My wife shared a book from 1997 with me this week, and the following passage jumped out at me. It’s from Common Purpose: Strengthening Families and Neighborhoods to Rebuild America by Lisbeth B. Schorr.
Rediscovering Community
Americans who agree on nothing else, writes William Raspberry, agree that we used to live in wonderful neighborhoods and communities. The neighborhoods that we who are middle-aged and older remember nostalgically may have been poor, seedy, segregated, and populated by the rejected and exploited, but they were our communities and we miss them.
Without a sense of community, says John Gardner, “people lose the conviction they can improve the quality of their lives through their own efforts.”
My friend and colleague Marian Wright Edelman, founder and president of the Children’s Defense Fund, reminisces about growing up in Bennettsville, South Carolina, in her wonderful books, The Measure of Our Success: A Letter to My Children and Yours:
“I went everywhere with my parents and was under the watchful eye of members of the congregation and community who were my extended family. They kept me when my parents went out of town, they reported on me and chided me when I strayed from the straight and narrow of community expectations, and they basked in and supported my achievements when I did well. Doing well, they made clear, meant high academic achievement, playing piano in Sunday school, participating in other church activities, being helpful, displaying good manners, and reading.”
Gil Walker’s memories of his childhood in Gary, Indiana, also feature networks of adults engaged with children, promoting community values.
“I can remember, when I was coming up, walking home from school with my report card in my hand. Before I got home, five or six people wanted to see it. If it was a good report card, I got hugs, I got kisses… If it was a bad report card, everyone of those individuals said, ‘Gil Walker, you know you could do better… ‘”
Gil Walker now runs a midnight basketball program for young people who live in Chicago public housing as his way of trying to replace the lost networks he remembers.
So what happened to those communities?
They have been rapidly eroding all over the industrialized world. Some combination of the following have interacted to weaken community bonds everywhere:
- Fear of crime, violence, and disorder deters people from gathering informally in public spaces. Public parks and playgrounds seem more threatening than welcoming. Older people especially, traditionally the backbone of neighborhoods, are afraid to venture out of their homes. In many neighborhoods, vigilant mothers keep their children – even teenagers – at home to keep them safe.
- Rapid advances in transportation and communication, together with the requirements of the post-industrial economy and the attraction of the suburbs and mild climates, have required and allowed vast number of people to move far from their neighborhoods and families of origin. Mobility has become easy and frequent – for all but the poor and elderly and those marooned by racial prejudice.
- The women who used to organize the PTA, volunteer in hospitals, and operate as front-porch disciplinarians and supervisors of the street scene are elsewhere. Some left with the opening of professional and workplace opportunities from which they had been excluded. Many more entered the labor market out of economic necessity.
- With the increase of single-parent families, many parents (usually mothers) must be both nurturer and breadwinner, leaving little time for community relationships.
- Technology has made it unnecessary to leave home and mingle with others to see movies and plays and listen to music. We watch sports on television rather than play them with our children, friends, and neighbors, and we listen to intimate matters being discussed by Oprah’s guests rather than our own.
- The scale of most institutions that touch our lives makes it harder to make connections. The corner grocery has been replaced by the supermarket, neighborhood stores by regional Wal-Marts, and even six-year-olds have to cope with elementary schools of two thousand children. Political institutions have become so large and so complex that most people have no chance to work together to solve small-scale problems, and feel they have no control over how their taxes are spent or how their children are taught.
For all these reasons and more, Americans feel less anchored, more adrift. Political philosopher Michael Sandel believes that the erosion of community lies at the heart of our contemporary discontent.
Robert F. Kennedy was one of the first American politicians to recognize that the loss of community was hurting us, individually and collectively. Not long before he was killed, he called attention to the destruction of “the thousand invisible strands of common experience and purpose, affection, and respect, which tie men to their fellows.” He believed that the world beyond the neighborhood has become “impersonal and abstract…beyond the reach of individual control or even understanding.” In his 1968 presidential campaign, he called for the restoration of community as “a place where people can see and know each other, where children can play and adults work together and join in the pleasures and responsibilities of the place where they live.”
The exciting new e-Vermont initiative is kicking off this Friday. Two dozen lucky Vermont towns will be on the receiving end of $3.7 million worth of access, gear, expertise and services to help their communities take full advantage of broadband internet access. We’re thrilled to expand Front Porch Forum through this new program.
So… which Vermont towns should be on the receiving end of this program? Leave a comment below. And, if you want to apply on behalf of your town, get in touch with VCRD immediately!
Media Alert
Contact: Paul Costello, VCRD Ex. Dir.
802 223-6091, info@vtrural.org
PO Box 1384 , Montpelier, VT 05601New e-Vermont Partnership Launches $3.8 million Community Development Project
Press Conference to Preview e-Vermont Community Project
Friday, April 9, 2010
11am
Vermont State House
Cedar Creek Room1. Project Background and nutshell summary
2. The role of e-Vermont partners:
-Heather Chirtea, Digital Wish
-Paul Costello, Vermont Council on Rural Development
-Mary Evslin, Evslin Family Foundation
-Christopher Kaufman-Ilstrup, VT Community Foundation
-Lenae Quillen-Blume, VT Small Business Development Center
-Martha Reid, VT Department of Libraries
-Mark Snelling, Snelling Center
-Karrin Wilks, VT State Colleges
-Michael Wood-Lewis, Front Porch Forum
Press Q&A(MONTPELIER) The two-year, $3.8 million e-Vermont Community Broadband Project is a bold new initiative to help rural Vermont towns use the internet more effectively to advance a wide variety of local needs including downtown marketing, community engagement, economic development, school innovation, job creation, health and social services, and e-commerce. It marks the first such effort in Vermont’s history.
The new e-Vermont Partnership is encouraging communities to apply quickly as it selects the first 12 communities to work with. This comprehensive approach will help our towns fully realize the potential of the digital age.
The Project is supported by a just announced $2.5 million Stimulus Grant from the federal Agency of Commerce. Additional support comes from Vermont philanthropists and corporate associates.
This project is not adding fiber optic cable or making other infrastructure improvements. It is focused on helping local e-teams develop innovative uses for the internet to address the needs listed above.
Learn the details of this story and the impact this e-Partnership will have as it works to strengthen our communities and economy.
This promises to be a great event hosted by USDA RD and VCRD…
The 2010 Northeast Rural Summit: Generating Rural Innovation and Regional Partnership ~ April 12 and 13, 2010 at the Burlington Hilton Hotel
Visit the Summit Website to Register or for more information
Join national and regional USDA leaders, state agency leaders, non-profit and business leaders from throughout the northeastern United States for two days of strategic planning around four crucial directions for the rural northeast:
- Food Systems: Local Foods Development and Regional Foods Systems
- Energy: Advancing Efficiency, Generation and Fuel Development
- Broadband: Global Opportunities & Rural Lifestyles
- Rural Economic Development: Investment in Innovation
The Summit is designed to share best regional and place-based practices and build strategic partnerships among state Rural Development offices and rural leadership organizations throughout the region.
It’s a real honor to have Front Porch Forum featured April 12 at this event.
Front Porch Forum will be expanding to more Vermont towns this year, thanks to federal stimulus funds. Contact VCRD (below) to get your town on the list!
This is part of the e-Vermont project… an exciting mix of resources coming from a great collection of entities to two dozen Vermont towns. Here’s the skinny…
From: Vermont Council on Rural Development
RE: Broadband Stimulus Fund Project
Date: March 25, 2010
Contact: Paul Costello, VCRD Executive Director
802 249-8051 or 802-223-6091$2.5 million Stimulus Grant Launches e-Vermont: the Community Broadband Project
MONTPELIER, VT – A $2.5 million federal Stimulus Grant from the federal Agency of Commerce, announced today, completes the funding to launch the $3.7 million “e-Vermont Community Broadband Project.” This major campaign to stimulate broadband use in 24 Vermont towns will be produced by a partnership of organizations dedicated to expanding broadband access and its practical use. The e-Vermont Partnership will be led by the Vermont Council on Rural Development (VCRD) over the next two years. VCRD is a non-profit organization dedicated to the support of the locally-defined progress of Vermont’s rural communities. Additional support for this project came from Vermont philanthropists and corporate associates.
By reaching the bedrocks of Vermont communities-schools, businesses, municipal government, libraries, health and social services groups-the e-Vermont Project will drive the benefits of the digital age to parts of the state that have been left behind, both economically and in digital culture, and are just now getting broadband services.
In addition to VCRD, the e-Vermont Partnership is made up of the Vermont State Colleges, the State Department of Libraries, Vermont Small Business Development Center, the Snelling Center for Government, Front Porch Forum and Digital Wish. Their application has been financially supported by the Vermont Community Foundation, the Jan and David Blittersdorf Foundation, the Evslin Family Foundation, UVM’s Center for Rural Studies, the Vermont Rural Partnership and by donated services and equipment from Dell, Microsoft, and Comcast.
“The federal stimulus money provides a tremendous opportunity for Vermonters to ensure that our communities take full advantage of broadband technology, including advancing the bottom line of our businesses,” said VCRD Executive Director Paul Costello. He emphasized that none of the 24 towns are selected yet, but will be through a competitive application process that will be announced soon.
Vermont’s congressional delegation have been strong supporters of the e-Vermont concept. Senator Leahy pointed out: “The impact of e-Vermont will yield both short-term and long-term community development benefits, creating new jobs, educating children and using technology to improve Vermonters’ lives.”e-Vermont Partners worked closely with Vermont’s stimulus office through the application process. According to Governor Douglas, “This effort is a key part of the SmartVermont strategy. In order to reach our goals in e-Education, e-Health, e-government, and e-Energy, we need to remove all obstacles to Internet use for Vermonters. Even when the problem of access is solved, other challenges like lack of equipment and training remain.”
e-Vermont will help municipal, school, community and business groups in rural Vermont towns design and implement campaigns to expand the use of digital tools and resources to serve a wide variety of local needs including social networking downtown marketing, community engagement, business development, and school innovation. Local committees in these towns will work with VCRD staff to customize a two year plan from a menu of e-Vermont programs and services such as:
-e-government – training and consultation on podcasting, on-line meetings, community scheduling, website development
–Front Porch Forums that link neighbors to each other and to local services
-Computers and training for libraries and senior centers
-Free Netbook computers for 4-5th graders and extensive teacher training to imbed technology in the curriculum
-Specialized classes ranging from basic computer literacy to advanced applications to meet the range of community and business needs
-e-commerce classes and one-to-one counseling for local businesses
-Building community calendars, business directories, buy-local maps, arts and crafts tours, sports schedules, ride shares, and a variety of new locally-driven digital applications
-Expanding on-line computer health information and opportunities
-Expanding the use of web-based tools to facilitate community engagement and advance locally-designed initiativesThe e-Vermont project will learn from each of the selected towns and share these best practices in the uses of digital tools through symposia and conferences statewide.
Municipal leaders and other local organizations that are interested in adding their community to the list of towns to be considered should contact VCRD at 802-223-6091 or by email at info@vtrural.org. Details on the applications process will be announced soon and posted at www.vtrural.org
Scott Heiferman’s tweet led me to take a closer look at the work of recent Nobel Laureate (economics) Elinor Ostrom. She studies how cooperation works best in some cases… better than competition or regulation… our two dominant forms of organizing markets. From a Forbes article…
Garrett Hardin called his famous 1968 essay on shared resources “The Tragedy of the Commons.” He argued that a shared village grazing pasture would tend to get overused and eventually destroyed. But even Hardin later acknowledged that shared common resources did not inevitably have to end in destruction, saying that he should have called his essay “The Tragedy of the Unmanaged Commons.”
And from Fran Korton’s interview at Shareable…
Fran: It’s interesting that your research is about people learning to cooperate…
Elinor: I have a new book coming out in May entitled Working Together, written with Amy Poteete and Marco Janssen. It is on collective actions in the commons. What we’re talking about is how people work together. We’ve used an immense array of different methods to look at this question “case studies, including my own dissertation and Amy’s work, modeling, experiments, large-scale statistical work. We show how people use multiple methods to work together.
Fran: Many people associate “the commons” with Garrett Hardin’s famous essay, “The Tragedy of the Commons.”… What’s the difference between your perspective and Hardin’s?
Elinor: Well, I don’t see the human as hopeless. There’s a general tendency to presume people just act for short-term profit. But anyone who knows about small-town businesses and how people in a community relate to one another realizes that many of those decisions are not just for profit and that humans do try to organize and solve problems.
If you are in a fishery or have a pasture and you know your family’s long-term benefit is that you don’t destroy it, and if you can talk with the other people who use that resource, then you may well figure out rules that fit that local setting and organize to enforce them. But if the community doesn’t have a good way of communicating with each other or the costs of self-organization are too high, then they won’t organize, and there will be failures.
Fran: So, are you saying that Hardin is sometimes right?
Elinor: Yes. People say I disproved him, and I come back and say “No, that’s not right. I’ve not disproved him. I’ve shown that his assertion that common property will always be degraded is wrong.” But he was addressing a problem of considerable significance that we need to take seriously. It’s just that he went too far. He said people could never manage the commons well.
At the Workshop we’ve done experiments where we create an artificial form of common property such as an imaginary fishery or pasture, and we bring people into a lab and have them make decisions about that property. When we don’t allow any communication among the players, then they overharvest [the commons]. But when people can communicate, particularly on a face-to-face basis, and say, “Well, gee, how about if we do this? How about we do that?” Then they can come to an agreement.
That last bit there about communication leading to better community decisions… love it. It’s so obvious. I guess that’s why it takes a non-economist Nobel Laureate in Economics to explain it to the economists of the world. And, for what it’s worth, her observation jibes with what we see at Front Porch Forum too. FPF leads to better communication among neighbors, more face-to-face conversation, and, in many cases, better community decisions.
Congratulations Dr. Ostrom!
Bill McKibben’s article in Yankee Magazine is leading to all sorts of interesting connections. We get lovely comments everyday, like this one from David in Vermont…
I just read that great article in Yankee by Bill McKibben. It brought tears to my eyes twice. I notice Randolph is not on your list yet so I’d like to be put on your waitlist.
And various new and traditional media are picking it up. Here are some. It all adds up to spotlighting widespread interest in building community at the local level.
The Orton Family Foundation just published a good article about building place-based community using online tools. Writer Rebecca Sanborn Stone touches on Front Porch Forum, Yelp, outside.in and LifeAt, and she focuses most of her piece on i-Neighbors, a website started by academic Keith Hampton several years ago.
The i-Neighbors team has done a great job spinning major corporate support of their research into a handy set of tools and North America-wide publicity. When trying to understand i-Neighbors years ago, I was told they had 10,000 subscribers across 5,000 of their “i-neighborhoods.” This new article states 73,000 subscribers (impressive!), but doesn’t mention how many groups/neighborhoods that total is divided across. I wonder what their average density is now, that is, the number of members divided by the total households in a given i-neighborhood? (The Washington Post reported 50,000 members in May 2009, but made no mention of density or number of i-neighborhoods either.)
Many observations that Professor Hampton makes in the article jibe with our years of experience running Front Porch Forum… and with some of his past research findings (e-neighbors study and a Pew study)…
… the real value of i-Neighbors might not emerge until there’s a local problem. “Having networks in place is really important,” Hampton says, “You need neighbors in an emergency.”… It’s much easier to bring neighbors together to discuss, resolve and act on an issue if they’ve already swapped recipes and developed a sense of common ground than if you start from scratch when the controversy hits.
The success of an online neighborhood community depends on a number of factors. i-Neighbors recommends keeping the neighborhood size to fewer than 500 households, and the site is more effective in areas with clear geographic boundaries… Interestingly, says Hampton, i-Neighbors doesn’t always work best in more affluent areas. He has seen major successes in typical middle class, suburban cul-de-sacs, and also in extremely disadvantaged inner-city neighborhoods where other communication channels are limited and existing social cohesion is frayed.
As easy as it is to click your way into i-Neighbors, the most important ingredients in a thriving online (and offline) community are old-fashioned hard work and organizing. “If you build it, they will come” doesn’t apply here; anyone starting an i-Neighbors group will need to advertise the site, work to engage members, and set ground rules for effective participation. i-Neighbors provides a poster template that users can print and hang around the neighborhood or bring door to door, but Hampton says the most successful groups usually have a committed individual or local organization behind them — someone who is concerned about a neighborhood issue, recognizes the value of the technology, and can spread the word and get others to start using the site.
Whether you’re ready to tackle a local legislative initiative or you just want to meet the folks across the picket fence, Hampton says the single most important thing is to just get started. After all, he says, “It only takes one person.” Start a site, tell a few friends, and soon you’ll have a few more. You may be surprised to find how much more you have in common than just a street address.
Pundit Seth Godin hit a homer yesterday with his blog post about the trade offs of pursuing the mindless masses of speed clickers vs. seeking small groups of folks who are really paying attention. Sayeth Seth…
The net has spawned two new ways to create and consume culture.
The first is the wide-open door for amateurs to create. This is blogging and online art, wikipedia and the maker movement. These guys get a lot of press, and deservedly so, because they’re changing everything.
The second, though, is distracting and ultimately a waste. We’re creating a culture of clickers, stumblers and jaded spectators who decide in the space of a moment whether to watch and participate (or not).
Imagine if people went to the theatre or the movies and stood up and walked out after the first six seconds. Imagine if people went to the senior prom and bailed on their date three seconds after the car pulled away from the curb…
If you create (or market) should you be chasing the people who click and leave? Or is it like trying to turn a cheetah into a house pet? Is manipulating the high-voltage attention stream of millions of caffeinated web surfers a viable long-term strategy?…
My fear is that the endless search for wow further coarsens our culture at the same time it encourages marketers to get ever more shallow. That’s where the first trend comes in… the artists, idea merchants and marketers that are having the most success are ignoring those that would rubberneck and drive on, focusing instead on cadres of fans that matter. Fans that will give permission, fans that will return tomorrow, fans that will spread the word to others that can also take action…
About 45% of Burlington households subscribe to Front Porch Forum now, which is amazing considering that about 85% have access to the internet. So, that leaves about 40% of the city who has access but has not subscribed to FPF yet. How might we lure in the remaining 40%? Must we go the flashy and shallow route described by Godin? That would be a poor approach… one that might attract, but wouldn’t likely retain, subscribers. Plus, as Godin points out, “coarsening of our culture” locally would not be far behind.
Ghost of Midnight is an online journal about fostering community within neighborhoods, with a special focus on Front Porch Forum (FPF). My wife, Valerie, and I founded FPF in 2006... read more