Knowledge Collisions: Perspectives from Community Economic Development Practitioners Working with Women

  • Mary Stratton
  • Edward T. Jackson

The concept of an interrelated world economy, generally termed “globalization,” has become an inevitable component of academic, media, government and everyday discussion. For developed countries such as Canada, this process of globalization supposedly moves our economy from a resource-manufacturing base towards one primarily concerned with knowledge production suitable to the new “information age.” In this new context, albeit with different interests and intents, academia, business, government, and lately, civil society, have increasingly focused on how and what people learn. “Entrepreneurship” and “microenterprise” have become catch words of this new economy. However, the ideology behind them often poses problems for those involved in community economic development (CED) and adult education, who insist on a component of social transformation as well as economic advancement.

Keywords

Transportation Amid Income Trench Trial Basis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Cawley, R., 1996, The incomplete revolution: the development of community work in Quebec CLSCs, Community Development Journal, 31(1): 54–65.Google Scholar
  2. Chambers, R., 1997, Whose Reality Counts? Intermediate Technology, London.Google Scholar
  3. Church, K., 2000, The Communal “We?”: A conversation piece on the richness of being a network. Network for New Approaches to Lifelong Learning (NALL), Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
  4. Church, K., Fontan, J., Ng, R. & Shragge, E., 2000, Social Learning among people who are excluded from the Labour Market: part one, context and case studies, a working paper: NALL, Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
  5. Clover, D. & Hall, B., 2000, In Search of Social Movement Learning: the growing jobs for living project, presented at Contested Terrain: The boundaries and practical impact of informal learning: The 4th Annual NALL Conference, October, Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
  6. Fontan, J. & Shragge, E., 2000, Tendencies and visions in the social economy, in E. Shragge & J. Fontan (Eds.), Social Economy: International Debates and Perspectives, Black Rose, Montreal.Google Scholar
  7. Gutierrez, L. & Lord, C., 1998, Toward a social constructionist method of community practice, in C. Franklin & P. Nurius (Eds.), Constructivism in Practice: Methods and Challenges, Families International, Milwaukee.Google Scholar
  8. Hansen, H., Ramstead, J., Richer, S., Smith, S., & Stratton, M., 2001, Unpacking participatory research in education, Interchange, 32(3): 295–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Heaney, T., 1993, If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em; the professionalization of participatory research, in P. Park, M. Brydon-Miller, B. Hall & T. Jackson (Eds.), Voices of Change: Participatory Research in the United States and Canada, Bergin & Garvey, Westport, CT.Google Scholar
  10. ID21 Development Research, 2000a, Sustainable Perspectives? A Gender Analysis of Environmental Change. [Research reporting service] http://www.id21.org/static/5acj1.html.
  11. ID21 Development Research, 2000b, Training for Empowerment: The Impact of Training on Women’s Microenterprise Development. [Research reporting service] http://nt1.ids.ac.uk/cgi-bin/dbtcgi
  12. Jackson, E.T., 2001, Accompaniment philanthropy: Canada’s Community Economic Development Assistance Program, in D. Bruce & G. Lister (Eds.), Rising Tide: Community Development Tools, Models and Processes, Rural and Small Town Program, Mount Allison University, Sackville, NB.Google Scholar
  13. Landsberg, M., 1997, Gritty, witty view of poverty from the front lines, reproduced in NAPO News 62 (February, 1998), The National Anti-Poverty Organization, Toronto http://www.napo-onap.ca/nn62.htm
  14. Lennie, J., 1999, Deconstructing gendered power relations in participatory planning: towards an empowering feminist framework of participation and action, Women’s Studies International Forum, 22(1): 97–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lewis, M., 1999, Community economic development, in K. Battle & S. Torjman (Eds.), Employment Policy Options, Caledon Institute of Social Policy, Ottawa.Google Scholar
  16. Livingstone, D.W., 2003, Exploring the icebergs of adult learning: findings of the first Canadian survey of informal learning practices, The Canadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education, 13(2): 49–72.Google Scholar
  17. Livingstone, D. & Sawchuk, P., 2000, Beyond cultural capital theory: hidden dimensions of working class learning. Draft paper circulated to NALL, March 2000.Google Scholar
  18. Lovett, T., 1997, Community education and community development: the Northern Ireland experience, Studies in the Education of Adults, 29(1): 39–50.Google Scholar
  19. Murray, J. & Ferguson, M., 1998, Exploring Priorities: Women’s Economic Development in Canada, Eko Nomos, Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
  20. Naples, N., 1997, Contested needs: shifting the standpoint on rural economic development, Feminist Economics, 3(2): 63–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Oberdof, C. (Ed.), 1999, Microfinance: Conversations with the Experts, Micro-enterprise Policy Institute, Bolivia.Google Scholar
  22. Rao, A., Stuart, R. & Kelleher, D., 1999, Gender at Work: Organizational Change for Equality, Kumarian, West Hartford, CT.Google Scholar
  23. Rubin, H., 1997, Being a conscience and a carpenter: interpretations of the community-based development model, in M. Weil (Ed.), Community Practice: Models in Action, Hartworth, Binghampton, NY.Google Scholar
  24. Saleebey, D., 1998, Constructing community: the emergent uses of social constructionism in economically distressed communities, in C. Franklin & P. Nurius (Eds.), Constructivism in Practice: Methods and Challenges, Families International, Milwaukee.Google Scholar
  25. Shragge, E. (Ed.), 1997, Community economic development: conflicts and visions, Community Economic Development: In Search of Empowerment, Black Rose Books, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
  26. Torjman, S., 1999, Are Outcomes the Best Outcome? Caledon Institute of Social Policy, Ottawa.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, B.V 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mary Stratton
    • 1
  • Edward T. Jackson
    • 2
  1. 1.Canadian Forum on Civil JusticeCanada
  2. 2.University in OttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations