Community Engagement - Explanations, Limits and Impacts

Head BW¹*

1. Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

Community engagement and citizen participation have a long tradition as a theme in liberal democratic theory. But the last two decades in many countries have seen a shift away from a managerialist top-down approach, towards a revitalised emphasis on building communication and institutional bridges between governmental leaders and citizenry.

The paper outlines some of the main explanations for this shift, at a variety of levels, from international trends in governance and political economy, through to improved communications techniques in managing major social and economic infrastructure projects.

The literature includes many and various approaches that bring together both descriptive analysis and normative conceptualisation concerning either the increasing usage or the benefits/desirability of community engagement.

Other critical perspectives are also raised, suggesting both a degree of cynicism about the intentions of the government and serious limits on the potential influence of the citizenry.

Some distinctions are drawn between the viewpoint of the governmental elites (in relation to purposes, limits and benefits) and the viewpoint of the community groups and NGOs on these matters. Some other distinctions are drawn between policy or arenas, with different dynamics and opportunities in different fields.

The term ‘community’ is notoriously vague and value-laden. For the purpose of this paper, major organised business interests are not directly included in the concept of community engagement, because it is argued that the dynamics of their involvement in public policy directions and major project approvals have not substantially shifted. Business nevertheless sits alongside community groups in some types of multi-sector forums.

Much of the literature on this topic is enmeshed in advocacy for particular models and solutions. This paper, by contrast, attempts to steer a course through these debates to suggest some clear analysis around some key distinctions and questions about context, purpose, process and benefit.

Click here to view the full paper