QUICK LINKS
2.1 Differentiating Community Engagement and Community Development
2.2 Shared Core Values and Principles of Community Engagement and Community Development
Quiz 8: Core Values and Principles of Community Engagement and Development Processes
To help distinguish between community engagement and community development processes, the following sections outline unique characteristics which distinguish the two concepts, as well as areas of similarity or overlap between them, as illustrated by the diagram and summary table below.
Figure 29: Overview of Similarities and Differences between Community Engagement and Community Development
Table 3: Overview of Similarities and Differences between Community Engagement and Development Processes
| Processes for working with communities | Unique Characteristics/Differences | Similarities |
|---|---|---|
| Community Engagement e.g. Semi-intensive Community Engagement Approach, and Extensive Societal Outreach and Campaigns Approach | • Supports engagement at the level of the individual, household, group, or societal level, not just groups since collective action is not the aim • Goal of the community participation process may be to consult, involve, collaborate or empower on the spectrum of participation • Priorities may be set by either the community or facilitating agency, although priority setting by communities is always recommended | • Seeks community participation to inform identification of issues and solutions, project planning and implementation. • Engagement of communities is an outcome (rather than a process) e.g. to build relationships, build capacity, provide information • Best practices informed by shared core values and principles (outlined below) |
| Community Development e.g. Intensive Community Development Approach | • Aim is to support collective action incl. but not limited to group formation • Goal of the community participation process on the spectrum of participation is to empower. • Requires strong community facilitation skills as heavily relies on participatory learning and action methods • Priorities set by community • Achieving empowerment may be more time/resource intensive to implement, however supports more lasting sustainable change. |
2.1 Differentiating Community Engagement and Community Development
GOALS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
While both community engagement and community development processes support community participation in decision making about issues affecting their lives, they differ somewhat in their participation goals and resultant level of participation achieved.
The public participation goal of any community development process is to empower, whereas the participation goal of community engagement processes can be more varied and may include: consult, involve, collaborate or empower. As such, community engagement processes can support a broader range of participation goals, thereby permitting greater flexibility for working in a variety of ways with communities, and can accommodate working on priorities identified by external agenda setters. However, having a participation goal of empower is a recommended best practice for community engagement or development processes whenever possible as this promotes the greatest level of ownership over decisions and outcomes by community members, fosters self-efficacy, and is more sustainable.
The level of community participation that is feasible and desired in any given context is ultimately dependent on a variety of factors including but not limited to: the community’ priorities, the number of people engaged, means of communication (e.g. face to face, online), objectives of participation, desired outcome level (e.g. household, group, society, business/organization etc.), and availability of resources to support participatory processes (e.g. human resources, time, money). Consideration of the context will therefore be important to informing selection of an appropriate and feasible approach for working with communities.
UNIT OF ENGAGEMENT
One of the key differences between community engagement and development approaches is the unit targeted for engagement. As the aim of community development is to support collective action, the unit targeted for engagement is typically a group or collective of community members e.g. informal or formally organized self-help groups, civil society organizations, cooperatives etc. Community engagement approaches on the other hand, do not have an explicit aim of supporting collective action, and are therefore much more flexible in terms of the unit of engagement. For example, community engagement approaches may seek to engage people at the individual, household, group, and/or or societal level.
RESOURCES TO IMPLEMENT
In addition to supporting engagement of different targets and differing participation goals, another key distinction between the community engagement and development models of working with communities we make within this resource is related to the resources required to support implementation. For ease of understanding, we have differentiated resources into the following three categories:
- Methods and Tools: Community development relies heavily on participatory learning and action (PLA) which is a term that broadly refers to approaches, tools and methods which enable and empower communities to share, analyse and enhance their knowledge of their life and conditions, and to plan, act, monitor, evaluate and reflect. While PLA methods and tools may still be used in community engagement processes, the range of participation goals supported by community engagement processes means they are not always appropriate or required, and other methods and tools may be more appropriate and sufficient for meeting the desired goal participation within different context (e.g. effective messaging and facilitating, motivational interviewing [58]).
- Time Investment: As the goal of community development processes are empowerment, this model of engaging with communities tends to be more time intensive than community engagement processes since facilitating empowerment and collective action can require additional efforts to support cohesion, trust for group functioning and shared decision making. Community engagement processes on the other hand tend to be less time intensive, with time investment varying depending on the participation goal and other contextual factors. Generally, community development processes may last anywhere from three to five years, while community engagement processes may generally last anywhere from one to three years.
- Core Competencies: As the participation goal of the community development approach’s is empowerment and collective action, effective implementation of CD processes require specialized training and community facilitation skills to facilitate community collaboration and empowerment, and be knowledgeable in the use of participatory learning and action (PLA) methods and tools. As community engagement processes don’t seek to facilitate collective action, and may not require use of PLA tools, individuals with alternative core competencies and lower levels of facilitation experience can support its implementation e.g. communication and outreach specialists, community change agents.
2.2 Shared Core Values and Principles of Community Engagement and Community Development
While community engagement and community development approaches for working with communities have unique characteristics, we identify the core values and principles underpinning best practices in both below [46, 37, 59, 60, 42]. These principles and values are interdependent and reinforcing of one another and it therefore recommended they be promoted together to the greatest extent feasible for achievement of optimal outcomes. However, it should be noted that these values and principle reflect only those which are shared by the CE and CD processes for which guidance is provided within this Communities for Animals resource, and are not an exhaustive list of all values and principles which can underpin CE and CD processes.
- Promote Community Participation and Two-Way Communication
Participation as a shared core value refers to the goal of both CE and CD processes being to ensure communities are involved in decision making that impacts their lives throughout all phases of a project cycle to the greatest extent feasible [41, 38, 42]. Community participation in CE or CD processes thus necessitates the use of two-way communication; however the extent to which participation is meaningfully achieved is dependent on the level of understanding of the local context, how CE and CD processes are designed and implemented to foster participation, the capacity of facilitators to implement such processes, as well as on the resources available to implement such processes [42, 41, 37, 46, 38]. - Self-Efficacy
Self-efficacy refers to the value both CE and CD processes place on promoting community members’ confidence in their ability to successfully take action [61, 41, 38, 62]. CE and CD processes achieve this by fostering community members’ self-esteem through recognizing their efforts to change, supporting them to mobilize their assets and strengths, and respecting and encouraging utilization of local knowledge, skills and resources [61, 41, 38, 62, 63, 58]. In addition, self-efficacy can be improved by ensuring community members are provided with opportunities to learn and address barriers to change as needed to make desired changes. - Self-Determination and Ownership
Ownership refers to ensuring “communities are involved in the planning and implementation of activities, including decision-making related to issues affecting their lives so that they reflect local priorities, needs and allocation of resources [61, 41, 38, 42]. Self-determination refers to ensuring communities have the right to choose to participate in any initiatives and determine any changes they desire to adopt [41, 37, 62]. In the context of animal welfare, this means communities are respected in deciding whether to participate in animal welfare projects, as well an in which animal welfare issues and related behaviours they wish to change [64]. When communities’ self-determination and ownership over issues, solutions, and related outcomes are supported, the likelihood positive changes being sustained is improved [63, 58]. In addition, embedding learning and reflection processes throughout all phases of the project cycle supports helps develop communities’ sense of ownership over the process, goals and results as well as the stakeholders they have agreed to work with [59, 61, 37]. However, it is important to recognize that community concerns may not necessarily reflect those of your organization, and if your organization has its own agenda, it is important to introduce it to communities in transparent manner, and seek to find common shared interests for working together rather imposing the external organization’s priorities on communities. - Promote Equality, Inclusiveness and Diversity
The principle of inclusiveness and diversity asserts that all those who are deemed underrepresented, disadvantaged, vulnerable and marginalized should be provided a fair chance of participation in setting the agenda, decision-making, and in benefiting from any CE or CD process or related actions [51, 38, 42]. Equality in opportunities to participate and in treatment of participants is therefore a central tenet of promoting inclusive and diverse participation, and may require the adoption of specific measures to ensure equal opportunity for those groups who are marginalized and discriminated against (e.g. special meeting times, child care, quotas that promote equality representation in leadership roles etc.) [42, 37]. Community animal welfare intervention projects should therefore ensure they do not operate in ways which are blind or exploitative of different social categorizations such gender, race, class, and, disability etc. Only when there is understanding of how different social categorizations interact to result in some groups’ marginalization and discrimination, can projects be designed to mitigate and/or address inequities which exist, and provide equal opportunities for these group’s participation and representation throughout the project. - Do No Harm
CE and CD processes bear risks and opportunities for individual participants and communities [42]. While they can increase ownership, empowerment, participation, service utilization and local capacity, they can incur physical, economic, political and social costs [42]. If not well implemented, they have the potential to exacerbate discrimination, unequal distribution of resources, stigmatization and abuse [56, 42]. Thus a core principle of CE and CD processes is to take a ‘Do No Harm’ approach, which can be applied to humans, animals, and the environment. Mitigating harm to people can be supported by mainstreaming gender and using an intersectional lens when designing and implementing such processes so as to ensure inequalities, discrimination, and social biases are not exploited or further exacerbated [56]. Taking a transformative approach to achieve equity as a means of promoting equality is recommended to the greatest extent feasible [56, 46, 51]. It is also important to ensure project activities or solutions adopted to support desired change do not have unintended consequences on the environment or animals, and consulting with thematic area experts may be helpful to assess potential risks of different actions, as is ongoing monitoring to ensure no unanticipated harm results. Adopting safeguarding measures to protect people and the environment from any harm, abuse or exploitation that may be caused during the project or by project staff is also recommended [46, 51].
Quiz 8: Core Values and Principles of Community Engagement and Development Processes