The authors[1] consider two broad models for community development: the “Need-Driven Provisions from External Sources” model (ND for short) and the “Capacity-Driven Provisions from Internal Sources” model (CD) for short
They present the standard “welfare” argument against ND:
Communities supported externally become dependent on external sources, undermining a communities capacity to become self-sustaining. The authors refer to neighborhoods that fall into this category “Client Neighborhoods”.
And an argument for CD:
Communities that recognize their internal resources become self-sustaining communities.
The signature feature of comparison between ND and CD is the focus of the surveys: needs vs. assets. This difference is stark and shows these models to be mutually exclusive: there is no “needs & capacity” model available because the starting points are so distinctive.
The conflict between CD and ND also elucidates, I argue, a problem with CD, that assets are difficult to realize because of needs. So, attempting to stimulate a community’s assets comes at the expense of alleviating their needs. For instance, an inner city Grandmother owns a plot of land behind her house that is ripe for development. However, in order to protect her home from theft, a common occurrence in her neighborhood, she owns a pit-bull, an animal which needs the space made available by this plot of land. So, her developmental assets cannot be used until policing of the neighborhood provides adequate protection. Thus, to generalize this Grandmother’s plight, in any model of community development, meeting needs will be a pre-condition for developing assets.
In sum, the models CD and ND present a paradox: in order to stimulate commodity use of a community, that community must have some needs met, but a consequence of meeting needs is that it undermines a community’s capacity for self-sustenance. This suggests that there is a “needs & capacity” model. What might that look like?
[1] "Building Communities from the Inside Out: A Path Toward Finding and Mobilizing a Community's Assets," by John P. Kretzmann and John L. McKnight.
I think an economic metaphor might be apt, although I am no economist. Imagine the communities as economies, and needs as imports and assets as exports. As far as I understand from my basic knowledge of economics, a community typically wants to export more than it imports, but usually can never eliminate imports entirely. Indeed, if a community ignores imports completely, it's members may starve from a food shortage or some other deficiency. Likewise if a community refuses to export, then it will never gain the money to pay for the imports, and will resort to taking handouts.
ReplyDeleteHow does this apply to community development? It seems that if we focus entirely on assets, the community will figuratively starve; it may lack education, infrastructure, etc. Likewise, if we focus entirely on the needs, or even simply keeping the assets within the community, then the community has nothing to exchange for the resources to meet its needs, and becomes dependent on handouts.
Insofar as I understand it, asset-based community development isn't so much about ignoring needs, as it is about choosing certain attitudes in one's approach to community involvement. If a city is seen as "needy" and these insufficiencies are emphasized, it generally leads the person who is seeking to get involved to see herself as "going in" to "help" the community as an "outsider". This, of course, leads to mutual disrespect and frustration.
ReplyDeleteAsset-based community development, rather, recognizes that a community has needs - why else would we bother getting involved, after all? - but also seeks to find ways to meet those needs from within the assets the community already has at its disposal. This is why Gordon in Lynn is so committed to supporting existing organizations in Lynn, instead of starting its own.
It's not so much an either/or relationship between needs/assets; rather, it's a question of looking at a community's needs and just seeing those needs, or of looking at a community's needs and then looking within the community for the assets available to help meet those needs.