Zoekresultaten

Understanding the social-psychological aspects of collective neighbourhood initiatives in the energy transition

Negotiating consent in neighbourhood-based community development work

This chapter discusses the efforts of community workers to obtain consent in local communities as a basis for taking action on issues that are affecting local people’s lives. Crucial here is that community workers resist the initial urge to settle for consensus and as a consequencelimit the possibilities for creativity, exploration and interpersonal development. Drawing on two case studies, one from Amsterdam (the Netherlands) and one from Chelsea (US), the requirements and process of acquiring consent are outlined. Consent in general refers to a form of permission to act or take action. In this chapter we consider it as a sense of approval by neighbourhood community members to engage in a collective course of action. Community workers often play a crucial part in the acquisition of community consent as they support the process of recognition of the diversity of interests, opinions and values that characterises local life. Consent is necessary for creatingsustainable local initiatives, incorporating, instead of eliminating, conflicting positions. This acknowledgement of diversity can be seen as an ethical requirement in community development practice, but also as a strategic issue for community workers. After all, without being able to obtain legitimacy for their engagement with local issues, effective community development work is impossible.This chapter focuses on neighbourhood-based community development work in geographical communities. However, similar principles apply in all forms of community development, including work with communities of interest and identity. We use the term‘community worker’ to refer to someone who takes on a facilitating and coordinating role with members of communities to build community capacity and/or bring about social change. Such workers may be paid and professionally qualified, or unpaid volunteers andactivists. They may live in the communities where they work/are active, or reside outside these areas. These circumstances influence the legitimacy of their interventions, as well as how consent is gained and consensus reached.

Fostering supportive structures for families in the neighbourhood

This dissertation focuses on how supportive neighbourhood structures for children and their families can be fostered. Supportive structures can positively influence social support for parents, and have positive outcomes, such as increased social competences, for children. Since the 90s there has been increasing attention for the role of communities for supporting families in neighbourhoods. Social work (SW) professionals at schools, playgrounds, community centres, and other community members (e.g. volunteers, other parents, grandparents) are seen as important partners to foster these social supportive structures in neighbourhoods. However, in informal urban settings, like the neighbourhood, this role is challenging. Knowledge about the role in and responsibilities for fostering these structures is lacking, but is important for the development of these supportive structures for families. Five consecutive studies were conducted to gain a better understanding of what is needed to foster supportive structures in neighbourhoods in order to improve the outcomes for children and their families.

Design Framework for Neighbourhood Resilience

This leaflet showcases a design framework for buildingcommunity resilience in urban neighbourhoods. Atits core, the framework challenges designers andother professionals to not only consider resilience inhuman communities, but also in other-than-humancommunities, including plants and animals. Theframework proposes a set of five concepts that helpbridging these two perspectives; each concept describesan important condition for community resilience toemerge for both humans and non-humans.

Local professionals' perceptions of health assets in a low-SES Dutch neighbourhood

BACKGROUND: Asset-based approaches have become popular in public health. As yet it is not known to what extent health and welfare professionals are able to identify and mobilise individual and community health assets. Therefore, the aim of this study was to understand professional's perceptions of health and health assets.METHODS: In a low-SES neighbourhood, 21 health and welfare professionals were interviewed about their definition of health and their perceptions of the residents' health status, assets available in the neighbourhood's environment, and the way residents use these assets. A Nominal Group Technique (NGT) session was conducted for member check. Verbatim transcripts of the semi-structured interviews were coded and analysed using Atlas.ti.RESULTS: The professionals used a broad health concept, emphasizing the social dimension of health as most important. They discussed the poor health of residents, mentioning multiple health problems and unmet health needs. They provided many examples of behaviour that they considered unhealthy, in particular unhealthy diet and lack of exercise. Professionals considered the green physical environment, as well as health and social services, including their own services, as important health enhancing factors, whereas social and economic factors were considered as major barriers for good health. Poor housing and litter in public space were considered as barriers as well. According to the professionals, residents underutilized neighbourhood health assets. They emphasised the impact of poverty on the residents and their health. Moreover, they felt that residents were lacking individual capabilities to lead a healthy life. Although committed to the wellbeing of the residents, some professionals seemed almost discouraged by the (perceived) situation. They looked for practical solutions by developing group-based approaches and supporting residents' self-organisation.CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows, firstly, that professionals in the priority district Slotermeer rated the health of the residents as poor and their health behaviour as inadequate. They considered poverty and lack of education as important causes of this situation. Secondly, the professionals tended to talk about barriers in the neighbourhood rather than about neighbourhood health assets. As such, it seems challenging to implement asset-based approaches. However, the professionals, based on their own experiences, did perceive the development of collective approaches as a promising direction for future community health development.

Resident participation in neighbourhood audit tools

Background: Healthy urban environments require careful planning and a testing of environmental quality that goes beyond statutory requirements. Moreover, it requires the inclusion of resident views, perceptions and experiences that help deepen the understanding of local (public health) problems. To facilitate this, neighbourhoods should be mapped in a way that is relevant to them. One way to do this is participative neighbourhood auditing. This paper provides an insight into availability and characteristics of participatory neighbourhood audit instruments. Methods: A scoping review in scientific and grey literature, consisting of the following steps: literature search, identification and selection of relevant audit instruments, data extraction and data charting (including a work meeting to discuss outputs), reporting. Results: In total, 13 participatory instruments were identified. The role of residents in most instruments was as ‘data collectors’; only few instruments included residents in other audit activities like problem definition or analysis of data. The instruments identified focus mainly on physical, not social, neighbourhood characteristics. Paper forms containing closed-ended questions or scales were the most often applied registration method. Conclusions: The results show that neighbourhood auditing could be improved by including social aspects in the audit tools. They also show that the role of residents in neighbourhood auditing is limited; however, little is known about how their engagement takes place in practice. Developers of new instruments need to balance not only social and physical aspects, but also resident engagement and scientific robustness. Technologies like mobile applications pose new opportunities for participative approaches in neighbourhood auditing.