Tuesday, 06 February 2007

Rural councillors

The Commission for Rural Communities has launched a national inquiry to explore the opportunities and challenges for rural councillors and what stands in the way of them doing more to help rural people have greater influence over local decisions.

Among the issues they're interested in:

  • Examples where rural councillors are helping their community influence local decisions
  • The barriers and constraints that stand in the way of rural councillors doing more
  • Why people sometimes chose other routes, such as local charities or community groups, to influence local decisions
  • What the role of councillors should be in the future and what is needed to unlock that potential.

Press release. Deadline is 18 May 2007.

6 Feb 2007 16:20:21 | Governance and participation

The comments to this entry are closed.

NEXT POST
Keep flawed consultation in the community! An urban regeneration company is facing protests about inadequate consultation. I know what you're thinking - 'dog bites man, that's not news.' The 1st East URC has set out regeneration proposals for Great Yarmouth and Lowestoft which include new parks, marinas, homes and offices, and they even propose moving Lowestoft railway station to create a new town centre. But not everyone's happy with the consultation process. Community groups? Nah, it's those rowdy left-wing agitators in the private sector trying to disrupt the rightful natural process of profitable development. One chamber of commerce rep said: "Existing business in both towns is supportive of regeneration, but is becoming suspicious and alienated from it by the way it is being treated." Tsk. Maybe bring in the community activists to mediate? From Planning resource.
PREVIOUS POST
Reciprocity in neighbourliness I'm trying to write a paper about neighbourliness and have been thinking about the reciprocity of acts of neighbouring. Viewing acts of instrumental support in terms of direct reciprocity between two neighbours (rather than as part of a generalised model of exchange with less recognisable returns), research has found that unbalanced (or non-reciprocal) exchange does not necessarily lead to discontinuation of the exchange.* In other words, sometimes one neighbour helps out another without getting much in return, and keeps doing so. (Before I go on, I ought to just admit that in the interests of a little rebalancing, yesterday I baked a wholemeal loaf and took it into my next door neighbour: from previous experience I know that her husband is very fond of it, and I wanted to check out how he's doing). However, the researchers only included instrumental support (or ‘favours’) in their study, and it seems to me that other, intangible forms of interpersonal behaviour which are in some way supportive – for instance a sympathetic chat on the doorstep to provide comfort in the face of bad news, or the sharing of information about local services – are likely to be viewed by neighbours as valid contributions to the same exchange relationship. (So don't we need a piece of work that maps and describes the subtle variety of acts of neighbourliness?) Many years ago I recall rushing out of my house shouting when I saw from my window a neighbour’s toddler stepping into the road, as the mother was getting the shopping from her car. For this simple act I was rewarded almost immediately with a bottle of wine from the shopping bag. It was clear that I had to accept it, not least because there was probably a confused swelling wave of guilt as well as gratitude in her expression of thanks. But it was also, of course, a recognition of the non-obligatory, but potentially vital, role of neighbour. *F Thomése et al, Continuation of exchange with neighbors in later life, Personal relationships, 10 (2003), 535-550.

Kevin Harris

Search

My Other Accounts

Recent Comments