the Pacific. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pawar, M. S., & Cox, D. R. (2010). Social development: Critical themes and perspectives. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peirce Edition Project. (Ed.). (1998). The essential Peirce: Selected philosophical writings (Vol. 2,  1893–1913). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, D. F., Ricci, E., Rhodes, R., Holohan, J., Smirnoff, M., & Richardson, D. R. (2008). Defining the “community” in community consultation for emergency research: Findings from the community VOICES study. Social Science & Medicine, 66(6), 1379–1392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Servaes, J. (2003). Approaches to development: Studies on communication for development. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirianni, C. (2009). Investing in democracy: Engaging citizens in collaborative governance. Washington D. C.: The Brooking Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, N., Littlejohns, L. B., & Dimple, R. (2003). Measuring community capacity: State of the field review and recommendations for future research. Alberta. Canada: Health Policy Research Program.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D., Sanders, P., Demirbilek, N., & Scott, A. (2005). Designing together: A collaborative experiment in design methodology within a multi-disciplinary environment. Paper presented at Drawing together: Convergent practices in architectural education, 3rd Conference of AASA, Brisbane, Queensland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Squire, G. (1992). Interdisciplinarity in higher education in the United Kingdom. European Journal of Education, 27(3) p.201-10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson, M. (2011). Conceiving land grant university community engagement as adaptive leadership. Higher Education, 61(1), 95–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tandon, R. (2008). Participation, citizenship and democracy: Reflections on 25 years of PRIA. Community Development Journal, 43(3), 284–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsey, K. (2008). Tackling endemic substance abuse among Indigenous Australians: The contribution of values-based family empowerment education. Forum on Public Policy (A Journal of the Oxford Round Table): Urbana.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsey, K., Harvey, D., Gibson, T., & Pearson, L. (2009). The role of empowerment in setting a foundation for social and emotional wellbeing. The Australian e-Journal for the Advancement of Mental Health, 8(1), 6–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaideanu, G. (1987). Interdisciplinarity in education: A tentative synthesis. Prospects, xvii(4), 487–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitruvius, M. (1960). The ten books on architecture. (trans: M. H. Morgan). New York: Dover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakefield, S., & Poland, B. (2005). Family, friend or foe? Critical reflections on the relevance and role of social capital in health promotion and community development. Social Science & Medicine, 60(12), 2819–2832.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallerstein, N. B., & Duran, B. (2006). Using community-based participatory research to address health disparities. Health Promotion Practice, 7(3), 312–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallerstein, N. B., & Duran, B. (2010). Community-based participatory research contributions to intervention research: The intersection of science and practice to improve health equity. http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2009.184036. Accessed 22 June 2013.

  • Wilcox, D. (1994). The guide to effective participation. London: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, I. M. (1990). Justice and politics of difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Many thanks to Jessica Winters for contributing to the literature review.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Architecture and Interior Architecture, Curtin University, Perth, Australia

    Dianne Smith

  2. Departments of Urban and Regional Planning and of Architecture and Interior Architecture, Curtin University, Perth, Australia

    Reena Tiwari

  3. Marina Lommerse Consultants, South Fremantle, Australia

    Marina Lommerse

  4. School of the Built Environment, Curtin University, Perth, Australia

    Marina Lommerse

Authors
  1. Dianne Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Reena Tiwari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marina Lommerse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dianne Smith .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Built Environment, Curtin University, Perth, West Australia, Australia

    Reena Tiwari

  2. Marina Lommerse Consultants, South Fremantle, West Australia, Australia

    Marina Lommerse

  3. Faculty of Built Environment, Curtin University, Perth, West Australia, Australia

    Dianne Smith

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Smith, D., Tiwari, R., Lommerse, M. (2014). Navigating Community Engagement. In: Tiwari, R., Lommerse, M., Smith, D. (eds) M² Models and Methodologies for Community Engagement. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4585-11-8_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation