Research, Community Organizing and Political Change

Anne Shlay Visiting Professor, School of Public Policy and Department of Geography, Hebrew University

Professor, Department of Sociology Temple University

http://astro.temple.edu/~ashlay

Outline Research, objectivity and interests Research, advocacy and bias Applied research University-Community Collaborations Collaborative community research and

advocacy Community reinvestment movement and

collaborative research EPOP and genesis of Research for Democracy Blight Free Philadelphia Any examples from Jerusalem?

Research, objectivity and interests Research training process in core

social sciences Disinterested and objective Scientific indifference to research

outcomes Arms length methods and

replicability Legitimacy of findings linked to

objectivity of method

Interests Research topics: come from literature. Emerge from field. Topic rooted in literature. Focus on objectivity of research, not on

whether there are vital interests in research New idea: Habermas: Knowledge and Human

Interests. Questions reveal interests Questions per se represent political value

system

What is research for? For the benefit of science. Expand literature Promote field Research can provide external

benefits But societal benefits secondary. Importance of retaining objectivity of

research and to remove any form of bias

Bias Appearance of slanting research

methods and findings one way or the other

Connecting research to advocacy organizations or groups with “interests” leads to charges of bias

Discredits the research Discredits the organizing and

organizer

What’s the problem?

Need mechanism to conduct “useful” research without risking charge of bias

Premise

Information is power Information provides legitimation

and credibility Information gives status to

organizers Information informs and supports

policy options

Premise continued

Organizations need information for: Developing policy alternatives Supporting advocacy positions Developing and strengthening

organizational capacity and leadership

Applied Research Applied research: research with a client Typically research where client hires

researcher to answer particular questions Client could be government, private

corporations, non-governmental organizations, or foundations

Can go to universities or private research organizations or to consultants.

Applied research process

Typically same as basic research process

Arms length methods Elimination of bias Distance between client and

researcher Lack of “interestedness” of

researcher in research findings.

Applied research: very useful Aids development of policy Supports government initiatives Gives valuable information to different

organizations Way of providing legitimate unbiased

information to organizations who then use the information.

Less concerned with development of fields per se

Applied research Not geared towards advocacy Not gears towards community

empowerment Can lead to advocacy around political

issues and can empower different groups.

But these outcomes are not intended. Would be useful but unintended outcome of the research process

University-Community Collaborations Innovation in 1990s in U.S. Idea that universities should be

more involved in issues with local communities.

Universities repositories of skills, information and energy.

Should be applied too solving community based problems

University-Community Collaborations continued U.S. government funded collaborative

initiatives. But typically more “service” oriented, not

research oriented. Providing counseling, tree planting, small business training, etc.

Not necessarily collaborative. University received funding. Money not

necessarily shared with community Ultimately, university “doing” for community.

Continuation of patronizing relationship of university with external groups.

Collaborative Community Research and Advocacy Relative new model for research Research not done for community

organization but with community organizations

Research questions and research design formulated in concert with community organizations

Research does not ask questions. Questions emerge from the organizing context.

Caveats Research not necessary done by community

organizations. Issues of bias and objectivity remain very present Even more important to provide highly

credentialed and methodologically rigorous research.

Major different: research done in ongoing collaboration with community organization.

Community organization shapes the research questions. Research works with, not for, community organization.

Lots of tensions and issues: explore later

Initial foray: Community Reinvestment Movement Movement in U.S. to get banks and other

lenders to make housing loans in low income, minority and central city communities.

Research effort: used data to demonstrate that lenders failing to do business with local communities.

Research documented business activity bordering on illegal and unethical.

Research evidence combined with community organizing used to have lender commit to putting more money in local communities

Caveats and Pitfalls Research must meet the standards of

science If politically powerful, research

scrutinized. To be credible, research and researcher

must be credible. Defensibility of research paramount Use very high standards for successful

collaborative research

EPOP and Genesis of Research for Democracy Newly formed community based

organization: Eastern Pennsylvania Organizing Coalition

Coalition modeled around “faith-based” organizing.

Faith based organizing uses already existing institutional structures to mobilize constituencies around political issues..

Different models of faith-based organizing In U.S., different national networks

of faith based organizations with different strategies and organizations.

EPOP: focuses on relationships between people and organizations and leadership development.

EPOP: organization geared towards building leadership.

EPOP and research EPOP organizing: veterans of the

community reinvestment era. Knew about the power of research tied

to organizing. Heard about me and approached me. Helped EPOP on a variety of projects. Did not “do” the projects. Gave advice,

reviews research instruments, and critiqued methods.

EPOP and Academics As part of my volunteer work with EPOP,

allowed my credentials to be used by EPOP.

EPOP used my name on reports and documents.

EPOP had me come to press conferences and meet with leaders.

Consequence: I built relationships with EPOP leaders and staff and they built relationships with me.

Trust and communication

Research requires research skills. Collaborative community research

requires building of trust and ongoing communication.

Lots of areas for tension and problems.

Key area of tension for researcher Undermining credibility of research

and researcher. E.g., community organizations makes

statements that are “not true,” that is, not consistent with research.

Tension: researchers used to making tentative conclusions. Organizers used to making bold pronouncements.

Key area of tension for community organization

Accessibility of research Ownership of research Timing of research

Research for Democracy Based on multiple successes in collaboration,

decided to embark on new organization structure: “Research for Democracy.”

Received support from local foundation Hired staff with research skills and connections

to community organizations. All research methodological issues reviewed by

me. Research for Democracy Director: worked both

for the EPOP and the university. Money received from foundation went to EPOP

and the university.

Blight Free Philadelphia: The Problem Philadelphia: old (by U.S.

standards) northeastern city. Home of major industry and

manufacturing. Deindustrialization moved industry

out of Philadelphia. Population loss Suburbanization

Philadelphia Housing Stock

Very old housing stock 42% built before 1940 Only 1.5% built between 1990 and

2000. Estimates of abandonment

converged around 30,000 units.

Population decline, Philadelphia City 1990-2005

2005 2000 1990

Population 1,463,281 1,517,550 1,585,577

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2005 Population Estimates, Census 2000, 1990 Census

Prognosis, Diagnosis and Treatment

With continuing population decline, problem will only get worse.

New Mayor: makes blight policy issue

Proposes blight plan based on demolishing abandoned housing units and assembling large parcels for development.

EPOP Leaders

Conceived blight as more wide spread.

Incipient abandonment in their neighborhoods

Saw blight as plague on their neighborhoods. Wanted to solve problems of incipient blight, not just concentrated blight.

TWO COMPETING DEFINITIONS OF THE BLIGHT PROBLEM

Market Driven Blight Institution/Policy Driven Blight

Definition Visible outcome Invisible process resulting in visible outcome

Indicators Concentrated dilapidated and abandoned property

Scattered property deterioration and abandonment

Causal Mechanisms Normal market forces emerging from the aggregation of decisions made by individual households and firms

Decisions by key housing market and policy institutions

Policy Remedy Demolition Reinvestment (loans and grants)

Policy Focus Vacant land assembly Neighborhood preservation

Spatial Focus Neighborhoods with opportunities for large scale land acquisition

Neighborhoods at risk of becoming blighted

Issue: Reconstruct the blight problem

Research: tool for shaping new political and policy perspective on the definition of the blight problem.

The Research: Distribution of Abandonment Developed analysis of the location of

abandoned housing. Used maps and graphs Showed distribution of blight in council

districts. Found that two conditions of blight:

Concentrated blight Dispersed blight Blight widespread

Research: Causes of Blight Used multivariate techniques to look at the

impact of various characteristics on the distribution of blight among neighborhoods.

Question: why is the number of abandoned housing high in some neighborhoods than others.

Findings emphasized the absence of local policy efforts in combating blight. City policy complicit in expanding blight. Need a policy solution to blight expansion

Research: Impact of Blight Used multivariate techniques to assess

the impact on the number of abandoned home on property values (the selling price of homes)

Found that small number of abandoned homes (incipient blight) had large negative effects on housing values.

Problem not just concentrated blight but wide spread incipient blight.

Blight problem: city wide, not neighborhood specific problem

Organizing EPOP held hearings with local council

people. Lobbied extensively with President of City

Council responsible for initiating blight legislation.

Succeeded in holding up the legislation Ultimately, legislation based containing

more money for neighborhood improvements and stabilization, not just demolition

Small but important victory

Illustrates the combined role of research and organizing in shaping policy

Research and universities tools for community empowerment under the right conditions and with the right people.

Any Jerusalem examples

Where could research help organizing

What are major development issues that community are organizing around?

Is research something that could be used in advocacy planning in Israel?