Occupy Differently: Space, Community and Urban Counter-Conduct

This article demonstrates how the concept of counter-conducts helps us understand Occupy by directing attention to the correlation between the way advanced liberalism works to control urban spaces and the way that control is countered through Occupy’s tactics. The first section outlines the term counter-conducts by looking to Foucault’s short and undeveloped theorisation. The second examines how advanced liberalism conducts conduct through the use of urban space, concentrating on London which comes to form a space of and for the mobility and circulation of goods, people and ideas. Occupy’s tactics directly confront and counter such movement while engaging in its own forms of counter-circulation and (im)mobility. The third section examines how advanced liberal techniques have increasingly come to use a particular, heavily instrumentalised understanding of community in order to divide and control urban populations. Occupy’s tactics embody versions of community which confront and oppose such instrumentalisation, ultimately both engaging with that control and partially reproducing it. Through these counter-conducts we can come to a view of Occupy as inevitably succeeding in its failure as a movement and failing in its success, while opening to an (im)possible
futurity of occupying urban space differently.

museology and community development in the XXI Century

Each time more, museology professionals are confronted with terms such as community, social inequality, social inclusion and development in their quotidian. Be it in conferences, publications or museum programmes, these are increasingly recurrent terms which, in great part, translate the dynamics of a relationship between museology and community development that has been constructed since the late 60’s. Although it is not new, such relationship has gone through a major bloom in the early 90’s and arrives today as an emerging priority within the world of museology. A first glance on the subject reveals that very different approaches and forms of action share the efforts in endowing museology with a role in community development today. In addition, despite of its growing popularity, it seems to be some misunderstandings on what the work with community development requires and truly signifies, as can be pointed out in a number of assertions originated from the field of museology. Accompanying such a plural environment, discussions and disagreements about to what extend museology is able to claim a role in social change also mark its affairs with community development. People are faced, indeed, with a rather polemic and intricate scenario. To a great extend, language barriers hinder the exchange of information on current initiatives and previous experiences, as well as on the development of concepts, approaches and proposals. Lack of better interactions among the groups of museology professionals and social actors who carry out different works with community development also contributes to making the potential of museology as a resource for development more difficult to be visualised.

The Maré Museum: an integrated project of community development

The Maré Museum, founded on 8 May 2006, arose from the desire of the inhabitants of the community to have a place of memory, a place that is immersed in the past and looks to the future, a place that reflects on this community, on their conditions and identities and on their territorial and cultural diversity. The intention of the Maré Museum is to break with the tradition that the experiences to be recollected and the places of memory to be remembered are those elected by the official version, the "winner" version of the story that restricts the representations of history and memory of large portions of the population. The Maré Museum, as a pioneer initiative in the city scene, proposed to expand the museological concept, so that it is not restricted to intellectual social groups and cultural spaces that are not accessible to the general population. The museum has established recognition that the slum is a place of memory and so has initiated a museographic reading of the Mare community. ..

Long-term effectiveness of sowing high and low diversity seed mixtures to enhance plant community development on ex-arable fields

Questions: How is succession on ex-arable land affected by sowing high and low diversity mixtures of grassland species as compared to natural succession? How long do effects persist? Location: Experimental plots installed in the Czech Republic, The Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Methods: The experiment was established on ex-arable land, with five blocks, each containing three 10 m x 10 m experiment tal plots: natural colonization, a low- (four species) and high-diversity (15 species) seed mixture. Species composition and biomass was followed for eight years. Results: The sown plants considerably affected the whole successional pathway and the effects persisted during the whole eight year period. Whilst the proportion of sown species (characterized by their cover) increased during the study period, the number of sown species started to decrease from the third season onwards. Sowing caused suppression of natural colonizing species, and the sown plots had more biomass. These effects were on average larger in the high diversity mixtures. However, the low diversity replicate sown with the mixture that produced the largest biomass or largest suppression of natural colonizers fell within the range recorded at the five replicates of the high diversity plots. The natural colonization plots usually had the highest total species richness and lowest productivity at the end of the observation period. Conclusions: The effect of sowing demonstrated dispersal limitation as a factor controlling the rate of early secondary succession. Diversity was important primarily for its 'insurance effect': the high diversity mixtures were always able to compensate for the failure of some species.

Community development in sustainable livelihoods approaches: an introduction

This article introduces sustainable livelihoods approaches, explaining what they are and how they have emerged. It examines how different organizations have taken up a sustainable livelihoods approach, and considers whether in so doing they have drawn on community development thinking and practice. It is found that community development is largely absent from sustainable livelihoods thinking and contended that part of the reason lies with the locally situated character of community development practice, which makes it difficult for externally driven sustainable livelihoods interventions to systematically incorporate community-level methods and practices. More fundamentally, sustainable livelihoods approaches embody a technocratic development drive, which is at odds with the principles, ethos and values that underpin much development work.

Tensions and dilemmas in community development: new discourses, new Trojans?

This paper begins by noting the range of contradictions and dilemmas facing those involved in community development today. It then draws on research into the operating frameworks that set the stage for much current community development activity. It discusses four key operating frameworks and how each framework can affect community development practice. The final section deals with the ways in which the frameworks, and the discourses associated with them, come together.

Community development orthodoxies

Drawing on recent research and reflections upon the role of community development in the twenty-first century, and discussion that have taken place in this Conference, this paper will examine constructions of community development and consider some of its key orthodoxies. Central to ideas of orthodoxy in community development is a conception of 'pure' community development. However, does the notion of 'pure' community development have practical and political value? If so, where are the boundaries? In answering these questions, this paper will explore elements of contemporary wisdom in community development, such as commitment to social change, participation, empowerment, capacity building, localism and the moral superiority of the oppressed.

Measuring wellness through interdisciplinary community development: linking the physical, economic and social environment

The aim of this study is to answer the question: Is there evidence that the quality of life of residents in a community that has had community development intervention is different as compared to the quality of life of residents in a nearby community that did not have community development initiatives? This was done by administering community development initiatives in a local area and comparing it to a similar community that did not receive this intervention. The residents of these communities rated the quality of their lives and communities in two purposively selected suburbs in Perth, Western Australia using the Australian Unity Wellbeing Index to measure individual and neighbourhood well-being. The quality of life of residents in both communities is then compared to national averages for quality of life or well-being. Answering this question provides empirical evidence of variation between ratings of quality of life of residents in different communities and highlights the utility of the Wellbeing Index for the evaluation of interdisciplinary community development