Understanding Community Networking:
Observations from Across the Ditch

Larry Stillman

larrys@vicnet.net.au

Techno-utopians

"Consistent with the present-oriented ethos of computer users, pundits write as if people had never worried about community before the Internet arose. Yet sociologists have been wondering for over a century about how technological changes (along with bureaucratization, industrialization, urbanization and capitalism) have affected community" (Wellman and Gulia 1996).

A great community quote

"The collective resources built up when we interact with other people outside our families. It includes trust, co-operative behaviour, helpful networks, and willingness to give and take and to participate in issues of common concern. It is generated by voluntary association and cannot be bought or sold, only shared." Pat Hanley, President, New Zealand Federation of Voluntary Welfare Organisations.

Another great quote

"The use of information technology worldwide is causing paradoxical, sometimes contradictory and confusing effects, with occasional miracles and widely spread new forms of exclusion. Still, the overall sense is one of empowerment - and surprise. The primal drive to discover, adapt, mutate and further develop technologies is a truly global phenomenon, one that cannot be overrun by a culture of complaint or the desire of corporate interests to create and capture markets." (Geert Lovink on GCNDotForce listserv, 15 Feb 2002, 12:14:06 +1100).

What is the Centre?

The Centre for Community Networking Research is a co-operatively funded centre whose mission is to develop and implement evaluation frameworks within the environment of emerging community uses of ICTs.

Its work will provide tools to document and measure the impact of community networking projects and activities to the community, government, academia, and others.

Who are we?

• Larry Stillman.
• Gary Hardy, founder of Vicnet.
• Prof Don Schauder, Chair.
• Dr Graeme Johanson.
• Tom Dennison & other p/t.
• Need for gender balance and diversity.

Why the Centre was established

• What have governments’ investments produced?
• To try and get behind what’s going on in Community Networking.
• To bring different understandings together.
• To develop some skill sets and toolkits.

Why bother with theory

1. It satisfies our quest to know what is going on.
2. It helps us make decisions about the limited resources (time, people, and other assets).
3. It provides you with a critical lever to dissect ideologies, which surround the meaning of ICT in its cultural, political, and economic framework.
4. It provides you with tools to influence the development of policy and funding frameworks.

What are we questioning?

• Unidimensional thinking about the ‘good effects’ of the Internet by techno-enthusiasts [one size fits all].
• The limits to limited state support and involvement.
• Overestimating where people are at.
• Unrealistic expectations on community and voluntary organisations, especially the human/technical and hardware resources required to ‘impact’.

Will it make any difference if…

• We don’t have the resources.
• The politician’s won’t listen.
• It’s just more paper.
• No time, space.
• My head hurts!
• We just need action!
• But we keep making mistakes, too…

Theories and concepts abound

• Thinking about the way that ITC can change society has been bundled up with a large number of expectations by government and others who either control the purse strings.
• There are widely varied understandings etc.
• The ‘third way’, mutual support and the apparently unlimited capacity of non-state organisations, market forces etc.

Theories and concepts...

• Social network theory.
• Social capital theory, community capacity theory.
• Organisational culture, change theory.
• Community development theory.
• Theorists of the global economy ( + and -)
• Urban theorists (technopoles).
• Theories about technology – (a benefit or a curse, a band aid or a cure).
• Parsimonious models are needed.

 

Issues in concepts

Government especially has these expectations:

• Numbers versus quality and understanding or process that can’t be easily quantified.
• Accountability expectations aren’t always the same as community expectations.
• These reflected deep seated differences in understand the effects of public policy: Conceptual sliding.
• Positivism (scientific certitude) ‘versus’ heuristic and hermeneutic (deep understandings)

After all this background, a report on where we have got to

• MC2 (my connected community.
• Brisbane study.
• ICT Capacity Index.
• Toolkit of Toolkits.
• July conference.
• October conference.

My Connected Community

• Large-scale program to set up ‘communities’ via a program to encourage the use of listservs/home pages, mc2.vicnet.net.au.
• Pilot volunteer group stage, now moved into a complex (large and small funded agency stage).
• Complex and multistage.

Issues for the Evaluation of MC2 and similar projects

• How can you demonstrate changes in ‘community capacity’ and social capital through ICT initiatives?
• There are lots of survey and toolkits around, but they are complex, require skills, considerable resources, and aren’t necessarily community development oriented processes.
• Many are based on well-resourced North American models.
• Expectations may be too large at this stage for other than general snapshots of trends rather than quantifiable data.

Answers??

• Realistic aims and expectations of projects.
• Measurement processes that are grounded.
• Triangulate (multiple sources) of data to build a strong case that can’t be easily ignored.
• Build an ‘archive’ of multiple case studies.

Review for Brisbane City Council portal

• Snapshot case studies of a range of 30 community organisations on line drawn from a much larger pool around Australia.
• E.g., Birders, Volunteer organisation, bike industry association, seniors net, neighbourhood house, soccer club, breastfeeding mums.

Brisbane review /2

• Identified benefits of going online.
• Increased organisational capacity to achieve mission.
• Resources (membership, sales, sponsorships, funding).
• Profile.
• Increased motivation and member retention/ new members & different profile of members.
• Increased efficiency and effectiveness of organisation’.

Brisbane - some conclusions

• Community organisations are very diverse, use different online tools, and make different uses of the same tools.
• Scale and content are very important.
• An individual with deep commitment is often the driving force.
• Direct correlation between the level of commitment and involvement with a site and the range and quality of activities on a site.
• Engagement with the Internet has been a slow, evolutionary, and iterative process.

ICT Connectivity Index

• To develop an ‘index’ of ICT uses and trends in voluntary/community/third sector organisations over time: quantitative and qualitative.
• Definitional issues; sample issues: defining community organisation is a problem.
• Whose sample to use?
• Similar capacity surveys conducted in the UK, North America (Office of the Envoy, Making the Net Work & others).
• Many focus on large organisations and neglect small organizations.

A Toolkit of Toolkits?

• No need to reinvent the wheel when there are so many kits out there.
• Develop a people-based mechanism to assist people to make technological choices more effectively.
• See http://www.technologyworks.org/ for ‘circuit riders’, a form of corporate mentoring and support, but would this be altruistically adopted in our countries? Volunteer support alone is not a real option.

July Conference in Melbourne

• Networks and Place.
• Community Education and Development.
• Learning & Learning Communities.
• Community Services.
• Community & Small Business.
• Establishment of a Networking Association.
• Library Services.
• Accessibility & Disability.
• Ageing.
• Indigenous Networking.
• Theory.
• Public Policy.
• Advocacy.
• Community Building.
• Digital Divide.

October Search conference

• A facilitated day of brainstorming with key policy makers, community representatives, academics.
• To explore different understandings of ICT and its use/impacts information and communication technologies on the social, community and non-profit sectors.