1 / 38

Cohousing and Democracy

Cohousing and Democracy. WHAT IS THE PROBEM? Concern over the following trends: Evidence of declines in national levels of trust, social cohesion & social capital. Declining quantity and quality of civic engagement.

ormand
Télécharger la présentation

Cohousing and Democracy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Cohousing and Democracy

  2. WHAT IS THE PROBEM? Concern over the following trends: • Evidence of declines in national levels of trust, social cohesion & social capital. • Declining quantity and quality of civic engagement. • Increasingly polarized, ‘uncivil’ public discourse – less constructive dialogue across difference. • Broad disgust with politics and government. What does this mean for our democracy?

  3. RESEARCH QUESTIONS: Do cohousing neighborhoods support - among residents:- • Social capital development? • Civic and democratic engagement? • Building of democratic capacities and practices? Role of predisposition vs. influence of living in cohousing? • Where change is observable - What factors appear to be key?

  4. THE STUDY: • Part I: National survey of 647 residents in 56 cohousing neighborhoods nation-wide. Compared against nationally representative data set (Harvard). • Part II: Qualitative Case studies of 3 cohousing neighborhoods: ‘East Village’, ‘West Village’, ‘Central Village’. Focus group surveys & interviews, individual interviews, document analysis & participant observation.

  5. NATIONAL SURVEY RESULTS: U.S. COHOUSING RESPONDENT PROFILE • High levels of education • Middle class (or higher) • Diversity: High for age & religion. Moderate/Low for socio-economic, political affiliation & race/ethic diversity. • More female than male

  6. COHOUSERS COMPARED TO NATIONAL AVERAGE: High levels of : • Volunteerism • Community participation • Service on committees • Org. leadership • Public meeting attendance • Interest in national affairs • Participation in political activities

  7. 90% Cohousing , 80% 66% 70% 60% 50% Sub-Sample, 32% 40% National 30% Sample, 18% 20% 10% 0% Served as an Officer or on a Committee of a Local Org

  8. EVIDENCE OF CHANGE IN SOCIAL CAPITAL AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT POST COHOUSING MOVE-IN: • Residents of all 3 case communities perceived positive changes in: • Engagement in neighborhood, local and national level issues. • Frequency of discussion of neighborhood, local and national issues. • High levels of trust among neighbors • Dramatic increase in reciprocal norms/behaviors • Increases in social networks and sense of social cohesion

  9. EVIDENCE RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT OF DEMOCRATIC SKILLS & CAPACITIES: • Enhanced access to information/ communication/exchange • Development of ‘political’ skills: self-expression, negotiation, conflict resolution, facilitation, leadership. • Increased sense of being able to make a difference –neighborhood, local and beyond.

  10. ‘Jane’ from West Village: “Well..still…because I am connected to 36 other households and they are connected out into the larger community… even if in one way that hasn’t directly broadened my engagement ….in other ways it has. Like I stuffed envelopes for Doctors for Global Health, even though I have never been involved with an international medical non-profit before ….I know more about the Israeli-Palestinian situation than I ever knew before because I have a neighbor who cares passionately about that and sends me things by email or talks to me about it and encourages me to sign petitions and things and I just wouldn’t necessarily have that kind of contact otherwise. And there are politically engaged people here…and people whose jobs are in different areas outside the community… with whom I can speak about a political issue that will impact them or that they might know something about that I didn’t know . I think all of those things have happened to me because I care about a bunch of people and sort of by extension, I care about what they care about and that helps me become more engaged. “

  11. ‘Lydia’ from West Village: “I think that, besides information and heightened awareness, I think there’s just easier access to things. For example I can call Nina to ask how she will vote on this thing or what is the deal with that thing because she knows more about local politics than I do and stuff like that, but besides all that -I feel like living here and being exposed to this and facilitating meetings and things have helped my self… and how you call it… my confidence about going out and doing stuff outside or organizing….organizing a group making things happen…and maybe it’s a function of age too, but I think there is something to being here that gives me the confidence to do stuff like that or to organize politically and being involved in the community, and taking on being president of this or that organization I think has been influenced by my being here. “

  12. PRACTICE OF “DELIBERATIVE” DEMOCRACY • Decision-making and forms of participation conform to definitions of ‘deliberative democracy’ in the theoretical and praxis literature. • Evidence that use of deliberative democracy in neighborhood governance is both difficult and rewarding for residents

  13. Conclusions • High civic and democratic engagement. • Living in cohousing fosters increased levels of engagement. • Civic and democratic effects are linked to social capital, capacity building and practice of deliberative democracy (Self Govt./Consensus)

  14. IMPORTANCE OF SEVERAL FEATURES IN SUPPORTING THE OBSERVED EFFECTS: 1.Physical design and layout of Coho 2. Intentionally pro-social, pro-community-building norms & practices 3. Participatory, deliberative, consensus-based forms of self-governance. 4. Rich connections beyond the neighborhood...to local and national networks/issues/efforts. EACH ENHANCES THE OTHERS…

  15. Is this the whole story ? …..Or just the beginning? Evidence suggests that Cohousing IS building democracy at the grassroots… Is there potential for further enhancement in this context ?

  16. POTENTIAL FOR COMMUNITIES AS PLATFORMS FOR PRACTICE OF ‘DEEP DEMOCRACY’?? • Citizen Summits • Consensus conferences • National Issues Forums • Public Conversations Project • World Café • Dialogue Circles • Study Circles • Appreciative Inquiry • Community Mediation

  17. LINK TO PAPER ON LINE: Poley, L. and Stephenson, M. O. , 2007-08-30 "Community, Trust and the Habits of Democracy: An Investigation into Social Capital and Civic Engagement in U.S. Cohousing Neighborhoods" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Hyatt Regency Chicago and the Sheraton Chicago Hotel and Towers, Chicago, ILOnline <PDF>. 2010-06-07 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p209987_index.html

More Related