Towards Building Direct Democratic Governance Through the Ward Committee System in South African Local Government

This chapter interrogates the ward committee system as an instrument in an institutionalised local government level to advance direct participatory governance. The ward committee has a constitutional mandate upon which accountability, democratization, community governance, and inclusive participation in the municipal decision-making is enhanced. The ward committee system was legislated to create a platform for community participation and enhance accountable local governance. Structuration theory has been used to engage with elements of representativity, powers, skills, functionality, access to information, influence in decision-making, and relationship with others structures as developed by Smith and de Visser. The chapter made use of various case studies to interrogate the role, potential, and challenges of the ward committee system in forging direct participatory governance.

Transformations of Urban Agro Ecology Landscapes in Territory Transition

This chapter has the objective to analyze the transformation process of the urban agro ecology landscape in territory transition. It begins questioning the implications that the agro ecological practices and territorial transformation and transition have on food systems sovereignty and security as well as other effects on land uses, climate change, environmental services, etc. The method used is based on an analytical review of the literature to elaborate a critical perspective of benefits and challenges. It is concluded that agro ecology is the key element in the construction of food system sovereignty and security which requires the transition towards the urban agro ecology based on the transformation of social and political power structures moving away from corporate control towards community governance aimed to achieve improvement ecosystem services and environmental sustainability of the city.

The Analysis of the Spatial Production Mechanism and the Coupling Coordination Degree of the Danwei Compound Based on the Spatial Ternary Dialectics

With the gradual deepening of the development of high-quality urban transformation, the “Danwei Compound” urban space production method constitutes the basis of Chinese current urban spatial transformation. The transformation plan of the original danwei compound “stock” to promote the healthy development of urban society has become the focus of research. First, with the help of Lefebvre’s space production theory, combined with the spatial transformation characteristics of its own structural form experienced by the Chinese urban danwei compound, the space production is divided into three stages, namely, the diversity-orderly type average space of the danwei compound system period, dispersed type abstract space of the commercial enclosed community period, and the integrated differential space of a livable community undergoing regeneration and transformation. At each stage, the government, market, and residents have different influences on time-space production. Secondly, using Hefei’s typical danwei compound as the research carrier, according to the space ternary dialectics, a multi-level analysis of “representations of space-representational space-spatial practice” is carried out on the production mechanism, and the logic of different types of spaces in different periods are described. Among them, the representations of space of the change of the danwei compound are the interrelationship of multiple governance subjects in different periods, such as changes in the implementation degree of governance strategies, the degree of residents’ community governance participation, residents’ satisfaction with community governance, etc. The representational space is the residents’ community perception and interpersonal relationship at different transition stages, Interpersonal trust, and other social relations’ changes. Spatial practice is manifested in changes in the support of public service facilities, public space, per capita living area, building quality, architectural style, and illegal building area. Finally, the three-dimensional space dialectical coupling coordination degree model is used to analyze and compare the representations of space of typical settlements in the three stages and the coupling characteristics of the representational space and the practice of space. On this basis, we provide innovative ideas and put forward relevant measures and suggestions for the regeneration, transformation, and development of livable areas.

Tensiones de la Gobernanza comunitaria de servicios sanitarios rurales en territorios periurbanos (Chile)

Unlike the private concession model applied in urban zones, rural water sanitation services in Chile are managed by rural drinking water (RDW) committees or cooperatives, under a community governance model. This article seeks to understand the tensions and conflicts faced by RDW community governance in the peri-urban territories of regional capitals, which are at the frontier of the private drinking water management model. Based on a political ecology and hybrid governance approach, this research proposes the hypothesis that, on facing urban expansion and water scarcity, the neoliberal institutional framework tends to favour drinking water market governance in peri-urban territories. With this aim, and through semi-structured interviews and participatory observation, focusing on three RDW cases located in the peri-urban zone of Talca, this study develops a critical discourse analysis of community managers and government regulators, identifying their perceptions and positions on current socio-ecological transformations, and community governance tensions. Consistent with the proposed hypothesis, from discourse analysis, it is possible to infer the potential risks of privatization, derived from the implementation of Law No. 20,998, which regulates rural water sanitation services.

‘Community’: A Q study exploring perspectives in community governance settings in Taranaki, New Zealand

<p>Attend any public meeting in Taranaki and, more often than not, one will hear the word ‘community’ used to bolster a policy proposal, or oppose it. But when that happens, what exactly is meant by ‘community’? Taking advantage of her position as an embedded participant, the author of this thesis set out to understand what ‘community’ means to those who occupy roles of influence in decision-making settings in Taranaki, Aotearoa- New Zealand. To the study’s informants and participants, a deceptively simple question was put: ‘what do you understand by ‘community’?’ The set of techniques used to elicit responses to this question was William Stephenson’s Q Methodology. Data collection began with 29 informant interviews from which 45 statements representative of what is understood by ‘community’ were extracted. Those statements were rank-ordered by 35 participants generating 47 Q sorts (the mechanism by which each viewpoint was captured). Using PQMethod 2.35, a three-factor solution generated through principal components analysis and subjected to a varimax rotation was selected for further analysis. The interpretation of the results substantiated three somewhat highly correlated, yet nuanced perspectives where ‘community’ is: ▪ ‘Everyone and we’re all in this together’ (Factor 1), ▪ ‘Well... it depends’ given the multiplicity of interests (Factor 2), and ▪ ‘It’s everything’ (Factor 3). The primacy of relationships and expectations to contribute to where one lives provide the basis for consensus. The nuance is in the scope and reach in terms of who counts, what matters and why it is important at a given point in time. The subsequent discussion noted there is still no agreement on a definition of ‘community’ and its malleability in meaning makes ‘community’ useful for furthering political interests. Its use in the community governance settings of this study reflects the pragmatism of everyday life. ‘Community’ is affirmed as a concept that frames policy discourse. This study also identifies ‘community’ as a practice and as a way of governing that frames policy responses where the basis for ‘community’ is as: ▪ A preference for face-to-face interaction and usually over a cup of tea (Factor 1), ▪ A strategy of enabling that is realistic and pragmatic (Factor 2), and ▪ An account of the integrated connections to places, with people and to events across time and space (Factor 3). The study opens up new ground as the collection, analysis and interpretation of first- person, vested responses from those ‘doing’ ‘community’ in community governance settings is missing from the scholarly and practitioner literature. This study forms a bridge in an identified gap between those who theorise in the political philosophy of ‘community’ and those who advocate in the political practice of ‘community’. Furthermore, the three perspectives identified and discussed in this study also lead to a proposition that the phrase ‘governing communities’ would be a more apt and authentic alternative to ‘community governance’. Such a development is positioned as the next step in the evolution of the theory surrounding local decision-making and local government in New Zealand and as a normative model for political practice.</p>

‘Community’: A Q study exploring perspectives in community governance settings in Taranaki, New Zealand

<p>Attend any public meeting in Taranaki and, more often than not, one will hear the word ‘community’ used to bolster a policy proposal, or oppose it. But when that happens, what exactly is meant by ‘community’? Taking advantage of her position as an embedded participant, the author of this thesis set out to understand what ‘community’ means to those who occupy roles of influence in decision-making settings in Taranaki, Aotearoa- New Zealand. To the study’s informants and participants, a deceptively simple question was put: ‘what do you understand by ‘community’?’ The set of techniques used to elicit responses to this question was William Stephenson’s Q Methodology. Data collection began with 29 informant interviews from which 45 statements representative of what is understood by ‘community’ were extracted. Those statements were rank-ordered by 35 participants generating 47 Q sorts (the mechanism by which each viewpoint was captured). Using PQMethod 2.35, a three-factor solution generated through principal components analysis and subjected to a varimax rotation was selected for further analysis. The interpretation of the results substantiated three somewhat highly correlated, yet nuanced perspectives where ‘community’ is: ▪ ‘Everyone and we’re all in this together’ (Factor 1), ▪ ‘Well... it depends’ given the multiplicity of interests (Factor 2), and ▪ ‘It’s everything’ (Factor 3). The primacy of relationships and expectations to contribute to where one lives provide the basis for consensus. The nuance is in the scope and reach in terms of who counts, what matters and why it is important at a given point in time. The subsequent discussion noted there is still no agreement on a definition of ‘community’ and its malleability in meaning makes ‘community’ useful for furthering political interests. Its use in the community governance settings of this study reflects the pragmatism of everyday life. ‘Community’ is affirmed as a concept that frames policy discourse. This study also identifies ‘community’ as a practice and as a way of governing that frames policy responses where the basis for ‘community’ is as: ▪ A preference for face-to-face interaction and usually over a cup of tea (Factor 1), ▪ A strategy of enabling that is realistic and pragmatic (Factor 2), and ▪ An account of the integrated connections to places, with people and to events across time and space (Factor 3). The study opens up new ground as the collection, analysis and interpretation of first- person, vested responses from those ‘doing’ ‘community’ in community governance settings is missing from the scholarly and practitioner literature. This study forms a bridge in an identified gap between those who theorise in the political philosophy of ‘community’ and those who advocate in the political practice of ‘community’. Furthermore, the three perspectives identified and discussed in this study also lead to a proposition that the phrase ‘governing communities’ would be a more apt and authentic alternative to ‘community governance’. Such a development is positioned as the next step in the evolution of the theory surrounding local decision-making and local government in New Zealand and as a normative model for political practice.</p>

Community Governance and Civil Society: An Examination of the Purpose, Intent and Structure of Residents' Groups in New Zealand

<p>Residents’ groups have been in existence in New Zealand for almost 150 years yet very little is known about them. The collection of residents’, ratepayers’ and progressive associations, community councils, neighbourhood committees and the like make up a part of the community governance sector that numbers over a thousand-strong. These groups are featured prominently in our news media, are active in local government affairs and expend many thousands of volunteer hours every year in their work in communities… but what exactly is that work? From the literature we see these groups can be a source of local community knowledge (Kass et al., 2009), a platform for political activity (Deegan, 2002), critical of government (Fullerton, 2005) or help maintain government transparency and accountability (Mcclymont and O'Hare, 2008). They are sometimes part of the establishment too (Wai, 2008) and are often heard promoting the interests of local people (Slater, 2004). Residents’ groups can be set up to represent the interests of a specific demographic group (Seng, 2007) or focus on protecting or promoting a sense of place (Kushner and Siegel, 2003) or physical environment (Savova, 2009). Some groups undertake charitable activities (Turkstra, 2008) or even act in a negative manner that can impact on the community (Horton, 1996). This research examines 582 New Zealand organisations to derive a set of purposes that residents’ groups perform and ascertains how their purposes differ between geo-social and political locality and over three distinct eras of community development. The thesis also examines the relationship between residents’ groups and councillors, council officers, district health board members and civil defence and seeks to uncover if the level of engagement (if any) has an affect on their overall raison d’etre. The research concludes with a typology of New Zealand residents’ groups along with the key purposes of each type.</p>

Community Governance and Civil Society: An Examination of the Purpose, Intent and Structure of Residents' Groups in New Zealand

<p>Residents’ groups have been in existence in New Zealand for almost 150 years yet very little is known about them. The collection of residents’, ratepayers’ and progressive associations, community councils, neighbourhood committees and the like make up a part of the community governance sector that numbers over a thousand-strong. These groups are featured prominently in our news media, are active in local government affairs and expend many thousands of volunteer hours every year in their work in communities… but what exactly is that work? From the literature we see these groups can be a source of local community knowledge (Kass et al., 2009), a platform for political activity (Deegan, 2002), critical of government (Fullerton, 2005) or help maintain government transparency and accountability (Mcclymont and O'Hare, 2008). They are sometimes part of the establishment too (Wai, 2008) and are often heard promoting the interests of local people (Slater, 2004). Residents’ groups can be set up to represent the interests of a specific demographic group (Seng, 2007) or focus on protecting or promoting a sense of place (Kushner and Siegel, 2003) or physical environment (Savova, 2009). Some groups undertake charitable activities (Turkstra, 2008) or even act in a negative manner that can impact on the community (Horton, 1996). This research examines 582 New Zealand organisations to derive a set of purposes that residents’ groups perform and ascertains how their purposes differ between geo-social and political locality and over three distinct eras of community development. The thesis also examines the relationship between residents’ groups and councillors, council officers, district health board members and civil defence and seeks to uncover if the level of engagement (if any) has an affect on their overall raison d’etre. The research concludes with a typology of New Zealand residents’ groups along with the key purposes of each type.</p>