“What is needed is an integrated approach that addresses economic, ecological, political, and cultural development as part of a strategy to reclaim and restore community as a focal point in people’s lives and an essential life-support system” (Pierce 5).

Areas of Action Include:

1. enhancing local wealth through economic self-reliance
2. gaining community control over local resources (self-governance)
3. becoming ecologically sustainable
4. meeting the needs of individuals
5. building a community culture

To achieve these initiatives communities can focus on several personal and group aspects. To fulfill the first item, groups and individuals should attempt to maximize their local resources with an eye on making more with less. Residents should support businesses with a stake in the health and vitality of their community, encouraging money to circulate and remain in the community. If the community lacks certain services, initiatives can be offered to encourage development of the needed skills or attract those who already possess them to the area.

For 2) Forming local committees and organizations to handle community issues provides an opportunity to improve the area while also fostering a sense of purpose for the participants. “Community-based agencies are those whose mission is primarily focused to meet a specific social or human-service need within a given community” (Clifton 9). Such collaborative efforts can be run by volunteers and/or receive local or national funding.

“These agencies are smaller than the more institutionalized nonprofit entities in terms of their operating budgets and the concomitant number of staff members. Nevertheless, these grassroots organizations have proven to be far more effective in achieving their mission than their larger counterparts.” The reasons for this are as follows: “the staffs and directors of these smaller organizations have indicated a much greater willingness to take risks…; the extremely limited financial sources usually available to [these types of] nonprofit agencies simply demand that they operate on a very cost-effective ratio of expenses versus income…; [and] these [smaller] agencies prove to be more effective for the simple reason that their size affords them the ‘opportunity’ to operate on a more personal level with their respective clients and with the community itself” (Clifton 9-10).

For 3) Decentralizing work from the office back into the home using telecommunications is beneficial for both the environment and community building. Less time spent commuting between home and work allows more time for socializing, including heightened community engagement. Greater local attention and governance increases the possibility for more sustainable practices, such as energy-efficient land-use policies. through the creation of self-contained communities where social services, shopping, working, recreation, and housing are within walking or bicycling distance of each other.

Residential neighbourhoods can be intensified to reduce urban sprawl. Concern over wildlife habitats might prompt an urban reforestation program, simultaneously increasing the appreciation of nature and reducing a community's impact on climate change. Local councils should be set up to develop ecological neighbourhood plans as well as offer incentives to ecological enterprises. Energy conservation by-laws for new and existing buildings can be established and enforced along with composting programs for schools and community centers. Programs for recycling and reducing solid waste can expand.

The promotion of urban food production, using converted warehouses, greenhouses and empty lots, is a way of fostering self-sufficiency and beautifying barren or depressing cityscapes. A system of ecological waste treatment should be employed at the neighbourhood level. The restoration of local rivers and the watersheds is required so that they can be used safely for drinking, swimming and fishing.

The benefits stemming from heightened community involvement produce positive repercussions far beyond the immediate vicinity. By taking steps to establish concern for local resources, business, people and climate we enhance the possibilities for growth and success against the ever-changing hurtles of our modern world. Although steps toward minimization and localizing seem regressive at first glance, the social, economic, environmental and cultural advantages sell this lifestyle as an evolving system, one which supports the basics while enabling progressive development.

“Now that the world has been fully colonized, there are no more mysterious ‘other places’ to site an ideal society. We have to do it ‘here’, at home, in the world-space that we know” (Frankel 21).


Works Cited

Carl Frankel. In Earth’s Company: Business, Environment and the Challenge of Sustainability. Gabriola 

       Island, BC: New Society Publishers, 1998. Print. Clifton, Robert L, Dahms, Alan M. Grassroots

       Organizations. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press Inc., 1993. Print.

“Sustainable Development Begins at Home: Community Solutions to Global Problems.” Communities,

       Development, and Sustainability Across Canada. Ed. John T. Pierce and Ann Dale. Vancouver, BC:

       UBC Press, 1999. 3-23. Print.

In one word: internet. This electronic communication method has connected numerous individuals across the globe, allowing for powerful positive as well as negative action. The internet’s potential for uniting common interest groups and informing the public should not be ignored but living a solely ‘wired’ reality is reclusive and unfulfilling. Although chatting on Messenger or Skype may be a great way to keep in touch long distance, most would ultimately prefer a night out with their friends.

People continue to treasure a physical sense of community since it unites them in a feeling of commonality, a support group of individuals who can come together over issues that concern them. When searching for a new home, people seek out the type of ‘community’ offered, hoping for a constructive as well as safe environment. It's true that people often identify with their cities but the lack of their interest in maintaining or even forming local communities illustrates one of the major challenges to improving social bonds in urban landscapes.

Fear is the largest factor in people’s hesitation to connect with those around them. Violent news stories discourage trust in one’s neighbours and, with increasingly busy lives, many people feel they simply cannot afford to take on the social responsibility of letting others into their lives. Since cities are too large to foster connection, the optimal environment for stable communities consists of an area containing a few hundred people, enough to offer diversity but not so many that everyone becomes a stranger. Many established communities have disappeared over the last few years. Sources of community breakdown include:

1. declining local economies due to technological advancement and the draining of wealth from communities by large, external corporations
2. loss of citizen control as decisions affecting the future of a community are made by higher levels of government and businesses that have no personal stake in the community
3. environmental degradation as local supplies of water, air and soil are poisoned by industrial and consumer waste
4. social degradation and neglect of human needs as increasing numbers of people are abandoned to homelessness, joblessness, and unsafe living conditions
5. erosion of local identity and community cohesiveness as people increasingly identify with the images of mass consumer culture
6. dissociation of identity with place, resulting in a loss of responsibility to communities. This is generally a result of globalisation.

The next question is: ‘why should we care?’ From an environmental point of view, communities that are self-sustaining and cooperative generally consume fewer resources and take better care of their landscapes. A sense of personal pride in a community garden or local nature trail encourages both an awareness and understanding of the natural world while enabling its preservation. Through the miniaturizing of neighbourhoods the need to drive long distances for basic necessities is reduced. Awareness and trust between community members means that the need for outside services are reduced.

To foster social connections, common meeting places, such as parks and markets, should be encouraged, bringing people with needs and people with skills to meet those needs together. Exposure encourages knowledge acquisition about and care for the lives of the people around you. Besides the environmental benefits of living in smaller neighbourhoods, people familiar with their local residents tend to be happier. While there will always be those whom you dislike, having relationships of any kind fosters a sense of unity and purpose in the monotony of human life.

Works Cited
Carl Frankel. In Earth’s Company: Business, Environment and the Challenge of Sustainability. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers, 1998. Print.

Clifton, Robert L, Dahms, Alan M. Grassroots Organizations. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press Inc., 1993. Print.

“Sustainable Development Begins at Home: Community Solutions to Global Problems.”Communities, Development, and Sustainability Across Canada. Ed. John T. Pierce and Ann Dale. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press, 1999. 3-23. Print.