Who organises the community? The university as an intermediary actor

Oliver Fehren


Abstract

For more than 25 years the Institut für Stadtteilentwicklung, Sozialraumorientierte Arbeit und Beratung (ISSAB) (‘Institute for community development, social space orientation and counselling’) of the University Duisburg-Essen, Germany, has been engaged in the development of disadvantaged urban communities. Increasingly, however, there is a need for intermediaries to bridge the gap between the community and the municipality because of the polarisation of the complex institutional world on the one hand and the increasing fragmentation of the life-world on the other. Based on a long-term cooperation contract with the municipality of Essen, this university institute plays a continuing and active role in local neighbourhood renewal projects. The article reflects on the prospects, challenges and ambivalences of the specific task of the university institute within these community development processes: to take on a mediating role – a moderating intermediary function – between the everyday life-world of the community and the political and administrative municipal system in order to support and enhance community development.

Key words: Community development, university-community partnership, intermediary function, integrated approach, civic engagement

Full Text

PDF

References

Benson, L, Harkvay, I & Puckett, J 2000, 'An implementation revolution as a strategy for fullfilling the democratic promise of university-community partnerships: Penn-West Philadelphia as an experiment in progress', Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 24–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0899764000291003

Berger, P & Neuhaus, R 1977, To empower people: The role of mediating structures in public policy, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, Washington DC.

Bringle, R & Hatcher, J 2002, 'Campus-community partnerships: The terms of engagement', Journal of Social Issues, vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 503–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00273

Drèze, J & Sen, A 1995, India: Economic development and social opportunity, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Fehren, O 2008, Wer organisiert das Gemeinwesen?, edition sigma, Berlin.

Franke, T & Grimm, G 2002: 'Quartiermanagement: Systematisierung und Begriffsbestimmung', in Bertelsmann Stiftung, Hans-Böckler-Stiftung, KGSt (eds), Quartiermanagement: Ein strategischer Stadt(teil)entwicklungsansatz, Netzwerkknoten Quartiermanagement, Hannover, pp. 5–12.

Grimm, G, Hinte, W & Litges, G 2004, Quartiermanagement: Eine kommunale Strategie für benachteiligte Wohngebiete, edition sigma, Berlin.

Habermas, J 1996, Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy, Routledge International Studies in the Philosophy of Education, Cambridge.

Hautekur, G 2010, 'Mehr Bridging, weniger Bonding: Der Bedarf an Sozialem Kapital in benachteiligten Kommunen', Sozialmagazin, no. 2, pp. 40–43.

Heinze, R & Olk, T 2001, 'Bürgerengagement in Deutschland: Zum Stand der wissenschaftlichen und politischen Diskussion, in R Heinze & T Olk (eds), Bürgerschaftliches Engagement in Deutschland: Bestandsaufnahmen und Perspektiven', Leske und Budrich, Opladen, pp. 11–26.

Hinte, W 2001, 'Soziale Kommunalpolitik: soziale Räume gestalten statt Elend verwalten', in W Hinte, M Lüttringhaus & D Oelschlägel, Grundlagen und Standards der Gemeinwesenarbeit, Votum, Münster, pp. 168–78.

Holland, B & Gelmon, S 1998, 'The state of the engaged campus: What have we learned about building and sustaining university-community partnerships', American Association of Higher Education Bulletin, pp. 3–6.

Kessl, F, Otto, H-U & Ziegler, H 2002, 'Einschließen oder Aufmachen? Der Raum, sein Kapital und deren Nutzer', in M Riege & H Schubert (eds), Sozialraumanalyse: Grundlagen – Methoden – Praxis. Leske und Budrich, Opladen, pp. 177–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-94995-0_10

Lüttringhaus, M 2000, Stadtentwicklung und Partizipation, Stiftung Mitarbeit, Bonn.

Onyx, J 2008, 'University-community engagement: What does it mean?', Gateways, vol. 1, pp. 90–106.

Park, R, Burgess, E & McKenzie, R [1925] 1992, The city: Suggestions for investigation of human behavior in the urban environment, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago & London.

Rose, N 1996, 'The death of the social? Refiguring the territory of government', Economy and Society, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 327–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03085149600000018

Stern, M 2004, 'Unter- und Überbetonungen des Raums: Einige Dilemmata in der empirischen Übersetzung der Sozialkapitaltheorie', in F Kessl & H-U Otto (eds), Soziale Arbeit und soziales Kapital, VS Verlag, Wiesbaden, pp. 209–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-91364-7_13

Woolcock, M 1998: 'Social capital and economic development: Towards a theoretical synthesis and policy', Theory and Society, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 151–208. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1006884930135

Woolcock, M & Narayan, D 2000, 'Social capital: Implications for development theory, research and policy', The World Bank Research Observer, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 225–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/wbro/15.2.225