Yes / In human societies there will always be differences of views and interests. But the reality today is that we are all interdependent and have to coexist on this small planet. Therefore, the only sensible and intelligent way of resolving differences and clashes of interests, whether between individuals or nations, is through dialogue. The promotion of a culture of dialogue and nonviolence for the future of mankind is thus an important task of the international community. (His Holiness the Dalai Lama, in a speech to the “Forum 2000″ Conference, Prague, Czech Republic, September 4, 1997)

Yes / The purpose of a systematization is threefold. It is first and foremost a tool for self reflection and critical analysis by participants of a process. Secondly, it enables participants to adjust and plan better for the future, learning from past mistakes and problems. And finally, it informs non-participants and hopefully encourages them to get involved. Lisa Cumming has worked with these goals in mind to produce this systematization of a six year experiment in how a University can share concerns and pool skills with local communities to help build a better place for working and living. She has been assisted by many people who have come in and out of the PPC as their time and inclination permits over the years. In the appendix we have only listed the members of our steering and now advisory committees. Many others have nurtured this process on its way and created lively and sometimes tense debates about the role of the PPC. We thank them all for their contributions. Readers will note that this systematization is open and self critical. The PPC did not set out to solve the problems of Bradford District. Participants in our network do not have a ‘solution’ to take off the shelf for addressing the complex issues facing the communities of the District. These include the legacy of economic change and decline and the differential impact on the South Asian communities who came to work in the factories that have closed down, as well as problems in housing, education and employment. PPC participants see value in the partnerships to be forged through the network and the discussion of difficult topics. Above all the PPC is a commitment to building a way of talking about the divisions and differences within and between our communities, largely a legacy of our social and economic past, as a first step to finding shared solutions for the future. On the journey, we have had many difficult moments as PPC network participants have debated and reflected on ways forward. Our systematization has tried to convey the ups and downs of this journey. We have learnt how quickly trust erodes where there is little clear leadership from the local state. We have also learnt that lack of trust makes it very difficult to challenge and open debate. Our idea of ‘safe spaces’ has been taken up in the District by others. But we are very aware that Bradford people are still not comfortable in talking about issues such as ethnicity, religion, gender, diversity, inequality and racism in ways which could encourage the search for shared understandings and an end to all discrimination and oppressions. It is for this reason that Bradford District’s idea of building a ‘Shared Future’ will require, we think, much more effort to open up ways of exploring these issues which go deep into our individual lived experiences as well as that in our groups and collectivities. One of our tasks for the future, therefore, is to deepen this effort and the challenges it implies. We all need to confront and examine our assumptions towards each other and to acknowledge the legacy of social inequality, racism and gender discrimination on people’s sense of self worth. We need to recognize the power relationships amongst us all, and how we can be powerless in one relationship and use our power to dominate in other relationships. There are complex intellectual problems to be addressed, such as the unresolved debate around multiculturalism, cohesion, integration and interaction. The PPC is just one space in our District for this debate to take place. The debate is not in itself the solution to the material problems facing our many poor communities. But opening it is one way of democratizing the search for such solutions and ensuring that as many voices as possible participate in finding them.

This field study is a thematic and feminist institutionalist analysis on how the civil society and grassroot activists in Gauteng province, South Africa, has been affected and mitigated during and after the COVID -19 pandemic in their work against gender-based violence. The data consist of five semi structured interviews with primary sources, divided in the two sub-groups of activists and formal NGO representatives.  The study presents civil society and activist viewpoints on adaptation, feminist movement building as well as shrinking space and crisis within crisis. This qualitative study is a thematic analysis linked to the theoretical framework of feminist institutionalism in the context of South Africa. The results reflect issues of representation, power balances linked to organizational status, accountability, transparency, and democracy. Conclusion of this study is that need for adaptation and to mitigate the crisis within crisis (GBV and COVID -19 pandemic) is predominant for all stakeholders, but the viewpoints on how the pandemic affected the cooperation within the civil society sector varies between the two subgroups. The formal NGO’s viewpoint in this study is that the pandemic strengthened the cooperation within civil society and with institutions. However, the grassroot activist group’s perspective is that the pandemic created a split within the feminist movement. Shrinking democratic space is evidently affecting the grassroot activist group to a larger extent. The formal NGO group articulates an improved dialogue and cooperation with institutions and an enhanced political will to address gender-based violence.  All stakeholders that were interviewed in this study articulates that the context with new emerging crises, such as power-poverty, inflation and food shortage are challenging the possibilities to address the “shadow pandemic” of gender-based violence which is still a predominant human rights and democratic crisis in South Africa. This study contributes to the context analysis around implementation of the national strategic plan on gender-based violence and femicide and informs on challenges on feminist institutionalism in post-pandemic South Africa.

No description available.

This master’s thesis addresses how strategic development takes shape, when ideas connected to an organization’s historical heritage meet contemporary expectations of organizational development. The Church of Sweden Diaconia sets the example and in a qualitative case study this meeting has been examined. With new institutional theory as starting point the interpretation is made that the meeting between tradition and develop­ment can be under­stood as a meeting between a value based and a scientifically based logic. From the con­tradicting logics, the deacon and the social worker appear as institu­tional myths and as a double work identity. To maintain legitimacy, both logics need to be encom­passed. I introduce the idea of a space for intentional reflection, open for negotiation between the identities.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.