Community development

The United Nations defines community development as "a process where community members
come together to take collective action and generate solutions to common problems."[1] It is a broad
concept, applied to the practices of civic leaders, activists, involved citizens, and professionals to
improve various aspects of communities, typically aiming to build stronger and more resilient local
communities.

Community development is also understood as a professional discipline, and is defined by the

International Association for Community Development as "a practice-based profession and an
academic discipline that promotes participative democracy, sustainable development, rights,
economic opportunity, equality and social justice, through the organisation, education and
empowerment of people within their communities, whether these be of locality, identity or interest,
in urban and rural settings".[2]

Community development seeks to empower individuals and groups of people with the skills they
need to effect change within their communities. These skills are often created through the
formation of social groups working for a common agenda. Community developers must understand
both how to work with individuals and how to affect communities' positions within the context of
larger social institutions.

Community development as a term has taken off widely in anglophone countries, i.e. the United
States, United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, as well as other countries in the
Commonwealth of Nations. It is also used in some countries in Eastern Europe with active
community development associations in Hungary and Romania. The Community Development
Journal, published by Oxford University Press, since 1966 has aimed to be the major forum for
research and dissemination of international community development theory and practice.[3]

Community development approaches are recognised internationally. These methods and

approaches have been acknowledged as significant for local social, economic, cultural,
environmental and political development by such organisations as the UN, WHO, OECD, World Bank,
Council of Europe and EU. There are a number of institutions of higher education offer community
development as an area of study and research such as the University of Toronto, Leiden University,
SOAS University of London, and the Balsillie School of International Affairs, among others.
Definitions

There are complementary definitions of community development.

The United Nations defines community development broadly as "a process where community
members come together to take collective action and generate solutions to common problems."[1]
and the International Association for Community Development defines it as both a practice based
profession and an academic discipline. Following the adoption of the IACD definition in 2016, the
association has gone on to produce International Standards for Community Development Practice.
The values and ethos that should underpin practice can be expressed as: Commitment to rights,
solidarity, democracy, equality, environmental and social justice. The purpose of community
development is understood by IACD as being to work with communities to achieve participative
democracy, sustainable development, rights, economic opportunity, equality and social justice. This
practice is carried out by people in different roles and contexts, including people explicitly called
professional community workers (and people taking on essentially the same role but with a different
job title), together with professionals in other occupations ranging from social work, adult
education, youth work, health disciplines, environmental education, local economic development, to
urban planning, regeneration, architecture and more who seek to apply community development
values and adopt community development methods. Community development practice also
encompasses a range of occupational settings and levels from development roles working with
communities, through to managerial and strategic community planning roles.

The Community Development Challenge report, which was produced by a working party comprising
leading UK organizations in the field including the (now defunct) Community Development
Foundation, the (now defunct) Community Development Exchange and the (now defunct)
Federation for Community Development Learning defines community development as:

A set of values and practices which plays a special role in overcoming

poverty and disadvantage, knitting society together at the grass roots and
deepening democracy. There is a community development profession,
defined by national occupational standards and a body of theory and
experience going back the best part of a century. There are active citizens
who use community development techniques on a voluntary basis, and
there are also other professions and agencies which use a community
development approach or some aspects of it.[4]
Community Development Exchange defines community development as:

both an occupation (such as a community development worker in a local

authority) and a way of working with communities. Its key purpose is to
build communities based on justice, equality and mutual respect.

Community development involves changing the relationships between

ordinary people and people in positions of power, so that everyone can
take part in the issues that affect their lives. It starts from the principle
that within any community there is a wealth of knowledge and experience
which, if used in creative ways, can be channeled into collective action to
achieve the communities' desired goals.

Community development practitioners work alongside people in

communities to help build relationships with key people and
organizations and to identify common concerns. They create opportunities
for :the community to learn new skills and, by enabling people to act
together, community development practitioners help to foster social
inclusion and equality.[5]

Different approaches

There are numerous overlapping approaches to community development. Some focus on the
processes, some on the outcomes/ objectives. They include:

Arts, Culture, and Development; focuses on the role of arts and culture in community
development, social transformation[6]

Community Engagement; focuses on relationships at the core of facilitating "understanding and

evaluation, involvement, exchange of information and opinions, about a concept, issue or project,
with the aim of building social capital and enhancing social outcomes through decision-making”
(p. 173).[7]

Women Self-help Group; focusing on the contribution of women in settlement groups.[8]

Community capacity building; focusing on helping communities obtain, strengthen, and maintain
the ability to set and achieve their own development objectives.[9]

Large Group Capacitation; an adult education and social psychology approach grounded in the
activity of the individual and the social psychology of the large group focusing on large groups of
unemployed or semi-employed participants, many of whom with Lower Levels of Literacy (LLLs).

Social capital formation; focusing on benefits derived from the cooperation between individuals
and groups.

Nonviolent direct action; when a group of people take action to reveal an existing problem,
highlight an alternative, or demonstrate a possible solution to a social issue which is not being
addressed through traditional societal institutions (governments, religious organizations or
established trade unions) to the satisfaction of the direct action participants.

Economic development, focusing on the "development" of developing countries as measured by

their economies, although it includes the processes and policies by which a nation improves the
economic, political, and social well-being of its people.

Community economic development (CED); an alternative to conventional economic development

which encourages using local resources in a way that enhances economic outcomes while
improving social conditions. For example, CED involves strategies which aim to improve access
to affordable housing, medical, and child care.[10]
A worker cooperative is a progressive CED strategy that operates as businesses both
managed and owned by their employees. They are beneficial due to their potential to create
jobs and providing a route for grassroots political action. Some challenges that the worker
cooperative faces include the mending of the cooperative’s identity as both business and as
a democratic humanitarian organization. They are limited in resources and scale.[11]

Sustainable development; which seeks to achieve, in a balanced manner, economic development,

social development and environmental protection outcomes.[12]

Community-driven development (CDD), an economic development model which shifts

overreliance on central governments to local communities.

Asset-based community development (ABCD); is a methodology that seeks to uncover and use
the strengths within communities as a means for sustainable development.[13]

Faith-based community development; which utilizes faith-based organizations to bring about

community development outcomes.[14]

Community-based participatory research (CBPR); a partnership approach to research that

equitably involves, for example, community members, organizational representatives, and
researchers in all aspects of the research process and in which all partners contribute expertise
and share decision making and ownership, which aims to integrate this knowledge with
community development outcomes.[15][16]
 Community organizing; an approach that generally assumes that social change necessarily
involves conflict and social struggle in order to generate collective power for the powerless.

Participatory planning including community-based planning (CBP); involving the entire

community in the strategic and management processes of urban planning; or, community-level
planning processes, urban or rural.[17][18]

Town-making; or machizukuri ( まちづくり) refers to a Japanese concept which is "an umbrella

term generally understood as citizen participation in the planning and management of a living
environment".[19] It can include redevelopment, revitalization, and post-disaster reconstruction,
and usually emphasizes the importance of local citizen participation. In recent years, cooperation
between local communities and contents tourism (such as video games, anime, and manga) has
also become a key driver of machizukuri in some local communities, such as the tie-up between
CAPCOM's Sengoku Basara and the city of Shiroishi.[20]

Language revitalization focuses on the use of a language so that it serves the needs of a
community. This may involve the creation of books, films and other media in the language. These
actions help a small language community to preserve their language and culture.[21]

Methodologies focusing on the educational component of community development, including the

community-wide empowerment that increased educational opportunity creates.

Methodologies addressing the issues and challenges of the Digital divide, making affordable
training and access to computers and the Internet, addressing the marginalisation of local
communities that cannot connect and participate in the global Online community. In the United
States, nonprofit organizations such as Per Scholas seek to “break the cycle of poverty by
providing education, technology and economic opportunities to individuals, families and
communities” as a path to development for the communities they serve.[22]

There are a myriad of job titles for community development workers and their employers include
public authorities and voluntary or non-governmental organisations, funded by the state and by
independent grant making bodies. Since the nineteen seventies the prefix word 'community' has
also been adopted by several other occupations from the police and health workers to planners and
architects, who have been influenced by community development approaches.

History

Amongst the earliest community development approaches were those developed in Kenya and
British East Africa during the 1930s. Community development practitioners have over many years
developed a range of approaches for working within local communities and in particular with
disadvantaged people. Since the nineteen sixties and seventies through the various anti poverty
programmes in both developed and developing countries, community development practitioners
have been influenced by structural analyses as to the causes of disadvantage and poverty i.e.
inequalities in the distribution of wealth, income, land, etc. and especially political power and the
need to mobilise people power to affect social change. Thus the influence of such educators as
Paulo Freire and his focus upon this work. Other key people who have influenced this field are Saul
Alinsky (Rules for Radicals) and E. F. Schumacher (Small Is Beautiful). There are a number of
international organisations that support community development, for example, Oxfam, UNICEF, The
Hunger Project and Freedom from Hunger, run community development programs based upon
community development initiatives for relief and prevention of malnutrition. Since 2006 the Dragon
Dreaming Project Management techniques have spread to 37 countries and are engaged in an
estimated 3,250 projects worldwide.

In the global North

In the 19th century, the work of the Welsh early socialist thinker Robert Owen (1771–1851), sought
to develop a more perfect community. At New Lanark and at later communities such as Oneida in
the USA and the New Australia Movement in Australia, groups of people came together to create
utopian or intentional communities, with mixed success. Some such communities, formed ex nihilo,
contrast the concepts of the development of a community at a later stage.

United States

In the United States in the 1960s, the term "community development" began to complement and
generally replace the idea of urban renewal, which typically focused on physical development
projects - often at the expense of working-class communities. One of the earliest proponents of the
term in the United States was social scientist William W. Biddle (100-1973).[23] In the late 1960s,
philanthropies such as the Ford Foundation and government officials such as Senator Robert F.
Kennedy took an interest in local nonprofit organizations. A pioneer was the Bedford Stuyvesant
Restoration Corporation in Brooklyn, which attempted to apply business and management skills to
the social mission of uplifting low-income residents and their neighborhoods. Eventually such
groups became known as "Community development corporations" or CDCs. Federal laws, beginning
with the 1974 Housing and Community Development Act, provided a way for state and municipal
governments to channel funds to CDCs and to other nonprofit organizations.

National organizations such as the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation (founded in 1978 and
known since 2005 as NeighborWorks America), the Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC)
(founded in 1980), and the Enterprise Foundation (founded in 1981) have built extensive networks
of affiliated local nonprofit organizations to which they help provide financing for numerous
physical- and social-development programs in urban and rural communities. The CDCs and similar
organizations have been credited by some with starting the process that stabilized and revived
seemingly hopeless inner-city areas such as the South Bronx in New York City.

United Kingdom

In the UK, community development has had two main traditions. The first was as an approach for
preparing for the independence of countries from the former British Empire in the 1950s and 1960s.
Domestically, community development first came into public prominence with the Labour
Government's anti deprivation programmes of the latter 1960s and 1970s. The main example of this
activity, the CDP (Community Development Programme), piloted local area-based community
development. This influenced a number of largely urban local authorities, in particular in Scotland
with Strathclyde Region's major community-development programme (the largest at the time in
Europe).

The Gulbenkian Foundation was a key funder of commissions and reports which influenced the
development of community development in the UK from the latter 1960s to the 1980s. This included
recommending that there be a national institute or centre for community development, able to
support practice and to advise government and local authorities on policy. This resulted in the
forma establishment in 1991 of the Community Development Foundation. In 2004 the Carnegie UK
Trust established a commission of inquiry into the future of rural community development,
examining such issues as land reform and climate change. Carnegie funded over sixty rural
community-development action-research projects across the UK and Ireland and national and
international communities of practice to exchange experiences. This included the International
Association for Community Development (IACD).

In 1999 the Labour Government established a UK-wide organisation responsible for setting
professional-training standards for all education and development practitioners working within local
communities. This organisation, PAULO – the National Training Organisation for Community
Learning and Development, was named after Paulo Freire (1921-1997). It was formally recognised
by David Blunkett, the Secretary of State for Education and Employment. Its first chair was Charlie
McConnell, the Chief Executive of the Scottish Community Education Council, who had played a lead
role in bringing together a range of occupational interests under a single national-training standards
body, including community education, community development and development education. The
inclusion of community development was significant as it was initially uncertain as to whether it
would join the National Training Organisation (NTO) for Social Care. The Community Learning and
Development NTO represented all the main employers, trades unions, professional associations and
national-development agencies working in this area across the four nations of the UK.
The new body used the wording "community learning and development" to acknowledge that all of
these occupations worked primarily within local communities, and that this work encompassed not
just providing less formal learning support but also a concern for the wider holistic development of
those communities – socio-economically, environmentally, culturally and politically. By bringing
together these occupational groups this created for the first time a single recognised employment-
sector of nearly 300,000 full- and part-time paid staff within the UK, approximately 10% of these
staff being full-time. The NTO continued to recognise the range of occupations within it, for example
specialists who work primarily with young people, but all agreed that they shared a core set of
professional approaches to their work. In 2002 the NTO became part of a wider Sector Skills Council
for lifelong learning.

The UK currently hosts the only global network of practitioners and activists working towards social
justice through community development approach, the International Association for Community
Development (IACD).[24] IACD, formed in the USA in 1953, moved to Belgium in 1978 and was
restructured and relaunched in Scotland in 1999.[25]

Canada

Community development in Canada has roots in the development of co-operatives, credit unions
and caisses populaires. The Antigonish Movement which started in the 1920s in Nova Scotia,
through the work of Doctor Moses Coady and Father James Tompkins, has been particularly
influential in the subsequent expansion of community economic development work across Canada.

Australia

Community development in Australia has often focussed on Aboriginal Australian communities, and
during the period of the 1980s to the early 21st century funds channelled through the Community
Employment Development Program, where Aboriginal people could be employed in "a work for the
dole" scheme, gave the chance for non-government organisations to apply for a full or part-time
worker funded by the Department for Social Security. Dr Jim Ife, formerly of Curtin University,
organised a ground-breaking text-book on community development.

In the "Global South"

Community planning techniques drawing on the history of utopian movements became important in
the 1920s and 1930s in East Africa, where community development proposals were seen as a way
of helping local people improve their own lives with indirect assistance from colonial authorities.[26]
Mohandas K. Gandhi adopted African community development ideals as a basis of his South
African Ashram, and then introduced it as a part of the Indian Swaraj movement, aiming at
establishing economic interdependence at village level throughout India. With Indian independence,
despite the continuing work of Vinoba Bhave in encouraging grassroots land reform, India under its
first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru adopted a mixed-economy approach, mixing elements of
socialism and capitalism. During the fifties and sixties, India ran a massive community development
programme with focus on rural development activities through government support. This was later
expanded in scope and was called integrated rural development scheme [IRDP]. A large number of
initiatives that can come under the community development umbrella have come up in recent years.

The main objective of community development in India remains to develop the villages and to help
the villagers help themselves to fight against poverty, illiteracy, malnutrition, etc. The beauty of
Indian model of community development lies in the homogeneity of villagers and high level of
participation.

Community development became a part of the Ujamaa Villages established in Tanzania by Julius
Nyerere, where it had some success in assisting with the delivery of education services throughout
rural areas, but has elsewhere met with mixed success. In the 1970s and 1980s, community
development became a part of "Integrated Rural Development", a strategy promoted by United
Nations Agencies and the World Bank. Central to these policies of community development were:

Adult literacy programs, drawing on the work of Brazilian educator Paulo Freire and the "Each One
Teach One" adult literacy teaching method conceived by Frank Laubach.

Youth and women's groups, following the work of the Serowe Brigades of Botswana, of Patrick
van Rensburg (https://web.archive.org/web/20091125064832/http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/
Home.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=ERICSearchResult&_urlType=action&newSearch=true&ERIC
ExtSearch_SearchType_1=au&ERICExtSearch_Operator_1=OR&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_1=%2
2Van+Rensburg+Patrick%22&searchtype=authors%7CMr) .

Development of community business ventures and particularly cooperatives, in part drawn on the
examples of José María Arizmendiarrieta and the Mondragon Cooperatives of the Basque region
of Spain

Compensatory education for those missing out in the formal education system, drawing on the
work of Open Education as pioneered by Michael Young.

Dissemination of alternative technologies, based upon the work of E. F. Schumacher as

advocated in his book Small Is Beautiful: A Study of Economics As If People Mattered
 Village nutrition programs and permaculture projects, based upon the work of Australians Bill
Mollison and David Holmgren.

Village water supply programs

In the 1990s, following critiques of the mixed success of "top down" government programs, and
drawing on the work of Robert Putnam, in the rediscovery of social capital, community development
internationally became concerned with social capital formation. In particular the outstanding
success of the work of Muhammad Yunus in Bangladesh with the Grameen Bank from its inception
in 1976, has led to the attempts to spread microenterprise credit schemes around the world. Yunus
saw that social problems like poverty and disease were not being solved by the market system on
its own. Thus, he established a banking system which lends to the poor with very little interest,
allowing them access to entrepreneurship.[27] This work was honoured by the 2006 Nobel Peace
Prize.

Another alternative to "top down" government programs is the participatory government institution.
Participatory governance institutions are organizations which aim to facilitate the participation of
citizens within larger decision making and action implementing processes in society. A case study
done on municipal councils and social housing programs in Brazil found that the presence of
participatory governance institutions supports the implementation of poverty alleviation programs
by local governments.[28]

The "human scale development" work of Right Livelihood Award-winning Chilean economist
Manfred Max Neef promotes the idea of development based upon fundamental human needs,
which are considered to be limited, universal and invariant to all human beings (being a part of our
human condition). He considers that poverty results from the failure to satisfy a particular human
need, it is not just an absence of money. Whilst human needs are limited, Max Neef shows that the
ways of satisfying human needs is potentially unlimited. Satisfiers also have different
characteristics: they can be violators or destroyers, pseudosatisfiers, inhibiting satisfiers, singular
satisfiers, or synergic satisfiers. Max-Neef shows that certain satisfiers, promoted as satisfying a
particular need, in fact inhibit or destroy the possibility of satisfying other needs: e.g., the arms race,
while ostensibly satisfying the need for protection, in fact then destroys subsistence, participation,
affection and freedom; formal democracy, which is supposed to meet the need for participation
often disempowers and alienates; commercial television, while used to satisfy the need for
recreation, interferes with understanding, creativity and identity. Synergic satisfiers, on the other
hand, not only satisfy one particular need, but also lead to satisfaction in other areas: some
examples are breastfeeding; self-managed production; popular education; democratic community
organizations; preventative medicine; meditation; educational games.
India

Community development in India was initiated by Government of India through Community

Development Programme (CDP) in 1952. The focus of CDP was on rural communities. But,
professionally trained social workers concentrated their practice in urban areas. Thus, although the
focus of community organization was rural, the major thrust of Social Work gave an urban character
which gave a balance in service for the program.[29]

Vietnam

International organizations apply the term community in Vietnam to the local administrative unit,
each with a traditional identity based on traditional, cultural, and kinship relations.[30] Community
development strategies in Vietnam aim to organize communities in ways that increase their
capacities to partner with institutions, the participation of local people, transparency and equality,
and unity within local communities.[30]

Social and economic development planning (SDEP) in Vietnam uses top-down centralized planning
methods and decision-making processes which do not consider local context and local
participation. The plans created by SDEP are ineffective and serve mainly for administrative
purposes. Local people are not informed of these development plans.[30] The participatory rural
appraisal (PRA) approach, a research methodology that allows local people to share and evaluate
their own life conditions, was introduced to Vietnam in the early 1990s to help reform the way that
government approaches local communities and development. PRA was used as a tool for mostly
outsiders to learn about the local community, which did not effect substantial change.[31]

The village/commune development (VDP/CDP) approach was developed as a more fitting approach
than PRA to analyze local context and address the needs of rural communities.[30] VDP/CDP
participatory planning is centered around Ho Chi Minh's saying that "People know, people discuss
and people supervise."[31] VDP/CDP is often useful in Vietnam for shifting centralized management
to more decentralization, helping develop local governance at the grassroots level.[31] Local people
use their knowledge to solve local issues.[31] They create mid-term and yearly plans that help
improve existing community development plans with the support of government organizations.[31]
Although VDP/CDP has been tested in many regions in Vietnam, it has not been fully implemented
for a couple reasons.[31] The methods applied in VDP/CDP are human resource and capacity
building intensive, especially at the early stages. It also requires the local people to have an
"initiative-taking" attitude. People in the remote areas where VDP/CDP has been tested have mostly
passive attitudes because they already receive assistance from outsiders.[31] There also are no
sufficient monitoring practices to ensure effective plan implementation. Integrating VDP/CDP into
the governmental system is difficult because the Communist Party and Central government's
policies on decentralization are not enforced in reality.[31]

Non-governmental organizations (NGO) in Vietnam, legalized in 1991, have claimed goals to

develop civil society, which was essentially nonexistent prior to the Đổi Mới economic reforms.[32]
NGO operations in Vietnam do not exactly live up to their claimed goals to expand civil society.[33][32]
This is mainly due to the fact that NGOs in Vietnam are mostly donor-driven, urban, and elite-based
organizations that employ staff with ties to the Communist Party and Central government.[33] NGOs
are also overlooked by the Vietnam Fatherland Front, an umbrella organization that reports
observations directly to the Party and Central government.[32] Since NGOs in Vietnam are not
entirely non-governmental, they have been coined instead as 'VNGOs.'[32] Most VNGOs have
originated from either the state, hospital or university groups, or individuals not previously
associated with any groups.[32] VNGOs have not yet reached those most in need, such as the rural
poor, due to the entrenched power networks' opposition to lobbying for issues such the rural poor's
land rights.[33] Authoritarianism is prevalent in nearly all Vietnamese civic organizations.[34]
Authoritarian practices are more present in inner-organizational functions than in organization
leaders' worldviews.[34] These leaders often reveal both authoritarian and libertarian values in
contradiction.[34] Representatives of Vietnam's NGO's stated that disagreements are normal, but
conflicts within an organization should be avoided, demonstrating the one-party "sameness"
mentality of authoritarian rule.[34]

See also

Community building Community practice

Complete communities Organization workshop

Community education Rural community development

Community engagement Urbanism

References

1. "Community development" (https://web.archive.org/web/20140714225617/http://unterm.un.or

g/DGAACS/unterm.nsf/8fa942046ff7601c85256983007ca4d8/526c2eaba978f007852569fd0
0036819?OpenDocument) . UNTERM. Archived from the original (http://unterm.un.org/DGAA
CS/unterm.nsf/8fa942046ff7601c85256983007ca4d8/526c2eaba978f007852569fd0003681
9?OpenDocument) on 14 July 2014. Retrieved 7 July 2014.
2. Alison Gilchrist; Marilyn Taylor (2011). The Short Guide to Community Development (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=NWiZFrT-Ns8C&pg=PA2) . Policy Press. pp. 2+. ISBN 978-1-84742-
689-5.

3. "Community Development Journal- about the journal" (https://web.archive.org/web/20051231

071327/http://www.oxfordjournals.org/our_journals/cdj/about.html) . Oxford University
Press. Archived from the original (http://www.oxfordjournals.org/our_journals/cdj/about.htm
l) on 31 December 2005. Retrieved 7 July 2014.

4. "Community Development Challenge Report" (https://web.archive.org/web/20180127230744/

http://www.cdf.org.uk/SITE/UPLOAD/DOCUMENT/communitydevelopmentchallenge.pdf)
(PDF). Produced by Community Development Foundation for Communities and Local
Government. Archived from the original (http://www.cdf.org.uk/SITE/UPLOAD/DOCUMENT/co
mmunitydevelopmentchallenge.pdf) (PDF) on 2018-01-27. Retrieved 2009-02-13.

5. "Definition of CD" (https://web.archive.org/web/20100714160130/http://www.cdx.org.uk/com

munity-development/what-community-development) . Community Development Exchange.
Archived from the original (http://www.cdx.org.uk/community-development/what-community-d
evelopment) on 2010-07-14. Retrieved 2010-06-08.

6. Maguire, Cindy; Holt, Ann (31 March 2022). Arts and culture in global development practice:
Expression, identity and empowerment (https://www.routledge.com/Arts-and-Culture-in-Global-
Development-Practice-Expression-Identity-and/Maguire-Holt/p/book/9780367708375) .
Routledge. ISBN 9780367708375.

7. Johnston, K. A., Lane, A. B., Devin, B., & Beatson, A. (2018). Episodic and Relational Community
Engagement: Implications for Social Impact and Social License. In K. A. Johnston & M. Taylor
(Eds.), The Handbook of Communication Engagement (pp. 169-185). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
https://www.wiley.com/en-au/The+Handbook+of+Communication+Engagement-p-
9781119167495

8. Chigbu, UE. (2015). Repositioning culture for development: women and development in a
Nigerian rural community. Community, Work & Family, 18,
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13668803.2014.981506#.VSmVekI2nFK

9. United Nations Development Group. "United Nations Development System- A Collective

Approach to Supporting Capacity Development" (https://web.archive.org/web/2014020913060
1/http://undg.org/docs/8948/Capacity-Development-UNDG-August-2009.pdf) (PDF).
Archived from the original (http://www.undg.org/docs/8948/Capacity-Development-UNDG-Aug
ust-2009.pdf) (PDF) on 9 February 2014. Retrieved 7 July 2014.
10. Clay, Roger A.; Jones, Susan R. (2009). "A Brief History of Community Economic Development".
Journal of Affordable Housing & Community Development Law. 18 (3): 257–267.
JSTOR 25782846 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/25782846) .

11. Krishna, Gowri J. (2013). "Worker Cooperative Creation As Progressive Lawyering? Moving
Beyond the One-Person, One-Vote Floor". Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law. 34
(1): 65–107. JSTOR 24052557 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/24052557) .

12. Sung, Hyung. "Sustainable development" (https://www.un.org/en/ga/president/65/issues/sust

dev.shtml) . General Assembly of the United Nations. Retrieved 12 July 2014.

13. Mathie, Alison & Cunningham, Gord (1 July 2010). "From clients to citizens: Asset-based
Community Development as a strategy for community-driven development". Development in
Practice. 13 (5): 474–486. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.613.1286 (https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/s
ummary?doi=10.1.1.613.1286) . doi:10.1080/0961452032000125857 (https://doi.org/10.108
0%2F0961452032000125857) . S2CID 5781831 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:5
781831) .

14. "Faith-Based Organizations in Community Development" (https://berkleycenter.georgetown.ed

u/publications/faith-based-organizations-in-community-development) .
berkleycenter.georgetown.edu. Retrieved 2017-05-04.

15. 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" (https://doi.org/10.114
6%2Fannurev.publhealth.19.1.173) . Annual Review of Public Health. 19: 173–202.
doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.19.1.173 (https://doi.org/10.1146%2Fannurev.publhealth.19.1.
173) . PMID 9611617 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9611617) .

16. Israel, B.A., Schulz, A.J., Parker, E.A., Becker, A.B., Allen, A., & Guzman, J.R. (2008). Critical
issues in developing and following CBPR Principles. In M. Minkler & N. Wallerstein (Eds.),
Community-based participatory research for health: From process to outcomes (2nd ed., pp. 47–
66). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

17. Lefevre, Pierre; Kolsteren, Patrick; De Wael, Marie-Paule; Byekwaso, Francis; Beghin, Ivan
(December 2000). "Comprehensive Participatory Planning and Evaluation" (https://web.archive.
org/web/20081206103730/http://www.ifad.org/pub/bsf/cppe/cppe.pdf) (PDF). Antwerp,
Belgium: IFAD. Archived from the original (http://www.ifad.org/pub/bsf/cppe/cppe.pdf) (PDF)
on 2008-12-06. Retrieved 2008-10-21.
18. McTague, C.; Jakubowski, S. (2013). "Marching to the beat of a silent drum: Wasted
consensus-building and failed neighborhood participatory planning". Applied Geography. 44:
182–191. doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.07.019 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.apgeog.2013.07.01
9) .

19. Posio, Pilvi (2018). "Reconstruction machizukuri and negotiating safety in post-3.11
community recovery in Yamamoto" (https://doi.org/10.1080%2F18692729.2018.1556495) .
Contemporary Japan. 31: 40–60. doi:10.1080/18692729.2018.1556495 (https://doi.org/10.108
0%2F18692729.2018.1556495) . S2CID 158293537 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusI
D:158293537) .

20. Yamamura, Takayoshi (2018). "Pop culture contents and historical heritage: The case of
heritage revitalization through 'contents tourism' in Shiroishi city". Contemporary Japan. 30 (2):
144–163. doi:10.1080/18692729.2018.1460049 (https://doi.org/10.1080%2F18692729.2018.
1460049) . S2CID 158229168 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:158229168) .

21. "Archived copy" (https://web.archive.org/web/20140807183035/http://www-01.sil.org/sil/glob

al/mdg_booklet.pdf) (PDF). Archived from the original (http://www-01.sil.org/sil/global/MDG
_booklet.pdf) (PDF) on 2014-08-07. Retrieved 2015-05-19.

22. "Per Scholas Website" (https://web.archive.org/web/20140714184826/http://perscholas.org/r

ecovery/) . Archived from the original (http://www.perscholas.org/recovery/) on July 14,
2014. Retrieved July 6, 2014.

23. List, E. Frederick (1973). "In Memoriam: William W. Biddle". Journal of the Community
Development Society. 4 (1): 5. doi:10.1080/00103829.1973.10877482 (https://doi.org/10.108
0%2F00103829.1973.10877482) .

24. "International Association for Community Development" (http://www.iacdglobal.org/) .

Retrieved 7 July 2014.

25. "IACD- a brief history" (https://web.archive.org/web/20140714165113/http://www.iacdglobal.o

rg/iacd-brief-history) . Archived from the original (http://www.iacdglobal.org/iacd-brief-histor
y) on 14 July 2014. Retrieved 7 July 2014.

26. Anderson, David (1984). "Depression, Dust Bowl, Demography, and Drought: The Colonial State
and Soil Conservation in East Africa during the 1930s". African Affairs. 83 (332): 321–343.
doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.afraf.a097622 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Foxfordjournals.afraf.a0
97622) . JSTOR 722351 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/722351) .
27. Gebremariam, Yilma (2010). "Review of Small Loans, Big Dreams: How the Nobel Prize Winner
Muhammad Yunus and Microfinance Are Changing the World". Eastern Economic Journal. 36
(1): 142–144. doi:10.1057/eej.2009.19 (https://doi.org/10.1057%2Feej.2009.19) .
JSTOR 20642514 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/20642514) . S2CID 154904885 (https://api.se
manticscholar.org/CorpusID:154904885) .

28. Donaghy, Maureen M. (2011). "Do Participatory Governance Institutions Matter? Municipal
Councils and Social Housing Programs in Brazil". Comparative Politics. 44 (1): 83–102.
doi:10.5129/001041510X13815229366606 (https://doi.org/10.5129%2F001041510X1381522
9366606) . JSTOR 23040659 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/23040659) .

29. Siddiqui, H.Y. (1997). Working with communities: An introduction to community work. New
Delhi: Hira Publications.

30. Yen, N. T. K.; Luong, P. Van (2008-07-01). "Participatory village and commune development
planning (VDP/CDP) and its contribution to local community development in Vietnam".
Community Development Journal. 43 (3): 329–340. doi:10.1093/cdj/bsn018 (https://doi.org/10.
1093%2Fcdj%2Fbsn018) . ISSN 0010-3802 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/0010-3802) .

31. Yen, N. T. K.; Van Luong, P. (2008-06-05). "Participatory village and commune development
planning (VDP/CDP) and its contribution to local community development in Vietnam".
Community Development Journal. 43 (3): 329–340. doi:10.1093/cdj/bsn018 (https://doi.org/10.
1093%2Fcdj%2Fbsn018) . ISSN 0010-3802 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/0010-3802) .

32. Gray, Michael (October 1999). "Creating Civil Society? The Emergence of NGOs in Vietnam" (htt
ps://web.archive.org/web/20180507085221/http://www.michaelgray.ca/writing/articles/VNG
O.pdf) (PDF). Development and Change. Archived from the original (http://www.michaelgray.c
a/writing/articles/VNGO.pdf) (PDF) on 2018-05-07. Retrieved 2018-05-06 – via School of
Oriental and African Studies, London.

33. Mercer, Clare (2002). "NGOs, civil society and democratization: a critical review of the
literature". Progress in Development Studies. 2: 5–22. doi:10.1191/1464993402ps027ra (http
s://doi.org/10.1191%2F1464993402ps027ra) . S2CID 154384357 (https://api.semanticschola
r.org/CorpusID:154384357) .

34. Wischermann, Jorg (July 2013). "Civic Organizations in Vietnam's One-Party State: Supporters
of Authoritarian Rule?" (https://www.giga-hamburg.de/de/publication/civic-organizations-in-vie
tnams-one-party-state-supporters-of-authoritarian-rule) . GIGA Working Papers. 228 – via
German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
Further reading

Briggs, Xavier de Souza, and Elizabeth Mueller and Mercer Sullivan, From Neighborhood to
Community: Evidence on the Social Effects of Community Development Corporation. Community
Development Research Center, 1997.

Ferguson, Ronald F. and William T. Dickens, eds., Urban Problems and Community Development.
Brookings Institution Press, 1999. ISBN 0-8157-1875-6, ISBN 978-0-8157-1875-8

Grogan, Paul and Tony Proscio, Comeback Cities: A Blueprint for Urban Neighborhood Revival.
Westview Press, 2002. ISBN 0-8133-3952-9, ISBN 978-0-8133-3952-8

von Hoffman, Alexander, House by House, Block by Block: The Rebirth of America's Urban
Neighborhoods. Oxford University Press, 2003, Ppbck. ed., 2004. ISBN 0-19-517614-6, ISBN 978-0-
19-517614-8

James, Paul; Nadarajah, Yaso; Haive, Karen; Stead, Victoria (2012). Sustainable Communities,
Sustainable Development: Other Paths for Papua New Guinea (https://www.academia.edu/323087
5) (PDF). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Kingslow, Marcia E.; Horton, Carol (1998), An Overview of the Major Asset Building and Community
Development Literatures (http://www.kingslow-assoc.com/images/AssetBldg___CommDev.pdf)
(PDF), Chicago, IL: Kingslow Associates, retrieved 16 September 2017

Magee, Liam; James, Paul; Scerri, Andy (2012). "Measuring Social Sustainability: A Community-
Centred Approach" (https://www.academia.edu/5178539) . Applied Research in the Quality of
Life. 7 (3): 239–61. doi:10.1007/s11482-012-9166-x (https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs11482-012-916
6-x) . S2CID 145257262 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:145257262) .

McConnell, Charlie, Community Learning and Development: The Making of an Empowering

Profession. Community Learning Scotland/PAULO, 2002, ISBN 0 947919 75 9

Silverman, Robert Mark (2003). "Progressive Reform, Gender, and Institutional Structure: A Critical
Analysis of Citizen Participation in Detroit's Community Development Corporations (CDCs)".
Urban Studies. 40 (13): 2731–2750. doi:10.1080/0042098032000146867 (https://doi.org/10.108
0%2F0042098032000146867) . S2CID 145732284 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:14
5732284) .

Sloman, Annie (January 2012). "Using Participatory Theatre in International Community

Development". Community Development Journal. 47 (1): 42–57. doi:10.1093/cdj/bsq059 (https://d
oi.org/10.1093%2Fcdj%2Fbsq059) .
 Towards Shared International Standards for Community Development Practice. IACD. 2018

External links

The Citizens' Handbook (http://citizenshandbook.org/) –A Scholia has a topic

large collection practices and activities for citizens' groups profile for Community
development.
National Civic League (https://www.nationalcivicleague.or
g/) – US organization that promotes partnerships between government and citizens' groups

Shelterforce (https://shelterforce.org/) – A nonprofit magazine on community development,

affordable housing, and neighborhood stabilization.