Vrijheid, gelijkwaardigheid & bevoogding
|PhD ceremony:||Mr I.M. (Ivo) Nienhuis|
|When:||November 13, 2014|
|Supervisor:||prof. dr. G. de Roo|
|Co-supervisor:||dr. ir. T. (Terry) van Dijk|
|Where:||Academy building RUG|
Self-organisation groups are firmly in the political spotlights. And also in local urban renewal and regeneration policy. Aim of local policy is not to improve the liveability of local communities but to empower residents to solve experienced local problems in their quality of life. It is therefore not surprising that local governments and organisations experiment with the question as how to stimulate local self organisation groups. The aim of this study is to contribute to answering this question, whereby the focus is on neighbourhood communities.
The assumption of this study is that the stimulation of self-organisations is a situational question, depending on available conditions in a specific neighbourhood. These conditions can be categorized in three ideal-typical forms of resilience, which are leading for the questions, which investment is necessary to stimulate self organisations and how resident participation can be effectively formed.
Limitedly resilient communities cannot solve collectively experienced problems in their quality of life. In this case it is necessary to invest in community cohesion and resident participation based on collaboration. Socially resilient communities are able to solve collectively experienced quality of life problems in line with social conventions. In this case, facilitation is the most fitting method. Asocially resilient communities can also solve collectively experienced quality of life problems, except that they do not comply with social conventions. In this case desired forms of self-organisation can be stimulated through participation processes based on guidance and investing in community bound tolerance, attractiveness of the neighbourhood and cross-community cultural connectedness.