Doctor of Philosophy / Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social Work / Gerad D. Middendorf / Although rural communities have great diversity, each rural community has resources that can be invested to develop community capital resources. Every rural community not only has resources that are held by local community members, each rural community is also embedded in a larger social network that has the power to exchange resources for its own benefit. Therefore, the holders of a rural community’s resources also have the power to influence the distribution of these resources. As a way to determine who holds the community’s capital resources and begin the community development process, Flora et al. (2006) encouraged rural community development practitioners to perform an assessment of their community’s built, financial, political, social, human, cultural, and natural capitals. The case study method was utilized for the research conducted in this study because of its ability to aid in determining the success or failure of Norton County Economic Development’s Downtown Program, which focused on the revitalization of Norton County’s downtown areas. It was revealed that many of the Downtown Development programs were successfully implemented because the resources that were controlled by local and outside power structures, which also constituted the dynamic and interactive power structure within that system, were identified, mobilized, and utilized in this rural economic development program. This study contributed to sociological knowledge because it looked at the ability of dynamic and interactive power structures to control capital resources in rural community development. As well, this study extended the literature on the importance of participation, solidarity, and the exchange of resources in rural community development, and added to the research on the use of community capitals in identifying and utilizing capital resources in planning rural community development programs that are successful.

Call number: LD2668 .T4 1978 A38 / Master of Science

This thesis explores the role of community participation in urban preservation planning processes. A case study of the North Central neighborhood in Charleston, SC is used to investigate this inquiry. This study seeks to explore what residents in North Central value as heritage assets and how this information compares to ongoing preservation planning, interactions with the City and local preservation advocacy organizations, and overall community engagement. Qualitative methods were used for data collection and an analytical framework was developed based in theories of democracy, participatory planning, and values-based heritage. The results indicate that residents of North Central value the built environment and architectural integrity of the neighborhood, however the intangible aspects of heritage resonate most with the community. These include the people, stories, experiences, and memories associated with the neighborhood and its features. While efforts to preserve the neighborhood have increased in recent years, there are still disparities in what is actively being preserved and what residents identify as important heritage assets. The thesis also reveals that a lack of democratic space for participation and a communication deficit serve as limitations to community participation in formal planning processes for preservation. Increased community participation in these processes could influence new development in the neighborhood to better reflect the contemporary needs and values of its residents. It also serves to foster better collaboration among organizations, governmental partners, and residents in order to continue developing inclusive approaches to neighborhood preservation and establishing initiatives in North Central with sustainable outcomes.

The internship experience with the Department of Community Development and its Urban Programs Division provided an opportunity to participate in the preparation and revision of operating budgets, in the organizing and revision of fiscal management systems and in the review and preparation of a federally assisted program. The functioning of intergovernmental relations was observed both between the city and the national government and between the city and the state government. Also, the role of individual personalities was observed in such relations. A part of the first two weeks of the internship was spent in private meetings with various department directors and division administrators. In these meetings, particular attention was paid to the techniques the directors and administrators use in the budgetary process. When the internship was over, the practical experience which it provided was compared to the academic experience.

published_or_final_version / Social Work / Master / Master of Social Work

published_or_final_version / Social Work / Master / Master of Social Work

published_or_final_version / Social Work / Master / Master of Social Work

published_or_final_version / Urban Planning / Master / Master of Science in Urban Planning

Settlement patterns on the urban fringe can present a host of threats to sociopolitical and biophysical sustainability, at the personal, municipal, and ecosystem scale. Mexico City’s expansive growth has forced the region’s poorest inhabitants to the farthest margins in the neighboring State of Mexico, where they often live in conditions of personal hardship and settle in patterns that threaten the ecological health of environmentally sensitive areas. Following interviews with practitioners in three periurban municipalities in the Valley of Mexico, this report examines how local land use regulators interpret the vulnerabilities facing communities in their jurisdictions and presents a typology of vulnerabilities. The report explores the processes of politicization that produce and re-produce the vulnerabilities facing individuals, communities and ecosystems. Several concrete policy recommendations are made for incorporating holistic thinking about vulnerability into government decision-making, and resources are provided for further research. / text

<p>The concept of community development is founded on the premise that changes in the living conditions of people are best effected by the people themselves. The term community evokes the idea of a homogeneous social group who can recognise their common interests and work together harmoniously for their common good. The concerns of the leading development agents and donors in the past two decades have been on empowering communities to participate in their own development by taking control of decisions and initiatives that seek to improve their living conditions. The zeal to address these concerns has in the past decade been pushed with such resounding statements that people&rsquo / s participation in development projects has not only been seen as a basic human right, but also as an imperative condition for human survival. It has been strongly argued in the UNDP reports that the overall development strategy is to enable people to gain access to a much broader range of opportunities.</p> <p><br /> From this perspective, development as a social activity seeks to ensconce economic liberalisation, freedom of association, good governance and access to free market economy as the guiding tenets of an improved life in all communities in the world. The realization of this dream posed a major challenge to many governments in the Third World and the 1980s saw the emergence of &lsquo / associational revolution&rsquo / &ndash / the proliferation of small-scale non governmental organizations (NGOs) with relative autonomy from the state. The mainstream development agencies perceived the NGOs as the best instruments to instigate changes in the living conditions of the poor and the disadvantaged people. For this reason, NGOs became increasingly instrumental in implementing development objectives in the rural and disadvantaged communities. Development in this sense consists of processes in which various groups are stimulated to improve aspects of their lives particularly by people from outside their community. This has drawn attention to how these outsider- development agents communicate development information particularly due to the sociolinguistic situation in many rural African communities. The real concern is with is that the target majority of the people in the rural areas are not speakers of the dominant languages of the development discourse, in most cases this is the official foreign languages taught in schools.</p> <p><br /> Communication is a fundamental part in community development programmes and language emerges as a key factor in effective communication and implementation of these programmes. While it is evident that social interactions are sustained by agreeable communicative principles, the role of language and the different mode of communication applied to development interventions have received very little attention from the parties concerned. This has yielded detrimental repercussions in the quality of interaction at the grassroots level. More often than not, it is assumed that once there is a common language, effective communication will take place and for this reason language use and mode of communication are never given much thought in the field of development interaction.</p>