Critical Reflection #6: Looking at the Glass Half-Full

According to Mathie and Cunningham, the Asset-based Community Development model “can be understood as an approach, as a set of methods for community mobilisation, and as a strategy for community-based development.” ABCD is a bottom-up way of working with communities that focuses on community strengths and assets rather than on deficits and problems. The article examines four different elements of ABCD that are integral to its success. The first characteristic of ABCD is appreciative inquiry as its theoretical base. The authors define appreciative inquiry as “a process that promotes positive change (in organisations or communities) by focusing on peak experiences and successes of the past.” This contrasts the needs-based approach, which focuses on playing up the severity of community problems in order to attract institutional resources, often resulting in a one-sided, negative view of the community that only outside experts can fix. Instead of denigrating the community, appreciative inquiry seeks to transform a culture from one that sees itself in largely negative terms to one that sees itself as having within it the capacity to enrich and enhance the quality of life of all its stakeholders. Next, the article outlines social capital as a core component of ABCD. Social capital is defined as “the store of goodwill and obligations generated by social relations,” thus social capital is treated as both an asset and a means to mobilize a community. The authors argue that “bonding social capital enables people to ‘get by’; bridging social capital enables people to ‘get ahead.’” Next, the authors explain how recognizing and developing economic capacity is part of ABCD, in contrast to CED. Community economic development (CED) is a field of study that actively elicits community involvement when working with government and private sectors to build strong communities. There are three perspectives to CED: the economic systems perspective, the individual capacity-building perspective, and the group capacity-building perspective. The authors argue that the collective action of group capacity-building “enables individuals who lack the resources to independently improve their well-being to work together to achieve this end.” Lastly, the authors argue that “A central theme of ABCD is the relocation of power to communities — power that has otherwise been held by external agencies.” NGOs and local governments can expand participatory democratic space by being “deliberate in leading by stepping back, strengthening the associational base of collective action in communities, and encouraging their federation as a means by which communities engage with external institutions on their own terms.”

Once again, social capital is understood as “the store of goodwill and obligations generated by social relations.” The authors describe it as a “latent asset, and individuals can increase or deplete it depending on where they stand in the reciprocal exchange of social support and obligation.” Social relationships are at the core of ABCD, whether they be formal or informal associations, networks, or extended families. Over the past month of doing service work at Kids Club, I have witnessed an inspiring level of social capital in the Canal. I think a strong example of this in the Canal is the mixed-family housing. Although the overcrowding in housing could be viewed as a deficit to the community, the appreciative inquiry of ABCD would encourage seeing it as a strength. In dominant American culture the importance of family focuses solely on the nuclear family, but in Latino communities, there is a stronger appreciation for extended family members. Many of the kids I have worked with in Kids Club have talked about living with their parents, siblings, an aunt, and a few cousins. While this is definitely indicative of a housing crisis, these expanded family networks can also be looked at as an advantage for the community. Shared family roles allows for more shared family resources. For example, an aunt or uncle can be home to watch the kids and cook dinner for them, while their parents are out working a job. Bigger family networks can also provide kids with a stronger sense of identity and more access to emotional support.

I would like to interview either Carlos Garcia (senior program director) or Lauren Muszynski (program manager) at Kids Club to learn more about the issues the kids and their families face in the Canal. Some of the questions I have brainstormed so far include:

• Do you think the kids are aware of the current political climate in respect to immigration issues?
• Have you observed emotional or behavioral problems among immigrant students?
• Has fear and concern for immigrant classmates affected students who are not targets of enforcement?
• What has the Canal community done to prepare itself in case of raids?
• How has Marin County government responded to immigration issues?