Worldconnectors background document on Vital Communities; second version Version: December 2012 Authors: Edith van Ewijk &

Gabi Spitz (NCDO) This is the second version of the background document on Vital Communities. This background document is based on discussions in the Worldconnectors Working Group Vital Communities, additional consultation with individual Worldconnectors and a quickscan of relevant literature. The Working Group Vital Communities consists of the following Worldconnectors: Sylvia Borren (chair), Nora Asrami, Lotte van Elp, Dirk Janssen, Charlotte Lemmens, Karen van Oudenhoven-Van der Zee, Jannet Vaessen and Masooma Yousufzai. Special advisors: Bert-Jan van der Mieden and Hans Agterberg. Supporters first phase: Alide Roerink, Miguel Heilbron and Afke de Groot (SID). Supporters second phase: Edith van Ewijk, Rosalie de Bruijn/ Reinier van Winden (NCDO).

TABLE OF CONTENT 1. PREAMBLE 2. INTRODUCTION 3. CIZITENSHIP, GOVERNANCE AND GLOBALISATION 4. VITAL COMMUNITIES 4a. Forms of vitality 4b. Forms of communities. 4c. Vitality of communities and social capital 4d. Vitality in relation to diversity 5. CONTRIBUTION OF VITAL COMMUNITIES TO GLOBAL CHALLENGES 6. VITAL COMMUNITIES AND NEGATIVE IMPACTS 7. ORGANIZATION AND LEADERSHIP OF VITAL COMMUNITIES 8. DOCUMENTED VITAL COMMUNITIES 9. REFERENCES

1. PREAMBLE
We stand at a critical moment in Earth's history, a time when humanity must choose its future. As the world becomes increasingly interdependent and fragile, the future at once holds great peril and great promise. To move forward we must recognize that in the midst of a magnificent diversity of cultures and life forms we are one human family and one Earth community with a common destiny. We must join together to bring forth a sustainable global society founded on respect for nature, universal human rights, economic justice, and a culture of peace. Towards this end, it is imperative that we, the peoples of Earth, declare our responsibility to one another, to the greater community of life, and to future generations.(Source: The Earth Charter)

The Worldconnectors aim to make an active contribution as a vital part of our Earth community. Worldconnectors commit themselves to being a dynamic community that engages with other groups in society, such as civil society organizations, grassroots movements, migrants, local governments and the business community. It is felt that the Worldconnectors can do more, in particular by making more explicit links at the local level, within the daily reality in which people live their lives both inside and outside The Netherlands. There is a widening gap between the so called losers and winners of globalisation which needs to be bridged. The current discussions in Dutch politics show that in these times of crises selfinterest has become leading in many decision-making processes. Moreover, the Dutch government is involved in a process whereby it gives less support to civil society initiatives and leaves more to Dutch citizens themselves. At the community level, partly in response to this development, citizens are increasingly creating initiatives in a spirit of solidarity. The Worldconnectors are convinced that communities, provided that they are vital, can make valuable contributions towards building a sustainable, inclusive and thriving global society. Where there is a lack of vital connections between people and an absence of shared values or a feeling of global responsibility, communities are threatened in their vitality and will also fail to contribute towards global goals. The aim of the Worldconnectors Working Group on Vital Communities is to explore what defines a vital community, to learn more about how these communities arise and the ways in which they contribute to tackling global challenges.

2. INTRODUCTION The world is globalising at an ever faster pace and societies are changing rapidly. These developments coincide with increasing pressure on the planet and its resources, a continuing widening of the gap between rich and poor and an on-going trend of individualisation. Some argue that action on the community level is the most useful way of engaging people in the tackling global issues. Bridger and Luloff (1999) emphasise the advantages of a community approach. Firstly, due to political and cultural obstacles, the idea of reaching global sustainability through decision-making on a global level is constrained. These obstacles are far less predominant on a local level and as a result concrete changes may be made more easily. Secondly, the community approach is much more appealing to people than an approach at a more abstract, global level. In general people tend to have greater trust in the local authorities than in international or national governments. Thirdly, community initiatives are associated with higher success rates. This might be explained by the fact that community efforts have a higher visibility within communities and often have more tangible results than more individual efforts aimed at changing global phenomena. Vital communities might contribute to global challenges and can be active at different levels and on different scales; local, regional, national and international or transnational. The use of the world wide web and social media has paved the way for establishing links at different levels, making it easier to establish connections.

3. CITIZENSHIP, GOVERNANCE AND GLOBALIZATION Citizenship in relation to governance The organization of citizens into networks focusing on social and sustainable change is related to the role of national and local governments and other actors, such as private companies. The context in which these communities operate is briefly described below. Some important differences and communalities between higher income countries in the western world and lower and middle income countries will be highlighted. Worldwide decentralization processes, in which governments tasks are being transferred from the national government to the local level, are taking place. As a result of decentralization processes local governments are obtaining new powers and duties and increasingly cooperating in partnerships which include civil society organizations and the private sector. (Baud et al. 2011; Helmsing, 2000; Pierre & Peters, 2000; Pierre, 2000). In general it is assumed that decentralization brings governance processes closer to the people (Blair 2000, Baud and de Wit, 2008) while a responsive local government also requires a strong civil society able to express their views and needs (Gaventa, 2002). The process of decentralization is however much debated, especially when states are weak. States might not be able to support decentralization processes in a proper way, or they can also retain authority and resources (Nuijten, 2004). Possible negative impacts can include mismanagement, corruption, nepotism and elite capture, a phenomenon which occurs when local elites misuse power (Baud and De Wit, 2008; Swyngedouw, 2005). Due to decentralization processes, the roles of local governments, civil society and the market are also changing; they increasingly work in partnership arrangements. Spaces for citizens to participate in local development and local governance can be created (by local governments), claimed (by civil society) or negotiated between government and civil society actors (Scott and Barnett, 2009 in Baud et al., 2011). Due to the combination of decentralization and liberalization processes, local governments have also increasingly started outsourcing services (such as waste management) to private companies. Generally it is believed that private organizations are able to work more efficiently, as providers have to compete to receive contracts from local governments. However, there is limited evidence that outsourcing indeed leads to greater efficiency and effectiveness, particularly for countries in the Global South (Batley 1996). Also in the western World the efficiency, effectiveness and democratic basis of privatization is much debated. Compared to governments in Western European countries, governments in lower and middle income countries are generally less strong. They generally face important challenges in providing basic services, such as clean water, sanitation, health facilities, waste management and infrastructure. In most Western European countries providing these basic services are well organized, but governments face other challenges such as financing the education and healthcare facilities and dealing with diversity. These challenges are especially evident in a time of economic slowdown. Taking care of the global common goods is a concern (or should be a concern) for governments worldwide, since it affects all citizens. In many lower and middle income countries, citizens have been organizing themselves to arrange facilities which are not provided by governments. In various Western European countries the state has long provided many facilities; however it is gradually beginning to withdraw (certainly financially) leaving more to its citizens. Active citizenship

has therefore been placed high on the agenda. Tonkens (2008) argues that active citizenship in Western European countries is seen as a solution for four main societal questions; 1) a lack of social coherence (especially between different groups in society), 2) consumerism and antisocial behaviour, 3) social exclusion, and 4) the gap between citizens and governance bodies. Furthermore according to Tonkens (2008) citizens can fulfil four different roles to address these questions. They can act as; 1) responsible citizens; creating initiatives and taking responsibility for their own life and welfare as well as for the neighbourhood or the surrounding community, 2) caring citizens, 3) decent citizens and 4) deliberative citizens (participating in policy making at the local level). Citizens in the Netherlands are indeed increasingly organizing themselves because the state is pulling out and/or because they are not satisfied with the services provided (van der Berg et al, 2011; Tonkens, 2008). At the same time, it is argued that the state still wants to maintain control over civil society; so with limited means the government want to have more control. In the literature several risks are described of policies whereby the state is pulling out whilst at the same time stimulating citizens initiatives , such as in the Big Society policy of the UK government. The main concern is that it is likely to enlarge the differences in societies, since a large group of citizens is not used to organizing itself (Kinsby, 2010). Professor Uitermark argued that the government should therefore stimulate a form of self organization in communities which are not used to taking action, in order to prevent the exclusion of groups of citizens. However, he warns that trying to activate citizens top-down is likely to have a negative impact on citizens initiatives (interview in OneWorld Article Power to the people, by Terlingen, 2012). The Scientific Council of the Dutch Government (WRR) also recommends facilitating the involvement of citizens not used to expressing their needs by involving professionals working at the frontline (such as police officers and social workers) as well as volunteers, both of whom can act as bridges between citizens and governments (WRR, 2012). The WRR (2012) also expressed its concern about the large group of citizens losing faith in the government as well as in their own capability of influencing the government. Only a small part of the population feels engaged with the way policy makers try to reach citizens, whilst policy makers are not very open to the new ways in which citizens express their needs and their involvement. The WRR concludes that there is a widening gap between citizens and policy makers and recommends that policy makers should be less fearful towards the new counter powers in society, because these give them the opportunity to make use of the creativity of and the solutions initiated by society1. Furthermore the WRR recommends that the government should broaden its scope and not only focus on participation at the neighbourhood level because, due to virtual connections, citizens involvement extends beyond the physical environment. Globalization Much has been written about globalization and transnationalism which emphasizes the expansion of worldwide connections (Sassen, 1998, 2001; Vertovec 1999 & 2001; Pries 2001 e.o.). Fukuyama (2001) argued that globalization can be perceived as a source for social capital as all sorts of people, groups and activists establish transnational connections, which stimulates the exchange of new ideas, habits and practices (19). Globalization does not,

Two years before the WRR report was published, the Ministry for Internal Affairs and Kingdom Relations published a workbook for municipalities to connect and facilitate citizens initiatives entitled Help een burger initiatief (help a citizens initiative) (2010).

however, necessarily lead to a more open perspective on the part of citizens. New developments, increased diversity and complexity within society can also result in a more inward orientation, since citizens feel that they are loosing control and are threatened by new developments. Citizens can also express less trust in governments and also in their own local influence on national and/or regional/global processes. At the same time, worldwide processes and products are more and more connected to each other. Most people are not aware of all these connections and they are also not fully aware of their own influence, for instance as consumers of goods (Clarke, 2011; NCDO, 2012).

4. THE CONCEPT VITAL COMMUNITIES The concept of vital communities is relatively new in the scientific domain and literature on this specific concept is rare. More use is made of other related concepts such as sustainable communities and resilient communities. The concept of vital communities is also closely related to concepts such as Informal Groups (van den Berg et al, 2011) and Civic Driven Change. Moreover there are many links with related themes in the literature, such as social capital, citizen participation, citizen action and citizen engagement. The concept of Civic Driven Change was discussed in depth among a group of scientists and practitioners and has been documented by ISS (Biekart & Fowler, 2009) and by Bieckmann (2008) in The Broker. Some interesting lessons can be drawn from these discussions in relation to the concept of vital communities. These will be elaborated further in this quickscan (see also box 1).
Box 1. Civic Driven Change The concept of Civic Driven Change was introduced at the beginning of 2008 by an international group of scientist and practitioners led by Alan Fowler and Kees Biekart (ISS). Their idea was that Civic Driven Change (CDC) could be a new narrative for development, next to the state and the market as driving principles (Bieckmann, 2008: 10). The C in Civic stands for normative behaviour of inclusion and care for the whole. The D in Driven stands for the force of what people want in the future, the C in Change stands for the natural and political process of changing existing power relations, versus the more linear progress or development(Bieckmann, 2008).

The concept of vital communities in itself was regarded as a neutral concept by the working group, like the state and the market. This is in line with the work and vision of the Worldconnectors, which is based on the UN Millennium Declaration and the Earth Charter. It is also linked to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. There are other approaches which put more emphasis on values and normative aspects. The group of international intellectuals working on the concept of Civic Driven Change concluded that the C in Civic is normative, because the aim is to strengthen civic behaviour and civic organization in order to bring forth changes in local, national and global societies. Civic behaviour was placed next to uncivic, or undemocratic, behaviour, which can occur in different domains, including the state, the market and civil society (Biekmann, 2008). 4a. Forms of vitality Based on the literature and extensive discussion, the Worldconnectors define vitality as: resilience on an ecological level; for instance by having a small ecological footprint and by applying a precautionary principle to all their activities (see examples of definitions on sustainable communities in box 2); resilience on an economic level, which means that communities are able to make a living for themselves. This does not necessarily require money. It is also possible that communities are economically resilient through the exchange of goods, by introducing

their own currency or by being totally self-sufficient in the production of food, clothing and housing; resilience on a social and cultural level. The Worldconnectors argue that resilience requires that communities are diverse (in terms of race, age, sex, religion and background) and inclusive in their composition. However, it should be mentioned that there is also a challenge and a tension here as homogenous communities are likely to organize themselves more easily since they share more characteristics (see also 4d; Vitality in relation to diversity). resilience on a democratic and political level. Communities can only be vital if they are democratically and transparently organised, enabling everyone to have a say in decision-making processes. Vital communities acknowledge the importance of tolerance and of people and reject violence.

It should be noted that the definition of vitality is value-driven and time-bound; the precise interpretation of vitality can change though time and from place to place. Vitality as defined above can be put into practice in many different ways, for instance in the field of employment, energy consumption, housing, transport, education and healthcare. The Earth Charter provides more detailed information on how the four principles of vitality can be put into practice in different contexts.
Box 2. Defining sustainable communities Sustainable communities meet the economic needs of their residents, enhance and protect the environment and promote more human societies (Bridger en Luloff, 1999). The ability of a community to utilize its natural, human, and technological resources to ensure that all members of present and future generations can attain a high degree of health and well-being, economic security, and a say in shaping their future, while maintaining the integrity of the ecological systems on which all life and production depends (Kline, 1995). a neighbourhood of humans in a place, plus the place itself: its soil, its water, its air, and all the families and tribes of nonhuman creatures that belong to itwe are speaking of a complex connection not only among human beings and their homeland, but also between the human economy and nature, between forest and field or orchard, and between troublesome creatures and pleasant ones. All neighbours are included (Berry, 1993). "Common aspirations among many of the pioneering sustainable neighbourhood initiatives are to: create human scale and compact settlements; protect and restore biodiversity and catchments reduce water consumption, harvest rainwater and re-use wastewater reduce greenhouse gas emissions be energy efficient and use renewable energy sources implement zero-waste systems and cycle nutrients effectively meet needs from local and bioregional resources produce nutritionally-dense local food strengthen local economies, and generate local work and right livelihoods reconnect people with community, culture, place, food, and the natural environment cultivate renewed links between urban and rural communities create safe, accessible and supportive living environments support ecoliteracy, education, training and lifelong learning nurture creative expression and cultural diversity support healthy active lifestyles engage and empower individuals as active citizens." (Gamble, 2006)

4b. Forms of community

Historically, communities were mainly organized based on their location, culture and/or religious beliefs. Physical features, such as location, size and boundaries were important characteristics of communities. During the nineties, sociologists focused more on the importance of relationships to define the nature and strength of communities (Preece, 2001). Generally speaking a community can be defined as a community when people acknowledge that they belong to it, because there is something that they share. Communities do not have to be limited to a geographical location, have a homogenous social structure or have shared norms and beliefs. They can be labelled as a community as long as there is something else that people within that community share. Communities can also share the same goal or just the same topic of interest. It should be noted that the solidarity within communities is often not so much the result of ideals, but the result of survival mechanisms. Working together and supporting each other within a community is historically driven by the knowledge that is it necessary and profitable. Because travelling and communication have become much easier over the years, communities are decreasingly bound to a physical location. Technological developments, such as the emergence of the internet, mobile phones and social media, have led to the development of a new kind of community: online or virtual communities. In these communities people can communicate or connect with people on different continents and in different time zones, with people they do not know and will never see. There are millions of virtual communities in which people debate issues, share emotions or comment on certain developments. Gamers play against each other in the SK-Gaming community that has 1 million(!) members, while professionals can discuss almost any professional topic in the broad spectrum of subgroups within LinkedIn. Online communities, like Facebook, do not only serve long distance communication with strangers. They are also used to keep in touch with well-known people nearby and have played a crucial role in strengthening and mobilizing communities, for instance during the uprisings in the Middle East and within the Occupy movement. Whereas people do not always have a choice as to whether or not to be a part of physical communities (such as family or school), they do choose whether they want to be part of a certain online community. It is therefore even more crucial for the success of online communities that there is a shared focus, interest or need within the group that provides people with a reason to belong to it. Even within online communities certain policies develop, such as a shared language, social norms and rituals. These strengthen a sense of history and a feeling of belonging (Preece, 2001). It should be noted that although digital innovation proceeds rapidly, there are still many people worldwide who do not have access to internet and as a result cannot participate in online communities.

4c. Vitality of communities and social capital According to Summers (1986) community vitality is defined by two factors: economic wellbeing, also known as development in the community, and social wellbeing, also known as development of the community. The political scientist Robert Putnam states that social capital is the driving force behind a vital civic culture. Francis Fukuyama defines social capital as: "shared norms or values that promote social cooperation, instantiated in actual social relationships (Fukuyama, 2002). Beckley et al (2008) differentiate between social, economic, natural and human capital to define the strength of communities and Putnam makes a distinction in bridging and bonding social capital; two forms of social capital that should be in balance with one another. Bridging social capital refers to the connections between different homogeneous groups, whereas bonding social capital refers to the strength of connections within a group (Putnam, 2000). Mark Roseland, author of the book Towards Sustainable Communities: resources for citizens and their governments states that community capital is the most important driver of strong and sustainable communities. Research shows that people who take part in cultural activities also tend to participate more actively as citizens in society. Social capital is an important contributor to social cohesion, which is an important determinant of the social sustainability of communities. 4d. Vitality in relation to diversity Some of the studies on existing vital community groups indicate that the composition is rather homogenous; people with similar characteristics generally congregate more easily than mixed groups. Examples include communities of more highly educated people taking initiatives to improve education for their children, or starting a cooperation to generate electricity. According to Putman (2007) people living in ethnically diverse communities are more likely to have an inward orientation and less trust in other people in their neighbourhood than those in more homogenous communities. Globalization processes can cause tensions due to the increase of cultural differences at the neighbourhood level (Hurenkamp & Tonkens, 2011). However Putman also argues that diversity can both strengthen and weaken communities, depending on the level of trust present within them (Putnam, 2007). Generally it can be argued that building communities based on diversity can be more challenging than building communities based on more homogenous groups. According to Van der Zee & van Oudenhoven (2004) a growing number of studies have demonstrated the role of personality, including attributes such as open-mindedness and social initiative, as a determinant of intercultural competence. Gender is another important aspect in relation to diversity. In their statement on Gender and Diversity, the Worldconnectors stressed the important role of the socialization and empowerment of women as a means of building vital and sustainable communities.

5. CONTRIBUTION OF VITAL COMMUNITIES TO GLOBAL CHALLENGES The Worldconnectors feel that connections within communities and between communities are vital to enable people to deal with global challenges. In the Worldconnectors statement on The Connection of Civilizations this is stated as follows: The more we are connected, the more we realise that we, as citizens of different countries, share the experience of poverty, oppression and alienation, which can only be countered by a unified global effort toward responsible action. This view on how a sense of community can contribute to positive changes on a global level is also in line with the ideas expressed in The Charter of Compassion. This Charter calls

for a revaluation of compassion as it can break down political, dogmatic, ideological and religious boundaries. Born of our deep interdependence, compassion is essential to human relationships and to a fulfilled humanity. It is the path to enlightenment, and indispensable to the creation of a just economy and a peaceful global community. Besides the contribution of vital communities to tolerance and peace on a global level, compassion and a sense of belonging can also make a lot of difference in a practical way. In response to the drought and food crisis that hit the Horn of Africa, a few young Kenyans and the phone company Safaricom joined hands to set up a campaign called Kenyans for Kenya. Via their mobile phones people could make a small donation to alleviate the hunger of the Kenyans in the areas hit by drought. Together the virtual community raised more than 7 million dollars in a few weeks. The people who participated in the campaign showed a great sense of community and compassion. From a CNN interview: "No one is thinking about tribes in this campaign," said Jane Waithera, who donated $3 to the effort. "We are all Kenyans. When you look at those suffering as your brothers, sisters or children, there's no way you can look the other way." One of the challenges explored by the workgroup vital communities is to link initiatives at the local level to global change. Communities can manifest themselves in many ways and can have different ways of making positive contributions to global change. Whereas the link to global change might be clear for some themes (such as setting up joint programs to generate sustainable energy), for other themes this link is less obvious (such as setting up a care network at the neighbourhood level). Linking local and global structures was also identified as one of the problems in the Civic Driven Change discussions, Real engagement by citizens in the sense of tangible ties with their surroundings and the problems they face is by definition local. However, a great deal of power has been wrested away from the local level. The challenge is therefore to link all these thousands of local initiatives, while avoiding undemocratic pitfalls(Bieckmann 2008:10). The work of Lester R. Brown can be an inspiration for people, alone or organised in communities, to take action at the local level to contribute to global sustainable development In his book Plan B 3.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization, (2008) Brown argues; The scale and urgency of the challenge we face has no precedent, but what we need to do can be done. It is doable. Sit down and map out your own personal plan and timetable for what you want to do to move the world off a path headed toward economic decline and onto one of sustainable economic progress. Set your own goals. Identify people in your community you can work with to achieve these goals. Pick an issue that is meaningful to you, such as restructuring the tax system, banning inefficient light bulbs, phasing out coal-fired power plants, or working for complete streets that are pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly in your community. What could be more exciting and rewarding? (278)

6. VITAL COMMUNITIES AND NEGATIVE IMPACTS The Worldconnectors Working Group on Vital Communities stresses that communities can be very dynamic and powerful, but can also have negative implications. For instance, diverse communities can fall apart into smaller monoculture-like groups, becoming disconnected from society, judging others by their own standards and denying them their rights. It argues that coercion from outside can also lead to the development of communities that are tight and powerful, but that do not contribute to the global society in a positive way. Examples mentioned in the Working Group are the Ku Klux Klan, and the emergence of anti-Western communities in Afghanistan as a response to the military intervention of the international community against the Taliban. It can be argued that communities that are totally self sufficient can also disconnect themselves from the global markets. The literature refers to negative social capital to describe the negative implications of communities. Sociologist Alejandro Portes has defined several forms of negative social capital, amongst others the exclusion of outsiders, excessive claims on group members and the restriction of individual freedom (Portes, 1998). As already discussed in this document, Tonkens (2008) argued that active citizenship in Western European countries is also seen as a solution for societal questions like anti-social behaviour and social exclusion. According to Tonkens, active citizens are increasingly expected to act as bridges between citizen groups and between citizen groups and government bodies, whilst at the same time there also is a new focus on a positive public morale which focuses on good citizenship and the question of which norms and values we share in the public domain. Tonkens argues that we need a normative democratisation at the general policy level as well as at the institutional level. As described earlier in this quickscan, in the civic driven change discussions, civic behaviour was placed next to uncivic, or undemocratic, behaviour. An interesting dilemma which emerged from this discussion is the question of who determines what is right and what is wrong. Fowler and Biekart, for instance, point to uncivic means such as civil disobedience, strikes, boycotts or blockades as a means to attain more civic, equitable and inclusive outcomes. They argue that altering power might sometimes be necessary to bring change. And this can include conflicts and breaking the law. The workgroup Vital Communities also discussed the role of conflict in relation to vital communities. Conflict can dramatically affect existing vital communities, for instance in breaking down existing structures including organisations and families. Communities can also play an important bridging role in peace management and conflict resolution. Lederach (1996) has especially focused on conflict transformation emphasizing conflicts are never -ending waxing and waning of social interactions (201). In the literature, conflict and violence in itself are not perceived as solely negative forces. Galtung (1996) argues conflict can also function as a creator. It can be at the base of building something and create new opportunities to overcome unjust social relationships and also stimulate relationships between various groups.

7. ORGANIZATION AND LEADERSHIP OF VITAL COMMUNITIES Vital communities require some form of organization. The Working Group on Vital Communities feels that the way initiatives are organized can be an important aspect influencing the extent of a communitys vitality. The way communities are organized is obviously strongly related to whether they are physical communities or online communities. It is outside the scope of this quickscan to explore the whole extensive body of literature on organizations. However some conclusions can be drawn based on a number of selected studies. The lessons on organisations described below are lessons of Dutch vital communities.

10

It should be stressed much can also be learnt from practices in Africa, Asia and Latin America (see also the following paragraph). First of all, in a research done by the Netherlands Institute for Social Research (SCP) amongst various informal groups in the Netherlands it was found that: the informal character of groups was generally accompanied by structure, regularity and joint agreements. There was a strong internal cohesion within the groups. Since they were small in scale and the lines were short, individual participants were able to contribute their own ideas, to shape their obligations and commit themselves to these obligations. The informal groups studied showed a certain extent of citizens emancipation; in addition to the recognized expertise of professionals, expertise gained through experience was valued and there was a certain kind of peer group teaching within the groups. The research also showed that formal institutions such as local governments, associations, libraries and housing cooperations provided important input for the activities of the small informal groups. Lastly it appeared that the informal groups were not closed communities but a vital part of the civil society as a whole (Van den Berg et al, 2011: 19-20). Secondly, Van Xanten et al (2010) analysed what was required for successful interventions by communities, based on research in four villages in the Netherlands where citizens organised themselves to maintain services in their municipalities. Based on their research they concluded: 1. A concrete cause for starting an initiative was important. Initiatives were often started out of dissatisfaction with a current situation which motivated people to initiate a change (for instance people who feel there is a lack of green space in their neighbourhood). 2. One person, or a few individuals, acted as drivers or leaders. These leaders generally have certain skills such as: knowledge about the community, the ability to listen, the ability to think pragmatically, the ability to engender the communitys trust and leadership skills. 3. Successes were required in the first phase. People were then motivated to build on those successes. Furthermore reference was made to the importance of: continuing working on the basis of the identified needs, receiving support from local governments, the existence of a certain form of organization such as a cooperative, community based organization. The above examples illustrate the importance of leadership. Following Andrea (2012), leadership is more than a formally organized position. Andrea argues that leadership is a choice and that it entails a person taking fundamental responsibility for their own life as well as claiming a place in society. Leadership positions can include all kind of organizations ranging from ministries, companies, voluntary organizations and families. The working group Vital Communities emphasized the importance individuals can play in stimulating other persons, forming communities and fulfilling an important role within these communities. These Vital persons can fulfil a role as agents of change. Furthermore, the Working Group felt that much can be learnt from models on changes in communities, such as the Quadrant of Ofman, and approaches to the ways people learn within communities, such as the learning styles of Kolb.

11

8. DOCUMENTED VITAL COMMUNITIES Vital communities come in many shapes and colours: they can be small or large, virtual or physical, long-term or short-term, local or international etc. The list of examples of successful vital communities can therefore be never-ending. At the same time, there are only a few vital communities that comply with all of the four themes (ecological, economic, social and cultural, democratic and political) identified by the Working Group. Several initiatives are described below, focussing on various themes. The list is not exhaustive.
Physical communities The Dutch initiative E-motive facilitates interaction between communities in order to stimulate shared learning and to increase tolerance. They have set up several projects in which experiences and methods of developing countries are used to tackle issues in Dutch communities. Examples: In the spring of 2011, professionals from the Peruvian organization Pasa la Voz came to Rotterdam, The Netherlands, in order to share their methods on how to give disadvantaged youth a voice. The Oasis Game is a similar initiative, using Brazilian knowledge and expertise on inclusive neighbourhood improvement to refresh deteriorated Dutch neighbourhoods There are also several communities that aim to create different financial systems. Noppes is an Amsterdam based community that facilitates local exchange and trade. The Dutch Nudge initiative is an independent organization that aims to stimulate sustainable development through a consumer platform Through this platform, citizens and initiatives are connected to each other and strengthened. The earlier mentioned Transition Towns Initiative is a network of sustainable local communities aiming to live and work in a way that keeps their ecological footprint as small as possible. The initiative started with one small community in Kinsale, Ireland, and has spread rapidly. At present there are more than 500 Transition Initiatives in 25 countries The Dialogue for Peaceful Change (DPC) a worldwide coalition which is part of Oikosnet, is a method aimed at dealing with conflicts. The method aims at bringing people together and helps different parties which are in conflict, to listen to each other and find solutions. It was based on a method for facilitating dialogue between people with a different cultural background. Online communities Avaaz.org is a global network with more than 10 million members that pressures governments and companies on urgent social and environmental matters through the use of online petitions. To give an impression of the scale of their activities: their petition that asking for support for the Occupy movements and calling upon governments to commit themselves to financial reforms was signed by over 800.000 people. Thanks to Avaaz, more than 1 million people were also able to form a citizens initiative against genetic food modification in the European Union. An impressive online community, which temporarily became a physical community, is the clean up Estonia/ Lets do it initiative. In 2008 50.000 people cleaned up 10.000 tons of illegal litter in just 5 hours. They all felt annoyed by the garbage lying around and had a shared goal: getting rid of it! In only three years the movement has become a global movement that organises a yearly World Clean Up in which millions of people participate. The 1% club connects people (from both developing and developed countries) with project ideas, money and expertise in order to make development cooperation work. Documented practices The Netherland The documentary Power to the people directed by Sabine Lubbe Bakker ( Tegenlicht, 7 oktober 2012) showed three cases in which vital communities provided their own energy supply and one case of an insurance company for freelancers in small cooperatives. Cases included 1) Sams, a Danish island, where Sren Hermansen took the initiative of arranging the energy supply for the entire island as well as creating a surplus, 2) Texel Energie aiming to be energy independent by 2020-, 3) Grunneger Power, one of the most successful energy cooperations and the 4) Bread fund ( broodfonds) initiated by freelancers living in Utrecht to collectively organize an insurance for long-term illness and disability.

12

Through the Urgandas 'Wij willen zon' (we want sun) initiative, local communities were motivated to organize themselves in small scale networks to introduce solar energy in their street or neighbourhood. NGO Urgenda purchased the solar panels in bulk, which reduced the costs. The Netherlands Institute for Social Research described and analyzed informal groups. The groups included recreative groups (in arts, sports and literature), neighbourhood groups (including village democracies, neighbourhood gardens), online communities (e.g. couchsurfing ) and specific groups ( youth groups focusing on sustainable development, self-help groups)) (van den Berg, van Houwelingen & de Hart, 2011), SCP announced that it will do more research in the field of informal groups who manifest themselves as an alternative for formal organizations. A report on private initiatives in development cooperation, with a focus on new links in Dutch society, will be published at the end of this year. Six examples are described in a OneWorld article Power to the people (Terlingen, 2012), including a communal garden in Utrecht ; a cooperation stimulating sustainability in Breda ; a local system of producing a local currency by undertaking small activities in the neighbourhood in Amsterdam , grandmothers who knit for young designers in Rotterdam , a project on sustainable living in the East of the Netherlands ; stimulating clean decentralized energy in Amsterdam The cooperation Kracht in NL (Power in NL) focuses on civic resilience. This cooperation was launched on 8 10 2012 by former minister Spies (Interior Ministry ) and includes a crowdsourcing platform with several initiatives which are structured by theme, location and initiator. Expeditie Burger (Expedition Citizens) organized by FORUM and started at end of October 2012. FORUM is organizing a number of meetings throughout the Netherlands to discuss experiences surrounding civic action. what makes people involved, angry and good(Wat maakt burgers betrokken, boos en braaf).

International The Centre for Civic Driven Change describes several practices of grass-roots initiatives. Most initiatives included are small scale economic activities. The Civil Society Building Programme by Hivos in cooperation with the Institute of Social Studies (ISS): The Programme is divided into two main research themes: 1. Civic action for responsive governance 2. Social movements and citizenship; social movements and the way external actors can support them effectively. See the example on the right on the relationship between indigenous movements and International NGOs. The Development Research Centre on Citizenship, Participation and Accountability (Citizenship DRC) has worked with universities, research institutes and non-governmental organizations in more than 25 countries to explore the new ways that citizens are shaping our states and societies. The research was funded by the UK Department for International Development. Research themes include: Overarching lessons, Citizenship: meanings and expressions, Claiming rights and accountability, New spaces for change?, Science and citizenship, Deepening democracy, Winning policy change, Global citizen engagement, Social movements in the south, Citizenship in violent settings The website includes various detailed case study descriptions CIVICUS has a toolkit for community based organizations focusing mainly on organization aspects such as promoting your organization, internal communication, etc. Damanhur is a federation of living communities and ecological villages in Italy. European Project for Interreligious Learning (EPIL). EPIL works as a European Roaming College, aiming to create mutual respect and cooperation in building peaceful communities of equality http://www.epil.ch/

13

9. REFERENCES
Andrea, J. (2012), Over leiderschap, Uitgave van Jan Andrea Batley, R. (1996), Public-Private Relationships and Performance in Service Provision, Urban Studies, Vol. 33, No. 4-5, 723-751, 1996. Baud, I.S.A. Pfeffer, K. Sydenstricker, J. Scott, D. (2011), Developing Participatory Spatial Knowledge Models in Metropolitan Governance Networks for Sustainable Development, Literature Review, Change2Sustain, EADI, Bonn. Baud I.S.A. & J. de Wit (2008), Shifts in Urban Governance: raising the questions, in: New forms of Urban Governance in India: shifts, models, networks and contestations, Sage, New Delhi. Beckley et al. (2008), Multiple Capacities, Multiple Outcomes: Delving Deeper into the Meaning of Community Capacity in Journal of Rural and Community Development. Berry, W. (1993), Sex, Economy, Freedom & Community. Pantheon Books: New York. Bieckmann, F. (2008), Special report: Civic Driven Change Initiative, Deep democracy, reinventing citizen action, The Broker, Issue 10, October 2008. Biekart, K. & A. Fowler (2009), Civic Driven Change: A concise guide to the basics, ISS, The Hague, The Netherlands. Blair, H. (2000), Participation and accountability at the periphery: democratic local governance in six countries. World Development, 28, 21-39. Bridger en Luloff (1999), Toward an interactional approach to sustainable community development Journal of Rural Studies. 15:377-387. Brown, L. (2008), Plan B 3.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization, Earth Policy Institute, New York London, Norten & Company. Clarke, N. (2011), Globalising care? Town twinning in Britain since 1945. Geoforum 41, 115-125. Earth Charter http://www.earthcharter.nl en www.earthcharter.org Engbersen, E., M. Uyterlinde, S. van Arum, A. van der Kooij (2010), Dorpsbewoners maken het dorp, Toolkit bewonersparticpatie platteland, MOVISIE, Partoer/ Prisma Brabant/ Scoop Fukuyama, F. (2002). Social Capital and Development: The Coming Agenda SAIS Review - Volume 22, Number 1, Winter-Spring 2002, pp. 23-37 Fukuyama, F. (2001). Social capital, civil society and development, Third World Quarterly, Vol. 22, No., pp. 720. Galtung, P. (1996), Peace by Peaceful Means: Peace and Conflict, Development and Civilization. London: Sage Publications. Gamble, M. (2006), Local and international examples of how sustainable communities can and do work, In Environment 24 1 Gaventa (2002) Towards participatory local governance: six propositions for discussion. Currents No. 28, August 2002: 29-35. Helmsing, A. H. J. (2000), Externalities, learning and governance, perspectives on local economic development. Inaugural lecture at ISS, The Hague, January 27, 2000. Hurenkamp, M & E. Tonkens (2011), De onbeholpen samenleving: burgerschap aan het begin van de 21e eeuw, Amsterdam University Press. Kisby, B. (2010), The Big Society: Power to the People?, The Political Quarterly Volume 81, Issue 4, pages 484491, October/December 2010. Lederach, J.P. (1996), Preparing for Peace: Conflict Transformation Across Cultures. New York: Syracuse University Press. Jeannotte, M. S. (2003), Singing alone? The contribution of cultural capital to social cohesion and sustainable communities in International Journal of Cultural Policy, 9, 1, 35-49. Kline, E. (1995), Sustainable community indicators. Unpublished manuscript. NCDO (2012), Mondiaal burgerschap, van draagvlak naar participatie, NCDO, Amsterdam NCDO (2010), Worldconnectors verklaring Gender en Diversiteit, Maart 2010 Newman, J & E. Tonkens(2011), Participation, Responsibility and Choice Summoning the Active Citizen in Western European Welfare States, Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam Nuijten, M. (2004), Governance in action, some theoretical and practical reflections on a key concept, in: D. Kalb, W. Pansters & H. Siebers, Globalization and Development; Themes and Concepts in Current Research, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. Pierre, J. (2000), Debating Governance, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Pierre, J. & G. Peters (2000), Governance, Politics and the State. New York: St.Martins Press. Portes, A. (1998), Social Capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology Annual Review of

14

Sociology, 24, 1-24. Preece, J. (2001), Online communities: Usability, Sociability, Theory and Methods. In R. Earnshaw, R. Guedj, A. van Dam and T. Vince (Eds) Frontiers of Human-Centred Computing, Online Communities and Virtual Environments. Springer Verlag: Amsterdam, 263-277. Pries, L. (2001), New transnational social spaces, international migration and transnational companies in the early twenty-first century, Routledge, London. Putnam, R. (2000), Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster. Putnam, R. (2007), 'E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century The 2006 Johan Skytte Prize Lecture', Scandinavian Political Studies 30 (2), 137174. Roseland, M. (1998), Toward Sustainable Communities: Resources for Citizens and Their Governments Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers Sassen, S. (1998), Globalization and its discontents, essays on the new mobility of people and money , with a foreword by K. Anthony Appiah, New York. Sassen, S. (2001), Cracking casings, notes towards an analytics for studying transnational processes (Chapter 10) in L. Pries, New transnational social spaces, international migration and transnational companies in the early twenty-first century, London.

Summers G. (1986), Rural community development. Annual Review of Sociology, 12, 34771. Swyngedouw, E. (2005), Governance Innovation and the Citizen: The Janus Face of Governance-beyond-theState, Urban Studies, vol. 42 no. 11 Terlingen, S. (2012), De burger aan de macht, Oneworld, 9, November 2012. Tonkens, E. (2008), De bal bij de burger, Burgerschap en publieke moraal in een pluriforme, dynamische samenleving (oratie). Amsterdam. Worldconnectors (2008), Statement Connection of Civilisations . NCDO, Worldconnectors http://www.worldconnectors.nl/upload/cms/390_Statement_Connection_of_Civilisations.pdf Worldconnectors (2010), Vision document on Sustainable World Citizenship and the Earth Charter, NCDO, Worldconnectors, http://www.worldconnectors.nl/upload/cms/670_Vision_document.pdf Van den Berg, P. Van Houwelingen & J. De Hart (2011), Informele groepen, verkenning van eigentijdse bronnen van sociale cohesive, Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau, Den Haag, maart 2011, http://www.scp.nl/content.jsp?objectid=26055 Van der Zee, K, J.P. van Oudenhoven (2004), Personality, Threat, and Cognitive and Emotional Reactions to Stressful Intercultural Situations Journal of Personality, Volume 72, Issue 5, pages 10691096, October 2004 Van Xanten, H., J. Schonewille , J. Engelen , J.W. van de Maat (2011), Sterke verhalen, burger initiativen voor voorzienigen in kleine dorpen, SEV, Movisie, Rotterdam Vertovec, S. (1999), Conceiving and researching transnationalism, Ethnic and Racial Studies, Vol 22, number 2, March 1999 Vertovec, S. (2001), Transnationalism and identity, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies Vol 27, No 4: 573582 October 2001 WRR ( 2012), Vertrouwen in burgers, WRR rapport 88, Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam.

15