Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Organizing community economic development in an inner-city neighbourhood: a case study Kemp, Leslie 1993

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


831-ubc_1993_fall_kemp_leslie.pdf [ 6.4MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0086425.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0086425-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0086425-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0086425-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0086425-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0086425-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0086425-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

ORGANIZING COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTIN AN INNER-CITY NEIGHBOURHOOD:A CASE STUDYByLESLIE RAE KEMPB.S.W., The University of Calgary, 1981A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OFTHE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OFMASTER OF SOCIAL WORKinTHE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES(School of Social Work)We accept this thesis as conformingto laireguired st.ndardTHE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIAAugust 1993© Leslie Rae Kemp, 1993In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanceddegree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make itfreely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensivecopying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of mydepartment or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying orpublication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my writtenpermission.,C(40.0^ ,.-DepaFtfrterit—of ^{707 1/Vot 4_The University of British ColumbiaVancouver, CanadaDate  ee7laber^/99.3DE-6 (2/88)- ii -ABSTRACTThis is a case study of a project focused on organizingcommunity economic development (CED) in the inner-cityneighbourhood of Mount Pleasant, in Vancouver. Participant-observation research techniques, combining the roles oforganizer and researcher, were used in this exploratorystudy.The ethnic and cultural diversity of this inner-cityneighbourhood, with its various "communities of interest,"presents challenges to CED organization. This studyexamines these challenges in relation to the process oforganizing CED and identifies the relevant factors fordetermining a community's readiness for CED. Key aspects ofthe organizing process are explored in depth (e.g., gaininglegitimacy within the community, assessing the community'sreadiness for CED, determining a development approach,cultivating leadership and developing an organizationalbase).This study proposes a framework for organizing CED whichidentifies the major stages, activities and critical factorsin organizing CED. The research identifies and discussesthe major roles of the organizer and the beliefs and valueswhich guided the organizing process.TABLE OF CONTENTSAbstractList of Tables^ viList of Figures viiAcknowledgements viiiCHAPTER ONE -- INTRODUCTION^ 1CHAPTER TWO -- A LITERATURE REVIEW: THE CONTEXT FOR THERESEARCH^ 7Introduction 7Community Economic Development^ 9Perceptions of Community 9Perceptions of the "New Economics"^ 13CED: Its Principles and Characteristics^19The Distinction between Local Economic Developmentand CED^ 26The Emergence and Growth of CED^ 29The Process of Community Organizing 36Major Approaches to Community Organizing andDevelopment^ 36Bringing in the Context: A Dialectical Framework^41Key Practitioner Roles and Functions^ 45Leadership Development^ 50Community Action Theory 54Stages in the Community Economic DevelopmentProcess^ 59A Community Profile of Mount Pleasant^ 63Historical Development^ 64Physical Characteristics 67Demographic Characteristics 70Income and Labour Force Data^ 71Socio-Economic Issues^ 74Organizational Infrastructure 76Summary^ 81CHAPTER THREE -- RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS^ 82Introduction^ 82Research Design 82Research Methods 83Data Collection Methods^ 83Data Analysis Methods 86Limitations of the Study 88Ethical Issues in the Research 93Summary^ 93- iv -CHAPTER FOUR -- ORGANIZING COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT:THE MOUNT PLEASANT EXPERIENCE^94Introduction^ 94Stage 1: Gaining Legitimacy^ 97Major Activities^ 97Guiding Values and Beliefs and Roles of theOrganizer^ 100Roles of Other Key Participants^ 100Critical Factors in Gaining Legitimacy^100The Importance of Gaining Legitimacy inOrganizing CED^ 104Stage 2: Assessing Community Readiness for CED^104Major Activities 105Guiding Values and Beliefs and Roles of theOrganizer^ 108Roles of Other Key Participants^ 108Factors Contributing to Community Readiness^109A Sense of Community^ 109Organizational Capacity 114Receptivity to Change 118Potential Obstacles to CED 120Community Alienation^ 120Community Instability 122Structural Disincentives to CED Involvement^124The Importance of Assessing Community Readinessin Organizing CED^ 126Stage 3: Determining a Development Approach^127Major Activities 127Guiding Values and Beliefs and Roles of theOrganizer^ 129Roles of Other Key Participants^ 129Factors in Determining a Development Approach^130The Importance of Determining a DevelopmentApproach in Organizing CED 131Stage 4: Cultivating Leadership^ 131Major Activities^ 132Guiding Values and Beliefs and Roles of theOrganizer^ 134Roles of Other Key Participants^ 134Factors in Cultivating Leadership 135Cultivating Leadership as a Key Factor inOrganizing CED^ 136Stage 5: Developing an Organizational Base^137Major Activities 137Guiding Values and Beliefs and Roles of theOrganizer^ 139Roles of Other Key Participants^ 139Key Factors in Developing an Organizational Base^139The Importance of Developing an OrganizationalBase in Organizing CED^ 144Summary^ 144- v -CHAPTER FIVE -- CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONSKey FindingsLimitationsQuestions for Further ResearchContribution of this ResearchEPILOGUEBIBLIOGRAPHYAPPENDICES146146153156157160164173Appendix I - Agreement Between School of Social Work,Student and Mount PleasantSupervisory Committee^ 174Appendix II - Advisory Committee Questionnaire^177Appendix III - Group Questionnaire^ 182Appendix IV - Advisory Committee Responses^187Appendix V - Group Responses^ 194Appendix VI - Ethical Approval 203Appendix VII - Newspaper Articles^ 208LIST OF TABLESTable 1 - Average Income: Comparisons Between Mount Pleasantand the City of Vancouver^ 72Table 2 - Labour Force Activity in Mount Pleasant(by percentage)^ 74Table 3 - Framework for Organizing CED^ 95Table 4 - Major Roles, Beliefs and Values of Organizer^96LIST OF FIGURESFigure 1 - Mount Pleasant in Context of City of Vancouver^65Figure 2 - Mount Pleasant's Neighbourhoods^ 68Figure 3 - Glaser's Concept Indicator Model 88- viii -ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSI would like to take this opportunity to thank Sharon MansonSinger for her excellent advice, support, and constructivecritique. I am also grateful to Roopchand Seebaran for hispatience and helpful suggestions, to Glenn Drover for histhoughtful criticisms and to John Crane for his inspirationand support. I am much appreciative of the confidence,encouragement and support given to me by my friends andcolleagues, particularly Melanie Conn, Michael Clague, andLarry Trunkey.Finally, I would like to thank the many people I worked within Mount Pleasant, particularly the members of AMPER and myAdvisory Committee. I feel very fortunate to have had theopportunity to work in this unique and special community. Iappreciated the interest, support and enthusiasm thatmembers of AMPER brought to our work together, especiallythose who worked so diligently in the first year and whohelped teach me the meaning of true community: Vladimir,Jill, Gavin, Bill, Wes, Sebastian, Paule, Darlene, andAnthony.CHAPTER ONEINTRODUCTIONCommunity economic development (CED) is an increasinglyimportant strategy for communities wishing to pursueeconomic development in harmony with social, cultural, andecological values and objectives. This strategy, whichemphasizes community control and self-reliance, is ofparticular relevance to communities characterized byeconomic dislocation, unemployment and poverty. However,communities which have high levels of structuralunemployment and poverty frequently experience a lack ofcommunity identity, alienation, isolation, anddisempowerment, all of which are potential obstacles to theorganization of CED initiatives.Lack of community identity, alienation, isolation anddisempowerment are typical problems of inner-citycommunities. Combined with other common social and economicproblems (such as high rates of unemployment, poverty,crime, transiency, safety issues, physical deterioration,and lack of adequate housing, parks, and recreationalservices), the potential obstacles to CED organization, inthese types of communities, can seem insurmountable.12An important aspect of CED organization is its attempt toinvolve the community in a process of examining its problemsand identifying potential strategies for achieving well-being. Critical to this process is the recognition of theexistence of a "community culture." As Marcia Nozicksuggests,So long as culture is kept alive communities willpersist, even under threat of extinction by war,economic depression, natural disasters and persecution.Ironically, often the struggle for survival itselfhelps to strengthen community as people bond togetherfor mutual aid and come to realize their unity ofpurpose and common identity. (1992, 182)This study explores the process of organizing CED within theinner-city community of Mount Pleasant in Vancouver. Theimpetus for this study was the researcher's interest inlearning how community economic development, as a strategythat explicitly integrates social and economic development,could be applied in the context of an urban community.Through the documentation of the organizing process,community research is integrated with the communityorganizing process.The author was both the principal community organizer andthe researcher. This combination of research and action wasundertaken as a combined research/practicum within thegraduate studies program in the School of Social Work (thepracticum contract is found in Appendix I). The researchrole involved participant-observation, which combines the3roles of active participant and researcher. Guidance wasprovided by an Advisory Committee drawn from the MountPleasant community.Mount Pleasant, over the past one hundred years, has evolvedfrom a relatively prosperous neighbourhood into anethnically diverse community of people with various socio-economic backgrounds. While many of its residents havelived in the community for a long time, Mount Pleasant alsohouses a significant number of new immigrants to thiscountry and has a large transient population.^Thecommunity has a high rate of unemployment and many residentsreceive some form of government income assistance. With itsrich blend of cultures, socio-economic backgrounds andincome levels, Mount Pleasant is a microcosm of Canadiansociety.Mount Pleasant's diversity presents challenges to theprocess of organizing CED. These challenges include thecomplexity of Mount Pleasant's social and economic issues,the rapid demographic changes the community is experiencing,the diversity of its ethnic groups, the influx of non-English speaking immigrants, its distinct "communities ofinterest" (e.g., ethnicity, arts, neighbourhood) and thecomplex infrastructure of agencies, services and communityorganizations within its boundaries.4This study examines these challenges in relation to theprocess of organizing CED and identifies the relevantfactors for determining a community's readiness for CED.Key aspects of the organizing process are explored in depth(e.g., gaining legitimacy within the community, assessingthe community's readiness for CED, determining a developmentapproach, cultivating leadership and developing anorganizational base) as well as the impact of theinterventions on the process.CED practice is concerned with the integration of social andeconomic planning and development. These are issues withwhich social work should be concerned. Poverty has been oflong-standing concern to social work and as structuralunemployment increases, poverty is increasing. Communityeconomic development provides opportunities for communitymembers to participate directly in issues that affect themand to work towards change that benefits both themselves andtheir communities. Community involvement in social changestrategies is of direct interest to social workers, inparticular to community practitioners. The linkage ofsocial and economic planning and development also hasimplications for social policy, especially for thedevelopment of policy that encourages an integrated approachto community well-being.5Chapter Two provides the context for the key aspects of thisstudy of organizing CED. It reviews the literature relatingto the philosophy and evolution of community economicdevelopment and provides an overview of the literaturedealing with community organizing. In order to give ageographical context for this study, a profile of MountPleasant is provided, containing relevant historical,physical, demographic, socio-economic and organizationalinformation.Chapter Three describes the research design and methodology,examines the limitations of the study and addresses theethical issues posed by the research.Chapter Four identifies, explores, and analyzes the researchissues. The five stages of the organizing process areidentified and discussed; the guiding values and beliefs ofthe organizer, the major roles and functions of theorganizer and the roles of other key participants withineach stage are examined. The major focus, activities andcritical elements of each stage are discussed and aframework for organizing CED is proposed.Chapter Five discusses the key findings of this study andthe possible limitations of the research. A number of6questions for further research are identified and the majorcontributions of this study are discussed.In sum, this research attempts to examine the process oforganizing CED and attempts to identify and explore keyissues related to the organizing process. In doing so, itsuggests a framework which can be applied to organizingactivities in both urban and non-urban settings.CHAPTER TWOA LITERATURE REVIEW:THE CONTEXT FOR THE RESEARCHINTRODUCTIONThis chapter discusses the context for the key aspects oforganizing CED activity: the who, what, why, and where ofthis process. Three distinct bodies of knowledge arerelevant to this study: literature relating to thephilosophy, evolution and practice of community economicdevelopment; key issues pertaining to the process ofcommunity organizing; and, relevant historical, physical,demographic, socio-economic and organizational datapertaining to the community of Mount Pleasant.The "why" and "what" questions are dealt with in the sectionon community economic development (CED). As the substantivecontext for this research, CED is discussed in relation toits philosophical basis and its emergence as an importantstrategy for addressing social and economic problems at acommunity level. "Community" and "new economics" aresalient concepts within the CED literature. The underlyingvalues and beliefs related to these concepts, as representedwithin the CED literature, are explored in order tounderstand the underpinning of the key principles of CED.78This leads to a discussion of the fundamentalcharacteristics and principles of CED and the application ofthese principles to CED practice and to the importantdistinctions between CED and other approaches to localeconomic development. Lastly, this section outlines theemergence and growth of CED in Canada and considers thesignificance of current CED practice.The "how" and "who" questions are addressed in a discussionof the process of organizing. An overview of thetheoretical literature relating to community organizing isprovided. Specifically, the major approaches to communityorganizing and development are outlined, discussed and thepredominant roles of the community organizer are examined.A discussion of the process of community organizing isprovided and the stages of initiated community action arehighlighted.The third and final section of this chapter addresses the"where" question. A profile of the community of MountPleasant is provided -- outlining the relevant historical,physical, demographic, and socio-economic characteristics ofMount Pleasant as well as describing its organizationalinfrastructure. This information provides a physical andsocial context for the research.9COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTMany definitions have been proposed for community economicdevelopment (CED). The following definition, developed bythe BC Working Group on Community Economic Development, isconsistent with the approach to CED described in this paper.CED is a community-based and community-directedprocess that explicitly combines social andeconomic development and is directed towardsfostering the economic, social, ecological andcultural well-being of communities and regions.As such it recognizes, affirms and supports allthe paid and unpaid activity that contributes tothe realization of this well-being.CED has emerged as an alternative to conventionalapproaches to economic development. It is foundedon the belief that problems facing communities --unemployment, poverty, job loss, economicinstability, environmental degradation and loss ofcommunity control -- need to be addressed in aholistic and participatory way.CED is an evolving, on-going process.This definition makes explicit some of the values andbeliefs about community as perceived within the CEDliterature.Perceptions of Community"Community" is an elusive concept.. . . there remains something about . . .[community] that is inherently mysterious,miraculous, unfathomable. Thus there is noadequate one-sentence definition of genuinecommunity.^(Peck 1988, 60)10It is within community that values are created which dignifyliving, suggests American philosopher, Baker Brownell. Hemaintains that a commitment to community is essential for ahealthy society (Melnyk 1985, 135). Similar themes areechoed by others. "In and through community lies thesalvation of the world," according to Scott Peck (1988, 17).The word "community" has both a wide descriptive meaning andan evaluative dimension (Plant 1974, 13). The range of itsdescriptive meaning is very wide. "Community has been linkedto locality, to identity of functional interests, to a senseof belonging, to shared cultural and ethnic ideas andvalues, to a way of life opposed to the organisation andbureaucracy of modern mass society, etc." (Plant 1974, 13).However, Plant maintains that "community" is "a word andconcept fraught with normative import" (1974, 13) and thus,"the evaluative position of the theorist may well determinethe aspects of the descriptive meaning to be emphasised"(1974, 37).During the industrial revolution, the division of labour,combined with the processes of urbanization andbureaucratization, created social divisions within societyand an estrangement from the social world. These socialdivisions, Plant maintains, are inimical to maintainingcommunity (1974, 16-19). These factors, along with the11values of individuality and autonomy, have shaped thedevelopment of a liberal theory of community which claimsthat locality in itself is not a necessary nor sufficientcondition for community. Plant asserts that the notion offunctional or interest communities is more relevant to theliberal framework (1974, 47).The notion of the functional community . . . is anattempt to make sense of the idea of communityfrom some overall liberal view of man (sic),taking into account the values of autonomy andfreedom realised as a result of the decline of thetraditional community. In addition, it should bepointed out that this liberal view of thecommunity is not some recent invention but goes tothe very start of sociological thought on thenature of community . . . (1974, 47).The functional community, which evolved from this liberalframework, is the basis for how community is viewed withinthe context of CED. "Communities of interest" are commonlyreferred to in CED literature and frequently are theinitiators of CED activity. Although geography is relevant,it can be argued that it is not a sufficient determinant ofcommunity. The concept of "community" in CED is explicitlyassociated with particular values and beliefs. As AlexanderLockhart suggests:The critical concept that distinguishes community-based from corporately-based development lies inan understanding of "community" as more than abedroom and a service annex to alien commercialinterests. Such a notion of community begins withthe recognition of the crucial role that thebuilding of shared commitments to the common well-being plays in the attainment of social health andindividual satisfaction. (1987, 396)12Scott Peck (1987) proposes several characteristics ofcommunity, four of which have particular relevance to CED.First, he suggests that "community is and must be inclusive"(61). Inclusiveness means more than welcoming newcomers, itmeans accepting and welcoming the human differences thatexist between people. "In community, instead of beingignored, denied, hidden, or changed, human differences arecelebrated as gifts" (62).Secondly, Peck suggests that community is consensual. Itcan never be totalitarian. In community, differences areresolved through means that go beyond democracy. "Decisionsin genuine community are arrived at through consensus, in aprocess that is not unlike a community of jurors, for whomconsensual decision making is mandated" (63).A third characteristic noted by Peck is: "Commitment--thewillingness to coexist is crucial" (62). This "requiresthat we hang in there when the going gets a little rough"(62).Finally, Peck maintains that communities are self-aware. Heclaims that "self-examination is the key to insight, whichis the key to wisdom" (66). Furthermore, "the community-building process requires self-examination from thebeginning" (66).13These values, which are represented in community, areimportant not only because they "dignify living" as BakerBrownell suggests. These values represent the dimension ofhuman relationships which must be acknowledged in theprocess of "community-building," a key objective and thrustof CED.Perceptions of the "New Economics" A "new economics" has emerged out of a critique of neo-classical economic theory. This new economic thinking,which underlies the philosophy of CED, represents afundamental departure from classical economic theory inthree major respects: its explicit focus on the satisfactionof human needs; its reconceptualization of the nature andvalue of work; and its emphasis on economic self-reliance(Ekins 1986, 97).The word "economics" is derived from the Greek root "oikos,"meaning "household." The suffix "nomos" means "to manage"(New Catalyst 1987, 2). Although economics originally meantthe management of a household, this did not refer to themanagement of a nuclear family's budget.Rather, it referred to a whole: the business of'managing', or living sustainably within aspecific, local niche in nature. 'Economy' wasnot just one's exchange relations with others, butthe whole, inter-dependent web of relations,social, cultural and ecological. (New Catalyst1987, 2)14Economic thought has evolved over the centuries, reflectingchanging ideas about the organization of political andsocial life. As the parameters of exchange broadenedgeographically, economics evolved to consider such mattersas the production and pricing of goods, and the distributionof income through wages, interest and profit. Adam Smithwas a major influence on classical economic theory. Hisinfluential book Wealth of Nations, published in 1776,postulated that economic growth is fostered by economicself-interest and competition in the market place. Heproposed that the market place ought to be unencumbered bygovernment intervention and advocated free trade (Galbraith1987, 64).Numerous writers, e.g., E.F. Schumacher (1973), JamesRobertson (1978), David Ross and Peter Usher ((1986), PaulEkins (1986), Mark A. Lutz and Kenneth Lux (1988), MarilynWaring (1988), Herman E. Daly and John B. Cobb (1989), andHazel Henderson (1991), have contributed to a critique ofneo-classical economics. Marilyn Waring argues that moderneconomic theory and practice, despite its claim to be freefrom moral judgments and values, is in fact predicated on aparticular view of human nature. She notes that Adam Smith:... established the logical foundation for hiswork by identifying what he thought was essentialhuman nature. He developed an image of humans asmaterialistic, egoistic, selfish, and primarilymotivated by pursuit of their own self-interest.This is also not a "scientific opinion" it seems15to me, but a created, and moral, judgment. (1988,22)A focus on the satisfaction of human needs is a basic pillarof the "new economics." This contrasts with conventionaleconomic approaches which emphasize economic growth withoutregard to its consequences on human and ecological systems.The conventional approach to economics is criticized for itslack of consideration of social, cultural and ecologicalfactors and its compartmentalization of human behaviour.Economic decision-making is frequently done in isolationfrom decision-making about social, cultural, andenvironmental matters. A consequence of this is thateconomic development frequently occurs without dueconsideration of other relevant factors, and benefits areoften assessed in narrow financial terms. Rarely are thebroader impacts of development considered: the impact on thenatural environment, on a community's culture and on thesocial dimension of people's lives.The focus on economic growth, rather than development, hasbeen widely criticized. There is "a mounting chorus ofcritics who point out how high the cost of growth of GNP hasbeen in psychological, sociological, and ecological terms"(Daly and Cobb 1989, 64). Alderson and Conn maintain that:"The drive for productivity and profit dominates the agendasof government programs and policies, business practices and16procedures, which in turn affect the lives of everyone inthe community" (1993, 4).Others criticize the tools, such as the Gross NationalProduct (GNP), that are used to measure economic growth.Daly and Cobb argue that the predominant use of theseconventional measures of economic activity has insidiouseffects. They point to what they call "the fallacy ofmisplaced concreteness" because "the market activity thatGNP measures has social costs that it ignores, and that itcounts positively market activity devoted to counteringthese same social costs. Obviously GNP overstates welfare!"(1989, 64).According to Ekins, the reconceptualization of the natureand value of work is the second pillar which comprises amajor break with conventional economic thinking (1986, 97).Many critics contend that the GNP excludes much activitythat is economically productive. Waring asserts that moderneconomics, which has a male perspective, contains underlyingassumptions about what is, and is not, productive work. Forexample, it carries an assumption that unpaid household workis not productive. As those who have contributed mostsignificantly to both the household and informal communitysectors, women. have long recognized that productiveactivity is not confined to the marketplace.17Unpaid work in the home and in the community, doneprimarily by women and often in addition to paidwork, is an essential part of the economy.Without this work the formal or cash economy wouldnot be able to operate. (Alderson and Conn 1993,4).Thus the relevance of the GNP as a valid measure ofproduction has been called into question:Again, the idea that wealth, or national product,is created by activity in the money-based,institutional sector of the economy and not byactivity in the informal domestic and localcommunity sector -- for example, that the economicproduction of the country actually goes down ifpeople grow their own vegetables instead of buyingthem in the shops -- is also wearing thin.(Robertson 1978, 42)Ross and Usher estimate that informal economic activity(represented by unrecorded community-based enterprise,voluntary activity, barter and skills exchange, mutual aidand household activity) is equal to at least one-half of therecorded Gross National Product (1986, 98; emphasis added).A commitment to self-reliance, the third pillar of the neweconomics, implies a social, environmental and economicresponsibility for the consequences of our decisions,according to Galtung (1986, 101). Conventional economicsdoes not consider the negative effects or "externalities"(e.g., pollution, global warming, deforestation, loss ofbiodiversity) of economic decisions insofar as they have nodirect impact on the enterprise. These are often seen asirrelevant. An emphasis on self-reliance would mean that18such externalities would be taken into consideration.Galtung argues that:[S]elf-reliance cuts both ways: it preserves thepositive externalities by trading much lessupwards, and protects against the negativeexternalities by trading much less downwards. Itis a measure of economic defence as well as a pactof non-aggressiveness. In self-reliance there isboth an element of enlightened egoism (don't giveaway the positive externalities) and enlightenedaltruism (don't damage others by exportingnegative externalities). (1986, 101)These criticisms have led to a fundamental rethinking of therole of economics in shaping public policy. This thinkinghas fuelled efforts at the community level to generate a newform of economic development. This type of economicdevelopment values all of the unpaid work in the householdand the community which contributes to community well-being;it promotes community self-reliance and it deliberatelyincorporates humanistic and ecological values. The well-known economist, E. F. Schumacher, advocated developing anew economics which emphasizes the needs of people and asensitivity to the environment:If it (economics) cannot get beyond its vastabstractions, the national income, the rate ofgrowth, capital/output ration, input-outputanalysis, labour mobility, capital accumulation;if it cannot get beyond all this and make contactwith the human realities of poverty, frustration,alienation, despair, breakdown, crime, escapism,stress, congestion, ugliness and spiritual death,then let us scrap economics and start afresh.(1973, 62)19CED: Its Principles and Characteristics Community economic development (CED) has emerged as a newapproach to economic development, an approach which isexplicitly rooted in a values framework. The CED literatureaddresses a number of important principles. Theseprinciples and characteristics are discussed with aparticular focus on how they are applied in CED activity.The six principles referred to in this discussion are:1) An integrated approach to development2) A broader definition of economic productivity3) Inclusive participation4) The use of democratic processes and structures5) A focus on building self-reliance and capacity6) An emphasis on building community.The first characteristic of CED is that it "recognizes thatthe healthy development of communities requires a holisticapproach that addresses the social, economic, cultural andecological dimensions of community well-being" (BC WorkingGroup on CED). Similarly, CED recognizes theinterrelatedness of social and economic problems.Unemployment is not just a social problem nor is it only aneconomic problem. Its effects are felt in terms ofcommunity economic well-being as well as impacting thepersonal lives of people in the community.20CED seeks to address socio-economic problems through methodswhich encourage both the social and economic development ofthe community. This integration of the social and economicdimension of problems and solutions is a key principle ofCED. "The goals of community economic development projectsare never solely economic: they are never limited just tocreating jobs or increasing the flow of capital into thecommunity. Nor are the goals solely social or cultural"(Wismer and Pell 1981, 3).Taking an integrated approach to development, CEDencompasses a wide range of activity. This includesactivities which enhance community self-reliance such ashousing development, loan guarantee funds, importsubstitution programs, community land trusts, individual andco-operative enterprises, and activities which emphasizetraining, education, and skill development (e.g., businesstraining centres, employment training programs, literacyprograms, personal empowerment skills, etc.). Otherinitiatives include strategies which empower workers such aspromoting worker cooperatives and worker ownership ofbusinesses.Providing sustainable employment within the community is amajor objective of CED. The primary strategy for achievingthis objective is the development and encouragement of local21enterprise. Local enterprise development frequently meetsbroader social, cultural, or environmental objectives aswell as fulfilling an economic objective. This might bereflected in the nature of the enterprise, itself, or in theway is it structured (e.g., worker co-operatives). Jobcreation strategies are frequently implemented in concertwith strategies for education, skill development and jobtraining, all methods which enhance not only the economic,but also the social well-being of communities.Discovering a community's cultural roots and characteristicsis a further aspect of this integrated approach. Nozickclaims that this can be done through keeping history alivein our physical surroundings. Heritage conservation can bea tool for community revitalization and community economicdevelopment by makingthe past a living part of a community's identity,a source of community pride, and an economic toolto revitalize a neighbourhood at the same time. .. . Heritage can also mean maintaining andreviving the character of old neighbourhoods --houses, streets, parks, flea markets, shops.(1992, 184)The second principle is that "CED recognizes, affirms andsupports all the paid and unpaid activity that contributes. . . to [community] well-being" (BC Working Group on CED).The previous section has related that conventional economicsexcludes much of the productive work that goes on in22communities and households. One way that women's CEDprojects consciously recognize and affirm this type ofactivity is by supporting women who have domestic and childcare responsibilities. A non-profit housing society inVancouver, Entre Nous Femmes, exemplifies this principle.The society was started by single mothers whowanted secure housing for themselves and theirchildren. In their training programs, familypreparation time (for making lunches and fordropping off children at daycare or school) isincorporated into the work day. (Alderson, Conn,Donald and Kemp, 1993)In addition, many CED organizations affirm the importance ofthis work by paying child care expenses of those attendingmeetings and conferences.A third principle of CED is that:CED encourages the active participation of allmembers of the community in the planning,decision-making, and benefits of CED initiatives,and works to remove the barriers that limit theparticipation of marginalized citizens. Inparticular, CED seeks to encourage the activeparticipation of women, youth, seniors,differently-abled people, racial/ethnic groups,the poor, and First Nations' peoples in the publiclife of the community. (BC Working Group on CED)While seeking to ensure that those who are most marginalizedin community are included is a major principle and objectiveof CED, this represents a key challenge for CED organizersand organizations. The BC Working Group on CED, in planninga Provincial Consultation on CED in 1992 for CEDpractitioners, developed a grid which consideredgeographical regions of B.C. and "communities of interest"23(as represented by the community arts sector, aboriginal andFirst Nations' communities, women's centres, anti-povertyactivists, housing groups, the credit union sector, the co-op sector, those engaged in community and regional economicdevelopment, the community business sector, thoserepresenting various ethnic and visible minority groups, aswell as several others). This was a way of attempting toensure that key representatives, from all sectors of CEDactivity, were included in this process.CED is also characterized by the use of democratic processesand structures. "CED supports decentralized, non-hierarchial decision-making processes that strengthen theautonomy of the individual, the community and the region"(BC Working Group on CED). According to a 1985 report ofthe Social Planning and Review Council of B.C., CEDorganizations frequently engage in consensus decision-making(7). Structures such as worker cooperatives, collectives,community development corporations, community enterprisecentres, business components of voluntary organizations,intentional communities, barter groups and organized skill-exchanges are some of the vehicles through whichparticipatory democracy is reinforced (Ross 1986, 13). Someof these structures, such as worker co-ops and collectives,emphasize worker ownership of the enterprise and workercontrol over the decision-making process.24A fifth principle is a focus on building community capacityand self-reliance. CED develops capacity by building on"local strengths, creativity and resources, and activelyseek[ing] to decrease dependency on, and vulnerability to,economic interests outside the community and region" (BCWorking Group on CED). CED contributes to self-reliance "byencouraging the acquisition of relevant skills and thedevelopment of supportive structures and institutions" (BCWorking Group on CED).Implicit in CED is a belief in the capacity of communitiesto solve their own problems. CED encourages the use ofresources within the local community whenever possible,limiting the community's reliance on external resources.Greater self-reliance means different things. Itmeans jobs, but it also means decreasingdependence on outside resources of goods andservices, by finding ways to provide such thingsas food outlets and medical care locally. Inaddition, greater self-reliance for the projectitself is important, so that it is not dependenton outside funding sources. When a communitygroup begins to talk about that kind of self-reliance, it begins a process of communityeconomic development. (Wismer and Pell 1981, 6)Nozick describes a number of strategies used in communitiesin working toward the goal of self-reliance. They includerecycling of resources (e.g., garbage, old buildings),encouraging community exchange (through barter networks,local lending, and local currencies), replacing imports with25local products, creating new products, and trading withequal partners (1992, 43-63).Finally, community-building is a key objective of CED. "CEDseeks to build a sense of community by fosteringrelationships of acceptance, understanding and mutualrespect" (BC Working Group on CED). Building community is acomplex process that can occur in many ways. Marcia Nozick,in her book No Place Like Home, discusses the importance ofindividual healing processes to the task of communityhealing and, therefore, to community-building. The biggestchallenge of this, she maintains, is "healing the wounds ofa broken society characterized by violence, abuse anddisempowerment of increasing numbers of individuals" (1992,149). A first step in this healing process is acknowledgingthe problems. The process of self-healing starts withindividuals, yet affects their relationships with family,friends and associates, and extends ultimately to thecommunity (Nozick 1992, 150). Nozick points to the AlkalaiLake Indian Band (in British Columbia), which was decimatedby alcoholism and abuse, as an example of a community whichhas been "healed" in this way and has been able toeffectively build a sense of community:What happened at Alkali Lake was the linking ofpersonal and social empowerment to revitalize anentire community -- spiritually, morally,culturally and economically. Personal empowermenthad to come first, and, from that, communityeconomic development followed. (1992, 103)26The Distinction between Local Economic Development and CEDCED represents a range of approaches and structures and issometimes confused with other approaches to local economicdevelopment. A major distinction is between local economicdevelopment and community economic development. The degreeand quality of community involvement in each of theseapproaches is a basic difference between these approaches.As the definition of CED used in this paper suggests, CED isa community-based and community directed strategy.Community development corporations and other community-basedorganizations are the primary vehicles through whichplanning and implementing economic development strategies iscarried out within CED. As Richard Schramm (1987, 158)notes, within traditional economic development strategies,the chief vehicles for planning and implementing economicdevelopment activities are industrial developmentauthorities, set up by the local government or Chamber ofCommerce. In British Columbia, the provincial governmentprovides funding for local economic development commissionswhich are established on a regional or local basis.Richard Schramm (1987) distinguishes between traditionaleconomic development strategies and community-based economicdevelopment strategies. He notes that traditional localeconomic development stresses:27economic growth, usually measured in terms of thegrowth in jobs, total income, and property valuesand the local tax base. This approach reliesheavily on the private sector, and uses publicpolicy instruments to increase the profits ofexisting local businesses or businesses agreeingto move to the community. (1987, 157)The local development approach accepts existing markets andmarket forces, and attempts to tie into these markets asmuch as possible through the link of "exported" goods. Itsemphasis is on businesses that sell goods and servicesoutside the locality. The traditional economic developmentapproach to addressing social and economic problems isexemplified through the "rising tide lifts all boats" and"trickle down" philosophies which rely on economic growthand private sector employment and local purchases to createlocal income through a multiplier effect (Schramm 1987,157).In contrast, community-based economic development isconcerned with the "stability and distribution of income andits production" (Schramm 1987, 158). Its strategies focuson development rather than growth and their focus is onbroader goals such as economic empowerment, security,quality and equity issues, not just increases in jobs, totalincome and tax base (158).Consequently, if a development project generates acertain number of jobs, a community-based approachfocuses not just on the number of jobs but on whatthey produce, who gets them, how they fit with28existing industry and employment, what they pay inwages and benefits, what security and workconditions they offer, and other concerns that gobeyond the number of jobs and the total incomethey bring. (Schramm 1987, 158).Schramm notes a number of other differences in theseapproaches. He indicates (1987, 158) that community-baseddevelopment, in contrast to traditional economicdevelopment:* supports labour, consumer, and community interestsdirectly, rather than using the support of private businessinterests as "trickle down" vehicles for local development;* emphasizes social, rather than just private, costs andbenefits from economic development projects;* uses subsidies to labour or other community groups tocreate businesses and jobs, rather than relying onconventional subsidies to private capital to provide themindirectly;* emphasizes the development of local resources, and theretention of local control over them rather than emphasizingthe search for outside private and public resources toaddress local economic problems;29* supports many small projects rather than a few large onesfrom outside that promise to save the local economy;* features ownership structures that are local andcooperatively or community owned rather than absent andprivately owned.While all of these distinguishing features are important,the salient distinguishing feature between these approachesis the involvement of the broader community, not just"experts" or local authorities, in determining thedevelopment strategies to be implemented.The Emergence and Growth of CED Although CED is considered to be a relatively recentmovement, its philosophy has its roots in the co-operativemovement of 150 years ago. Co-operatives were firstdeveloped in Canada in the late part of the 19th century(Melnyk 1985, 21). They have continued to develop and haveexperienced a resurgence of growth in recent years. Melnykreports that a federal government study has shown that 43%of adult Canadians belong to at least one co-op (1985, 19).Co-operative activity remains an important element of thebroader CED movement.30Community development is also an important underpinning forCED and the two terms are often used interchangeably.However, CED is distinguished from community development inits explicit focus on the economic as well as the social andcultural development of community.The development of CED in Canada was also influenced by theAmerican experience with community development corporationswhich were developed as a tool for urban renewal and localempowerment. Inner-city communities in the United Statesare characterized by unbearable conditions of racialinequality, urban decay, poverty, poor housing and lack ofeducational opportunities. In the 1960s, the disintegrationof these communities prompted riots and fires which werefurther destroying them. This situation led to amobilization of middle and working class African Americanswho formed neighbourhood groups to reassess their situation.Out of this emerged a recognition that communities coulddevelop the capacity to address many of these problems(Perry 1982, 8).What happened spontaneously to each city began asneighbourhood after neighbourhood puzzled out thelocal scene, and the pieces of the answer fellinto the same pattern: a community has to have itsown institutions to deal with a comprehensiveinterlocking of economic activities as well aspolitical, of new business as well as new voterregistration, of housing development as well asintegrated schools, of industrial parks as well asrecreational facilities, of the sense of self-respect in a neighbourhood as well as the dignityof a national citizen. And they came to the same31general institutional innovation. Out of theirrecognition a new social and economic tool wasinvented -- the community development corporation.The CDC would represent and direct a communityapproach to comprehensive revitalization of aunified neighbourhood. (Perry 1982, 8)The community development corporation has been successfullytransplanted into the Canadian context. Cape Breton, anisolated region of Nova Scotia, had long been neglected bythe provincial government and when it announced that thelocal coal mines would be allowed to close, a local groupformed to address the problems of high unemployment andlocal economic underdevelopment. Out of these efforts grewthe community development corporation of New Dawn,incorporated in 1976 (MacLeod 1986, 13-24).In Canada, economic dislocation has occurred both at aregional level and in urban areas. Federal and provincialregional development policies, on the whole, have beenunsuccessful at resolving the problems of chronically highunemployment, poverty, and underdeveloped local economies.The development of CED in eastern Quebec was an earlyexample of attempts by an economically underdeveloped regionto introduce new strategies for regional development whichcombined economic and social goals. Operation Dignity wasformed in 1970 to protest governmental policies directed atclosing down villages that were considered economicallyunviable (MacLeod 1986, 29).32Community economic development emerged elsewhere in Canadain response to the need to create an economic means toaddress social needs (e.g., housing, child care, etc.). Forexample, the CCEC Credit Union (formerly the CommunityCongress for Economic Change Society) was established tomeet the capital financing needs of co-operativeinitiatives. In 1974, people involved in daycare, consumerand housing co-operatives met and discussed their concernsabout their lack of access to capital within the community.They decided to pool their money and form a financialinstitution. Today, the CCEC Credit Union supports co-operative, democratic and self-help organizations and,describes its bottom line as "community economicdevelopment." Priority is given to loans which help peopleworking cooperatively to provide services to credit unionmembers or to the community as a whole (Strandberg 1985,39).Another Vancouver project, the CRS Workers' Co-op, began in1974 as a means to start food co-ops and food processingoperations. Originally a consumer co-op, it later evolvedinto a worker co-op with full-time permanent staff. It isowned and run collectively by all the members who work init. It also developed a food wholesale operation and begana bakery, called "Uprising Breads Bakery," which producesand sells a variety of breads and pastries. CRS Workers'33Co-op has identified a number of objectives including theoperation of enterprises "according to the principles ofworker ownership and control" and the support of "equalityof women and men in the workplace" (Strandberg 1985, 11).The early to mid-1980s saw CED emerge as a response toclosures and high levels of unemployment in resourcedependent communities. The communities of Nanaimo, PortAlberni, and Nelson have all examined CED in response toeconomic hardship within their communities.While some government programs and community institutionshave explicitly recognized and supported CED, governmentsupport for CED, until very recently, has beeninsignificant. As Lockhart claimed in 1987: "To be sure, anoccasional government department has dabbled in thesemantics, but only long enough for the forces of orthodoxyto reassert their hegemony" (411). The federal CommunityFutures Program, under Employment and Immigration Canada,began in 1986 to provide operational and capital funding intargeted regions of the country (with high unemploymentrates) to diversify local economies and create localemployment opportunities. Other short-term funding programssuch as the federal Innovations Program were created to fundinnovative solutions to employment. These programs haveoften acted as a catalyst for communities and regions to34examine alternative economic development strategies, andsome of them have developed CED initiatives.More recently, there is evidence of growing interest in CED.In the late 1980s, the Economic Council of Canadacommissioned a number of case studies on local developmentand established a task force to examine the potential of CED(Lockhart 1991, 12). Health and Welfare Canada held aspecial competition for research on community economicdevelopment in 1991 and National Welfare Grants is nowplanning a five-year program of research on CED (NationalWelfare Grants).Provincial and territorial governments are also becominginterested in CED and, in some cases, are supporting itsdevelopment (e.g., Yukon, Northwest Territories,Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Saskatchewan, BritishColumbia). Local governments, including Montreal, Ottawaand Edmonton, are also supporting CED projects inneighbourhoods that have been "hit hard by major corporateshut downs or curtailments" (Lockhart 1991, 11). However,as Lockhart notes, "notwithstanding these encouragingexamples, it is the conventional development wisdom thatstill dominates Canada's national economic developmentpolicy" (1991, 11).35Institutional support has also come from educationalinstitutions (e.g., Simon Fraser University's Centre forCED) and to a limited degree from the credit union sector.Although many credit unions have taken conservativeapproaches to CED, Vancouver City Savings Credit Union, thelargest credit union in British Columbia, has activelysupported CED through the establishment of the "VanCityCommunity Foundation" whose mandate includes CED.Community economic development is not just a North Americanphenomenon. All over the globe, CED strategies such ascommunity enterprise centres, community-owned businesses,co-operatives, community land trusts, community forestryprojects, micro-enterprises, credit circles and communityfinancing alternatives are in various stages ofexperimentation and use. Lockhart notes the irony of the"recognition by Canada's own international developmentagencies that CED has proven to be far more successful, andhence worthy of foreign aid funding, than the once popularorthodox developmental projects" (1991, 11).It is fair to conclude that the practice of CED is stillrelatively innovative and experimental. Further explorationand documentation of CED is required to facilitate broadunderstanding of CED principles and practices. Communitiesare beginning to share and learn from each others'36experience with CED. Recognizing the validity of thisexperience and sharing it with others is the essence of CED.THE PROCESS OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZINGThis section of the chapter highlights some of the keyissues in the approaches to community organizing anddevelopment and the predominant roles of the communityorganizer.Major Approaches to Community Organizing and Development Community organization encapsulates a number of distinctpractice areas. Various terms have been used to describethe activities carried out under the rubric of communityorganization. Included in these are community planning,community development, community work, and social action.Community organization practice is described by Rothman as"intervention at the community level oriented towardimproving or changing community institutions and solvingcommunity problems" (1979a, 3). It is work which isperformed by professionals such as social workers, publichealth nurses, adult educators, city planners and communitymental health practitioners, as well as by citizenvolunteers (Rothman 1979a, 3).37The diversity and scope of practice within the field ofcommunity organization has led to some confusion about whatconstitutes community organization practice. To helpalleviate this confusion, Rothman (1979b) developed threemodels which delineate the major approaches to communityorganization practice: locality development, socialplanning, and social action. These models distinguishbetween each of the approaches in relation to such factorsas its goals, assumptions, basic change strategies andpractitioner roles. Although somewhat arbitrary, thesemodels provide some useful distinctions between the majorareas of practice.The social planning approach, according to Rothman,emphasizes a technical process of problem-solvingwith regard to substantive social problems, suchas delinquency, housing, and mental health.Rational, deliberately planned, and controlledchange has a central place in this model. . . . Byand large, the concern here is with establishing,arranging, and delivering goods and services topeople who need them. Building community capacityor fostering radical or fundamental social changedoes not play a central part. (1979b, 27)This model is practised at the municipal level, withinnational or provincial social agencies and at the provincialand federal levels of government.In contrast with this technical, deliberate, top-downapproach, social action:38presupposes a disadvantaged segment of thepopulation that needs to be organized, perhapsin alliance with others, in order to makeadequate demands on the larger community forincreased resources or treatment more inaccordance with social justice or democracy.It aims at making basic changes in majorinstitutions or community practices. Socialaction as employed here seeks redistribution ofpower, resources or decision-making within thecommunity and/or changing basic policies offormal organizations. (Rothman 1979b, 27)Social action strategies are more likely to be carried outat the neighbourhood or community level. Social actionefforts often take place within advocacy groups, such asanti-poverty, feminist and human rights organizations.The locality development model is a somewhat moreconsensus-oriented approach to community change. It"presupposes that community change may be pursued optimallythrough broad participation of a wide spectrum of people atthe local community level in goal determination and action"(Rothman 1979b, 26). This approach typically takes place ina neighbourhood setting or a distinct geographical locationand is commonly referred to as "community development." Insome cases, whole towns may be the target of communitydevelopment efforts. Community development is a commonstrategy for combatting social and economic problems indeveloping countries.Christenson (1989) developed a thematic categorization ofcommunity development based on a review of over 300 articles39that appeared in the Journal of the Community DevelopmentSociety over twenty years. Three major themes emerged fromthis review, each of which represents distinct approaches tointervention: self-help, technical assistance, and conflict.The self-help theme can be compared with Rothman's localitydevelopment model, the technical assistance theme is similarto Rothman's social planning model and the conflict approachcorresponds with his social action model. On the whole,this categorization does not appear to contributesignificantly to a theory of community organization.Fisher and Romanofsky (1981) distinguish between twodominant and distinct approaches to community organization,one based in the social work tradition, and the other, inthe political activist tradition. In the social worktradition the community is viewed as a social organism andthe focus is on building a sense of community (xiii). Thepolitical activist approach views the community as apolitical entity and the focus of this approach is onobtaining, maintaining, or restructuring power (xv).The usefulness of such models is questioned by some.Perlman and Gurin (1972, 55) suggest that the development ofmodels, or even a theory of community organization, ispremature given the diversity and dynamic nature ofcommunity organization practice. They criticize Rothman's40models, pointing out that there are limitations to equatingcertain fields of practice to specific techniques. "At thepresent time statements as to what methodologies areappropriate under certain conditions frequently representphilosophical value positions or at most untestedhypotheses" (54-5). One limitation is that this promotes atendency to consider a particular field of activity as self-contained and therefore minimizes its interdependence withother areas of practice (54). Secondly, there is a tendencyfor practitioners to limit the options available for action.Despite these limitations, as an organizer it is useful tobe aware of one's view of the community and of the changestrategies being employed. While how one views thecommunity does not necessarily determine the change strategyand tactics to be employed, one important aspect of thesemodels is that they reflect differing values and beliefsabout the nature of community and about how social changeoccurs and is sustained. Within the community developmentmodel, the community is seen as eclipsed, static and lackingin democratic problem-solving capacities; this model impliesthat the community has common interests or reconcilabledifferences and a consensus approach is favoured forproblem-solving. The social action approach sees thecommunity as consisting of disadvantaged populations, socialinjustice and inequity; change is achieved through conflict41or confrontation, direct action or negotiation through thecrystallization of issues and organization of people to takeaction against enemy targets. The social planning approachsees the community as having substantive social problems;its basic change strategies include fact-gathering aboutproblems and making decisions on the basis of the mostrational course of action by either consensus or conflict(Rothman 1979b, 30).While these models highlight some basic differences inbeliefs and approaches, the differences are not necessarilyirreconcilable. All of the above views of community may beconsistent with an organizer's perception of a givencommunity. The change strategies employed may depend on thecontext and/or they may be determined on the basis ofbeliefs and values.In the context of this study, a question might be posed asto which, if any, of these approaches, is consistent withCED values and principles. The short answer to thisquestion is that all of them are consistent, depending onthe context.Bringing in the Context: A Dialectical Framework The context or conditions of practice are a key ingredient,according to Burghardt (1982). He asserts that "good42organizers always ground their strategic stance in the"objective" condition before them" (27).^Further, hesuggests that a false dichotomy has developed in communityorganization practice between "technical" skills and"interactional" skills, in that particular models emphasizeone or the other rather than drawing upon both. Forinstance, process or interactional skills are stronglyemphasized in the community development approach while thesocial planning approach stresses technical skills. He alsosubmits that the predominant Social Work frameworks helpcreate a dichotomy between clinical and community practiceby suggesting that caseworkers work with individuals (in thepsycho-social sphere) and organizers with communities (inthe socio-political sphere). The reality is oftendifferent. He argues that effective community organizinginvolves skill in interpersonal communication and anawareness of the emotional, as well as socio-political,context.Burghardt's book, The Other Side of Organizing (1982),provides a new framework for community organizing practicewhich brings together both predominant aspects oforganizing. The core of this "dialectical framework" isachieving a unity between the personal and social elementsof practice. This is key to an engaged, dynamic practice.One way of realizing this is by learning to be comfortable43with both our intuitive and intellectual abilities (30). Hesuggests that the "joining of such abilities is fundamentalto the mastery of what Paulo Freire calls "criticalreflection" -- the ability to both act and reflect,simultaneously, on one's work" (30). Intuitive skills, hemaintains, deepen practice experience by helping oneunderstand intellectual content in actual application andvice versa (32).Burghardt maintains that both the interpersonal and socio-political elements are at play all the time. In thedialectical framework, the organizer engages in a constantexamination of both elements simultaneously (46). Severalbenefits are achieved by this type of practice, he suggests.One is what Freire calls the "constant development ofconsciousness" (47). "The way in which we act is asimportant as on what" (47). Secondly, this framework"materially roots one's work at all times" (48). Thepractice is developed and shaped by the larger socialconditions. This keeps the practitionerinvolved and aware to as much change as possiblewithin that context. The two-headed coin of falseidealism and cynicism is replaced with a lessinflated image of realistic activism. (48)Further, Burghardt argues that heightened tactical self-awareness can increase one's organizing effectiveness (51).This helps organizers to realize that to be effective, they44do not have to do everything well. By becoming more awareof aspects of one's personality and of skills that are moredeveloped than others, one can choose to emphasize thoseskills in which she has strength and to encourage others toplay roles in which the organizer is less skilled. Whenthis is not an option, the organizer can, at the very least,build in supports in personally difficult situations oradapt their own personal attributes to particular situations(52-55).There are four important aspects of Burghardt's work.First, it places needed emphasis on the duality of roles ofthe practitioner. Instead of emphasizing one over theother, his framework allows both key aspects of theorganizing work to be simultaneously considered. This is incontrast to other frameworks, such as Rothman's, which seethe organizer in primarily one mode at any given time,within any given model. Secondly, it places the communityorganizing within a context, which is crucial in choosingamong approaches, strategies, and tactics. It recognizesthat the interpersonal, social, and political contexts allhelp to shape the development of approaches to intervention.Thirdly, this model encourages practitioners to be self-aware, an important aspect of effective practice. Fourthly,and perhaps most importantly, this framework facilitates thedevelopment of integrity in community practice by suggesting45that the means are the ends. It suggests that how an actionis achieved is as important as what is achieved. AsBurghardt notes, over time the content of communityorganizing is often remembered over the process. However,what may be the most important elements, and those whichhave the most lasting significance within the community, arethe result of the processes -- the relationships that arecreated, the leadership that has been cultivated, thecapacity that is developed, and the sense of community thatremains.Key Practitioner Roles and Functions The role of the change agent or community organizer is apredominant theme in the community development literature ofthe 1960s and 1970s. Several theorists have attemptedvarious categorizations of these roles, e.g., Ross (1967),Perlman and Gurin (1972), Grosser (1976), Morris (1979), andRothman (1979).Ross's categorization, often cited in the literature, mosteffectively brings together the combination of theinterpersonal and socio-political dimensions of practice.Ross (1967) specifies four distinct roles: guide, enabler,expert, and a social therapy role (which he indicates isrelevant only in limited situations). Additional role46categories, specified by other writers, include those ofbroker, advocate and activist (Grosser 1976, Rothman 1979).The role of guide involves helping the community toestablish and find a means of achieving its own goals (Ross1967, 203-4). Ross indicates that the organizer does notimpose her own views but encourages discussion by askingleading questions and focusing thought on problems she feelsare important (207). Further, this role includes takinginitiative by stirring consciousness of community problemsand stirring discontent. The organizer's expertise is inbringing diverse groups of people together for collectivedecision-making (212).The enabling role is one of the most widely recognized rolesof the organizer and is discussed by several theorists(e.g., Ross, Rothman, Grosser). It involves facilitatingthe community organizing process by focusing discontent,encouraging organization, nourishing good interpersonalrelations, and emphasizing common objectives. The workerfocuses discontent by helping people see that their"personal" problems are "social" problems in many cases.According to Ross, this role of a "catalytic agent" involveshelping people to:look at themselves, to look below the surface andprobe their deepest feelings about community life.[The worker] encourages verbalization of thesefeelings, he helps people see the commonality of47their feelings, he nourishes the hope thatsomething can be done collectively about these.As feelings and consciousness of common problemsbegin to crystallize, the worker functions in away that will support efforts to come together, toorganize, to deal with these problems. (1967, 215)Ross cautions the organizer against pushing the community,accelerating the pace of change or minimizing thedifficulties of change, suggesting that it is best to moveslowly in most situations (216-7). The enabling role meansthat the organizer does not lead, but facilitates, localefforts, does not provide answers but has questions whichstimulate insight and does not carry the burden ofresponsibility for organizing and action but providesencouragement and support for those that do (Ross 1967,221).A non-directive approach to intervention is reinforced byother community practitioners, e.g., Lees (1975), Rothman(1979), Littrell and Hobb (1989). The characteristic rolein Rothman's locality development model is that of "enabler"which includes facilitating a process of problem-solving,encouraging organization, nourishing good interpersonalrelationships and emphasizing common objectives (Rothman,33-5). In Littrell and Hobbs' (1989) self-helpcategorization, change agents help people to explorealternatives and organize for action. Their role is botheducational and organizational, providing people with theskills and knowledge to facilitate their decision-making48process and to accomplish their specific objectives. Thepeople, themselves, not the change agent, determine what isto be done (33-4).The expert role involves providing data and direct advice inareas in which the organizer has knowledge. According toRoss, this role does not conflict with the role of enabler(1967, 221). In this role, the organizer provides researchdata, technical expertise, resource material, and advice onmethods (221). While the organizer provides facts andresources, she should not make recommendations about whatthe community or its associations should do (222). Rossidentifies several functions of the expert role: communitydiagnosis, research skill, information about othercommunities, advice on methods, technical information, andevaluation (222).Rothman (1979b) also emphasizes the role of expert. In hissocial planning model, fact-finding and analytical skillsare important. The expert role involves communitydiagnosis, research skill, information about othercommunities, advice on methods of organization andprocedure, technical information, and evaluation (33-5).Fear, Gamm and Fisher (1989) indicate that the role of thetechnical expert or planner is to assess the situation basedon technical information and to suggest the most4 9economically feasible and socially responsible approaches toimproving the situation (35-6).Grosser (1976) emphasizes the importance of the roles ofbroker, advocate and activist. The broker involves puttingone's clients in touch with resources and in some cases,"action may also be necessary to ensure the exchange" (196).The role of advocate may need to be assumed in certaincircumstances, where the organizer is unable to "effect atransaction between server and served" (197). "The workerin these circumstances is not an impartial enabler, broker,expert, consultant, guide, or social therapist: he is apartisan in a social conflict" (197). This might make itnecessary for the organizer "to provide leadership andresources directed toward eliciting information, tochallenge the stance of the institution, and to argueissues" (197). Finally, Grosser maintains that role ofactivist is "a legitimate one for the social worker, andespecially for the community organizer" (200-1). This roleinvolves focusing discontent and encouraging theorganization of social action and protest strategies usuallydirected at a specific outcome.In addition to the key roles of guide, enabler, expert,broker, advocate and activist, community workers perform arange of tasks and functions. They:50conduct needs assessments, encourage citizenparticipation, facilitate decision-making,identify resources, educate others, presentalternatives, analyze information, developleaders, formulate plans, stimulate organizationalefforts, and assist in implementation ofsolutions. (Warner 1989, 120).Some theorists emphasize the personal qualities needed to bean effective organizer. Kahn (1970) suggests that aneffective organizer will "have a good deal in common withthe people he (sic) is working among" (5). He stresses theimportance of the organizer being liked and accepted inorder to gain their confidence. He also suggests honesty iscrucial. Ross suggests that the organizer should be "awarm, friendly person, sensitive to the deeper feelings ofpeople and interested in the 'little things' that areimportant in the lives of individuals and communities"(1967, 218). Like Kahn, Ross also emphasizes the importanceof the organizer being accepted, liked and trusted.Leadership Development Leadership involves "both the ability to organize andsustain task performance and the ability to arouse orstimulate others to join in the task" (Garkovich 1989, 203).The "situational-contingency" approach is a theory ofleadership development which is most relevant to the socialaction model of community development. This approachproposes that leadership emerges from the interaction of51individuals traits or behaviours with the characteristics ofother persons and within a particular situation (203). Thisapproach emphasizes the flexible and adaptive nature ofcommunity leadership and suggests that leadership isactivated in response to particular interests, is variablein its enactments, and is sensitive to the needs of itsfollowers. Leaders may specialize in interest fields, oremerge to offer their skills and knowledge when appropriatesituations develop (203). This theory suggests thatcommunities contain many potential leaders and efforts mustbe made to both activate and nurture this leadership (203).Kahn (1970, 39) suggests that developing leadership is a keyfunction of the role of the organizer. He claims thattraining local people as organizers and transferring theorganizer's skills and knowledge to community members is oneof the organizer's most important responsibilities.Consistent with an empowering, non-hierarchal approach,leadership should be broadly based within a group ratherthan be concentrated in the hands of a few people (45). Theprocess of developing leadership is "mostly one of involvingothers in the process of planning and decision-making" (45).Informal leadership roles should be stressed at first -- hesuggests that rotating the chair from meeting to meeting isone method of developing leadership skills in group members(51). Further, Kahn suggests that the group structure52should be kept loose until people have had the time andexperience to develop leadership abilities of their own(52).However, the transference of skills and techniques is justone aspect of leadership development. Burghardt (1982)suggests that there are three dominant approaches used bycommunity organizers to develop leaders. The first involveschanging the situational problems to the exclusion ofleadership development; this approach focuses on getting thejob done but does not develop leaders (85). The secondinvolves developing leaders who are grounded inorganizational, and not critical consciousness, which hesuggests is the most common form of leadership developmentin organizing (86). This "short-cut approach" to leadershipdevelopment involves focusing on a set of techniquesdivorced from the social context and perpetuates "a model ofleadership devoid of the critical reflection necessary tocreatively act within the world" (87).The development of critical consciousness is the third modelof leadership development which Burghardt discusses. Hesuggests that this process of leadership developmentinvolves making the linkage between the "personal" and"political" in which the possibility of dialogue that can"transform the world" opens up. However, this process of53leadership development demands that the organizer recognizethe necessary integration of the political context with thepersonal attributes of people that are integral to thataction. In other words, the organizer needs to recognizethe importance of both the task (action) and process(reflection) functions (91).The development of critical consciousness as it relates toleadership development involves three phases. Phase oneconsists of the active work and the exposure of need or thesharing of self where the organizer presents herself ascapable of completing the group's tasks yet "open enough asa person to suggest a more mutual determination of theproblem and how to end it" (102). The second phase involvesthe demand for sharing the work in which the organizerdemands of clients that they assert their full selves byexposing their strength consistently. The organizer risksdemanding success and will openly and honestly criticizefailure, daring them "to be as fully human as you haveattempted to be" (104-6).In the third phase,the ability of the practitioner to organicallymove from intellectually to intuitively focusedissues within the practice situation (a"critically reflective" skill), frees you both topresent skills and to risk vulnerability in waysthat begin restructuring the themes of how aproblem situation is defined. . . . Theapplication of these skills, shared with others54and changing as the situation warrants, ifsuccessful, then develops the final irony to this"model of leadership development" -- doneeffectively, people come to realize they don'tneed "leaders" at all!" (Burghardt 1982, 108).Community Action TheoryOf particular relevance to this study is the body ofliterature pertaining to community action theory. Communityaction is a broad concept, encompassing a range ofactivities and events within communities. Warren (1972)maintains that it is important to distinguish betweencommunity action episodes and other basic social processes,such as cooperation, competition and conflict. Communityaction episodes are change processes that, rather than beingcontinuous, have a distinct beginning and end. They existto achieve a specific purpose and theyinvolve a process of organization and taskperformance in the direction of accomplishing thepurpose, which in the process may be modified;then with the resolution of their effort theaction subsides, and the episode is finished.(Warren 1972, 308)Poplin categorizes community action as being either"spontaneous", "routinized" or "initiated." It is thelatter type of community action that is of relevance to thisstudy and is, according to Poplin, the area in whichcommunity action theorists have focused most of theirattention (1979, 205).55Poplin describes initiated community action as thoseactivities and events which have as their main purpose theinitiation of change at the community level through themechanism of orderly group processes. He indicates that"initiated community action can be viewed as an episode inthe life of the community: a group comes into being, actionis taken to bring about a desired change, and the groupdisbands or undertakes some other project" (1979, 205).Poplin further identifies several distinguishingcharacteristics of initiated community action. The first isan emphasis on problem solving or achieving a concrete,well-defined goal (1979, 206). The second majorcharacteristic of initiated community action is that most ofthe participants are members of the local community. Poplinstates that "the one exception might be a professionalperson who is sent in by an outside sponsoring agency tohelp community members carry out a successful communityaction program" (206).Poplin's third characteristic of initiated community actionis more prescriptive than descriptive. He asserts that afundamental characteristic of the ideal program is ademocratic orientation in which all members, not only theleaders, are given an opportunity to participate in theestablishment of goals, the planning for action and the56carrying out of the action program (1979, 207).^He alsospecifies that these programs "should be free from controlby vested interest groups, and the participation of allinterested, conscientious citizens should be welcomed"(207).Several community action theorists have identified anddescribed the stages through which episodes of initiatedcommunity action pass as they move from initiation tocompletion. Poplin notes that each of these theorists"sheds light on slightly different aspects of the 'totalaction process'" which helps to account for the disparity intheir categorization of these episodes (1979, 208).Green and Mayo delineate the specific steps that arerequired to carry a project through to completion. Theyhave identified four stages: initiation of action; goaldefinition and planning for achievement; implementation ofplans; and goal achievement consequences (Poplin 1979, 209).Warren describes a model that was developed over a number ofyears at Michigan State University by Holland and hisassociates as "perhaps the most sophisticated and the mostuseful model so far available for such analysis" (Poplin1979, 209). This model, which focuses on the mechanics ofcommunity action episodes, was tested in two other studies.57It identifies five stages in the action process: theconvergence of interest, the establishment of an initiatingset, legitimation and sponsorship, the establishment of anexecution set and finally the fulfilment of the "charter" orgoals (Poplin 1979, 209).Warren (1972) developed his own five stage model which hedescribed as an attempt to accommodate the "various dynamicaspects of the development and change of community actionsystems".^Its focus is on the emergence and operation ofaction systems. This model includes the followingcomponents: initial systemic environment; inception of theaction system; expansion of the action system; operation ofthe expanded action system; and transformation of the actionsystem.Poplin suggests that there is enough similarity among thesecategorizations to attempt a rough comparison. Hesummarizes the major elements of the stages. Initiatedcommunity action begins "when at least a few people becomeaware of a problem and express interest in working towardits solution (stage 1)." Poplin suggests that this interestmay arise "in conversations among neighbors or among theleaders of voluntary associations, and it may even bestimulated by an outside change agent, such as a community58consultant employed by a university or governmental body"(209-10).While this first stage involves only a few people, "if acommunity action project is to move beyond the discussionstage, a temporary action system must emerge which can "getthe ball rolling" (stage 2)." This stage involves theformation of an initiating set which usually involves manyof the same people who originally became aware of theproblem (210).The persons who participate in the initiating set must"define the goals of the action episode and map out specificstrategies by which these goals may be achieved." Next, theinitiating set must "establish its right to take action,i.e., it must list the cooperation of persons who, by virtueof their position in the community, can make or break theproject (stage 3)" (210).The fourth stage involves the expansion of the action systemto include "actors who have not previously been involved"(210). Fifth, is the achievement of the goals and purposesof the action episode. At that time, the action system maybe disbanded or "in some cases the rewards of workingtogether with other citizens to better the community are so59great that the participants in the action episode desire totackle other problems and pursue other goals" (210).An understanding of community action episodes is importantfor a number of reasons. Warren suggests that understandingcommunity action episodes helps to delineate the structureof the community and therefore, to promote understanding ofthe role and importance of the power structure in communityaction. Second, he maintains it increases our understandingof the community in its dynamic aspects, rather than as a"relatively static structure." Finally, it helps toincrease understanding of the role of the change agent inthe process of change (1972, 308-9).Furthermore, the attempts to develop models around theconcept of community action are important steps in theorygeneration, according to Warren. He quotes Homans:Any classification, no matter how crude, providedthat it is used regularly, forces us to take upone thing at a time and consider systematicallythe relations of that thing to others. This isone of the roads that leads to generalization(1972, 308).Stages in the Community Economic Development Process While there are few theoretical models to guide CEDactivity, some practitioners have made efforts to documentthe process involved in implementing projects. Theseefforts are briefly summarized.60The Social Planning and Research Council of British Columbia(SPARC of BC) has produced a number of papers describingcommunity economic development and has summarized some ofthe efforts of CED organization within B.C. communities. Inits 1985 report, Community Economic Development in British Columbia: Nine Case Studies, profiles were provided of nineCED initiatives. The stories detailed the history of theproject, structure, membership, activities that wereundertaken, and the integration of social and economicaspects of the development. Furthermore, the reportoutlined a common developmental process involved inestablishing these projects (Strandberg 1985).The stages were identified as follows: 1) unemployment"crisis"; 2) small group meets; 3) expands membership(entire community or special interest); 4) idea generation(brainstorm/think tank/workshop); 5) society formed(strategic plan/commitment); 6) apply for funds (usuallyLEAD/Canada Works); 7) feasibility study/market analysis; 8)select and develop project(s); 9) renew process/businessexpansion/business takeover/no further development.In a 1983 report, Wismer and Pell describe three casestudies of community economic development efforts in threedifferent locations in Canada, detailing the process which61occurred in each of these situations. They identify fivestages and a number of distinct steps within each.The first stage involves the task of forming a workinggroup. According to Wismer and Pell, most projects of thisnature involve a small number of people who feel that somechange in their community is desirable. Their task is torecruit similarly-minded people to form a working group.Wismer and Pell suggest that between six and ten people is adesirable group size (1983, 50).The second stage is described by Wismer and Pell as problemidentification. It involves five steps: 1) identifying theproblem to be addressed; 2) creating a forum forcommunity-wide discussion; 3) identifying goals for theprocess; 4) identifying opportunities (how the group willachieve its goals); and, 5) developing a base of communitysupport and a participatory mechanism for community-basedplanning. This last step may be achieved through a numberof means, including regular public meetings, elections,affiliating with an elected body and appointingrepresentatives from already established communityorganizations (1983, 51-2).The third stage, forming a strategy, involves two steps: 1)choosing an approach from the alternatives identified as62potential opportunities; and, 2) developing a plan ofaction. As a first step, market surveys, social andeconomic cost-benefit studies, and feasibility studies areconducted, and preliminary business or project plans areprepared. Based on the information that is collected,decisions can be made about the most feasible and desirablestrategies for achieving the goals of the group. Once thisdecision is made, the group is in a position to develop aplan of action which identifies strategies and activitiesfor implementing the project and the time frame in whichthey are to be accomplished (1983, 53 - 4).The fourth stage of implementation, has three steps: 1)creating an organizational base for community action; 2)accessing resources; and, 3) implementing the selectedstrategies. The first of these steps involves formalizingthe organizational structure and legally incorporating as asociety. The group then accesses resources from thecommunity as well as from the public and private sectors.Once this is achieved, the implementation of the plans canoccur (1983, 54 - 5).The fifth and final stage involves the steps of 1) futureplanning and, 2) training and skill development. Futureplanning involves reviewing the plan and making decisionsabout future steps. Training and skill development is63required on an ongoing basis to enhance the capacity of thepeople involved (1983, 55-6).This documentation suggests that organizing a CED initiativerequires a number of steps which do not necessarily occur inan orderly and systematic way. These steps may alsooverlap. The common ingredients of these categorizationsinclude: 1) the formation of a group to initiate theprocess; 2) problem and opportunity identification andanalysis; 3) the development of goals and strategies; 4)membership recruitment and development; 5) the developmentof an organizational base for community action; 6) thedevelopment of community support and participatorymechanisms for community-based planning; 7) projectdevelopment (including obtaining the necessary sponsorshipand resources for funding and sustaining the initiative);and, 8) future planning and development.A COMMUNITY PROFILE OF MOUNT PLEASANTThe third and final section of this chapter addresses the"where" question by providing a context for the setting inwhich the research was conducted. This section highlightssome of the relevant historical, physical, and demographiccharacteristics of Mount Pleasant. It also discusses thesocio-economic issues facing the community and describes the64community's organizational infrastructure, with particularemphasis on those organizations which support communitydevelopment.Mount Pleasant is home to approximately 21,000 people. Theboundaries of this inter-city community are Cambie Street onthe west, 16th Avenue and Kingsway on the south, KnightStreet and Clark Drive on the east and Great Northern Wayand 2nd Avenue on the north. Mount Pleasant's geographicallocation within Vancouver is shown on the map on page 65(figure 1).Historical Development As Vancouver's first suburb, Mount Pleasant was once aprosperous community. Much of the early development inMount Pleasant revolved around Brewery Creek, whose freshwaters contributed to industrial development (MPCPC 1987,3). The first industry developed in Mount Pleasant was theHastings Mill, in 1867 (MPCPC 1987, 4). The creek was namedafter the many breweries which it attracted to thecommunity, from 1888 to 1912 (MPCPC 1987, 5). A localhistorian and member of the Brewery Creek Urban Committee,Claude Douglas, provides this account of the earlydevelopment of Mount Pleasant:CIS...'111■11111111MSTMC?r -ma!,sommovq 11-our Pow oilyIIEWills' 0m111 10 4111c2:18i•MAP OF MOUNT PLEASANTSS SSS NICON•ifiT1111. •aleDUN•401•SOutft&m011MU* C07141111 0.1.140,000vICTO•■•-SSSS S MIiwii SNlll'I'll' Pill65Figure 1Mount Pleasant in context of City of Vancouver66Brewery Creek, so accurately named, in conjunctionwith the connecting routes of Main and Kingsway,became the centre of industry and commerce for thedistrict of Mt. Pleasant. By 1897 there had beena fairly large conglomeration of residences tohouse workers, by shortly after the turn of thecentury there was a teeming population growthcentered on Broadway and Main. The industries ofBrewery Creek and False Creek provided the drawfor many working families that densely populatedthe area below Broadway.. . . . The commercial section filled up withmerchants and service industries. Streetcarservice was improved, a streetcar terminal wasbuilt at 14th and Main in 1917 (the same structureis now used by the I.G.A.), the main routes werepaved with wooden blocks, the Broadway Theatre ranfirst-run films, and the first skyscraper, theLee Building, was built in 1912. 'UptownVancouver' was well established as a prestigioussuburb.Brewery Creek and False Creek were eventuallyfilled in. . . . Into the 1930s the Brewery Creekarea changed drastically. The area below Broadwayand west of Scotia began to develop into lightmanufacturing and dispensing warehouses. Of themany hundreds of homes there when it wasresidential, only a few dozen remain, asbulldozers razed the majority to make the areacommercial and industrial.. • . . The Brewery Creek watershed has changeddrastically over the past few decades; however, ithas a very rich history of great importance toVancouver, and the "fabric" that it was helpedshape the Mount Pleasant region. Although it isnow a zone of transition, the area has a very richmixture of buildings, people, land uses,industries and businesses, contributing to itsunique character. The people of Mount Pleasant,and all Vancouverites, should pride themselves inthe history of the Creek, and its identity shouldbe better defined as the original centre of MountPleasant (MPCPC 1987, 5-6).67Physical Characteristics Mount Pleasant encompasses a wide range of zoning areas andtypes of development. Residential buildings occupy 55% ofthe land base in Mount Pleasant. Civic and institutionaluses, including the City Hall, schools, churches and parks,comprise more than 10% of the land area, while industrialand commercial uses occupy 30% of the available land (MPCPC1987, 12).Residential zoning ranges from single family to mediumdensity residential; commercial zoning ranges from local toregional uses and industrial ranges from light to heavy(MPCPC 1987, 13).Five distinct neighbourhoods, set apart by land use,building form, and major streets, have been identified bythe community (MPCPC 1987, 19). The neighbourhoodboundaries are shown on the map on page 68 (figure 2).Of the housing in Mount Pleasant, the predominant types aremultiple dwellings, with over 88% of residences belonging tothis category. The predominant type of dwelling isapartments with less than five storeys (76.5%). Only 9.5%of the dwellings are single-detached houses, while 3.2% areapartment buildings with five or more storeys (1986 CanadaCensus).69More than 80%; of the residential dwellings in Mount Pleasantare rented; this compares with the city average of 57.6',%,(1986 Canada Census). Only 29.296 of Mount Pleasant'spopulation has lived in the same dwelling as they did fiveyears previous (1986 Canada Census). The comparable figurefor the City of Vancouver as a whole is 48.596. Together,these statistics suggest that residents of Mount Pleasantare relatively mobile.Housing costs are lower in Mount Pleasant than the cityaverage. In 1986, housing costs were an average of $454 permonth (for renters) and $455 (owner's average monthlypayments), while the respective figures for the City as awhole were $545 and $518 (1986 Canada Census). A wide rangeof non-market housing is located in Mount Pleasant includinghousing co-operatives, senior citizen housing, housing forpeople with disabilities, and group homes.Commercial developments include large offices such the RoyalBank Visa Centre, City Hall, the Canada Employment Centre,and the Ministry of Health. Retail outlets such assupermarkets, auto car sales lots, furniture stores and autorepair shops are found in Mount Pleasant. However, thepredominant commercial developments are small,individually-owned businesses. There is one indoor shoppingfacility, Kingsgate Mall. A growing artistic community70features several art galleries, live theatres and dancestudios. Industrial developments include wholesalers,warehouses, printing and light manufacturing (MPCPC 1987,15).Mount Pleasant has the second lowest ratio of park space perperson of the communities in Vancouver. There are 1.1 acresper 1000 persons compared with the city average of 2.7 acresper 1000 persons (MPCPC 1987, 18).Mount Pleasant is at the centre of several importanttransportation routes within the city. The primary andsecondary arterial streets which dissect the community orrun adjacent to it include the following: Kingsway, 16thAvenue, 12th Avenue, 7th Avenue, Broadway, Great NorthernMay/2nd Avenue, Cambie Street, Main Street, Fraser Streetand Knight Street/Clark Drive (MPCPC 1987, 8-9).Demographic Characteristics Close to 40% of Mount Pleasant's population is between 20and 34 years of age. Another significant age group is thatbetween 35 and 44 years, comprising 14.8% of the population.Children up to 14 years of age comprise 12.5% of thepopulation and 11.1% of the population are over 65 years ofage (1986 Canada Census).71Over 35% of Mount Pleasant residents have a mother tongueother than English (mother tongue refers to the firstlanguage learned in childhood and still understood). Thelargest non-English group is Chinese, with 10.5% of thepopulation having Chinese as their mother tongue. Close to40% of Mount Pleasant residents were born outside of Canada,and half of these were born in Asia. This is remarkablysimilar with the figures for Vancouver as a whole. Ofparticular note is that 22.1% of Mount Pleasant's immigrantpopulation arrived between 1983-1986 and a further 20.9%arrived in the period between 1978-1982, revealing arelatively large population of recent immigrants (1986Canada Census).Income and Labour Force Data The average family income in Mount Pleasant ($23,740) isless than 60% of that for the City as a whole ($39,908)(1986 Canada Census). Table 1, on page 72, compares theincome data for families, households, and individuals (maleand female), between Mount Pleasant and the City ofVancouver. The percentage of "low income economic families"in Mount Pleasant is 39.4% compared with 19.4% in Vancouveras a whole. More than half of Mount Pleasant's unattachedindividuals (52.4%) are considered low income (1986 CanadaCensus).72Table 1Average Income:Comparisons between Mount Pleasant and the City of VancouverMountPleasantCity ofVancouverAverage Family Income $23,740 $39,908Average Household Income $20,050 $32,403Average Individual^(Male) $14,490 $22,485Average Individual^(Female) $12,392 $14,509According to the 1986 Census, more than three quarters (76%)of the income earned in Mount Pleasant is throughemployment, 17.8% is from government transfer payments and6.2% is from other sources. (The government transfer paymentcategory includes all transfer payments from governmentprograms excluding family allowances, Old Age Securitypensions, Guaranteed Income Supplements, Canada Pension Planbenefits, U.I.C. benefits, and Federal child tax credits --all of which are included in the "other" category. Thelatter category also includes income from retirementpensions, annuities, dividends, and interests payments.)The City's Social Planning Department estimated in 1987 that37% of Mount Pleasant's population is dependent upon someform of public income or subsidy. An approximate breakdownof this figure by income source is: 4,300 people receiving73welfare; 2,600 people receiving unemployment insurancebenefits; and 400 people receiving senior and disabilitypensions (MPCPC 1987, 22).The data for labour force activity in Mount Pleasant (seeTable 2 on page 74) shows that 76.4% of males and 65.1% offemales (15 years and over) are in the labour force (thisincludes those of the working age population who, in theweek prior to the Census, were employed or unemployed). Ofthese, 59.4% of males and 56.3% of females were employed and17% of males and 8.7% of females were unemployed. The"unemployed" category, as defined by Statistics Canada,includes those actively looking and available for work inthat week, those on lay-off with expectations of returningto work, and those who had arrangements to start a new jobwithin four weeks of the Census. The remainder of theworking age population, who were unwilling or unable to workin the reference week, is classified as not in the labourforce. The total unemployment rate for Mount Pleasant is18.3%; however, the unemployment rate for those in the 15-24age group is 21.8%. This compares to a rate of 12.7% forVancouver as a whole and a rate of 16.4% for those inVancouver in the 15-24 age group (1986 Canada Census).74Table 2Labour Force Activity in Mount Pleasant (by percentage)Males^(15years andover)Females^(15years andover)In the Labour Force 76.4 65.1Employed 59.4 56.3Unemployed 17.0 8.7Not in Labour Force 23.6 34.9Socio-Economic Issues This demographic information reveals some socio-economiccharacteristics of the community which can contribute tosocial and economic problems. Mount Pleasant's highmobility rate can lead to a lack of community identity andsense of community. Its relatively high immigrantpopulation and the high numbers of people with a mothertongue other than English reveal the possibility of asignificant population who does not speak English.Furthermore, a relatively high number of immigrants arerecent arrivals and this may contribute to difficulties ofintegration into the community.The data on labour force activity and income reveal thatMount Pleasant residents have relatively low incomes and are75more dependent on government income transfers than the Cityaverage.In addition, a number of other social and economic issueshave been identified by community members. The CommunityDevelopment Plan (32) identifies six major problems areas inwhich strategies for community social development arerequired. These are: 1) Visible and direct impacts ofstreet prostitution and its implications for the communityat large; 2) General deterioration of the social fabric andphysical environment of the community; 3) Escalating levelsof transiency brought on by the community's poor image andlack of services; 4) High levels of unemployment andwelfare; 5) Appearance and perception of high levels ofcrime and socially deviant behaviour; and, 6) Appearance ofeconomically-depressed commercial areas.The Plan notes the interrelatedness of these problems.While they can be seen as distinct, together these problemsform part of a pattern, which, if not resolved, could leadto further deterioration of the community. Streetprostitution, the Plan notes, is a prime example of how avicious cycle is created through such problems.Neighbourhood neglect was a factor which "attracted"prostitutes initially; prostitution then contributed to aserious image problem for the community and created major76disruption to residents. This, in turn, prompted some longtime residents to move out of the community and establishedMount Pleasant as an undesirable location for families.The problem of street prostitution is not likely to go awayon its own. The Community Development Plan recognizes theneed to develop a comprehensive strategy for addressing thecommunity's social and economic problems, the basis of whichinvolves making the community a desirable one in which tolive.Organizational Infrastructure Despite these issues, residents of Mount Pleasant have muchto be hopeful about. Many of them are involved inaddressing the community's problems and working to make thefuture a brighter one for Mount Pleasant. Some of the keygovernment and community organizations and otherinstitutions involved in community development activitiesare briefly described.In April 1982, the City of Vancouver Planning Departmentestablished a temporary store-front location on Broadway,which housed the City Planning staff who assisted the MountPleasant Citizens' Planning Committee with the preparationof the Community Development Plan for Mount Pleasant. Thiscollaboration, between City Planning staff and Mount77Pleasant residents, has focused much community attention onaddressing the problems of the community and on improvingthe quality of life for Mount Pleasant residents. The MountPleasant Citizens' Planning Committee involved the work ofapproximately ninety community volunteers in the five yearsof its existence. This committee identified a number ofcommunity issues and concerns and developed a framework foraddressing them. The Community Development Plan, which wasadopted by City Council in May 1987, was a product of theseefforts.Several other community organizations have played importantroles in addressing community issues. The Mount PleasantNeighbourhood Association (MPNA) has shown leadershipthrough advocating to City Council on behalf of thecommunity's interests and working with various neighbourhoodgroups to address local concerns.The Mount Pleasant Business Association (MPBA) was formed in1985 to represent the interests of the business communityand to promote the revitalization of the business sector.It sponsored a beautification project in the Main Street andBroadway area.The Brewery Creek Urban Committee and the Mount PleasantHeritage Conservation Society have actively promoted Mount78Pleasant's historical significance and the conservation ofthe community's many historical buildings.The Mount Pleasant Police Liaison Committee was formed towork with the police in community crime prevention. TheTraffic Planning Committee is working to address residents'concerns about the increased traffic flow through thecommunity.The Association for Mount Pleasant Economic Renewal (AMPER)is the community organization which was formed as a resultof the organizing process described in this paper (ChapterFour details this process). Its mandate is "to assist MountPleasant economic renewal, through developing and assistingprojects which provide sustainable local enterprise andlocal employment and encourage a sense of community"(Resource Directory, 1989).The Community Development Plan (29) identifies a number ofother organizations working on specific issues within thecommunity including: the Allied Indian and Metis Society;the Mount Pleasant Mini-Team (an inter-agency committee ofsocial services); the Royal Canadian Legion, Mount PleasantBranch; and the Mount Pleasant Block Neighbours.79A range of community agencies and services provide importantsocial and recreational services to residents of thecommunity. The Mount Pleasant Neighbourhood House operatesa range of community services and programs, includingprograms for newcomers and immigrants. The Mount PleasantFamily Centre, the Mount Pleasant library, the Kimount andKivan Boys and Girls Clubs, and the Mount Pleasant CommunityCentre (which provides recreational and social programming)all provide important services to residents of thecommunity. Although five day care centres are located inMount Pleasant (MPCPC 1987, 16), a VCC staff member who wasinvolved in the establishment of a Day Care Centre adjacentto the College claims there is a shortage of day carefacilities in the community.A variety of ethnic groups are represented in MountPleasant. Some of them do not have their own facilities butmeet informally (e.g., the Latin American group holdsmeetings at the Neighbourhood House). Some of the groupswith facilities include: the Australia-New ZealandAssociation Social Club, the Athens Social Club, and theFinlandia Club (MPCPC 1987, 16).The growing arts community in Mount Pleasant has activelypromoted the community as a venue for both the performingand the visual arts. Mount Pleasant has served as the host80of Vancouver's Fringe Festival since the Festival'sbeginning in 1985. This festival, which occurs everySeptember, presents a diverse range of live theatre in 13different venues throughout the community. The 1986festival, the second one held, attracted over 8,000 peopleto the community and the Festival continues to grow. Otherartistic and cultural groups based in Mount Pleasantinclude: Western Front (art gallery), Grunt Gallery,Vancouver Little Theatre, Theatre Space, Hot Jazz Society,Arcadian Dance Hall, Bruhanski Theatre, and the GOH Ballet(MPCPC 1987, 64).A number of educational institutions are located in MountPleasant including five elementary schools, a secondaryschool, the Vancouver Community College (VCC) King EdwardCampus, and the Native Education Centre (MPCPC 1987, 16).Operated by the Urban Native Indian Education Society, theNative Education Centre is the largest post-secondaryeducation and training centre for Aboriginal people in B.C.(Mt. Pleasant Revue, Nov. 1/87, 9).As was suggested in the City of Vancouver PlanningDepartment's 1985 report, Mount Pleasant: Overall PolicyPlan, Mount Pleasant stands at a particularly significantcrossroads.It can continue to bear the burden of currenttrends and possibly slide into oblivion, a state81of being forgotten. This does not mean MountPleasant will cease to exist as a physical entity,but that it will cease to exist as a communitywith focus and aspirations for the future. Thealternative is to meet change with positivedirection, to shape Mount Pleasant's future,building on the strength of the past and withinthe context of its present role within the city.The community has indicated through its effortsits desire to work with City staff to achieve thisgoal. (1)As this discussion has suggested, many of Mount Pleasant'sresidents and community organizations have demonstratedtheir own aspirations for this community. If nothing else,this bodes well for the future of Mount Pleasant.SUMMARYThe three major sections of this chapter have attempted toprovide a context for this study of the process oforganizing CED within Mount Pleasant. This process will bediscussed in some detail in Chapter Four. The next task,however, is to provide a description of the research designand methodology.CHAPTER THREERESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSINTRODUCTIONThis chapter provides an overview of the research design andincludes the sampling design, methodological orientation andthe theoretical basis of the research. The data collectionmethods are discussed and the framework for data analysis ispresented. Lastly, this chapter addresses the limitationsof the study and the ethical issues associated with theresearch.RESEARCH DESIGNThe unit of analysis in this study is the inner-citycommunity of Mount Pleasant. The research design limits theinvestigation and analysis to a single unit or case.Qualitative methods, such as participant-observation,document analysis, and the administration of open-endedquestionnaires, were chosen because of their suitability tothis type of case study. Qualitative methods areappropriate because they allow in-depth thematic explorationof research issues and questions. This type of researchmethod:8283seeks to capture what people have to say in theirown words. Qualitative measures describe theexperiences of people in depth. The data areopen-ended in order to find out what people'slives, experiences, and interactions mean to themin their own terms and in their natural settings.(Patton 1980, 22)This research, a case study of organized CED activity, hasan exploratory and mapping function of gaining a preliminaryunderstanding of phenomena and of developing concepts andhypotheses. Although the beginning conceptual map wasderived from theory relating to community economicdevelopment and community organizing, a specific conceptualframework was not used either to guide the actions of theorganizer or to develop questions for the research.RESEARCH METHODSData Collection Methods The data collection proceeded simultaneous to the organizingactivity. Data collection, to obtain relevant documentationof the meetings attended by the researcher, to document theinterventions, and to record the organizer's observations,questions and analysis of the community and the processesthat occurred, was undertaken from September 1986 to April1987. In keeping with these goals, participant-observationwas the primary method of data collection. Participant-observation involves a situation in which the researcher84becomes a participant in the process, as well as anobserver. The participant role involved organizing CEDwithin the community. The observer role involved observingand recording the dynamics and details of meetings andinformal interviews, and documenting the interventions andactivities related to the organizing process. Field noteswere used to record the reflections about the meaning of thedata.The principal technique of participant-observation wasaugmented by document analysis. The main use of thesedocuments (e.g., minutes of meetings, reports, newsarticles, and research surveys) was to supplement the datafrom participant-observation. Documents such as the minutesof the meetings of the initiating group (AMPER), served asan important part of the data in this study. The minutes ofthe AMPER meetings were recorded by the researcher and theiraccuracy was verified with the group. The researcher'srecording of the meeting minutes was done both to assist thegroup to maintain records of the meetings as well as to meetthe researcher's needs for accurate information.Other documents used as data sources included: planningdocuments such as one prepared by the City of VancouverPlanning Department entitled Mount Pleasant Overall PolicyPlan: A Framework for Community Development and the85Community Development Plan for Mount Pleasant prepared bythe Mount Pleasant Citizens' Advisory Committee; a report ofa survey conducted by the Mount Pleasant NeighbourhoodAssociation; field practice progress reports; 1986 CanadaCensus data; lists of community agencies; and, articles inthe community newspapers. These sources of data providedrelevant information about the community, additionalperspectives, and corroborated the data gathered through theparticipant observation process.The third method of data collection used in this study wasthe administration of an open-ended questionnaire to bothadvisory committee members and to group participants uponcompletion of the practicum (see appendices II and III).The questionnaires were designed to elicit the views of thecommunity advisors and the group participants about theinvestment of their time in the project, the strengths andweaknesses of the project, the ways in which the social workpractitioner/researcher influenced the process and outcomeof the project and the prospects for future success. Thisinformation was sought to obtain additional perspectives,particularly those of other participants, about the role ofthe organizer and the process of community economicdevelopment organizing. This information was also used toaugment the field notes of the participant-observer and toprovide additional information and perspectives not86available through the technique of participant-observation.Data Analysis Methods The data were analyzed using the constant comparative methodof qualitative analysis (Glaser 1978). The first step inthe data analysis process was the coding of the data (i.e.,field notes, meeting minutes and open ended questionnaires)on a line by line basis, to identity emerging themes andpatterns. This substantive coding involves generatingconcepts about the empirical data base. A number ofrecurring themes were noted (e.g., sense of community,organizational capacity, receptivity to change, structuralobstacles to CED, resources for CED, etc.). These becamethe basis upon which codes were developed.The second level of coding is known as theoretical coding(Glaser 1978). In this research, the substantive codes of"sense of community," "organizational capacity," and"receptivity to change" represent indicators of "communityreadiness for CED." Next, the data were reviewed for theirfit into these categories, a process of selective coding.The selection of the core category was the next major stepin the analysis. Of the major categories that emerged fromthe data, the determination of what was core demandedreflection and analysis; this was assisted by the writing of87"theoretical memos," a procedure highly recommended byGlaser. This step involved interrupting the coding to writedown ideas about how the categories relate to one another.The researcher, in attempting to determine the corecategory, asked the question posed by Glaser: "what is thisdata a study of?" (1978, 57). The core category,"organizing", emerged from this analysis. Although onecategory was selected as the core variable, other categoriesrelated to the core variable, also emerged. Two suchcategories in this study are "community readiness" and"gaining legitimacy." Once the core category and the othercategories were selected, the next step in the data analysisinvolved the development of concepts and their indicators.Glaser's concept indicator model illustrates the processinvolved in the comparing of indicators with each other andto the emerging concept (1978, 62). This model isillustrated on page 88, using one of the major concepts ofthis study and its indicators.The final step of analysis was the development of aframework for organizing CED (see Table 3). This frameworkidentifies the major stages of the process of organizing CEDand identifies the key activities and critical elements ofeach stage. Table 4 identifies the roles and functions ofthe organizer and the guiding values and beliefs in eachstage of the process. Tables 3 and 4 summarize the major88findings of the research which are fully discussed inChapter Four.Figure 3Glaser's Concept Indicator ModelConcept: Community ReadinessIndicator 1:Sense ofCommunity- inclusiveness- commitment- consensus- self-awarenessIndicator 2:OrganizationalCapacity-neighbourhood-business-co-ops-educationIndicator 3:Receptivity toChange- to addressingproblems- to CED general- specific CEDLIMITATIONS OF THE STUDYThe limitations of this research are related to its scope,feasibility and the data gathering techniques used.This study is limited in scope to that of a single case.Although an advantage of such a study is that it allows adetailed description of a particular process, like all casestudies, it suffers from a lack of comparison with similarcases.89Case studies have been criticized for providing little basisfor scientific generalization. While Reid and Smith (1981)have noted this limitation of case studies, they believe itis offset by other factors, such as the richness of datathat can be gained from a detailed study of one case.Furthermore, Yin argues that "case studies are generalizableto theoretical propositions and not to populations anduniverses" (1984, 21). In this sense, the case study doesnot represent a "sample". The goal of the researcher is to"expand and generalize theories (analytic generalization)and not to enumerate frequencies (statisticalgeneralization)" (Yin 1984, 21).A second limitation is the feasibility of undertaking astudy of this nature within the time frame that was used(i.e., the academic year of the University). The time framefor data collection was limited to a period of about eightmonths, a relatively short time frame for this type ofstudy. While this timeline allowed for the collection ofdata on the beginning phases of organizing, it did not allowthe long-term outcomes of the organizing process to beassessed.Furthermore, the research has several limitations withrespect to the data collection methods used. A weakness ofparticipant-observation is that the observer may affect the90process in unknown ways (Patton 1980). In this study, theresearcher played the key role of "organizer" in addition tothe research role of observation. Therefore, it is morelikely that her participant role of "organizer" affected theprocess than did the research role of "observer." The roleof organizer is explicitly examined in the research.To observe with accuracy while also participating can be adifficult task. "The challenge is to combine participationand observation so as to become capable of understanding theprogram as an insider while describing the program foroutsiders" (Patton 1980, 128). One potential problem theresearcher faces as a participant-observer is becoming soimmersed in the program that she fails to observe meaningsand patterns in what is occurring. Furthermore, while it isdesirable to maintain a balance between the subjectivity ofa participant and the pure objectivity of a researcher, Yinnotes that the participant role may require too muchattention relative to the observer role. Balancing theseroles was a challenge in this research because of thesometimes conflicting demands of guiding the process whilealso attempting to document it. Furthermore, in addition tothe roles of "observer," the role of "organizer" encompasseda number of distinct roles including that of guide, enabler,and information resource on community economic development.91A strength of this approach is the researcher's access to aninsider's view of the process. This was essential. Itwould have been difficult, if not impossible, to gather thistype of information if the researcher had not been aparticipant. The role of organizer, in fact, was essentialto the process of organizing community economic developmentin Mount Pleasant. The organizing activity, as is describedin Chapter Four, would not have occurred without theinterventions of the organizer.A further limitation of this study is its reliance on theobservations of a single participant-observer. Although theresearcher can endeavour to be objective in the recording ofobservations, complete objectivity is impossible. Inaddition, the investigator, at times, may have to assumepositions or advocacy roles contrary to the interests ofgood scientific practices (Yin 1984). In this case, theroles of organizer and researcher were complementary in thatboth roles demanded an impartially with respect toadvocating particular positions or taking "sides" on issueswithin the community. However, what was captured in thefield notes was not always an "objective" account of theprocess, but the process as recorded and reflected upon bythe participant-observer. To offset the subjectivity ofthese recordings and to help ensure their accuracy, meetingparticipants were asked to verify the minutes of meetings.92Furthermore, efforts were made to obtain additional sourcesof data. Using a variety of data sources results in a morereliable data base than would any of the methodsindividually. In this study, the views of both theparticipants (of the initiating group) and the advisorycommittee members were elicited through a questionnaireadministered at the conclusion of the research. Seeking theopinions of the participants directly by means of aquestionnaire had the advantage of introducing theperspectives of more than just the researcher and was ameans of communicating the views of all key participants.This method of data collection helped to offset thesubjectivity of the participant-observation method and addedanother major source of information from which theresearcher could draw.Documents were also used as a basis for comparing data. Thedocuments refer to matters about which there can beobjective agreement, such as the existence of certainresources and organizations in the community, theidentification of particular community problems, and aboutmeetings and events which occurred.93ETHICAL ISSUES IN THE RESEARCHThe ethical considerations in this study primarily centrearound the dealings with the project participants. Thisinvolved communicating to the participants the objectives ofthe practicum and research project and the use which wouldbe made of the data. From the outset, the participants wereinformed that the researcher would be recording informationabout what was occurring (in meetings, etc.). Upontermination of the project, participants were requested tocomplete a process evaluation which was structured as anopen-ended questionnaire. A written description, indicatingthe use of the results of the evaluation and the voluntarynature of their participation in completing the evaluationform, accompanied this questionnaire (see Appendices II andIII). In accordance with university procedures, a "Requestfor Ethical Review" form was completed and approval wasgranted (see Appendix VI).SUMMARYThis chapter's discussion of the design, methodology andlimitations of the research has attempted to provide anunderstanding of how the "framework for organizing CED"emerged from the empirical data. The framework and itsconcepts are explored in the next chapter.CHAPTER FOURORGANIZING COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT:THE MOUNT PLEASANT EXPERIENCEINTRODUCTIONOrganizing community economic development is a processconsisting of five key stages. These five stages are: 1)Gaining Legitimacy; 2) Assessing Community Readiness 3)Determining a Development Approach; 4) CultivatingLeadership; and, 5) Developing an Organizational Base. Thispostulate emerged from an analysis of the data from theMount Pleasant experience of organizing CED. This chapterattempts to substantiate this postulate by showing evidenceof these data.Furthermore, this chapter identifies the key issues of eachstage, describes the activities that occurred in each stage,discusses the guiding values and beliefs of the organizerand highlights the roles of the organizer and the other keyparticipants. It also identifies those factors which werecritical to the completion of each stage and describes whyeach stage is critical to the overall organizing process. AFramework for Organizing CED emerged from this analysis.This framework (see Table 3, on page 95) identifies eachstage, its major activities and the factors that were9495Table 3A Framework for Organizing CEDSTAGE^ MAJOR ACTIVITIES^CRITICAL FACTORS/ISSUESAssessingCommunityReadinessDetermining aDevelopmentApproachCultivatingLeadershipDeveloping anOrganizationalBaseInformation Gatheringabout the community(strengths/resources &issues/obstacles)Assessing relevance ofinformation to CEDinitiativesContact with specificsegments of communityGeneral communityoutreach and educationFormulating a plan ofactionRecruiting participantsOrganizing an initialmeeting of interestedresidentsEncouraging groupleadershipDiscussion at groupmeetings of mission,goals, name, membershipand organizationalstructureOrganizer's CredibilitySupport of Key CommunityMembersAddressing issuesperceived as importantto the communityCommunity Readiness:* sense of community* organizationalcapacity to respond toneeds* receptivity to changeObstacles:* community alienation* community instability* structuraldisincentives to CEDTarget specificaspect(s) of communityor consider community asa whole?Identification ofleadership potentialRecruitment ofparticipantsEncouragement ofleadership rolesEstablishment of groupidentityDefinition of mandateDetermination of anOrganizational StructureGaining Legitimacy Initial contact withPlanning DepartmentFormation of AdvisoryCommitteeDevelopment of contractand terms of reference96critical to the realization of the stage.^Table 4, shownbelow, identifies the roles and functions of the organizerand the values and beliefs that guided the organizer withineach stage.Table 4Major Roles, Beliefs and Values of OrganizerSTAGEGainingLegitimacyAssessingCommunityReadinessDetermining aDevelopmentApproachCultivatingLeadershipDeveloping anOrganizationalBaseROLES & FUNCTIONS OFORGANIZERGuide, enablerResearcher, analyst,catalystAnalyst, advocate,and plannerGuide, planner,enablerGuide, enabler,technical expertGUIDING VALUES &BELIEFSRespect forcommunity self-determinationBelief in humanpotential andcommunity capacityfor changeRecognition ofsocio-politicalcontext; belief incapacity toameliorateBelief in individualcapacity; activeself-awarenessBelief in groupcapacity andconsensus processes;respect for groupself-determination97STAGE 1: GAINING LEGITIMACYA favourable perception by community members is an essentialfoundation for organizing a community process. Obtainingcommunity support and legitimation for the organizingactivity is a key issue. This section describes the majoractivities of this stage, the role of the organizer andother key participants and identifies and discusses thecritical factors in gaining legitimacy. It discusses theimportance of this stage to the overall process oforganizing CED.Major Activities The major activities of this stage involved making contactwith the Planning Department to discuss practicum options,the formation of an Advisory Committee, and developing acontract and terms of reference.In early September, 1986, the student contacted the City ofVancouver Planning Department's Local Area Office in MountPleasant. This "store-front" operation was established tooversee the development of a Community Development Plan.Options for a potential practicum were discussed. TheDepartment expressed interest in having social workpracticum students assist with the social dimensions of thisPlan. Potential research topics identified were: the98business community's effect on residents; the issue ofunemployment; the impact of physical planning on socialplanning; how to involve the community of immigrants; and,the role of co-operatives in the community.A follow-up meeting with the Planning Assistant and afaculty member of the Business Department of the VancouverCommunity College (VCC), King Edward Campus, was held todetermine a focus for the practicum. It was agreed thepracticum would explore the linkages between social andeconomic development, with particular emphasis on co-operative development. It was also agreed that theestablishment of an advisory committee would be beneficial.It was hoped that this Committee could provide guidance andsupport to the student and assist the student to accesscommunity resources.The first meeting of the Advisory Committee took place inSeptember. In addition to the VCC faculty member and theCity planner, two other members comprised this committee:the President of the Mount Pleasant NeighbourhoodAssociation (MPNA), and a Community Development Worker whowas hired by the City of Vancouver to work with residents inaddressing community issues. The meeting centred on thefocus and scope of the practicum with some discussion on the99role of co-operatives and the potential for co-operativedevelopment in Mount Pleasant.A contract was drafted (Appendix I), which described thescope and mandate of the practicum and the activities whichwere to be undertaken by the student. It describes themandate of the practicum to be "the exploration of theconcept of 'Community Economic Development' and itsrelationship with community development and cohesiveness."It further detailed that "the student will investigate,develop and organize community economic development projectssuch as community-based co-operatives. In addition to theabove, the student will perform an assessment of thecommunity support for such a project, and will undertakeappropriate research within the overall context of theproject." The contract identified the role of the AdvisoryCommittee to "act as a resource to the student, providingadvice, support and guidance." The contract was signed bythe School of Social Work advisor, the Planning Assistant onbehalf of the Mount Pleasant Committee and the student.During this stage, the student met individually with eachmember of the Advisory Committee to develop a workingrelationship with each Advisor and to tap their knowledge ofthe community and obtain their perceptions about the keysocial and economic issues.100Guiding Values and Beliefs and Roles of the Organizer During this stage the organizer guided the process byidentifying specific areas of interest, exploring practicumpossibilities with key community contacts, drafting thecontract and taking the initiative in meeting with Advisors.The organizer played an enabling role in listening to theneeds and perceptions of community members. In doing so,the organizer was guided by a respect for the community'sself-determination.Roles of Other Key Participants The Planning Assistant facilitated the development of thepracticum and the formation of the Advisory Committee. TheAdvisory Committee acted as a support and resource to theorganizer by providing initial direction and offeringproject ideas. The Committee members also providedreferrals to community members with specific CED expertiseor interest.Critical Factors in Gaining LegitimacyWharf notes that, despite its practical importance incommunity work, relatively little attention has been givento the concept of 'legitimacy' in this literature (1979,250). Despite the lack of theory pertaining to thisconcept, the Mount Pleasant experience points to a number ofkey factors in gaining legitimacy. They include:101establishing the organizer's credibility; obtaining thesupport of key community members; and, addressing issuesperceived as important by the community.The organizer's credibility initially stemmed from herassociation with the School of Social Work, University ofBritish Columbia (UBC) which was seen by the PlanningDepartment as a valuable resource for social planning. Thisassociation helped the organizer to gain legitimacy firstwith the Planning Department, and then with the AdvisoryCommittee.Credibility has to do with reliability and trustworthiness.Gaining the trust and respect of the Committee required theorganizer to develop a good relationship with the Committeeas a whole as well as with individual members of theCommittee. The organizer's credibility with the Committeewas strengthened as the Advisors got to know the student andsaw evidence of her reliability through her use of theAdvisory Committee meetings and individual meetings withAdvisors. Although the Committee indicated it felt thestudent "arrived in Mount Pleasant showing a veryprofessional attitude and good social work skills," gainingtheir respect and trust was an evolving aspect of thisrelationship which grew over the course of the project. Inits final evaluation, the Committee indicated that the102student "used her management committee for much more than areporting panel. This resulted in a good feeling of trustbetween the management committee and the student."The importance of building trust with key individuals in thecommunity appears to have some support in the literature:Legitimation demands that newcomers prove themselvesand develop a reputation of being open, trustworthy,and fair. It requires identifying key individuals inorganizations and/or communities and building andmaintaining relationships with these individuals (Wharf1979, 16).Obtaining the support of key community members helped theorganizer to gain legitimacy within the larger community.Among the most significant factors in gaining legitimacy wasthe project's connection to an advisory committee whichrepresented key players in relation to neighbourhood issues,community development, community planning, and economicdevelopment. The composition of the Advisory Committee waskey to this. The Planning Assistant was able to bring tothe project the visible support of the City of VancouverPlanning Office. In addition, the institutional support ofthe community college was provided through the provision ofa faculty member's time on this committee; this representeda commitment from the college to supporting the community'sinterest in CED. The representative from the NeighbourhoodAssociation was able to bring a legitimacy from thecommunity that association with a resident-based group could103only give.^The Community Worker also gave the project thistype of legitimacy because of her strong connections with'grassroots' neighbourhood activists. In addition to theorganizations they were representing on the Committee, twoof the Advisors were connected with other importantcommunity organizations which contributed to thelegitimation of the project. The VCC representative wasalso involved with the Mount Pleasant Business Associationwhich could be a potential player in CED. Likewise, theMPNA representative was a respected minister of a churchthat was involved in many community issues.Addressing issues that are important to the community isalso a key factor in gaining legitimacy, most likely becausepeople tend to value opinions, ideas and interests that areconsistent with their own. The Planning Department'soriginal interest in employment issues and co-operativedevelopment coincided with many of the student's interests.The process of determining a focus for the practicum anddrafting a contract was a collaborative one, ensuring thatboth the interests of the researcher/organizer and theinterests and concerns of community members were addressed.The signed contract, not only reinforced the organizationalsupport of the School of Social Work for the project, itcontributed to legitimation by explicitly stating the104project's mandate and scope, which were seen as relevant andimportant by key community members.While gaining legitimacy is a key issue at the outset of acommunity process, to some extent it is an issue that isnever fully resolved. As Barr notes in his discussion of acase study on Regent Park, "gaining legitimacy was not aone-shot, one-time process. It began before the unit openedits doors and to a lessor extent, has carried on ever since"(1979, 44).The Importance of Gaining Legitimacy in Organizing CED Gaining and maintaining legitimacy is critical to communitysupport for the process of organizing CED. Without it, thisproject could not have proceeded. In the next stages, theAdvisory Committee facilitated access to the meetings ofimportant community organizations. These meetings providedthe opportunity to recruit potential participants for a CEDinitiative. Without the generally perceived legitimacy ofthis project, it is doubtful that these recruitment effortswould have been successful.STAGE 2: ASSESSING COMMUNITY READINESS FOR CEDAssessing a community's readiness for CED is the second keystage of any organizing activity. The critical issues in105this stage are: 1) determining the key factors thatcontribute to community readiness for CED, and 2)determining the potential obstacles to CED. This sectiondescribes the process undertaken in assessing communityreadiness, identifies the factors that contribute toreadiness for CED and identifies the potential obstacles toCED. It also examines the relevance of the concept ofreadiness to the process of organizing CED activity.Major Activities The major activity focus in this stage was gatheringrelevant information about the community and assessing itsrelevance to a potential CED initiative. The organizer,through her contact with community members, began a processof testing for community interest in CED.Information gathering was done in a variety of ways. Themost important method was talking to people in the communityabout their perceptions of Mount Pleasant (e.g., itsstrengths and resources and the potential barriers to CED).This procedure of information gathering started withAdvisory Committee members and then extended to othersreferred by Advisory Committee members. Information wasalso obtained from relevant documents including communitynewspapers, Planning Department documents, a survey106undertaken by the MPNA, and a listing of community servicesand agencies.The Advisory Committee was a rich source of informationabout the community and directed the organizer to potentialresources. Committee meetings were a valuable forum fordiscussing project ideas and assessing potential obstaclesto CED.During this stage, the organizer was also testing thecommunity for interest in CED. People were asked abouttheir own interest in CED and about others who might haveinterest in CED. In addition, the organizer attendedmeetings of key community organizations (including the MPNA,the Mount Pleasant Business Association (MPBA), and theMount Pleasant Citizens' Planning Committee). At thesemeetings, she generally gave a brief presentation about CEDand expressed the hope of finding people interested inbecoming involved in a CED initiative. At a meeting of theMPNA, she circulated a sign-up sheet for interested peoplewhich resulted in a list of four names.Assessing the relevance of all the information gathered wasa more complex process. Various community assessmentapproaches were reviewed and the organizer developed a listof dimensions that were important to consider (e.g.,107history, physical characteristics, demographic information,social/economic issues, organizational infrastructure, andpeoples' perceptions of the community) in an assessment ofthe community.This assessment was done in a number of ways. Gatheringinformation from a range of sources allowed the organizer tocompare and interpret the information. For example, severalpeople referred to a previous attempt at organizing CED.About one year earlier, a workshop on CED was organized withabout 12 to 15 people in attendance. The workshop was to befollowed by a series of three films shown on subsequentevenings at the Neighbourhood House. While the workshopseemed to generate considerable interest and led to a numberof project ideas, the attendance was low for the films andthe third showing was cancelled. When this information wasoriginally shared with the organizer by the ExecutiveDirector of the Neighbourhood House, it was presented asevidence of a lack of community interest in CED. However,after talking to other people, it emerged that people hadnot lost their excitement about the project ideas that cameup at the workshop.When all of the information related to history, physicalcharacteristics, demographics, social and economic problems,organizational infrastructure, and peoples' perceptions of108the community was put together, a picture began to emerge ofthe factors that contribute to community readiness for CEDas well as some potential obstacles to CED.Guiding Values and Beliefs and Roles of the Organizer The major role during this stage was that of researcher,(gathering, interpreting and analyzing information). Theorganizer also acted as a catalyst by encouraging people'sinterest and involvement in CED. The values that guided theorganizer were a belief in human potential and in thecommunity's capacity for change. The existing strengths andcapacities of the community were recognized.Roles of Other Key Participants The Advisory Committee played a key resource role in thisstage by contributing information about the community andgiving the organizer referrals to other potentialinformation resources. In addition, the Committee played animportant role in contributing to the analysis of MountPleasant's readiness for CED through discussion focusing onthe strengths and resources of the community and thepotential obstacles to CED.109Factors Contributing to Community Readiness The major factors contributing to readiness for CED are asense of community, organizational capacity to respond toemerging community needs, and a receptivity to change.A Sense of CommunityA sense of community is important because without it, thereis a lack of collective will to address problems and developgoals and strategies for change.Chapter Two discusses the various connotations of community.While the geographical community of Mount Pleasant is thecontext for this research, the organizer hoped to determineto what extent "a sense of community" existed within MountPleasant's geographical boundaries. In order to achieve a"sense of community" certain principles, such asinclusiveness, commitment, consensus, and self-awareness,need to be practised.Inclusiveness is an important indicator of a sense ofcommunity, as was noted in Chapter Two. The organizer foundevidence of efforts to include both newcomers in thecommunity as well as a readiness to include ethniccommunities in broader neighbourhood initiatives.Neighbourhood organizations such as the Neighbourhood Houseand the MPNA were making conscious efforts to include both110newcomers and people of diverse ethnic backgrounds in theirmembership and activities. English as a Second Languageprograms were offered by the Neighbourhood House along withprograms which targeted specific ethnic communities (e.g.,Spanish-speaking, Korean). The Neighbourhood House was aplace of connection for many people new to both thecommunity and to Canada. Although the MPNA did not haverepresentation from many of the ethnic groups in thecommunity, this was stated to be a concern on severaloccasions and was something the Association was working on.A tangible expression of "a sense of community" is theextent to which people will become involved in communityactivities. A neighbourhood survey, undertaken by the MPNAin 1985, dealt with a number of issues of concern by MountPleasant residents. One section of the final report of thesurvey was entitled "sense of community" and had responsesto a number of questions about how well people knew theirneighbours and their sense of belonging or identity with theMount Pleasant neighbourhood. One of the report'sconclusions was that "the better residents knew theirneighbours, the more likely they were to feel a sense ofbelonging or identity with Mount Pleasant." Of those whosaid they knew some of the people on their block or in theirbuilding "very well," nearly eighty per cent (8090 alsoindicated they felt a sense of belonging or identity with111the Mount Pleasant neighbourhood. However, those whoanswered "not too well" and "not at all" felt a sense ofcommunity only 38% and 19% of the time respectively. Thereport concludes that this:demonstrates the essential importance in communityorganizing of building networks among the residents ofthe community. Only by pulling together and organizingaround matters of concern can effective change berealized and can improvements be made to a community.What feeling a sense of community is about is residentscoming to realize that they have common interests andconcerns which revolve around the community and puttingaside whatever other differences may exist to worktogether for these common goals.Evidence of a community commitment to organizing aroundmatters of concern was demonstrated by residents' commitmentof time to specific community issues and by the large numberof community meetings being held. In virtually everymeeting the organizer attended, there was a focus onaddressing community problems or on planning activities torevitalize the community. The Citizens' Planning Committee,which focused on the Community Development Plan, struck anumber of task forces to deal with safety issues, traffic,etc. The level of citizen involvement in the process wasgrowing.The quality of the meetings also gave the impression of adynamic and involved community. Residents showed energy andcommitment to action and pride in their community. Thefavourable aspects of the community, such as its valuable112heritage and its vibrant artistic community, were oftenhighlighted.Commitment to community was also shown by the residents'interest in their own neighbourhoods. After several yearsof inactivity, the MPNA was undergoing a period of renewaland growth. In addition to involvement on the MPNA board,members were meeting on a neighbourhood basis to deal withspecific neighbourhood issues. One long-time residentobserved that "I have been a resident for 35 years and I'venever seen Mount Pleasant as active as it is now."Consensual methods of decision-making are also an importantcomponent of community as was indicated in Chapter Two.Many instances of consensual and inclusive methods ofparticipation and decision-making were observed by theorganizer. For example, at one meeting of the MPNA, thelarger group broke into smaller neighbourhood sections toallow people who had not spoken in the larger group anopportunity to speak with their neighbours. This was aneffective way of encouraging everyone to have input into thediscussion. Many of the community meetings were informal,allowing people to feel welcome and comfortable in sharingtheir ideas and perspectives. While the organizer did notattend enough community meetings to determine whetherconsensus decision-making was the norm, at the few meetings113she did attend, she observed attempts to make decisions byconsensus rather than by majority rule and to ensure peoplefelt included in the decision-making process.Another aspect of true community is its capacity to knowitself.Among the reasons that a community is humble and hencerealistic is that it is contemplative. It examinesitself. It is self-aware. It knows itself (Peck 1987,65)If Mount Pleasant was anything, it was a community lookingat itself. It was looking at itself from many angles. Itwas looking at what it once was. There was strong awarenessof Mount Pleasant's history (a history of the community hadbeen prepared by a local resident and an historical societyhad formed to protect and promote Mount Pleasant'sheritage).Mount Pleasant was also looking at what it had become.Community members were very aware of Mount Pleasant's socialand economic problems and many were actively engaged inaddressing these problems. In addition to the CommunityDevelopment Plan, which was initiated out of residents'concerns about the deterioration of the community, peoplewere coming together through many different means to sharetheir perceptions of problems and to work together forsolutions. Just prior to the organizer's involvement inMount Pleasant, a community meeting was held with the Mayor114of Vancouver and the area's MLA. The Mount Pleasant ActionGroup presented a report which identified an Action Plan forthe community. It described Mount Pleasant as "exciting andvital as it is diverse. Within its boundaries one will findthe best that city living has to offer as well as the veryworst. It is neither homogenous nor boring."Lastly, Mount Pleasant was looking at what it was becoming:a place for arts and a community which could acknowledge andcelebrate the diversity of cultures contained within itsboundaries. It was also becoming a home for many newimmigrants to Canada and a community which valued itshistory. Organizations such as the Native Education Centre,the Fringe Festival, and the Mount Pleasant HeritageConservation Society were examples of the new and emergingface of Mount Pleasant.A sense of community is not an end point. It is somethingthat a community continually struggles with and builds.Mount Pleasant strived to apply the principles ofinclusiveness, commitment, consensus, and self-awarenessdiscussed above.Organizational CapacityOrganizational capacity represents a community's ability torespond to issues and develop strategies for change.115Community organizations provide the infrastructure requiredfor achieving goals. As Zald suggests, "organizations comeinto being to pursue collective ends" (1979, 240). Theorganizer's task was to determine which organizations hadthe potential to either play a leadership role in CED or tosupport a CED initiative.While the evidence suggests a rich variety of communityorganizations, it was unclear whether these organizationshad the capacity to deal with complex issues and to workcooperatively towards common objectives. Someorganizations, such as the MPNA were undergoing arevitalization and new leadership was emerging. Otherorganizations were being formed to address particular needsand interests. The Fringe Festival had been recentlyorganized to promote and celebrate the performing arts andthe Mount Pleasant Heritage Conservation Society wasdeveloped to preserve the heritage of the community.An unpublished report (author believed to be the VancouverPlanning Department) entitled "Mount Pleasant: A SocialAction Plan" inventories community resources, trends, andsocial problems. It identifies a key problem as a lack ofcommunity organization or leadership in Mount Pleasant.• . • Mount Pleasant lacks one central facility orstaff responsible for co-ordination of services, itlacks any one identifiable political leader and lacksfull co-operation between community organizations.116Nevertheless, the organizer identified several organizationswhich might be potential sources of leadership and supportfor CED. These included neighbourhood organizations (inparticular the MPNA and perhaps the Neighbourhood House),the Mount Pleasant Business Association, key organizationsin the co-operative sector (including housing co-ops andcredit unions), and the community college. Although CED wasnot an explicit mandate of any one organization, there wasevidence that these organizations supported CED.Some of the residents of the community, who were part ofMPNA, indicated interest in CED. In addition, theorganization was concerned with both the social and economicdevelopment of the community. Furthermore, the Presidenthad expressed strong interest in CED.The Neighbourhood House had agreed to sponsor the filmseries on CED which was cancelled after two evenings. TheExecutive Director had indicated he had "done a lot ofresearch on CED and has attended meetings." He suggestedthere has been "too much discussion about CED byprofessionals" and not enough action. He believed that thepeople who need CED were not involved and expressed concernabout targeting efforts at particular groups in thecommunity because it might leave out other groups who could117benefit. However, he offered himself as a resource to anyorganizing activities.The Mount Pleasant Business Association (MPBA) was stronglyfocused on 'Main Street' revitalization efforts and onsupporting the existing business community. Some of itsmembers expressed interest in CED after a presentation madeby the organizer.The co-operative sector in the community was represented bya number of housing co-operatives, several credit unions,and an arts co-operative. There was a perception by someresidents that the housing co-ops were not "part of thecommunity"; their interest and capacity to participate inbroad community initiatives was not clear. Two creditunions in Mount Pleasant had expressed interest in CED.They were the Mount Pleasant Credit Union, which primarilyserved the residents and businesses of Mount Pleasant, andthe CCEC Credit Union, which had a city-wide clientele andan explicit mandate to support CED. No investigation of thearts co-op was undertaken.The Vancouver Community College was another potentialresource for CED. One of the members of the BusinessFaculty (who was represented on the Advisory Committee) had118shown strong interest in CED and expressed a willingness tooffer relevant courses or training pertaining to CED.Out of this assessment a number of organizations wereidentified with the potential to play a role in a future CEDinitiative.Receptivity to ChangeReceptivity to change was an important factor in determiningreadiness for CED because CED represents a major change inthe power relationships in a community and is likely to beresisted by those holding current economic power and also bythose who could potentially benefit from CED. Wharf notesthat "the more widespread, the more unsettling, the moreradical the change, the more intensely it will be resisted"(1979, 18). Furthermore, he suggests that because changewill likely to be resisted by some community members, "thoseinterested in change must, therefore, undertake a systematicanalysis in order to ascertain whether those affected by thechange will accept or resist it" (19).Much of the evidence presented thus far suggests areceptivity within the community to addressing currentsocial and economic problems, an important beginning forCED. In addition, the interest in CED, itself, has beendiscussed. Key organizations and individual members of the119community were strongly supportive of CED. Whether thisreceptivity to CED extended to those holding currenteconomic power or to those most affected, was more difficultto ascertain. Because CED can be seen as marginal to thelarger sphere of economic activity, it is not likely to beperceived as a major threat until it displaces other, moreconventional strategies. In many respects, CED couldbenefit the conventional business community, which consistsmainly of individually-owned businesses. For example,strategies such as the encouragement of residents to "buylocally" and support these businesses, would likely to besupported by the local business community.Although there appeared to be general receptivity to CED,the receptivity of those most likely to benefit from CEDmerits some examination. In addition to the support ofexisting small businesses, CED strategies focus on thedevelopment of enterprises and employment for members of thecommunity.^The local unemployed population is obviously atarget for CED initiatives. A potential lack of receptivityto CED of those who are currently unemployed was discussedby the Advisory Committee. At one meeting, a member of theAdvisory Committee acknowledged that "the current systemlocks people into their present situation (e.g., it providesno motivation to get new skills, be innovative, startbusinesses, etc.). People who are in the welfare and120unemployment insurance systems lose their motivation tofight the injustices of the system and they lose themotivation to work." While it is unlikely that those whoare unemployed would resist CED, existing structuraldisincentives need to be considered in examining thereceptivity of the unemployed to becoming involved in CEDinitiatives. These structural disincentives are discussedfurther in the section dealing with obstacles to CED.Potential Obstacles to CED Potential obstacles to CED organization include: communityalienation; community instability; and, structuraldisincentives to CED involvement.Community AlienationAlienation is characterized by indifference, estrangement,withdrawal and isolation. It can act as an obstacle to CEDin two ways. First, the feeling of estrangement cancontribute to apathy and hopelessness on the part ofcommunity members which can make it difficult to mobilizethem for action. Second, CED requires resources, both fromthe community and from those outside of the community.Community members who are indifferent or who feel estrangedfrom the community are not likely to perceive themselves asbeing resources for CED. Moreover, isolation from thedominant sources of power increases the difficulty in121obtaining needed outside resources. This is furthercompounded by competition within communities for scarceresources.Strong feelings of alienation and isolation do exist inMount Pleasant. They are a result of long years ofperceived neglect by City Hall and a perception by manyresidents that Mount Pleasant has become a "dumping ground"for other communities' problems. These perceptions are notungrounded. Until the Local Area Planning Office wasestablished in Mount Pleasant, few city resources went tothe community. Moreover, compared to other neighbourhoods,Mount Pleasant has fewer amenities such as parks andrecreational facilities (next to Grandview-Woodlands, it hasthe lowest number of parks) and the community has beenallowed to deteriorate physically.The perception of Mount Pleasant as a dumping ground forproblems in other parts of the City was fuelled by theemergence of street prostitution in Mount Pleasant. Thereport of the Mount Pleasant Action Group's presentation toMayor Harcourt on September 3, 1986 stated that:Up until 1984 street prostitution was not a problem inMount Pleasant. The residential nature of thecommunity made it an unnatural location for streetprostitution and related activities to develop. Theproblem was moved to Mount Pleasant. Attorney-GeneralBrian Smith obtained an injunction prohibiting streetprostitution in the West End due to the intolerableimpacts in that community. When the same intolerable122impacts manifested themselves in Mount Pleasant, Mr.Smith refused to apply for a similar injunction forfear of moving the problem to yet another residentialcommunity. Thus, the provincial government endorsedthe use of Mount Pleasant for street prostitutes,pimps, johns and drug dealers. During this period ofofficial encouragement, street prostitution becameendemic in our community and a rapid deterioration inthe quality of life ensued.As a result of residents demanding that City Hall addressthis issue, much attention was finally focused on MountPleasant and residents began to get involved in addressingthe problems Mount Pleasant was facing. Nevertheless, thecontinuing apathy of some residents, combined with a lack ofcommunity resources, still contributes to strong feelings ofcommunity alienation.Community InstabilityCommunity instability, caused by a transient population, isanother potential obstacle to CED. First, a high degree oftransience implies that a substantial portion of thepopulation lacks a commitment to the community. Commitmenthas already been discussed as a contributor to a sense ofcommunity and ultimately, to community readiness for CED.Furthermore, it can be speculated that those most likely tobenefit from CED (i.e., the unemployed and poor members ofthe community) may be the most transient. Another seriousproblem associated with a transient population is the123difficulty this poses in cultivating leadership within thecommunity.The profile of Mount Pleasant provided in Chapter Twoidentified the degree of transience within Mount Pleasant'spopulation. Under 301%. of Mount Pleasant's population haslived in the same location for five years or more. TheMarch 1987 Draft Community Development Plan for MountPleasant (35-6) identifies two factors which account forMount Pleasant's high level of transiency. The first isthat Mount Pleasant has some of the lowest priced rentalaccommodation in the City which "attracts individuals andfamilies on unemployment and welfare as well as first timeworkers and young couples just starting out" as well as manyimmigrants and new arrivals to the City. The secondimportant factor which contributes to transiency is the"physical image of the community." The report explains thatas people become better acquainted with their neighbourhoodand other communities in the City (and make a comparison ofamenities, such as parks, shopping and recreationalservices) they may make the decision to move once theyobtain work or are able to increase their income.The Community Development Worker maintained that, until thepopulation of Mount Pleasant became more stable, the chanceof succeeding with a CED initiative was small. For CED to124become a strategy of significance within Mount Pleasant, astrong commitment by residents is needed to develop andimplement strategies over a long-term. This demands asignificant commitment of time and energy from more than ajust a few keen community members. It needs strongcommunity leadership and perseverance which necessitates acertain level of stability in the resident population.Structural Disincentives to CED InvolvementAs referred to in the discussion of receptivity, structuraldisincentives to CED are found in the existing incomesecurity systems of social assistance and unemploymentinsurance. As was noted earlier, these systems reinforcedependency by building in disincentives to participation incommunity development initiatives, certain training programsand self-employment and business development initiatives.For example, despite the relatively low income peoplereceive through welfare benefits, such benefits ofteninclude health care coverage and other non-monetary benefits(e.g., prescription drugs). Working for low wages is adisincentive for many people because they may stand to losethe non-monetary benefits of the welfare system withoutgaining significantly (if at all) in monetary terms.Furthermore, recipients may fear that if they becomeinvolved in business development initiatives, they risk125losing benefits. This risk is not acceptable to manypeople, particularly those with families to support."Unemployment and low incomes are often cited as theunderlying nemesis for the community" (MPCPC 1987, 39). Thedemographic information in Chapter Two pointed to therelatively high levels of dependency of Mount Pleasantresidents on government transfer payments such as provincialsocial assistance and disability pensions. Furthermore, asdiscussed in the section on receptivity, the AdvisoryCommittee was aware of these potential obstacles. At ameeting of the Committee, one of the Advisors warned theorganizer of the importance of being "aware of the politicaland structural obstacles to CED. He said that 36% of MountPleasant's population is receiving income assistance. Thesepeople are not likely to respond to CED... [it is] toocostly for them and too risky."At the Mayor's Workshop referred to earlier, Mayor Harcourtsuggested that economic development at a neighbourhood levelwould be a tough venture. The Mayor said that localeconomics are so interrelated to regional, provincial andfederal patterns. He noted that the City of VancouverEconomic Development Office employs six people who spendmost of their time assisting business and industry and,while over 44,000 jobs had been created in the region (not126including Expo), unemployment remained high in a communitylike Mount Pleasant (meeting minutes).Although unemployment is frequently the catalyst for CED,the challenge of involving those affected by unemploymentremains an important issue to be addressed. Although thisissue was acknowledged, it was not resolved. However, asensitivity to the structural disincentives to involvementin CED can influence the development of specific approachesto CED.This discussion can be concluded with the observation that,while obstacles to CED do exist, the recognition of theseobstacles needs to be weighed against the factors whichcontribute to readiness for CED. Given the informationwhich was available to the organizer and the organizer'sassessment of this information, it was determined that, onthe whole, Mount Pleasant was "ready" for CED. The nextstep was determining a development strategy which wasappropriate for the community.The Importance of Assessing Community Readiness in Organizing CED Assessing community readiness is an important step inorganizing CED. In addition to determining the strengthsand resources of the community with respect to CED, anassessment of readiness will identify the factors which can127block CED initiatives. It is important to anticipate thepotential obstacles to CED so that they might be addressed.Moreover, this assessment might conclude that CED is notlikely to succeed and will help prevent fruitless efforts.STAGE 3: DETERMINING A DEVELOPMENT APPROACHA critical issue in determining a development approach forCED is in deciding whether to target particular aspects ofthe community or to consider the community as a whole as afocus for the development of CED initiatives. This decisioncircumscribes the subsequent choice of CED organizingstrategies. This section briefly describes the majoractivities of this third stage of organizing CED, outlinesthe roles of both organizer and key participants anddiscusses the factors to be considered in choosing adevelopment approach. Lastly, it discusses the importanceof determining a development approach to the organizingprocess.Malor Activities The major activity focus in this stage was the organizer'scontact with specific segments of the community (e.g.,neigbbourhood organizations, co-operatives, business, thearts community), general community outreach and education,and the formulation of a plan of action.128Contact with specific segments of the community wasundertaken to determine their interest in CED (this wasdescribed in the previous section). This assessment, whichoccurred in the previous stage, led to a conclusion thatinterest in CED existed in many parts of the community.Yet, no apparent or specific development opportunitiespresented themselves (i.e., a group indicating interest inproviding direct leadership for an initiative).Furthermore, in a conversation with the Executive Directorof the Neigbbourhood House, a concern was expressed aboutemploying a strategy which would target particular segmentsof the community.Community outreach and education continued in this stagewith community presentations and meetings. In addition, theorganizer contacted the local media and arranged for annewspaper article on CED (see Appendix VI). An article waspublished in December 1986, inviting community participationin a CED process.An Advisory Committee meeting focused on the question ofwhether to focus on a particular aspect of the community orto initiate a process involving interested residents.Consensus was that the approach should be focused aroundthose who had most interest in CED.129The organizer agreed to develop a strategy for discussionwith the Advisory Committee. This strategy was presented tothe Committee in early January 1987. The strategy outlineda number of objectives, actions and a timeline. The fourobjectives were to: 1) Identify potential resource peoplefor CED project; 2) Recruit and organize local CEDCommittee; 3) Facilitate committee's identification ofmandate, goals, and objectives; and 4) Facilitate committeemovement toward plans and strategies for specific CED'projects.' Essentially, this strategy focused onidentifying interested people from the broader community andrecruiting their involvement in an ongoing CED initiative.Guiding Values and Beliefs and Roles of the Organizer The major roles of the organizer were to identify andanalyze the development options, to advocate CED, and todevelop a specific plan of action. In undertaking theseroles, the organizer was guided by a recognition of thesocio-political context (i.e., where the readiness for CEDoriginated) and a belief in the capacity to ameliorateconditions within the community.Roles of Other Key Participants The Director of the Neighbourhood House acted as a catalystfor raising the issue of appropriate development strategies.The Advisory Committee acted as a sounding board for the130organizer, helping to clarify and discuss the developmentoptions.Factors in Determining a Development ApproachCommunity interest is a major factor in determining adevelopment approach. The role of the organizer is touncover this interest and to encourage it. The organizercannot easily create interest that does not exist.The difficulty with targeting a specific organization forCED is that organizations come into being to pursue theirown purposes and are usually focused on activities whichrelate to these purposes. Targeting a specific group oreven segment of the population could be seen as animposition of the organizer's agenda.On the other hand, several individuals within the communityhad expressed interest in CED. In addition, the organizerhad already identified potential leadership and resourcesfrom specific organizations and institutions. A strategyfocused on bringing together residents and grouprepresentatives would not be imposing an agenda. It wouldbe facilitating a process for which they had expressedinterest.131In the discussion on initiated community action (in ChapterTwo), Poplin maintains that broad community participation isdesirable. Inclusive participation is a key principle andcharacteristic of CED; therefore, efforts should be made tochoose an approach which is consistent with CED principles.The Importance of Determining a Developmental Approach inOrganizing CED Developing a strategy or a plan of action is a criticalstage in the process of organizing CED. This stage providesthe link between analysis and action. It is criticalbecause it forces careful consideration of the options foraction and emphasizes a deliberate and planned strategy.This facilitates later assessment of the effectiveness ofthe strategy.STAGE 4: CULTIVATING LEADERSHIPCritical issues in cultivating leadership include findingcommunity members who are interested in becoming involved,sustaining their involvement and assisting them to assumeleadership roles and responsibilities. This sectiondescribes the major activities of this fourth stage oforganizing CED, outlines the roles of both organizer and keyparticipants and discusses the factors in cultivatingleadership. Lastly, it discusses the importance ofcultivating leadership to organizing CED.132Major Activities The major activities related to cultivating leadershipincluded the recruitment of participants for a CEDinitiative, the organizing of a meeting for interestedresidents, and, once an initiating group was established, tosupport and encourage leadership roles within the initiatinggroup.The recruitment process began by identifying people whomight have interest in CED. This was facilitated by thereferrals from Advisory Committee members. Another methodof identifying people interested in CED was through thecommunity meetings attended by the organizer. Noticing whoasked questions or expressed interest and then pursuingindividual conversations with these people was part of thisstrategy. Finally, as has already been noted, a sign-upsheet was used at one meeting to identify people with CEDinterest.Recruiting participants for a CED initiative involvedarranging a meeting for community members who had expressedinterest in CED. Developing a list of potential inviteeswas part of the meeting strategy. The invitation listincluded those who had expressed interest or who had beenreferred by others. These people were phoned and personallyinvited to the meeting which was to be held the first week133of February, 1987. They were also encouraged to inviteothers they thought might be interested. A meeting date andlocation was established with a careful consideration ofimportant factors (e.g., convenience, accessibility, etc.).A plan for the meeting was developed in consultation withAdvisory Committee members. The meeting was carefullyplanned to encourage participation, facilitate theexpression of interest and ideas and to obtain a commitmentfor a follow-up meeting.At the first meeting of the group of interested residents,the organizer encouraged meeting participants to shareinformation about themselves, their current involvement inthe community and their interest and involvement (if any) inCED. This enabled the seven group participants to get toknow each other and quickly established their commoninterest in CED involvement and facilitated a discussion ofspecific project ideas of interest to the participants.This led to a decision to meet within a week's time todiscuss the formation of an ongoing group to address CED.At the second meeting, the organizer encouraged a groupmember to facilitate the meeting which allowed the organizerto concentrate on recording the minutes of the meeting.Thereafter, the group assumed responsibility for meetingfacilitation, rotating the responsibility among a few134members. Group members also took responsibility for bookingmeeting rooms, contacting potential resource people andinviting other community members to attend meetings.The organizer also tried to encourage the group to takeresponsibility for the overall direction of the process andmeetings. However, suggestions were made by the organizerfrom time to time about key issues for discussion.Guiding Values and Beliefs and Roles of the Organizer The organizer guided the process by identifying andrecruiting potential participants and planning andfacilitating the initial meeting of interested residents.However, an enabling role was also critical; facilitatingand encouraging group members to take responsibility for thedirection of the group was an important part of the enablingrole. These roles were guided by the organizer's belief inthe capacity of individuals and an active self-awareness ofher role in relation to the emerging group.Roles of Other Key Participants The Advisory Committee acted as a resource by facilitatingthe organizer's contact with potential participants. Inaddition, the Committee helped the organizer to develop aneffective meeting strategy. Group members assumed135responsibility for meeting arrangements, facilitation, andresource people.Factors in Cultivating Leadership The major factors in cultivating leadership include:identifying leadership potential, recruiting participants,and encouraging leadership roles.Cultivating leadership occurs from the outset of theorganizing process. The organizer is always on the lookoutfor potential leaders and participants. A first step isidentifying leadership potential. In this project, theorganizer attempted to identify potential participants earlyin the process. Ross indicates that potential leaders canbe found in both formal groupings within the community, andwithin informal groupings which he suggests are "far moredifficult to identify" yet are as important (1967, 169). Inthis case, potential leaders were identified primarily fromformal groupings although several people were identifiedinformally by other residents.Once potential leaders are identified, they need to berecruited. Generally, this involves finding communitymembers who are interested in CED and encouraging theirinvolvement in the organizing activity. The process of136recruitment used in this study was explained in the previoussection.The third factor in cultivating leadership has to do withencouraging leadership within the group of existingparticipants. As Ross notes, leadership "is a complex rolewith a multiplicity of functions . .^. [and] while theremay be one central figure, there are actually many personscontributing to the leadership of the group" (1967, 193).Given the principles and characteristics of CED (whichencourage inclusive participation and empowerment),leadership roles can be, and should be, shared among groupmembers. The organizer, especially when the group isgetting established, can help to facilitate leadershipbehaviour and shared responsibility for the functioning ofthe group.Cultivating Leadership as a Key Step in Organizing CED Cultivating leadership is a key stage of the organizingprocess. As discussed, leadership refers to roles andresponsibilities assumed by community members rather than asan inherent attribute of one or two people.^Without peoplewho can provide community leadership for an initiative, itcannot succeed. CED is not something that can be directedfrom outside of the community; the community, itself, mustassume this responsibility.137STAGE 5: DEVELOPING AN ORGANIZATIONAL BASEThe critical issues in developing an organizational base aredeveloping group a identity, mandate, and an organizationalstructure. Once indigenous leadership and an organizationalbase has been created, the involvement of an outsiderorganizer can cease. The formation of an organization is animportant outcome of the organizing activity. This sectionbriefly describes the major activities of this fifth andfinal stage of organizing CED, outlines the roles of bothorganizer and key participants and discusses the factors indeveloping an organizational base. Lastly, it addresses theimportance of developing an organizational base toorganizing CED.Major Activities The major activities in this stage of the process weremeetings with the initiating group focusing on thedevelopment of a group mission and goals, the selection of aname, and the discussion of membership criteria andorganizational structure.In this final stage in the process of organizing CED, sixadditional meetings of the initiating group were held.During this period, from February to April 1987, the groupmoved from being a number of individuals interested in CED138to an organized group with an identity and mission. Itselected a name and agreed upon a mission statement. Thename chosen was the "Association for Mount Pleasant EconomicRenewal" CAMPER) and its mission was: "To Advance MountPleasant's Economic Renewal, through developing andassisting projects which provide sustainable localenterprise and employment, and encourage a sense ofcommunity."The meetings focused on identifying a mission and goals forthe organization, discussing specific project ideas,identifying a long-range vision, and examining appropriateorganizational models for CED. While some additionalmembers joined the group over this period, the focus was ondeveloping an identity and focus for the group, not onmembership expansion.In the course of the group's deliberations about mission andgoals it referred to information about existing CED projectsand used some outside resources (e.g., representatives ofCED projects). In addition, the group invited two of theseresource people to meetings to assist with specific areas ofconcern (i.e., goal development, project development, andstructural models).139Guiding Values and Beliefs and Roles of the OrganizerThe organizer helped to guide the process of organizationand enabled the group to find its own identity and mission.The organizer also acted as a technical expert, providinginformation and resources about CED. The organizer wasguided by a belief in group capacity and consensusapproaches to decision-making and a respect for the group'sself-determination.Roles of Other Key Participants The Advisory Committee acted as a sounding board to theorganizer and a resource. The initiating group (AMPER)members facilitated meetings, sought out resources andgenerated project ideas and much discussion.Key Factors in Developing an Organizational Base The key factors in developing an organizational baseinclude: establishing group identity, defining a mandate;and determining an organizational structure.Establishing a group identity has both internal and externalcomponents. Internal components include: choosing a name,defining group rules and norms (e.g., decision-makingmethods) and agreeing on membership criteria. Externalcomponents include resolving issues of autonomy vs.140affiliation and other matters concerning the group'srelations with the broader community.One of the first issues that arose with respect to groupidentity was the issue of whether the core group should seekaffiliation with an existing organization (e.g., the MPNA)or remain autonomous. This was discussed at the group'ssecond meeting; one participant expressed concern that thisgroup may risk being "swallowed up" by another organizationif it were to affiliate. It was agreed to maintain theautonomy of the group and not seek affiliation.A second issue, which took several meetings to resolve, wasthat of a name. After several sessions of brainstormingalternative names one was finally chosen that met with mostmembers' approval. However, even after a decision was madeto call the group AMPER (Association for Mount PleasantEconomic Renewal), one member at a later meeting asked toreconsider the name. After further consideration it wasdecided to adhere to the original decision.Issues with respect to membership emerged. Expanding thegroup's membership base was discussed. Seven people otherthan the organizer attended the first meeting. Of those,four attended the second meeting. One or two new peopleattended each subsequent meeting. Although almost every141meeting saw new people join, the major focus was not onexpansion but on consolidation. Another issue that arosewith respect to membership was whether agencyrepresentatives should be targeted for membership. Althoughthere was interest in having a few representatives of otherorganizations as members, it was agreed that the membershipof AMPER should be primarily resident-based as opposed toconsisting of organizational representatives.Defining a mandate has several components includingdetermining the major problem being addressed, developing along-term vision, specifying a mission and goals, andconsidering specific project activities.At the group's first meeting, one of the participantssuggested that the group needs to define the problem that ithopes to address. After some discussion the followingproblems emerged: unemployment, high transiency, poorshopping, money leaving the community, infrastructural andtransit problems.The second meeting began to address goals for the group.These preliminary goals were identified: provision of localemployment, being political neutral, identifying theappropriate resources, and using local resources whenever142possible. The idea of using the Brewery Creek site forpotential CED activity was also discussed.The third meeting addressed the issue of mission and goalssomewhat more systematically. A number of elementsimportant to CED in Mount Pleasant were identified. Thegroup then decided which of these elements should have themost emphasis. These were then integrated into the draftmission statement which was eventually adopted with minorchanges.The goal development process undertaken helped the group todevelop a long-range vision. A group visualization exercisewhich occurred at a workshop facilitated by an outsideresource person also helped in developing a vision. Thefacilitator asked the group to visualize where it would bein two years time (group members were encouraged to pictureits location, activities and who would be involved).Project ideas emerged in the course of discussions. Theyranged from small business development (e.g., hardwarestore) to ideas for integrated projects combining serviceprovision and training (e.g., providing child care services,English as a Second Language training, and training of homecare providers). Interest in the development of a localexchange trading system was also expressed.143Determining an organizational structure for CED involvesdetermining an organizational structure which is congruentwith the group's mandate. The decision to develop aseparate organization to explore and promote CED was thefirst step. Resource people were invited to group meetingson two occasions to discuss organizational structure andmodels. A representative of the Downtown Eastside EconomicDevelopment Society (DEEDS) attended two meetings. At onemeeting he outlined DEEDS organizational structure anddescribed the process that DEEDS had undergone in developingits organization. A workshop was facilitated by arepresentative of WomenSkills Development Society at whichseveral organizational models for CED were discussed. Twomodels were described in detail: the community developmentcorporation and the community enterprise model.The issue of organizational structure was addressed but notresolved during the period of this study. One group memberexpressed his view that AMPER could function as acoordinating body to facilitate the development of projectsand businesses. While this view was similar to the view ofother members, the issue of organizational structurerequired further exploration and deliberation.144The Importance of Developing an Organizational Base inOrganizing CED As a community-controlled activity directed towardscommunity self-reliance, CED needs an organizational basewithin the community. An organization provides the capacityfor a community to explore CED and develop specific CEDinitiatives. Developing an organizational base is theoutcome of a process of organizing and is, thus, a keyelement in the organizing process.SUMMARYThe process of organizing CED is a complex process.Although presented here as a series of stages, the processis far from being linear. While each of the stagesaddresses particular issues, these issues are not alwayscompletely resolved before the next stage in the processoccurs.The role of the organizer varied according to the stage ofthe process and the changing context of the process. Amultiplicity of roles (i.e., guide, enabler, researcher,advocate, analyst, planner, and technical expert) is neededto respond effectively to the evolving context and to affectchange within the community. The specific roles of theorganizer are guided by values and beliefs concerningindividual, group, and community capacity, the importance of145change and a respect for group and community self-determination. Underpinning all of these values and beliefsare the values of human dignity, social justice and equity-- fundamental values of social work.The fifth and final chapter discusses the key findings andimplications of this study and suggests a number ofquestions for further research.CHAPTER FIVECONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONSThis chapter reviews and discusses the chief findings ofthis study. It addresses the limitations and contributionsof this research and identifies questions for furtherresearch.KEY FINDINGSThis study proposes a framework for organizing CED. Theframework identifies organizing as a process consisting offive stages and identifies, for each stage, the majoractivities and the critical factors for accomplishing itsobjectives. Each of these stages was found to be essentialto the overall organizing process which culminated in thedevelopment of an organizational base for CED within MountPleasant.Critical to the understanding of organizing that emergedfrom this research is that organizing is not just atechnical process. Organizing is a process of relationshipbuilding. And relationships are the building blocks ofcommunity. Effective organizing consciously brings togetherboth the process elements of relationship building and the146147technical aspects of meeting organization and facilitation,planning, research and analysis, and public relations.Furthermore, the values and beliefs of the organizer act asa lens through which the organizer both reflects and acts.The values and principles of CED can serve as a guide to CEDorganizers. The principles of CED (an integrated approachto development, a broader definition of economicproductivity, inclusive participation, the use of democraticprocesses and structures, a focus on building communityself-reliance and capacity, and an emphasis on buildingcommunity), ideally, should be explicit in the organizingprocess.This study attempted to understand how the values andbeliefs of the organizer helped to shape the process ofcommunity organization. The values and beliefs whichunderlie the activities, roles and functions of theorganizer at each stage of the process are identified (seeTable 4, page 96). Values and beliefs were a critical partof the context that helped to shape the communityorganization process in this study. The organizer'sawareness of the values and beliefs which exemplified "theCED approach to development" as distinct from moreconventional forms of both social and economic developmentinfluenced the organization process.148The intervention process was another research issueidentified at the outset. This study delineated the role ofthe organizer in each stage of the process. It found thatthe role of organizer is critical to the process oforganizing and further, that this role demands flexibilityas the focus of the organizing effort changes over time.The role varies from that of guiding and enabling, toadvocating and educating, to research and analysis, andserving as a catalyst and technical resource. In of allthese roles, the fundamental principles of CED should beconsidered: the organizer's role is an enabling andempowering one which seeks to encourage the involvement ofcommunity members in the process. Although the role of theorganizer is important, even more essential is the activeparticipation of the community from the outset. A keyfunction of the organizer is to seek participation from thecommunity and to cultivate leadership from within thecommunity.Secondly, the study attempted to assess the impact of theinterventions on the process of organization. The studyfound that the organizer affected the process in severalways. The impetus for the project and its focus oncommunity economic development came from the organizer's owninterest which meshed with the expressed needs of communitymembers. The organizer, with advice and support from an149advisory committee, guided the overall process of exploringthe conditions within the community, obtaining theperspectives of additional members of the community, andthen functioning as an advocate and educator of CED. Theorganizer recruited and brought together a group ofinterested residents, and then provided facilitative andtechnical support, information and guidance to the groupwhich enabled it to establish an identity and mission. Themultiplicity of roles and functions performed by communityorganizers is noted in the literature.The literature also points to the importance of theorganizer's function of developing capacity and leadershipwithin the group so that it can function without an outsideorganizer. Leadership in CED, as in any organizing process,is critical. CED principles of inclusive participation andconsensus approaches to decision-making suggest an approachto leadership cultivation which focuses, not on thedevelopment of one or two leaders but, on fostering sharedresponsibility for the functioning and development of agroup. Further, it recognizes the strengths of variousmembers and empowers group members to take responsibilityfor various leadership functions of the organization.In this study, the organizer attempted to cultivateleadership by encouraging the group members to takeresponsibility for meeting facilitation, obtaining resource150people for meetings, inviting new people into the group andmaking contact with other organizations.However, leadership development is a complex and not wellunderstood process. The literature suggests that thetransference of knowledge and skills between the organizerand potential leaders can be done through the organizer'smodelling and encouragement of leadership behaviour.Burghardt suggests that the development of criticalconsciousness is the ideal form of leadership development.At this stage of leadership development, community membersdevelop, not only the capacity to perform organizingtechniques, but have the capacity to engage in both criticalreflection and action. The goal of this phase is to gobeyond the ordinary definitions of leadership to reach "acollectively shared, mutually supported collectiveconsciousness" (Burghardt 1982, 108).The relationship between the organizer and the AdvisoryCommittee exemplified the process of what Burghardt refersto as the development of collective consciousness where amutual understanding of the problem and possible strategiesfor addressing the problem were developed over time throughthe sharing of personal perspectives and experiences.The project was an educational process for both theresearcher and the Committee. In exploring issues together,151deeper understanding of the community and the complexity ofits problems was achieved. The importance of thisexploration was expressed by an Advisory Committee member intheir evaluation of the project:This has been a very significant contribution to MountPleasant even if it does not go any further, though Iexpect it will. It has helped to develop an awarenessof local economic development both needed and possibleboth within the community and perhaps most important inrelation to City Hall. It really has been anunexplored territory and this exploration has been bothpositive and enriching.This notion of leadership is particularly relevant to CED.CED is much more than a technical process. The effectiveorganization of CED requires what Burghardt calls "tacticalself-awareness," where the organizer is simultaneously awareof both the psycho-social and socio-political contexts andcan engage in simultaneous action and reflection. Thedevelopment of critical consciousness goes hand in hand withthe development of specific strategies. This process isobviously not a "cookie cutter" approach to organization.It demands that the organizer be fully engaged in theprocess and aware of the context.Burghardt discusses the importance of both the psycho-social(interpersonal) and socio-political contexts in communityorganizing. He suggests that both dimensions of social workpractice are relevant to community organization. Both the152interpersonal and socio-political context was relevant inthis study.The stages in the framework for community organizingexplicitly recognize both the interpersonal and socio-political dimensions of the organizing process. The stagesof "gaining legitimacy," "cultivating leadership," and"developing an organizational base," emphasize theinterpersonal or process aspects of the organizing activitywhere the emphasis was on building relationships anddeveloping individual and group capacity. The socio-political aspects are more apparent in the stages of"assessing community readiness," and "determining adevelopment approach," where an awareness of socio-politicalfactors such as the sense of community, the receptivity tochange, the organizational capacity to respond to needs, thefeelings of community alienation and the existence ofstructural disincentives to CED, were critical.Both the process and task functions, and the interpersonaland socio-political contexts are woven together throughoutthe organizing process. An example of the use of bothelements of context was in making a decision about whetherto target a specific aspect of the community or to focus theorganizing activity on the community as a whole. Both theanalytical functions of the organizer (recognizing the153socio-political context) and the organizer's sensitivity tothe interpersonal context were important considerations inmaking this decision. The analytical focus enabled theorganizer to determine which aspects of the community weremost "ready" for CED and the organizer's sensitivity tointerpersonal dynamics helped her to see "who" wasinterested in becoming involved in this type of initiative.LIMITATIONSIf a comparison can be made between the organizing frameworkdeveloped in this study and the stages of initiatedcommunity action, the stages identified in this study mayrepresent only the first two or three stages of Poplin'scategorization of initiated community action (i.e., initialawareness of a community problem, the formation of an"initiating set" to begin action on the problem, anddefining the goals and strategies of the action episode.The time constraints within this research did not permit thestudy of an entire "action episode" as defined in communityaction theory. Rather, the focus of this study was on thebeginning stages of the organizing process.However, the framework developed in this study does not fitneatly into Poplin's categorization of community actionepisodes. As discussed in Chapter Two, the focus of154initiated community action episodes is on achievingspecific, concrete goals. This may account, in part, forthe differences between the stages as identified in thisresearch and the stages of initiated community actionepisodes. In community action episodes, once the goal isachieved, the "episode" comes to a conclusion. However,rather than focusing on the accomplishment of a concretegoal, the organizing process in this research was focused onorganizing residents to develop strategies to enhance thesocial and economic well-being of their community. This isan ongoing process, rather than an episode.The substantive context for this research may also help toaccount for the differences noted above. The stagesdescribed in this process focus on various activities andfactors required in developing a strategy for CED (e.g.,assessing community readiness, determining a developmentapproach, cultivating leadership) in contrast to communityaction theory which attempts to increase understanding ofthe dynamics of change in a community. The organizingframework developed in this study attempts to integrate thesubstantive context (i.e., community economic development)into a general framework that could be applicable to varyingcontexts (e.g., the five stages as described could apply toother organizing activities such as the organizing of anelection campaign or a labour union).155Another possible limitation of this research is its emphasison values and beliefs without being able to objectivelyassess their applicability to the organizing process. Theintangibility of values and beliefs means that they are opento potentially very different interpretation by differentpeople. It is comparatively easier to assess the outcomesof activities. Assessing the values which underlieparticular activities or approaches is much more difficult.Moreover, values and principles often do not lend themselvesto an "either-or" situation. For example, if CED is acommunity building process, as is suggested, then the valuesof community that Scott Peck refers to (inclusiveness,consensus, commitment, and self-awareness) ought to bereflected in the process of organizing CED. Peck's (1987,62) definition of inclusiveness is not just about who is apart of the community; it is about accepting and welcomingthe human differences that exist between people. While thecomposition of AMPER did not reflect the true diversity ofthe community in many respects (especially the ethnic andsocio-economic composition), there was an attempt to listento and appreciate the different perspectives that groupmembers brought. Other values -- such as commitment,consensus and self-awareness -- are similar. The reality isthat often there is a degree of inclusiveness, commitment,consensus or self-awareness; it is not an "either-or"situation.156The use of participant-observation as a key method of datacollection is another possible limitation. The combinedroles of researcher and organizer may contribute to aninherent bias in the research, particularly in those aspectsof the research that are difficult to substantiate byoutside sources (e.g., values and beliefs). However, thisis offset to some degree by obtaining the perspectives ofother participants (e.g., through the questionnaireadministered to members of AMPER and to the AdvisoryCommittee). In addition, key aspects of the process weredocumented in the minutes of meetings and practicumevaluation.On the other hand, this method facilitated a conscious andself-aware approach to the process of organizing. As bothparticipant and observer, or organizer and researcher -- amore reflective approach to organizing and a more practicalapproach to the research was undertaken.QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCHThis study suggests a number of questions for furtherresearch. An important question is how applicable is thisframework for organizing CED to other situations of CEDorganization and to other types of organizing? Key concepts157within this framework such as "gaining legitimacy" and"assessing readiness," which have not been explored indepth, should be examined for their applicability, to CEDorganizing, and other types of organizing. Are there otherconsiderations needed to assess a community's readiness forCED? And, if so, how can this assessment be made?Further questions about the role of the organizer indeveloping leadership can be explored. For example, howbroadly can the development of "critical consciousness" as aleadership development technique be applied? Is thisapproach to leadership development appropriate or possiblein all communities? How can it be facilitated?The relationship of CED principles to the process oforganizing can also be explored further. How can CEDorganizing more consciously incorporate the principles ofCED? What approaches can communities use in reachingconsensus about the values that they will use in guiding CEDactivity?CONTRIBUTION OF THIS RESEARCHThis research has attempted to examine a number of issueswith respect to the organization of CED within an inner-citycontext. An important outcome of this study is the158development of a framework for organizing which can beapplied in other contexts. This framework can be used as atool for understanding the process of organizing, inrelation to major stages of activity, key issues andcritical factors within each stage, the role of organizer,and guiding beliefs and values. While the particularcontext will vary in other CED organization activities, thisframework suggests a number of important themes and issueswhich have relevance for CED organization, and possibly forother types of organizing activity.This research, in explicitly examining the values andbeliefs which guided CED organization, has contributed to anawareness of the importance of values and beliefs in guidingCED activity. Values and beliefs are the lens through whichwe view the world and from which we act. Only by beingconscious of our values and beliefs, can we be open toquestioning them and to finding new ways of approaching theworld. This has an implication for the education of CEDpractitioners and other community practitioners. In orderto realize the overall objectives of CED, the principles ofCED must be explicit. Education must emphasize values, notjust techniques. The process of education for CEDpractitioners must encourage discussion of values andbeliefs and encourage practitioners to be more consciouslyself-aware of their own values and beliefs.159So far, little research on CED has been conducted. What ismissing from any of the research on CED is a discussion ofthe role of the organizer and the impact of the organizer onthe process. This study has contributed to such adiscussion, particularly with respect to the various rolesand functions performed and the values and beliefs whichguided the organizer.Finally, understanding the process of change is critical.This is important to communities such as Mount Pleasant inwhich change is not only possible, it is necessary for theirsurvival.Active neighbourhoods are the living cells in society.If they fail to function, decay sets in. But whenneighbourhoods come alive, society as a whole regainsits nerve, and people dare to believe in their capacityto shape the future together" (Gibson 1992, 391-2).EPILOGUEThe data collection portion of the research ended in April1987. However, my involvement in AMPER continued at theinvitation of the group.The next several months were a busy period for AMPER. Withthe assistance of a doctoral student in social work, AMPERconducted a "goal identification exercise" in July 1987which helped the group to define a set of goals andobjectives. Specific strategies were identified in August1987 and the group began to focus its attention on specificproject ideas. In October 1987, AMPER conceived of aproject idea to publish and broadly distribute a CommunityResource Directory which would list key community services,agencies and local businesses. The group began to explorevarious funding possibilities and a proposal was developedand submitted in January 1988 to Employment and ImmigrationCanada (EIC) for a Section 38 grant.AMPER also became involved in advocacy activities. In March1987, it had written a letter of support to Vancouver CityCouncil in support of a business incubator proposed by theDowntown Eastside Economic Development Society (DEEDS). InMay 1987, it presented a brief on CED to the Mayor'sConference on Small Business.160161During this period, AMPER also began to expand its contacts,both within Mount Pleasant, and within the broader "CEDcommunity." It liaised with community groups such as theMount Pleasant Business Association, the Mount PleasantNeighbourhood Association, the Fringe Festival, and otherarts and heritage groups. It developed relationships withtwo local credit unions, both which sent representatives toAMPER meetings. It continued to liaise with the City ofVancouver Planning Office and Vancouver Community College.AMPER also made political contacts with the MLAsrepresenting Mount Pleasant and with Carole Taylor, a memberof City Council.In November 1987, AMPER decided to become incorporated as aSociety and began the process of developing by-laws and aconstitution. This process continued throughout the springand summer of 1988. AMPER eventually became incorporated asa Society in early 1989.AMPER's application for a Section 38 grant was approved byEIC in the spring of 1988. This grant enabled AMPER to hirethree workers and pay the expenses to undertake theresearch, design, compilation and distribution of aCommunity Resource Directory. AMPER rented an office nearMain and 7th Avenue and the project commenced in May 1988.This project gave AMPER broad exposure within the community.162There was much support in the community for this project andmany community members provided assistance. Likewise, AMPERattempted to involve many aspects of the community (e.g.,arts, business, heritage) in this project. A decision wasmade to incorporate historical information and photographsof the early history of Mount Pleasant in the Directory andan art competition was held for the cover of the Directory.An awards jury, with representation from the local artscommunity, judged the many submissions received. AMPERdecided to use a local printer for the Directory and otherlocal businesses were also used in this project. AMPERexplored the possibility of translating the Directory intoother languages but was not able to find the necessaryfunding to do this.The Directory was unique in highlighting both businesses andcommunity services. 15,000 copies of the Community ResourceDirectory were printed and the Directory was distributed toevery household and business in Mount Pleasant.In January 1989, after this project was completed, theinfrastructure (e.g., office, furniture, computer, etc.)could no longer be sustained. AMPER did not have an ongoingsource of funding. Several project ideas and fundingpossibilities were explored; however no funding sources werefound. Furthermore, AMPER began to lose steam after the163intense energy of its first project. The group agreed totake a break in the spring of 1989. I have not had anysignificant involvement in AMPER or in Mount Pleasant sinceMarch 1989.While AMPER is no longer active in Mount Pleasant, thecommunity has continued to be active in addressing importantsocial and economic issues. A "healthy communities" projectwas initiated in 1989 and has made a substantialcontribution to the community. The arts and heritageaspects of the community have also enhanced the vitality ofMount Pleasant. The Fringe Festival has become an importantcultural event in the community. Still, despite theevidence of increased community vitality, many of the samesocial and economic issues (e.g., poverty, crime,prostitution, and alienation) exist. Such problems are noteasily resolved. Mount Pleasant continues to evolve as acommunity. My sense is that it has become a stronger andmore vital community.BIBLIOGRAPHYAlderson, Lucy and Melanie Conn. 1993. Making Communities Work: Women and Community Economic Development. Vancouver:WomenFutures.Alderson, Lucy, Melanie Conn, Janet Donald and Leslie Kemp.1993. Making Communities Work: Women and Community EconomicDevelopment. National Research and Policy Symposium onCommunity Economic Development, March 30 - April 3, 1993.Vancouver: WomenFutures and SPARC.Association for Mount Pleasant Economic Renewal. 1989. The Mount Pleasant Community Resource Directory. Vancouver:AMPER.Anyanwu, C. N. 1988. "The Technique of Participatory Researchin Community Development." Community Development Journal 23.1: 11-5Bailie, Samuel H. 1975. "Community Development as a Process ofEmergence." Action-Research in Community Development. Eds.Ray Lees & George Smith. London: Routledge. 169-73.Barr, Douglas. 1979. "The Regent Park Community Services Unit:Partnership Can Work." Community Work in Canada. Ed. BrianWharf. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart.Barton, D. et al. 1985. A Third Way: Community EconomicDevelopment. Ottawa: CommunityWorks.BC Working Group on Community Economic Development. 1993.Report of the Provincial Consultation and Follow-Up Meetingon Community Economic Development. Held in June andNovember, 1992. Vancouver: BC Working Group on CED.Berkowitz, William R. 1982. Community Impact: CreatingGrassroots Change in Hard Times. Cambridge, MA: Schenkman.Burghardt, Steve. 1979. "The Tactical Use of Group Structureand Process in Community Organization." Strategies of Community Organization. Ed. Cox et al. 3rd ed. Illinois:Peacock. 113-30.Burghardt, Steve. 1982. The Other Side of Organizing.Cambridge: Schenkman.164165Canadian Council on Social Development. Report on the Feasibility Study and Design of a Project to Develop anActive Inventory of Local Economic Initiatives in Canada.Unpublished report, n.d.Cary, Lee J. 1989. "Teaching Community Development."Community Development in Perspective.  Eds. James A.Christenson and Jerry W. Robinson, Jr. Ames: Iowa StateUniversity P. 159-72.Christenson, James A. 1989. "Themes of Community Development."Community Development in Perspective. Eds. James A.Christenson and Jerry W. Robinson, Jr. Ames: Iowa StateUniversity P. 26-47.City of Vancouver Planning Department. 1985.^Mount Pleasant Overall Policy Plan: A Framework for Community Development.Vancouver._ . 1988. Vancouver Local Areas 1986: 100% data from the_ _Canada Census._ _ . 1989. Vancouver Local Areas 1986: 20% data from the_Canada Census.Clague, Michael. 1986. Community Economic Development inBritish Columbia: Discussion Paper (Status Report IV.Vancouver: SPARC.Community Economic Options. Pamphlet. Burnaby, BC.: WomenSkillsDevelopment Society, n.d.Community Initiatives 1986 1.2: 1-12.Community Initiatives Digest 1987 2.1: 1-15.Community Initiatives Digest 1987 2.2: 1-13.Conn, Melanie. Lecture. "Community Profiles Workshop."Training Institute for Community Economic DevelopmentPractitioners. New Westminster, BC, 29 Nov. 1986.Crane, John. 1982. The Evaluation of Social Policies. Boston:Nijhoff.Daly, Herman E. and John B. Cobbs, Jr. 1989. For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy Toward Community, the Environment, and a Sustainable Future. Boston: BeaconPress.Dobson, Ross V.G. 1993. Bringing the Economy Home From the Market. Montreal: Black Rose.166Ecklein, Joan. 1984. Community Organizers. 2nd ed. New York:John Wiley & Sons.Ekins, Paul, ed. 1986. The Living Economy. London: Routledge._ _ _ . Lectures. "The New Economy," "Local EconomicGeneration," and "An Agenda for New Economics." DouglasCollege Community Programs and Services. New Westminster,BC, 29 Feb. 1987.Fear, Frank A., Larry Gamm, and Frederick Fisher. 1989. "TheTechnical Assistance Approach." Community Development inPerspective. Eds. James A. Christenson and Jerry W.Robinson, Jr. Ames: Iowa State University P. 69-88.Fisher, Robert and Peter Romanof sky, eds. 1981. Community Organization for Urban Social Change: A Historical Perspective. Westport: Greenwood Press.Galbraith, John Kenneth. 1987. Economics in Perspective: A Critical History. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Galtung, Johan. 1986. "Towards a New Economics: On the Theoryand Practice of Self-Reliance." The Living Economy. Ed.Paul Ekins. London: Routledge. 97-109.Garkovich, Lorraine E. 1989. "Local Organizations andLeadership in Community Development." Community Development in Perspective. Eds. James A. Christenson and Jerry W.Robinson, Jr. Ames: Iowa State University P. 196-218.Gibson, Tony. 1992. "Changing Neighbourhoods." Real Life Economics: Understanding Wealth Creation. Eds. Paul Ekinsand Manfred Max-Neef. New York: Routledge.Glaser, Barney G., and Aselm L. Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Illinois: Aldine.Glaser, Barney G. 1978. Theoretical Sensitivity. Mill Valley,CA: Sociology.Goodwin, Barry. 1986. "Community-Based Economic Planning: TheNew Westminster Experience." [New Westminster]: Royal CityCommunity Development Assn.Grosser, Charles F. 1976. New Directions in CommunityOrganization: From Enabling to Advocacy. New York: Praeger.Henderson, Hazel. 1991. Paradigms in Progress: Life Beyond Economics. Indianapolis: Knowledge Systems.167Kahn, Si. 1970. How People Get Power: Organizing Oppressed Communities for Action. New York: McGraw-Hill.Keating, Donald R. 1977. "The Future of NeighbourhoodOrganizing." n.p.: Community Organizing Institute ofCanada.Kelly, James G. 1979. "The Community Development Specialist'sRole in Community Research: Creating Trust and ManagingPower." Community Development Research: Concepts, Issues and Strategies. Ed. Edward Blakely. New York: HumanServices P. 197-217.Khinduka, S.K. 1979. "Community Development: Potentials andLimitations." Strategies of Community Organization. Ed.Cox et al. 3rd ed. Illinois: Peacock. 356-64.Kramer, Ralph M. and Harry Specht, eds. 1983. CommunityOrganization Practice. 3rd ed. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.Lees, Ray. 1975. "The Action-Research Relationship." Action-Research in Community Development. Eds. Ray Lees & GeorgeSmith. London: Routledge. 59-66.Littrell, Donald W. and Daryl Hobbs. 1989. "The Self-HelpApproach." Community Development in Perspective. Eds.James A. Christenson and Jerry W. Robinson, Jr. Ames: IowaState University P. 48-68.Lockhart, Alexander. "The Concept of Community: Toward theAttainment of a Local Developmental and PlanningCapability." Unpublished paper, n.d.1982. "The Insider-Outsider Dialectic in Native Socio-Economic Development: A Case Study in ProcessUnderstanding." The Canadian Journal of Native Studies 2.1: 160-8.Address. "Assessing the Readiness of your Communityfor Development." Training Institute for CommunityEconomic Development Practitioners. New Westminster, BC, 28Nov. 1986.- - -. 1987. "Community-Based Development and ConventionalEconomics in the Canadian North." Social Intervention: Theory and Practice. Ed. Edward M. Bennett. Lewiston:Edwin Mellen Press. 11: 393-414.- - -. "Community, Civil Society, and Economic Development."Statistics Canada Invitational Colloquim. Ottawa, 26 Feb.1991.168Lotz, Jim. 1987. "U. I. Stands For You and I." Journal of Community Development 1.1: 6+.Lutz, Mark A. and Kenneth Lux. 1988. Humanistic Economics: The New Challenge. New York: The Bootstrap Press.MacLeod, Greg. 1982. "Community Control." The Nuts and Bolts of Community Based Economic Development. Eds. Candas Dorsey &Ellen Ticoll. Edmonton: Edmonton Social Planning Council.14-6.-^1986. New Age Business: Community Corporations That Work. Ottawa: Canadian Council on Social Development.McRobie, George. 1986. "Small is Possible: Towards A Human-Scale Technology." Employment and Social Development in aChanging Economy. Ottawa: Canadian Council on SocialDevelopment. 55-79.Melnyk, George. 1985. The Search for Community: From Utopia toa Co-operative Society. Montreal: Black Rose.Miles, Matthew B., and Michael A. Huberman. 1984. Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods. Beverly Hills,CA: Sage.Mizrahi, Terry, and John D. Morrison, eds. 1993. Community Organization and Social Administration: Advances, Trends, and Emerging Principles. New York: Haworth Press.Morris, Robert. 1979. "The Role of the Agent in Local CommunityWork." Strategies of Community Organization. Ed. Cox etal. 3rd ed. Illinois: Peacock. 103-13.Mount Pleasant: A Social Action Plan. n.p. n.d.Mount Pleasant Business Association. Pamphlet. [Vancouver]:n.p., n.d.Mount Pleasant Citizens Planning Committee. 1987. Draft Community Development Plan for Mount Pleasant. Vancouver:City of Vancouver Planning Department.Mount Pleasant Community Service Agencies and Programs. 1985.Pamphlet. Vancouver: Mount Pleasant Planning Office.Mount Pleasant Neighbourhood Association. 1986. Pamphlet.Vancouver: City of Vancouver Planning Department.Mount Pleasant Neighbourhood Association. 1985. "NeighbourhoodSurvey Final Report." (unpublished).169Mount Pleasant Revue. "Public Invited to Open House at NativeEducation Centre." Nov. 1 1987. 10.43: 9.New Catalyst. 1987. "Bucking the System: Alternative Economics."Spec. issue. 7: 1-27.New Economy Development Group Inc. 1992. Defining a Mid-Term Plan of Action and Research Agenda on Community Economic Development. Ottawa: National Welfare Grants, Health andWelfare Canada.Nicolls, William, and William Dyson. 1983. The Informal Economy. Ottawa: Vanier Institute of the Family.Nozick, Marcia. 1992. No Place Like Home: Building SustainableCommunities. Ottawa: Canadian Council on SocialDevelopment.O'Brien, David J. 1975. Neighborhood Organization and Interest-Group Processes. Princeton: Princeton University P.Patton, Michael Quinn. 1978. Utilization-Focused Evaluation.California: Sage.- - -. 1980. Qualitative Evaluation Methods. CA: Sage.Peck, M. Scott, MD. 1988. The Different Drum: Community Makingand Peace. New York: Simon and Schuster.Perlman, Robert and Arnold Gurin. 1972. Community Organizationand Social Planning. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Perry, Stewart. 1982. "Evolving a New Economic Perspective."The Nuts and Bolts of Community Based Economic Development.Eds. Candas Dorsey & Ellen Ticoll. Edmonton: EdmontonSocial Planning Council. 5-13.Perry, Stewart E., Mike Lewis, and Jean-Marc Fontan. 1993.Revitalizing Canada's Neighbourhoods: A Research Report onCommunity Economic Development. Vancouver: Centre forCommunity Enterprise.Plant, Raymond. 1974. Community and Ideology: An Essay in Applied Social Philosophy. London: Routledge and KeganPaul.Poplin, Dennis E. 1979. Communities: A Survey of Theories and Methods of Research. 2nd ed. New York: MacMillan. 1.1: 6+.Quarter, Jack. 1992. Canada's Social Economy: Co-operatives, Non-Profits, and Other Community Enterprises. Toronto:James Lorimer & Company.170Reid, William J. and Audrey D. Smith. 1981. Research in Social Work. New York: Columbia UP.Robertson, James. 1978. The Sane Alternative: Signposts to a Self-Fulfilling Future. London: Villiers.Ross, David. 1986. "Local Economic Initiative: An Overview."Employment and Social Development in a Changing Economy.Ottawa: Canadian Council on Social Development. 7-16.Ross, David P., and Peter J. Usher. 1986. From the Roots Up: Economic Development As if Community Mattered.Croton-on-Hudson, NY: Bootstrap.Ross, Murray G. 1967. Community Organization: Theory, Principles, and Practice. 2nd ed. New York: Harper & Row.Rothman, Jack. 1979a. Introduction. "Concepts of CommunityOrganization and Trends in Practice." Strategies of Community Organization. Ed. Cox et al. 3rd ed. Illinois:Peacock. 3-22.-^1979b. "Three Models of Community Organization Practice,Their Mixing and Phasing." Strategies of CommunityOrganization. Ed. Cox et al. 3rd ed. Illinois: Peacock.25-45Rubin, Herbert J., and Irene Rubin. 1986. Community Organizingand Development. Toronto: Merrill.Schramm, Richard. 1987. "Local, Regional, and NationalStrategies." Beyond the Market and the State. Eds. SeverynT. Bruyn and James Meehan. Philadelphia: Temple UniversityP.Schumacher, E.F. 1973. Small is Beautiful: A Study of Economics as if People Mattered. London: Abacus.Smith, George. 1975. "Action-Research: Experimental SocialAdministration." Action-Research in Community Development.Eds. Ray Lees and George Smith. London: Routledge. 188-99.Social Planning and Review Council of British Columbia. 1985.Bridging Social and Economic Planning: An Exploration of Community Economic Development Activities in British Columbia. Vancouver: SPARC.Spiegel, Hans B. 1979. "Theoretical Research and CommunityDevelopment Practice." Community Development Research: Concepts, Issues and Strategies. Ed. Edward Blakely. NewYork: Human Services P. 24-45.171Strandberg, Coro T. 1985. Community Economic Development in British Columbia: Nine Case Studies.^Vancouver: SPARC.Strauss, Anselm L. 1987. Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. New York: Cambridge University P.Vanier Institute of the Family. 1983. A Social Framework for Economics: Development From the Ground Up. Submission tothe Royal Commission on the Economic Union and DevelopmentProspects for Canada. Ottawa: Vanier Inst.Voth, Donald E. 1979a. "Problems in the Evaluation of CommunityDevelopment Efforts." Community Development Research: Concepts, Issues and Strategies. Ed. Edward Blakely. NewYork: Human Services P. 153-74.-^1979b. "Social Action Research in CommunityDevelopment." Community Development Research: Concepts, Issues and Strategies. Ed. Edward Blakely. New York: HumanServices P. 67-81.Walker, Gillian. 1985. "Community Economic Development: SelfHelp Capitalism or Oppositional Base?" SPAN -- CanadianReview of Social Policy 13: 65-71.Waring, Marilyn. 1988. If Women Counted: A New Feminist Economics. New York: HarperCollins.Warner, Paul D. 1989. "Professional Community DevelopmentRoles." Community Development in Perspective. Eds. JamesA. Christenson and Jerry W. Robinson, Jr. Ames: Iowa StateUniversity P. 117-135.Warren, Rachelle B. and Donald I. Warren. 1977. TheNeighborhood Organizer's Handbook. Indiana: University ofNotre Dame P.Warren, Roland L. 1972. The Community in America. 2nd ed.Chicago: Rand McNally.Welton, Michael, Jim Lotz, and Carl Duguay, eds. 1986.Community Options^1.3: 1-45.Wharf, Brian. 1979. Community Work in Canada. Toronto:McClelland and Stewart.Williams, Michael R. 1985. Neighbourhood Organizations: Seeds of an Urban Life. Westport, CT: Greenwood.Wilson, Steve. 1979. "Explorations of the Usefulness of CaseStudy Evaluations." Evaluation Quarterly 3.3: 446-59.172Wismer, Susan, and David Pell. 1981. Community Profit: Community-Based Economic Development in Canada. Toronto: IsFive Press.- 1983. Community-Based Planning: Part I -- The Process of Planning for Community-Based Economic Development. Guelph,ON: Wismer Pell.- 1984. "Community Self-Reliance in the Age of 6 and 5."The Nuts and Bolts of Community Based Economic Development.Eds. Candas Dorsey and Ellen Ticoll. Edmonton: EdmontonSocial Planning Council. 24-38.- 1985. Community Enterprise Centres: Enterpreneurial Development as a Strategy for Local Economic Development.Guelph, ON: Wismer Pell.Yin, Robert K. 1984. Case Study Research: Design and Methods.California: Sage.Zald, Mayer N. 1979. "Organizations as Polities: An Analysis ofCommunity Organization Agencies." Strategies of CommunityOrganization.^Ed. Cox et al. 3rd ed. Illinois: Peacock.238-48.173APPENDICES174Appendix IAgreement Between School of Social Work,Student, and Mount Pleasant Supervisory Committee175This agreement is between the School of Social Work,University of British Columbia; M.S.W. student Leslie Kemp;and her supervisory committee within the community of MountPleasant, represented by Leah Hartley, Planning Assistant,Planning Department, City of Vancouver. It defines theexpectations and the respective roles of each of theaforementioned parties with regard to a field studies/thesisplacement within the community of Mount Pleasant.1. The M.S.W. student, Leslie Kemp agrees to engage in apiece of community social work practice in the communityof Mount Pleasant. It is expected that accepted techniquesof community practice will be carried out in aprofessional manner consistent with the Social Work Codeof Ethics.The particular area in which the student will be involvedis in the exploration of the concept of "CommunityEconomic Development" and its relationship with communitydevelopment and cohesiveness. Contingent upon communitysupport, the student will investigate, develop andorganize community economic development projects such ascommunity-based cooperatives.In addition to the above, the student will perform anassessment of the community support for such a project,and will undertake appropriate research within the overallcontext of the project.The student will be available approximately two days (16hours) per week for work on this project, from now untilApril 3, 1987. Mondays and Tuesdays will normally be thedays in which work on this project will take place.2. The School of Social Work will provide support, advice anddirection to the student in the course of her involvementin the project. Professor Roop Seebaran, as the student'ssupervisor, will have periodic contact with the fieldsupervisor, and will be available for consultation andproblem-solving, if needed.3. The Mount Pleasant Committee, which has agreed to act inan advisory capacity to the student, is comprised of LeahHartley, Planning Assistant, Planning Department, City ofVancouver; Val Anderson, President, Mount PleasantNeighbourhood Association; Howard Turpin, VancouverCommunity College; and Judy Minchinton, CommunityDevelopment Worker for Mount Pleasant.176This Committee will act as a resource to the student,providing advice, support and guidance. In addition, theCommittee has agreed to provide the student with an officewithin the community, with a desk and telephone. It willprovide feedback to the student and the universityregarding the performance of the student and her workwithin the community. Leah Hartley has agreed to serve asthe formal liaison between the Committee and the School ofSocial Work.177Appendix IIAdvisory Committee Questionnaire178TO: Members of the Advisory Committee for M.S.W. studentLeslie Kemp (Leah Hartley, Val Anderson, Judy Minchintonand Howard Turpin)The intent of this questionnaire is to obtain youropinions about the following questions. The information youprovide will greatly assist in obtaining a participant'sperspective of the project that you have been involved insince September. The results of this questionnaire will beused in the research project being conducted by social workstudent Leslie Kemp. Your participation in completing thisquestionnaire is greatly appreciated. It is estimated thatthe questionnaire will take 20 minutes of your time.Please keep in mind that your participation is entirelyvoluntary. You have the right to decline to complete thequestionnaire and may leave blank any item you findunacceptable.Thank you very much for your time and co-operation infilling out this questionnaire.11791. Do you feel the investment of yourtime and energies as anAdvisory Committee member was worthwhile? (Please checkthe category which most closely reflects your feelingsabout this)Not at all worthwhile^Somewhat worthwhileNot sure ^ Very worthwhilePlease elaborate . . •2. Please elaborate on the strengths and weaknesses of theproject, both in terms of the process involved and inrelation to the outcome.21803. a) What is your best bet as to the future success of thisproject?b) What do you expect to be happening vis-a-visthis project one year from now?c) What are the most important factors, in your view, toensuring eventual success?31814. In your view, what roles did the Advisory Committeeplay in this project?5. In what ways do you feel the social work studenthas influenced the process and/or the outcome of theproject up to this point?6. Any further comments you have about this project and/oryour involvement are welcomed.THIS COMPLETES THE QUESTIONNAIRE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FORYOUR HELP.4182Appendix IIIGroup Questionnaire183TO: Members of the Association for Mount Pleasant's EconomicRenewal (AMPER)The intent of this questionnaire is to obtain theopinions of the members of the Association for MountPleasant's Economic Renewal (AMPER) about the followingquestions. The information you provide will greatly assistin obtaining a participant's perspective of the project thatyou have been involved in since early February. The resultsof this questionnaire will be used in the research projectbeing conducted by social work student Leslie Kemp. Yourparticipation in completing this questionnaire is greatlyappreciated. It is estimated that the questionnaire willtake 20 minutes of your time.Please keep in mind that your participation is entirelyvoluntary. You have the right to decline to complete thequestionnaire and may leave blank any item you findunacceptable.Thank you very much for your time and co-operation infilling out this questionnaire.11841. Do you feel the investment of your time and energies hasbeen worthwhile up to this point? (Please check thecategory which most closely reflects your feelings aboutthis)Not at all worthwhile-- ^worthwhileNot sure ^ Very worthwhile ^Please elaborate . . .2. Please elaborate on the strengths and weaknesses of theproject so far.21853. a) What is your best bet as to the future success of thisproject?b) What do you expect to be happening vis-a-visthis project one year from now?c) What are the most important factors, in your view, toensuring eventual success?d) What do you see as your role, if any, in relation tothis project or in relation to AMPER, one year fromnow?31864. In what ways do you feel the social work studenthas influenced the process and/or the outcome of theproject up to this point?5. How many meetings (approximately) of AMPER have youattended?6. Any further comments you have about this project and/oryour involvement are welcomed.THIS COMPLETES THE QUESTIONNAIRE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FORYOUR HELP.4187Appendix IVAdvisory Committee Response188Do you feel the investment of your time and energies as anAdvisory Committee member was worthwhile? (Please check thecategory which most closely reflects your feelings aboutthis).[Responses 4/4]Not at all worthwhile^Somewhat worthwhileNot sure  2 Very Worthwhile 2Please elaborate . .A "I hope that the process was useful for you, Leslie. Itwas certainly useful for the community. The existence ofan ongoing process in Mount Pleasant has the potential forlasting benefits and, therefore, is very worthwhile."B "It was first of all enjoyable working with Leslie andthen rewarding in working as part of her supervisory teamfor this helped me to also gain many new insights into theprocess of economic development and also through her eyesto have another view of this community."C "Personally, I would rather be more directly involvedthat [sic] my available time allowed. The student says Iwas useful; I am interested in C.E.D. & learned a fewthings but remain feeling unsatisfied, sort of--Iattended/contributed @ most meetings, but did I do anywork?"D "Not sure what results will come from the project. Willthe project survive after withdrawal of student support?If not, I see limited value in the project and feel thatthe time & energy spent in the project was not worthwhileas it may have only raised false expectations."189Please elaborate on the strengths and weaknesses of theproject, both in terms of the process involved and inrelation to its outcome.A "I suppose the weakness of the project could be relatedto the original goals of the project which now appear tohave been unrealistic. The strength of the project isthat this did not prevent success. Leslie's flexibilityand professionalism enabled her to recognize and remidy[sic] the problems and develop a very positive outcome.""The strength of the project was first that it tackled avery much needed and practical aspect of this community.Leslie then brought to bear, first a study of the need,second a study of possible resoources and resource peopleand third she initiated a process of practical responsewhich is still continuing and appears it will continueafter she leaves."The weakness is mostly in the shortage of time for such alarge undertaking, though I must report she did accomplishher initial goal of setting a valid process in place whichnow can have a life of its own, I think a remarkableachievement."C "I didn't find weaknesses that I can recall in theproject--and it was revised to a 'community-realistic'placement: formation of a group vs product-project(employment) Process was good, student insight &assessment good. The outcome is a C.E.D. group with alife of its own."D no response190What is your best bet as to the future success of thisproject?A "My guess is that the group now established will produceprojects and get results measurable in terms of economicdevelopment."• "At this point the initiating committee appears to bevery committed to working for success. Particularly theyare inter-connected with a large network of supportivegroups like King Edward Campus, DEEDS, the NeighbourhoodAssociation, the Local Area Planning and City EconomicDevelopment."C "I think it will not be able to get a project off theground that produces a product or employs people."D no responseWhat do you expect to be happening vis-a-vis this project oneyear from now?A "How about one project actually happening!"B "I trust that a year from now the committee will havetested out one or more specific economic developmentpossibilities and may well have one or more of them onthe way to permanence."• "that participants will have explored C.E.D. & educatedthemselves on the subject concluding that Mt Pleasant areacannot support same. (They might do something like get agovernment grant and employ 'x' people doing somethingwhich will end when grant ends & that is not C.E.D.--evenif one names it 'C.E.D.'."• no response191What are the most important factors, in your view, toensuring eventual success?A "(1) Leslie's continued low-key involvement with thegroup. (2) Increased membership in the community andnetworking with other like-minded groups.""The fist [sic] factor is the ongoing commitment of thepresent members and secondly their ability to tap theopportunities and resources available. They seem to havea good base to make one feel optomistic."C "the biggest factor is a stable community."D "Taking on small, distinct activities which areguarenteed [sic] to succeed and for which one person isclearly responsible."In your view, what roles did the Advisory Committee play inthis project?A "(1) A sounding board--a place where ideas could betested and concerns shared. (2) A source of resources--Leslie was able to draw out the help she needed."B "First this committee helped to bring the project intoexistence and then acted as a sounding board, and inputgroup for developing community contacts. It was a groupto respond to process and ideas and help those to beclarified before presenting them to others. Thesupervisory group members were also able to help withcommunity inter-connections."C "Sounding board", student required minimal teachingsupervision only normal supportive supervision. Helpedstudent quickly get in touch with community residents &resources.""Bringing in the student and esablishing initial liaisonin the community."192In what ways do you feel the social work student hasinfluenced the process and/or outcome of the project up tothis point?A "(1) research--provided the basis for action(2)organization--guided the structure for development(3) public relations--provided, in a variety of ways,the visibility such a project needed to get going."B "Leslie has been key to the whole process. In thebeginning she assessed the community and presented andrefined a viable project and process. She then did thevast majority of the research on the community and oneconomic development process and brought together thosewho might be interested. She then was key to the processof organizing those who were interested into a viableworking committee of which she gradually changed fromorganizer to resource person."C "From the beginning ensured the group would controlitself: started off with independence building thusenabling group to continue on its own without everfeeling 'leader-lost" because the student left."D "Student had full direction of the project."193Any further comments you have about this project and/oryour involvement are welcomed.A "I think we all benefited from the project. It is usefulto see the community in a new perspective and throughsomeone else's eyes. Thanks for what you'veaccomplished."B "This has been a very significant conitribution to MountPleasant even if it does not go any further, though Iexpect it will. It has helped to develop an awareness oflocal economic development both needed and possible bothwithin the community and perhaps most important inrelation to City Hall. It really has been an unexploredterritory and this exploration has been both positive andenriching."We owe a great deal to Leslie's persistance, patience,and vision."C "It is too bad Mt. Pleasant area is too unstable to beable to take advantage of C.E.D. concept. I will happilybe proven wrong. The project is useful as a discussion/education group and individuals will not lose thelearning, and hopefully the community can repair itself tothe point of being able to make use of C.E.D."D no response194Appendix VGroup Responses195Do you feel the investment of your time and energies has beenworthwhile up to this point? (Please check the categorywhich most closely reflects your feelings about this).[Responses 6/61Not at all worthwhile^Somewhat worthwhile INot sure  I Very worthwhile 4Please elaborate . .A "Its a good process--have enjoyed the project, like thepeople we're working with. Some very creative people areinvolved."B No responseC "There is a real possibility of getting some CED launchedin Mount Pleasant. If it happens that will beexhilarating. If not--well, we tried."• "Relative newcomer to this group, although not to the CEDinitiative."E "The forming of the group, and the process of goal setting& discussion has taken what seems to be a fairly longtime. However, I feel that this is probably not unusualor abnormal, & that we are about where we should be atthis point."• "The amount of energy I have put in so far has beenminimal. As I'm not a resident of the neighbourhood andinstead am representing a local financial institution Isee myself as a potential resource for the group. I thinkthis role will be more valuable at a later stage in thegroup's development."196Please elaborate on the strengths and weaknesses of theproject so far.A "Strengths: --a good core group, creative.--lots of community support--at least inprinciple--meetings have been quite business-likeWeaknesses --I've found that the goal development processhas been quite slow--We're short on ideas for projects & arebeing held back by procedural methods--alittle bit anyway--we need to find some "do-ers" (I mean peoplenot too busy to take on a project)""The reason that I feel that my time is well spent ininitial stage of the Association (AMPER). Because theidea of revatelize depressed aeria as Mount Plesant isbenificial to all community and individuals, who livesin this aeria and are lacking support of otherorganization to give assistance in job finding orestablishing self support businesses. AMPER--couldeventually play big roll in supporting and advizing thosepeople who are interested to be self supporting andindependent. [sic]"C "Strengths-commitment of the group-existence of DEEDS, with its problems, as an example ofwhat can be done experienced in Vancouver.-Mount Pleasant has better resource potential thanDowntown Eastside-Political interest potential in MPWeaknesses-the usual problem that the do-ers in MP are spread toothin and there aren't enough of them-we need an energetic co-ordinator when Leslie leaves totake us next step-we need a promising project on which all can focus-Not enough involvement yet of other resource peopleneeded."197D. "Strengths - dedicated & diversified core group.Weaknesses - although mission statement is in place, notquite sure that the group has reached consensus onspecifics, e.g. structure of projects & governing body."E "Strengths: it has brought together people from variouspoints & backgrounds in Mt. Pleasant to work for apositive goal: namely, economic development. Moreover,the participants have displayed a strong desire to "getit right". A good deal of discussion has focused on'what kind of structure' & what kind of development do wewant in Mt. Pleasant. I would only add that it has alsobeen enjoyable working in the company of group members whodisplay a high degree of competence & willingness toachieve goals."F "As I haven't attended the last 3 meetings I'm out oftouch with how much progress has been made. A weaknessat an earlier stage was a coherent vision of what thegroup wanted to accomplish."198What is your best bet as to the future success of thisproject?A "We need to get moving on something specific, or we'lllose interest. If we hit on a workable project, we'll befine.""With energy and know how of the members of this group andsupport of local and Provincial governments success ispossible."C "50-50"• "depends on what goals constitute 'success'--if the groupstays together & keeps on trying, then this will besuccess enough."E "I hesitate to 'bet', but the project has a good chance tosucceed."• "Sorry, out of touch."What do you expect to be happening vis-a-vis this project oneyear from now?A "Doing something! We'll have a project & will beworking on it. Hard to say exactly what."• "I expect that more interest will be shown by the businesspeople and elected members of local government toward thisgroup (AMPER), and more knowelagable people will joint thegroup to support it's cause [sic]."• "Either--moribund/dead or--at least one project up andmoving with more following in various stages ofdevelopment"199D "registered as society--possible to have incubator inplace as the City warms to CED."• "I would expect that the project would have at least onebusiness success to its credit. I would expect that ifgov't funding assistance was not 'in place' that it wouldbe resolved very soon. I would expect that the localcredit union interest would have become more 'concrete'i.e) that they would actually be involved in a fundingarrangement."• "ditto" [previous question]What are the most important factors, in your view, toensuring eventual success?A "1) Find a project 2) Find money to support action--astaff person, 3) Networking with other agencies--we may beable to ally ourselves with another group to make projectswork."B "To get more people involved in (AMPER) and contributetheir knowledge."C "Involvement of the resource elements: people with smallbusiness succes allied to adequate funding (grants andloans) and the necessary skills and disciplinessupporting."D "education--politicking--determination--ability to followthrough"• "most important: 1) to reach out to the existing businesscommunity & include them in the process. 2) to choosebusiness projects that have good (or v. good) chances ofsucceeding 3) to choose appropriate management structuresfor the business(es). 4) Selling the idea to thecommunity at large."• "willingness of participants to work outside the meetings--a decision to work on a specific project."200What do you see as your role, if any, in relation to thisproject or in relation to AMPER, one year from now?A "Depends--as long as I'm working at VCC, I would be partliaison, part "board" member (but active)."• "For myself I do not see that I will be playing animportant role in this group."C "Providing specialist advice and helping to draw in theparts set out in (c)."D no responseE "To assist in a coordinating role, vis a vis the othercontacts I have in the community & city. --To assist byoffering the benefit of the limited small businessexperience I have."F "-to provide information on how the organization can getfinancing from a financial organization (if appropriate).-to provide some publicity through the credit unionnewsletter"201In what ways do you feel the social work student hasinfluenced the process and/Or outcome of the project up tothis point?A "Greatly! Role as group convenor & organizer as beenterrific. We needed for a) to get it going b) as aresource person c) to keep us on target. What will wedo without you. Up till now you have been the "staffperson" we're going to need later on."• "The person who was asigned for this project isoutstanding in her energy and effort to collect necessarydata and organize people to be interested in idea ofsupports to revatelize the aeria [sic]."• "By providing the initiative and the coordination AMPERis at least off the ground. Without this AMPER would notexist."D "strong leadership--high degree of responibility"E "Leslie has been very effective at setting the tone forthe project meetings to date. She has also been veryefficient in the handling & dissemination of AMPER minutes& related literature. Her interaction skills are verygood. She has not tried to dominate proceedings. She hasassisted the members of the group to find their own way."• "--by providing secretarial support--by soliciting theinvolvement of outside resources & community members.--bynot taking too large a leadership role thereby encouragingthe group to take role."202How many meetings (approximately) of AMPER have you attended?A "I think all of them. I may have missed one."• "Eight regular meetings."C "7"D "4"E "All (8)"F "3"Any further comments you have about this project and/or yourinvolvement are welcomed.A "I think I said it all."• "I hope the group will continue to work toward set goals."• "We have to get more real contributors involved."D "Good luck to us all!"• "I have enjoyed being part of the project & I expect tocontinue my participation. I look forward to being partof a successful future for AMPER & its goals."F No response.203Appendix VIEthical ApprovalOCT 12 '93 12:12PM ORSIL,UBC^ P . 1204THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIAOffice of Research Services323 - WoodwazdIRC 2194 Health Sciences MallVancouver B.C., V6T 1Z3Phone: 604-822-9252Fax: 604-822-8589/5093DOCUMENT SENT BY FACSIMILE MACHINEOctober 12, 1993MEMO TO:^Dr. Sharon Manson SingerSocial WorkFROM:^Shirley A. ThompsonManager Ethical Review/UBC GrantsSUBJECT:^Leslie Kemp's thesisNUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS MEMO: 2A copy of the computer screen follows this memo.It shows that the Class projects for Social Work 551-3, Principal InvestigatorJohn Crane were submitted for review on August 18, 1986 and approved onSeptember 5, 1986. OCT 12 '93 1212PM ORSIL,UBC^ P.211584^N B86-160 1229 Crane, J.11585^T Class Projects: SW 551-311587^V11588^R 86-08-1811588.5 A 86-09-0511589^3 86-08-18 V205206The University of British Columbia BehaIWUral Sciences Screening CommitteeFor Research and Other Studies Involving Human Subjects.REOUEST FOR ETHICAL REVIEW1 Principal Investigator (or faculty advisor)Dr. John Crane3 UBC DepartmentSocial Work4 Phone Number228 -42782 Student or Co - Investigator(s)Leslie Kemp5 Granting AgencyN/A6 Project PeriodSeptember 1986 -June 1877 Title of ProjectA Case Study of a Community Action Process in Addressing Economic and Social ProblemsALL INFORMATION REQUESTED IN THIS FORM MUST BE TYPEWRITTEN IN THE SPACE PROVIDED.•"4, NOTE : IF THE PROJECT IS LIMITED TO ONE OF THE FOLLOWING. PLEASE CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOXAND COMPLETE AND SUBMIT ONLY PAGES 1 AND 2 OF THIS FORM:0 observation without intervention0 interviews of professional colleagues in the fields of law or business in which no invasion ofan individual's personal privacy or possible jeopardy of employment status is involved.(Summarize interview/questionnaire content in item #12 or attach a copy)El course or programme evaluation0 modification of existing approved protocol #any revised attachments. indicate changes only and submit copies of8 Summary of purpose and objectives of projectThis is an exploratory descriptive study of the process undertaken withinthe neighbourhood of Mount Pleasant to address social and economic problemsthrough the development of a community economic development strategy. The roleof the research-practitioner is to organize and engage residents in a processof addressing community economic development. The purpose of the study is todocument and analyze the process by which community economic development isaddressed and to evaluate the impact of the research-practitioner on the process.This study will provide a basis for examining how community economic developmentcan be addressed in the context of an inner-city community. It will be of interestto current Community Economic Development practitioners wanting informationabout the dynamics of community economic development; it should also be of use topeople in communities beginning to examine community economic development as apotential strategy for addressing social and economic problems.SIGNATURES9 Principal Investigator(or faculty advisor)10 Student or Co-Investigator(s)(if applicable)11 UBC Department Head or DeanDateDateDate12 Summary of methodology and procedures.^207Sutmary of methodology and proceduresThe principle methods of data collection will be participant-Observation,.informal interviews and content analysis of minutes Of meetings, newspaperarticles and other relevant material. The study will be divided into threemajor stages:1. Entry - This stage involves problem identification, goal-setting andformulation of 'specific objectives and action strategies in conjunction withthe advisory committee. It involves familiarization with the community andmeetings with community groups and individuals.2. Basic Data-Gathering/Action - Research-practitioner organizes group ofinterested residents and business people and involves them in a, series ofmeetings. During this stage, a group is formed and a planning process developsin which concrete plans and strategies are developed to address communityeconomic development. The research practitioner collects data from groupmeetings and conversations with people in the community. A questionnairedesigned to gather information on the participants' perception of the groupdevelopmental process and the impact of the research-practitioner is administeredto group participants.3. Closing - This stage involves data analysis. Field notes will be reviewedand a content analysis will be documented onminutes of meetings and otherrelevant documents. The data will be analyzed to elicit emerging themes andphases in the developmental process of the community. The results of thestudy will be written up.DESCRIPTION OF POPULATION^13 How many subjects will be used?^N/A^How many in the control group?^N/A14 Who is being recruited and what are the criteria for their selection?No one is being recruited. People have, volunteered to participate in the process ofaddressing economic and social problems at the community level.208Appendix VIINewspaper Articles209C do-bet-^Mout271 i'Ver-aA/ Mt. Pleasant "in crisis"Mount Pleasant is acommunity in crisis,according to a groupof community leaderswho met with MayorMike Harcourt lastmonth.During the Septem-ber 3 meeting,arranged by the Mayorwith about 35 invitedcommunity leaders,concerns includingstreet prostitution, traf-fic problems, lack ofcommunity services,and demoralizedpolice were discussed."A growing lack ofrespect for the com-munity (is)demoralizing to thosepolice officers, civilservants, and arearesidents who arededicated to savingand rebuilding thecommunity," saidMount Pleasant ActionGroup spokespersonMichael Goldstein.Individuals com-mented on the needfor greater policepresence, the need toammend the CriminalCode to control streetprostitution, and theproblems caused byabsentee landlordship.The Mayor respon-ded by outlining someof the major projectsthe city has under-taken to control trafficflow. He said Skytrain,the Cassiar connector,and the GrandvewCut roadway aredesigned to alleviatecommuter trafficpressure on com-munities • such asMount Pleasant.-He also suggestedthat a ward systemwould be more effec-tive in theachievement of localarea needs. -A number of taskforces were formedwhich will study andreport on social ser-vices, communityfacilities, employmentand crime.Minutes of themeeting are availableat the planning office,325 E. Broadway, orthe NeighbourhoodHouse, 535 E.Broadway.210I MOUNT PLEASANT MAGAZINE PAGE TWO mcvni Nunn+ neNalct3r-Doc iq CED; a new approach for jobsBy LESLIE KEMPAre residents antibusiness people con-cerned about socialand economic issueswithin MountPleasant? Is ,there aneed for social andeconomic revitalizationof the community?What sort of things canbe done to improvethe quality of lifewithin MountPleasant?Community Eco-nomic Development(CED) is a process ofdeveloping social,economic and culturalaspects of the com-munity. It involveseconomic revitalizationand the creation oflocal employment forlocal people. Thegoals of communityeconomic develop-ment are not limited toeconomics, however;they usually encom-pass social and culturaldimensions, as well.CED implies an in-tegrated approach tocommunity develop-ment, taking into con-sideration the manycomponents of com-munity life.CED involvespeople workingtogether to plan goalsand strategies for thedevelopment of thecommunity. It involvespeople who are con-cerned and are willingto participate increating new solutionsto the problems whichface us. Residents,business people, socialagencies, cultural,ethnic and arts groups,schools, churches, theNeighbourhood Assoc-iation, and others.Many communitieshave shown that theycan tackle their socialand economic dif-ficulties and create anew type of com-munity environment.Are you interested inbecoming involved?In the next fewweeks I will be contac-ting various com-munity groups andorganizations andasking for their con-tributions andassistance. I am com-piling a list of peoplewho are interested inbecoming involved inthe CommunityEconomic Develop-ment process. If this_type of involvementinterests you - whetheryou are a member of agroup in the com-munity or are simplyan interested residentor business person -we want and need tohear from you! I maybe contacted at theNeighbourhood House(phone 879-8208) forinformation about thisProJect.211Mod I ticg7-P6'7c*it Pi(d-NorlifitAdeMeeting to discussMt. Pleasant communityand economic developmentLeslie Kemp, aUBC student workingon her master's degreeIn social work, isusing her time and ex-pertise to assist thecommunity of MountPleasant.Kemp Is organizinga meeting in room4043 of the King Ed-ward campus of VCC,1155 East Broadway,,March 5th, 7:30 p.m.and has invited peopleIn the neighbourhoodto attend.She is hoping to at-tract speakers fromother neighbourhoodsas well to come andshare their ideas andexperiences."As part of mythesis, I'm workingwith a group inMount Pleasant thatis interested in com-munity and economicdevelopment," shesays."I want it to be aneducational oppor-tunity for the com-munity," says Kemp,"and also for it to bea brain-stormingsession to come upwith ideas to addressthe social andeconomic problems ofthe area."But mainly its away to raise the levelof participation inMount Pleasant, tohave people realizethey can dosomething, she adds.


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items