Are rural development programmes socially inclusive? Social inclusion, civic engagement, participation, and social capital: Exploring the differences

Considerable importance is attached to social exclusion/inclusion in recent EU rural development programmes. At the national/regional operation of these programmes groups of people who are not participating are often identified as ‘socially excluded groups’. This article contends that rural development programmes are misinterpreting the social processes of participation and consequently labelling some groups as socially excluded when they are not. This is partly because of the interchangeable and confused use of the concepts social inclusion, social capital and civic engagement, and partly because of the presumption that to participate is the default position. Three groups identified as socially excluded groups in Northern Ireland are considered. It is argued that a more careful analysis of what social inclusion means, what civic engagement means, and why participation is presumed to be the norm, leads to a different conclusion about who is excluded. This has both theoretical and policy relevance for the much used concept of social inclusion.

Crossing borders through cyberspace: a discussion of a social work education electronic exchange pilot project across the Atlantic

This article discusses a trial electronic exchange project developed between social work education departments in the Republic of Ireland and the USA. It outlines the contemporary significance and challenges of integrating global content into national social work curricula, which are often strongly tied to statutory or accreditation requirements. The mechanics of the exchange are explained and critiqued in detail. An illustrative example of how the transnational students discussed two questions is analyzed. The article finds that an international electronic exchange has great potential to make global social work real to students by allowing them to cross borders through cyberspace, however it requires careful planning and attention to cultural and educational system differences.

From the Land to Sea and Back Again? Using Terrestrial Planning to Understand the Process of Marine Spatial Planning

Over the last 5–10 years, marine spatial planning (MSP) has emerged as a new management regime for national and international waters and has already attracted a substantial body of multi-disciplinary research on its goals and policy processes. This paper argues that this literature has generally lacked deeper reflexive engagement with the emerging system of governance for our seas that has meant that many of MSP’s core concepts, assumptions and institutional arrangements have not been subject rigorous intellectual debate. In an attempt to initiate such an approach, this article explores the relationship between MSP and its land-based cousin, terrestrial spatial planning (TSP). While it is recognized that there are inherent limitations to a comparison of these two systems, it is argued that the tradition of social science debate over the purpose and processes of TSP can be used as a useful stimulus for a more rigorous reflection of such issues as they relate to MSP. The article therefore explores some of the parallels between MSP and TSP and then discusses some of the key intellectual traditions that have shaped TSP and the implications these may have for future marine planning practice. The article concludes with a number of potentially useful new avenues that may form the basis of a critical research agenda for MSP.

Marine Spatial Planning: A New Frontier? (Editorial to a special issue on Marine Spatial Planning)

Marine spatial planning is taking on greater international significance as a response to increased perceived threats to the marine environment and the need for more systematic maritime governance. It also expands the horizons of spatial planning and leads to calls for interdisciplinary research to support its development. This special issue brings together papers focusing on the need for a more active engagement of natural and social science perspectives in the formation of spatial strategies concerned with the future well-being of the seas and oceans.

Multiprofessional Views on Older Patients' Participation in Care Planning Meetings in a Hospital Context

Care planning meetings (CPMs; sometimes referred to as family meetings) for older patients involve group decision-making between the multidisciplinary team, the older person and their family. However, service user participation is challenged by the inequity of knowledge and power between participants, together with organisational and resource pressures for timely discharge. The effective use and perhaps, potential misuse of communication strategies within CPMs is of ethical concern to all participants. Habermas' essential critique of participatory communication provides insight as to how older people's involvement can be either enabled or blocked by healthcare professionals (HCPs) depending on their use of communication strategies. Seven discipline-specific mini-focus groups provided an opportunity for HCPs to reflect on the participation of patients over 65 and their families in CPMs. Findings explore HCPs' understanding of older patients involvement based on key dimensions of communicative participation, namely, mutuality, inclusiveness, patient centredness and clear outcomes. Whilst the benefits of collaborative decision-making were confirmed, legitimate concerns as to the quality of participatory practices, limited attention to group work processes and the exclusion of older patients with cognitive impairment were identified. © 2013 Copyright British Association of Social Workers.

Large‐scale wind deployment, social acceptance

The public is typically in agreement with the renewable energy targets established in many national states and generally supports the idea of increased reliance on wind energy. Nevertheless, many specific wind power projects face significant local opposition. A key question for the wind energy sector is, therefore, how to better engage local people to foster support for specific projects. IEA Wind Task 28 on Social Acceptance of Wind Energy Projects aims to facilitate wind energy development by reviewing current practices, emerging ideas, and exchanging successful practices among the participating countries. It also aims to disseminate the insights of leading research to a nontechnical audience, including project developers, local planning officials, and the general public. The interdisciplinary approach adopted by Task 28 enables an in-depth understanding of the nature of opposition to wind projects and a critical assessment of emerging strategies for social acceptance. Task 28 has analyzed a range of key issues related to social acceptance of wind energy, including the impacts on landscapes and ecosystems, on standard of living and well-being, the implementation of energy policy and spatial planning, the distribution of costs and benefits, and procedural justice. It is clear that although wind energy has many benefits; however, specific projects do impact local communities. As such the concerns of the affected people have to be taken seriously. Moreover, as opposition is rarely without foundation, it is in the interests of developers and advocates to engage local people and to improve projects for the benefit of all.