The contribution of community enterprise to British urban regeneration in a period of state retrenchment

This chapter discusses the growth and nature of community enterprise and in particular the sub-set of asset-based community development trusts and reviews their contribution to urban regeneration in Britain. Three models are presented and illustrated with case studies.

Submission to the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government: Sustainable Residential Development in Urban Areas

The Institute of Public Health in Ireland is an all-island body which aims to improve health in Ireland by working to combat health inequalities and influence public policies in favour of health. The Institute promotes co-operation in research, training, information and policy in order to contribute to policies which tackle inequalities in health.   Over the past ten years the Institute has worked closely with the Department of Health and Children and the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety in Northern Ireland to build capacity for public health across the island of Ireland.   The Institute takes the view that health is determined by policies, plans and programmes in many sectors outside the health sector as well as being dependent on access to and availability of first class health services. The importance of other sectors is encapsulated in a social determinants of health perspective which recognises that health is largely shaped and influenced by the physical, social, economic and cultural environments in which people live, work and play. Figure 1 illustrates these multi-dimensional impacts on health and also serves to highlight the clear and inextricable links between health and sustainable development. Factors that impact on long-term sustainability will thus also impact on health.

An Inquiry of Changes in Environmental Governance by Community-driven Process

Urban environmental depletion has been a critical problem among industrialized-transformed societies, especially at the local level where administrative authorities’ capacity lags behind changes. Derived from governance concept, the idea of civil society inclusion is highlighted. Focusing on an agglomerated case study, Bang Plee Community in Thailand, this research investigates on a non-state sector, 201-Community organization, as an agent for changes to improve urban environments on solid waste collection. Two roles are contested: as an agent for neighborhood internal change and as an intermediary toward governance changes in state-civil society interaction. By employing longitudinal analysis via a project intervention as research experiment, the outcomes of both roles are detected portrayed in three spheres: state, state-civil society interaction, and civil society sphere. It discovers in the research regarding agglomerated context that as an internal changes for environmental betterment, 201-Community organization operation brings on waste reduction at the minimal level. Community-based organization as an agent for changes – despite capacity input it still limited in efficiency and effectiveness – can mobilize fruitfully only at the individual and network level of civil society sectors, while fails managing at the organizational level. The positive outcomes result by economic waste incentive associated with a limited-bonded group rather than the rise of awareness at large. As an intermediary agent for shared governance, the community-based organization cannot bring on mutual dialogue with state as much as cannot change the state’s operation arena of solid waste management. The findings confine the shared governance concept that it does not applicable in agglomerated locality as an effective outcome, both in terms of being instrumental toward civil society inclusion and being provocative of internal change. Shared environmental governance as summarized in this research can last merely a community development action. It distances significantly from civil society inclusion and empowerment. However, the research proposes that community-based environmental management and shared governance toward civil society inclusion in urban environmental improvement are still an expectable option and reachable if their factors and conditions of key success and failure are intersected with a particular context. Further studies demand more precise on scale, scope, and theses factors of environmental management operation operated by civil society sectors.

Urban conservation areas and sustainable development: exploring the relationship

With increasing emphasis being placed on concentrating development in urban areas and improving the quality of life in British cities and towns, the importance of accommodating necessary development without compromising the valued heritage and architectural quality of urban areas is now becoming central to sustainable urban development. Urban conservation policy and practice has the potential to contribute to this and other aspects of sustainability. This paper explores this contribution and develops an analytical framework which draws out the key linkages between conservation area policy and sustainable development. The framework is then used to research the potential and actual contribution of urban conservation policy and practice in England, using a selective survey and two case studies (i.e. Winchester and Basingstoke). The main conclusions from the research are that: Conservation area policy can make a significant contribution to the principles of sustainable development; Most local planning authorities in England have not fully woken-up to this potential and have not developed policies or practices to address it; and Urban conservation policy needs to develop a more proactive approach in which local planning authorities actively guide and encourage new development with regard to use, design, layout, methods of construction, materials and energy efficiency.

Application of the concepts of agro-tourism, agricultural diversification and food and nutrition for the development of Caribbean communities with reference to standards and priority setting

Introduction There is a renewed call for a new approach to development with emphasis on community empowerment or participation, with the belief that more sustainable activities will be undertaken in those communities. Much of that call, however, is coming not from within the communities, but primarily from advocates of change who may have little to do with those communities. What then will the new approach bring apart from a change in who are the decision-makers? And how do we ensure that the change that is called for will, in fact, bring added benefits to the communities themselves? To be sure, there are some successful stories of a community approach to problem solving. However, there are also many more stories of project failures. Serious analytical work, therefore, needs to be done to determine the factors that promote a successful community-based approach; when this approach should be used; and the methodology that should be employed. In an attempt to determine these factors, a brief analysis will be made of some of the governing structures in the subregion and their possible impact on the proposed new approach. Some of the earlier efforts at stakeholder and community approach to projects will also be examined as well as the new development strategy that is prompting the call for this new paradigm. The new paradigm focuses to a large extent on decision-making and community empowerment. With few exceptions, it is short on the promotion of tangible activities that are based on the resource inventory of the communities. This is not surprising, since, as noted before, the advocates of community empowerment may have very little connection with the communities and, in most cases, are unfamiliar with the resource base. Hence, a theoretical case is made, suggesting more style than substance. Another obvious shortcoming of this new paradigm is its continued over- dependence on assistance from the outside to build communities. Externally funded projects, seminars and meetings outside of the communities and foreign technical assistance continue to dominate these projects. While, of course, all communities have basic common needs such as water, health, education and electricity, there is sufficient diversity within communities to allow for tailoring of activities and programmes such that their differences become assets. It is in that context, that agro-tourism activities, standards, agricultural diversification, food and nutrition and priority setting have been chosen as aspects and activities for promoting community development, drawing on the various strengths of communities, rural or urban.

Investing in America : initiatives for community and economic development /

Item 851-J.

Handbook for community economic development /

" ... An inter-agency project funded by five Federal agencies: Division of Economic Research, EDA (lead agency); Office of Minority Enterprise (OMBE); United States Travel Service (USTS); Office of Economic Development, CSA; Office of Neighborhood Development, HUD."

Organizing for development : final report : reorganization study of federal community and economic development programs.

Item 854

Community-based volunteer management : a quick reference guide for rural community and economic development leaders /

"This publication is available from IIRA in print and on the IIRA website."--T.p. verso.

Community improvement through resource conservation and development : Q's and A'S.

Issued June 1974.

Local economic development tools and techniques : a guidebook for local government /

September 1979.

The private economic development process : a guidebook for local government /

September 1979.