Abstract
Conceptions of community tend to influence community development activities and outcomes. However, it appears many community development practitioners gloss over these and operate with a homogenising mindset in rural communities that may appear very simple to the outsider. This paper undertakes a qualitative study of a rural community that has been seriously affected by surface mining problems in the western region of Ghana. It analyses how community dynamics seem to have led to negative reinforcements at the local level, and how these have stalled effective community level responses to the surface mining problems. The findings reveal that collective action is not automatic; community interests may also diverge even in rural settings that may seem laid-back to the casual observer. The paper argues that a lack of in-depth understanding of community dynamics is likely to produce ineffective responses to community problems. Community development workers may therefore need to abandon simplistic, homogenizing and harmonious notions of community and strive to gain more realistic understanding of community dynamics in order to achieve development objectives. Key words : Community, Development, Interests, Mining, Pollution
Highlights
IntroductionBellah et al (1986) described a community as a group of people who are socially interdependent with shared practices, whilst Etzioni (1993:6) has spoken of community as a web of affect-laden relationships with shared commitment to a set of values, norms, meanings, history, identity and a culture
This paper examines community dynamics, how these influence perceptions of problems at the community level and its impact on efforts to address the problems
Various conceptualisations of community have been examined, bearing in mind all the inherent complexities involved. These have been examined in view of the surface mining struggles in Dumase, which seems to be spiralling downwards and continuously destroying the livelihoods of many members of the community
Summary
Bellah et al (1986) described a community as a group of people who are socially interdependent with shared practices, whilst Etzioni (1993:6) has spoken of community as a web of affect-laden relationships with shared commitment to a set of values, norms, meanings, history, identity and a culture These present a rather romantic view of community and seem to rule out the existence of divergent views, conflict and unequal power relations that privilege some members of the community in terms of access to decision making processes, resources and advantages in the society. This critical model is adopted as the framework to examine why community development challenges may be more complicated than they appear, and may require greater sophistication to resolve
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
