CR6: Addressing Assets
When assisting a community in addressing obstacles and making positive change, it’s important to understand the variety of approaches as well as their strengths and weaknesses. Often a needs based approach is taken in which an outside individual or organization looks at what an organization is lacking, provides the capital or resources to meet those immediate needs, and then assumes the organizations issues have been addressed. This approach however can have quite damaging consequences. In their article, Alison Mathie and Gord Cunningham explain a needs based approach can leave those served feeling “deficient and incapable of taking charge of their lives and of the community” (476). A more effective solution that specifically seeks to empower communities and recognize their individual knowledge is the Asset Based Community Development Model. This model, also referred to as ABCD, recognizes that it is the community members that best understand their own needs and have the capacity to achieve them. Mathie and Gunnigham write, “the process of recognising these capacities begins with the construction of a new lens through which communities can begin to assemble their strengths into new combinations, new structures of opportunity, new sources of income and control, and new possibilities for production” (476). The model requires first taking an appreciative inquiry or a communities prior successes stories, strengths, and diverse forms of capital. Pierre Bourdieu argues that there are three distinct forms of capital: economic, cultural, and social. During an appreciative inquiry these forms of capital are thoroughly explored in hopes of determining where a community has room for growth and how they might use their preexisting assets to facilitate that development.
Community Economic Development Model, or CED, is another commonly used approach for addressing a community’s needs.Roger Clay Jr. and Susan Jones explain “CED emphasizes local participation in the design and implementation of affordable housing, job creation, and financing programs” (257). Similar to ABCD, CED values the input of actual community members when creating opportunities for their economic advancement. The difference between the two models is that CED is to achieve a more specific outcome and doesn’t necessarily make use of a communities pre existing resources the way ABCD actively seeks.
The Marin Chinese Cultural Association is quite rich with all forms of assets. The organization’s members are well educated, financially stable, and seem to be respected for their seniority contributing to their social equity. Culturally, the organization’s mission to preserve Chinese and Chinese American culture sets it aside from many other organizations in the area and provides it with a sense of importance. The culture of the MCCA and its members are both rich. The community seems to use this form of capital quite effectively by using it to gain members who identify with the organization’s culture. Economically, the MCCA is extremely well supported in terms of funds and has adequate access to facilities when necessary. The organization could perhaps invest in permanent real estate to call its own or hire staff to maintain their website and ensure smooth flow of events. It seems to me that the MCCA has the capability of growing further and addressing these potential needs; however, the organization seems to be content to continue functioning as is and appears to be in no hurry to grow.
