Full text of DOI:10.1093/cdj/36.1.3

© 2001 OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JOURNAL
Hurriyet Babacan
Community work
partnerships in a
global context
and Narayan
Gopalkrishnan
When Oppression Becomes the Norm, Resistance Becomes Duty (1992 AIDEX Anti-
Arms Manufacturing Rally, Canberra, Australia)
ABSTRACT The above words adopted as a motto in Australia at the beginning
of the 1990s reflect the mood of community development workers and grass roots
activists as we head into a new century. Communities have struggled over centuries
about the way to allocate resources within society and how to live in harmony with
each other. Those who have resources have power over others. This power can be
used often to exclude others and to set up structures that perpetuate oppression in
society. Privileged positions in society and within communities are only sustained
because significant sectors of society carry the burden or bear the damages.
The current changes in society have had enormous impact on communities and
have caused a great level of social unease and restructuring. Community workers and
activists have had to manage the impact of this crisis in many circumstances. This
paper examines the impact of global changes on communities at a macro level and
their implication for community organising and community development.
Introduction
Community work and community development are contested fields as we
experience social, political and economic change at the global level. We are
witnessing mass movements of people, economic restructuring, changes to
the role and processes of government and the dominance in many areas of
the world, of new right ideologies. The concept of social welfare and the
resources available to it are being much more narrowly defined.
There have been a number of community work responses to these
changes. Some efforts have been put into managing the impact of changes
at the local level, others have been to look at coalition building and develop-
ing social movements nationally. Often, the community workers have not
been able to relate the issues in their community with that of the broader
national and international contexts or have been constrained by the organis-
ations they have worked for (often due to the funding conditions being
imposed on them). This paper argues that the scope of the challenges ahead
for community work is so great that international forms of organising and
partnerships are needed.
Understanding the global context of community work is the first step
toward developing appropriate community work frameworks. Appadurai’s
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JOURNAL
VOL. 36 NO. 1 January 2001 pp. 3–17

4
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JOURNAL VOL. 36 NO. 1 2001
(1990) framework will be used to analyse the global context of communities.
Then the challenges to global context to community work will be explored,
with special emphasis on what is pertinent for community work in the future.
The paper will conclude with options and opportunities for the future.
The main contention in the paper is that in a climate of rapid change and
oppression being imposed on societies across the world, there is a major role
for community development as an instrument to challenge and resist dis-
empowerment, economic rationalism and fragmentation. It is argued that
the way forward in the future is by embracing the idea of global co-opera-
tion and partnerships in what has been described as ‘globalisation from
below’.
Global Context of Community Work
There are major global trends which form the background to community
work across many countries. Appadurai (1990) offers the concept of ‘scapes’
(borrowing from the world landscape) to depict sociological scenery.
Appadurai’s notion of scapes will be used to contextualise the changing
global conditions for community development. In the scapes of the world,
there are five dimensions: ethnoscapes, mediascapes, technoscapes, ideo-
scapes and financescapes.
• Ethnoscapes: landscapes of people who constitute a shifting world – immi-
grants, tourists, refugees. The changes in ethnoscapes are determined by
shifts in global capital, production, technology, and policies of nation
states (e.g. refugees)
• Mediascapes: electronic and print capabilities to disseminate information
(e.g. news, films, newspapers). The mediascapes create images of the
world – both real and imaginary.
• Technoscapes: rapid movements of technologies and information across
boundaries. This is fluid process and changes quickly. It is highly depen-
dent upon complex money flows, political possibilities and availability of
low and highly skilled labour.
• Ideoscapes: ideologies that shape and are shaped by the politics and poli-
cies of nations. Ideologies are reflected through terminologies, symbols
and fashion apart from the political, social and economic structures.
• Financescapes: vast movements of money internationally
In imagining these scapes a number of issues appear as relevant for the
global context of community work. The role of nation state is being affected
as never seen before. The crisis of the welfare state in terms of its expendi-
tures, legitimacy and rationality is being challenged further by globalisation
(Oconnor, 1973; Habermas, 1976). Governments are more driven by global
economic and political concerns than before and are forced to commit
resources to initiatives which are not in their national interest.
The vast movement of people, hence ethnoscapes, are also important

COMMUNITY WORK PARTNERSHIPS IN A GLOBAL CONTEXT
5
from the point of view of constituency and also how we may define ‘com-
munity’. The UN estimates that there are more than 17 million refugees, a
total of 40 million displaced people. According to the World Tourism
Organisation the number of international tourists has increased from 25
million in 1950 to 160 million in 1970 to 450 million in 1990. The number of
people moving internally within countries is unknown. Peter Stalker esti-
mated that in 1997 that there are more than 90 million people living outside
their country of birth: 75 million as international migrant workers and 13
million as refugees (Stalker, 1997: 1). A key issue which community
development will need to address in the future is the global movement of
people and its implication for wealth distribution.
The role of the media is currently very important in the information com-
munities receive and as a medium of opinion making. Pilger (1998) points
to the concentration of the media in the hands of fewer, richer and more
powerful sources. He indicates that ninety percent of all world news and
current affairs come from few concentrated sources, with the major sources
of information, news, documentaries and entertainment emanating from a
handful of powerful people or corporations. For example, three agencies,
Associated Press, Reuters and Agence France Press supply most of the
world’s wire service news (p. 531).
The nature of the news, information and current affairs is detailed by
many writers including Pilger, 1998 and Shiva, 1993.
Pilger states that some news
have been reported, even glimpsed on the evening news where they are un-
remembered as part of a moving belt of images shot and edited to the rhythms
of Coca-Cola advertisement . . . the average length of the TV news soundbite
in the US has gone from 42.3 seconds in 1968 to 9.9 seconds. . . . That is the
trend. The result is not just infotainment but infoadvertising programs that flow
seamlessly into commercials (Pilger, 1998: 1)
The implication for community development is that the opinion of com-
munities we are working with is being sourced from powerful and uniform
agencies. At the same time the sources of alternative information dissemi-
nation are much more strictly controlled and other views are not available
in the mainstream. Some of the information is based on user pays and this
further disempowers people at the lower end of the social ladder. These
trends are challenging for community work in that many of the communi-
ties may not understand their oppressive situations and consciousness
raising activities will require greater effort. Community work effort will
need to focus much more on better access to information as this is a source
of power in what Ife (1995) calls ‘network societies’.
Technologies promised a leap for human society. Information superhigh-
ways, satellites, mass production with fewer skilled labour, telecommuni-
cations and multimedia are some of the ways in which techoscapes have
influenced global life.

6
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JOURNAL VOL. 36 NO. 1 2001
While the benefits of technology are applauded, not everyone shares this
view. Woudhuysen (1997) points out that although technologies have
resulted in technological determinism and in narrowing horizons, ‘it is by
no means clear that dreams about superhighways are worth dreaming. As
we have shown, such dreams speak of narrow horizons – of a vision which,
expansive though it is in rhetoric is fundamentally cramped’ (p. 360). Other
writers have pointed to the link between technologies and cultural coloni-
sation that has occurred through their introduction to societies (Shiva,
1993). Technological advancement is often used to disempower and sub-
jugate people, often in very covert ways. The control over technologies is
an increasingly important way to control information, employment and
decision making within societies.
The lack of access to technology by some segments of the community is
also problematic for community development. Control over technologies is
a way to control information, employment and decision making. While we
are able to acknowledge the impact of technological change in communities,
there are many who do not access basic technologies and are afraid to do
so even when opportunities arise. Physical and psychological access to
technologies therefore, is becoming a key point of focus for community
development.
A major issue which community development has to address in the new
global context is the economic and financial structures and their impact on
communities. Pilger points to the merging of the era of ‘new democracy’ in
the world which enables free flows of capitals and provides a free environ-
ment for multinationals to set up investments. He provides examples of how
the major agencies of the world financial and economic sectors such as the
International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank collaborate with the
institutions of certain nations such as Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and Development (OECD) and the World Trade Organisation
(WTO). Pilger points out that free trade takes place not between nations
but between the 180 multinational companies. Governments legitimise the
conditions for free trade either through economic coercion or through co-
option.
These multinationals are totalitarian by nature and are labelled by Pilger
as ‘private tyrannies’. They flood the markets and control economic policies
of other countries. For example the surpluses of American agricultural
products in the form of exports to poorer countries can destroy the
agricultural base of those countries as is in the case of Korea and can cause
malnutrition and starvation in many African countries. The impact on coun-
tries are further heightened by various structural adjustment programs
imposed by IMF and other such global financial bodies.
The drive is for consumerism, and people gain significance in relation to
their purchasing power. The movement of finance is closely linked with the
movement of people and the role of media in promotion of consumption
through advertising.

COMMUNITY WORK PARTNERSHIPS IN A GLOBAL CONTEXT
7
The moving nature of finance also has led to considerable upheaval in
employment and security of people. Craig (1998) argues that the conse-
quences of economic decisions are felt more quickly than ever by increas-
ing numbers of those who do not take the decision. On the one hand there
is a need for a consumer market where people need incomes to purchase.
On the other the finance needs cheap sources of labour at lower wages and
often this is disguised as flexibility. The casualisation of labour and high
levels of unemployment resulting from the flexible systems, on the other
hand, limits the demand for goods. The contradictions and the unreliability
of permanent capital is characterised by downsizing, insecurity and unem-
ployment in many countries.
The difficulties for many nations is the acceptance of economic rational-
ist arguments where surplus budgets are strived for at the expense of ‘the
underclass’ of people who need government subsidies and welfare expen-
diture.
The overarching effect of financescapes is a world characterised by:
• Competition and emphasis on free markets
• Individualism
• Minimal government intervention, privatisation of public assets
• ‘Trickle down’ approach to welfare
• Emphasis on outputs, throughputs and quantity as outcomes
• Growth of supranational organisations
• Managerialism (Craig, 1998; Kenny, 1994; Horne, 1992; Pusey, 1991)
The Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) is the latest attempt to
gain unlimited freedom by the institutions within the financescapes. Once
signed, these agreements will remove the restrictions on the movement of
free capital any where in the world. The MAI, according to Pilger, repre-
sent the most important imperial advance for over half a century. The effect
of MAI is to transfer policy making responsibilities away from national
governments to the multinationals. However, under the conditions of the
MAI, corporations will be able to challenge local or national laws in inter-
national tribunals but no individual or government will have the right to
take action against offending corporations. This gives licence to corpor-
ations to abrogate their responsibilities in a range of areas including citi-
zens’ rights, environmental protection or loss of employment. Also, under
MAI agreements, signatory countries cannot protect their local industries
which will lead to immense job losses.
So why would governments sign MAI agreements under such conditions?
The World Development Movement (1997) argues that in 1995 more than
80 percent of investment ended up in twelve countries. The forty eight least
developed countries received only 0.5 per cent. The poorer countries are
being faced with increased pressure to sign up or face the prospect of no
investment. This will further perpetuate the imbalance in global distribution
of wealth and resources and may lead to further movements of people.

8
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JOURNAL VOL. 36 NO. 1 2001
The economic crisis which the world faces poses important responsi-
bilities for community work. While there is much talk of accountability and
transparency, the market processes in place render both governments and
multinationals unaccountable. Much community work takes place in man-
aging the impact of the economic factors such as income security, loss of
employment and training. Related issues such as crime, racism and poverty
are also the domains of community work. However, the focus needs to be
on challenging the economic agenda and this is a task which is too great for
any one community organisation and even individual nations to impact
upon. The challenges to the multinational companies and world financial
institutions can only come about if there is a global organisation of com-
munities.
Habermas (1971) discusses the ideologies of the 20th century and
explains how the technocratic consciousness acts as a justification of the
social order. He argues that decisions are made on economy or efficiency.
However, decisions are presented as technical decisions rather than politi-
cal ones. For example, unemployment is portrayed as an economic necessity
and the need for flexibility, rather than a social or political choice.
Craig (1998) points to the impact of ideoscapes arguing that there is a
widening gap between the rich and the poor at a global level. The free
market approaches (driven by ideologies) have been at the root of increas-
ing poverty and social exclusion both in the North and the South. Craig also
points to the rise of growth of inter-communal conflict based on race,
national boundaries, culture and religion. He states
what we appear to be witnessing in part on a global basis is the displacement of
competing ideologies by those based on race or religion. The competition
between socialism and capitalism is being overshadowed by that between
fundamental Islam and fundamental Christianity, between black and white . . .
in a context where disillusionment with the failure of earlier political options
and increasing economic immiseration leave people more vulnerable to the
promises of those that follow apparently certain creeds (p. 12)
A number of writers point to the confused definition of community (Mayo,
1994; Kenny, 1994; Craig, 1998). Community participation is often a substi-
tute for abrogation of responsibility back to the voluntary sector. Delivery
of social services is given to the community sector at a much lower funding
level. The conceptualisation of ‘the community’ is being driven by dominant
ideologies. For example Etzione (1995) argues for communitarism where
people take responsibility for themselves, their communities and the neigh-
bourhood. He questions the concept of rights and sets forth an argument
for the common good. Many social democratic governments in Western
societies have embraced these notions under the pretense of community
involvement.
While appearing to provide an empowering goal for communities, such
arguments provide an escape to governments and other organisations from

COMMUNITY WORK PARTNERSHIPS IN A GLOBAL CONTEXT
9
having to deal with the consequences of decisions which impact on the lives
of people – decisions made by external players such as multinational com-
panies. On the surface the concept of self help and community ownership
provides the right rhetoric and appearance of participation. Mayo (1994)
argues that the moral and political agendas of the left and right seem to be
merging and all kinds of political parties speak of empowerment, freedom
and self help and that there is a strong need to overcome ideological con-
fusion about community basis. Craig (1998) points out the urgent need to
reassert the ideological basis of community development and the need to
ensure that it is not hijacked by those supporting very different political
agendas.
Appadurai argues that these dimensions form the basic global infra-
structure. The relationship on one dimension is, however, deeply disjunctive,
unpredictable and acts as both a constraint or a parameter of movement to
each other. He argues that the result is deterritorialisation – which is a
central feature of the modern world. This brings labouring populations into
the lower sectors of more wealthy societies and creates new markets for
various scapes, e.g., money and investment markets free of national bound-
aries or travel agencies formed from the group’s longing for homeland. The
mediascapes meanwhile, are able to maintain a sense of homeland and
ideologies in the diaspora. Deterritorialisation enables a constant chase of
money, commodities and people through the globe. Although the scope of
this paper does not provide for a detailed discussion, this typology provides
a useful understanding of the features of globalisation and from this a
number of themes arise for community development.
What emerges as a context for community development is a sociological
landscape which is oppressive and grim. Communities are affected in ways
which are multi-directional, confusing and complex. There are many policy
directions which are contradictory and irrational. Yet what emerges is also
a role for community work and a greater set of responsibilities which in this
context becomes critical. There is now, more than ever, a need by com-
munity workers to build a culture of resistance in the face of oppression and
to establish organisations which will bring about social change and resist-
ance. The dilemmas for strategies of social change is whether to work within
existing frameworks and structures to achieve incremental change or to
work towards complete overhaul of systems.
Challenges, Themes and Opportunities for the
Future
From the above complex realities facing our societies a number of chal-
lenges and themes emerge which we as communities, social scientists and
activists and as participants have to come to terms with, and use towards the
benefit of our communities. There is much discussion on the implications
for community development from the trend towards globalisation (Mulgan,

10 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JOURNAL VOL. 36 NO. 1 2001
1997; Featherstone, 1990; Theobald, 1997; Solomas and Back, 1996; Kenny,
1994; Ife, 1995; Twine, 1994). In this section we raise some of these themes
which highlight the scope for partnerships, and the areas in which further
community develop work needs to be undertaken.
Mulgan (1997) identifies that there is a slow shift in goals away from quan-
tity towards quality. Economic growth and distribution of welfare defined in
economic terms is not enough. He argues that it is not enough simply to
accumulate more. There is abundance of evidence that economic growth on
its own does not necessarily translate into a better quality of life, welfare or
happiness. Twine points out that there are limits to material growth both in
terms of individuals and also in terms of the environment. Community
workers need therefore to work towards the recognition of the limits to
globalisation. Even the largest multinationals tend to keep a strong national
base. Although globalisation is stretching the fabric of daily life and remak-
ing political relations and of locality beyond anything known in the past it
provides a backdrop about how different systems interconnect: industries,
environments, educational and political systems. This can provide a basis
for rigorous analysis and allow for ideas to be open and new partnerships
to be forged. The alternatives is one where social issues are taken into
account and community debate occurs on these issues.
The limits of economic theory as a mechanism for decision making is
being reconsidered in the face of environmental and social forces. This pro-
vides opportunities for better quality of life and solutions which are not just
local but global in nature. A change is required towards value orientation
and a redistribution of wealth and resources not just within but between
nations. A shift in paradigm from ‘having’ to ‘being’ needs to occur. This
can only be achieved through more informed and participatory politics and
processes. This is where the opportunities lie for strategic partnerships and
a holistic approach to society. Community workers are often being called
on to manage the process of economic change. The task at hand is not just
to help people adjust to insecurity and fragmentation in their lives but to
look at wealth redistribution and a more just society. The potential for coali-
tions and partnerships both locally, nationally and internationally with
different stakeholders is infinite.
Another theme is diversity. Most of the political and institutional tra-
ditions are based on assumptions of homogeneity. The idea that there is a
single public, community, nation or generalising the experiences of one
class (e.g. working class) does no longer hold. Diversity, while there may
be resistance to it, is a fact of life – there is no longer a single language,
single set of values or single ethnic mix. Diversity, along gender, ethnicity,
race, sexuality and ability are posing new challenges. Certain groups forced
by marginalisation within their environment forge alliances with other
groups. The traditional loyalties and alliances are altered. For example, in
Australia some conservative politicians take very progressive stances in
relation to race issues, contrary to the views of their political parties. This

COMMUNITY WORK PARTNERSHIPS IN A GLOBAL CONTEXT 11
potential for new forms of organising brings new dimensions and can offer
strategic partnerships for social progress. The inherent danger may be what
compromises one may be forced to make. Regardless of the challenges,
community work needs to pay greater attention to diversity issues, especi-
ally ethnic and racial diversity.
An additional dimension of diversity is inter-communal conflict which
characterises much of the world. Community development can have a major
role to play. Community workers are already engaged with refugee com-
munities – in their resettlement, in raising awareness of struggles around the
world and in ensuring material support for refugees. In Australia, for
example, much community development work is undertaken to empower
ethnic communities so that there are community structures available to
ensure that ethnic groups are not marginalised or isolated. Barnes and
Mercer (1995) argue that the focus on identity can retain a non-divisive and
internationalist perspective. This can only occur if community development
work is based on respect for human dignity, diversity, and a recognition of
the support needed by oppressed minorities. Partnerships with agencies at
an international level needs to be strengthened, particularly on issues of
oppression of minorities and human rights. The disfunctional nature of the
UN and its control by powerful nations necessitates the building of alterna-
tives and developing existing ones such as Amnesty International, Minority
Rights Group and Human Rights Watch.
Anthropologists also argue that cultures are resilient, constantly chang-
ing and dynamic. This imposition of global uniformity may bring points of
commonality but it will also bring about difference and diversity. The
struggle to maintain heritage and tradition, protection of indigenous cul-
tures and adaption of western norms and practices into indigenous cultures
to create new hybrid but progressive societies offers new potential. This can
only occur through strategic partnership across diverse sections of society.
Reshaping of the state and its changing role will impact on society. There
is a shift away from central government to a situation where there are many
levels of governance – from the transnational to the local. Competition for
loyalty, resources and power will occur at the different levels of government
and potentially across different blocks of countries in the globe.
The state is still a contested terrain where much of the struggle occurs –
struggle for resources, power and justice. The states, as they are currently
organised, are controlled by the forces in the financescapes. If the state is to
become either fairer in any way, it needs to be freed from the grip of the
powerful forces of the finance markets. State apparatus has to be much more
open, democratic and participatory. As the role of the state is questioned,
and in the face of global demands, there is great potential for a reshaping of
the state. As the role of the state changes, there is potential for partnerships
between communities and government to work together on social problems.
Community workers currently engage with the state in a number of ways,
in both conflictual or confrontational and also collaborative ways. One key

12 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JOURNAL VOL. 36 NO. 1 2001
challenge for partnerships with the state is for community based agencies
or non-government organisations to work with communities to voice their
own need rather than work toward meeting a need that is defined by others,
often the government (Smith, Rochester and Nessey, 1995).
Learning is critical in the new era. Information and knowledge are the
primary base of the economy although that knowledge may be vocational
and skills oriented. There is little emphasis on learning about society, under-
standing its history and continuity. A key area of social development and
holistic approach to society is the continuity of the past and the present, not
only in the narrow sense of the word ‘culture’ but including history. George
Orwell stated that ‘those who control the past controls the future. Who con-
trols the present controls the past’. (Nineteen Eighty-four). The pace of life,
the rapid movement of events in our lives are often without linkage. Many
young people learn history through the media. Some do not learn at all. For
example in a recent survey undertaken in Eastern Germany approximately
66% of young people between the age of 13–19 did not know about
Auschwitz or other concentration camps. They had not heard of Hitler’s
attempt at genocide of the Jewish people. Rather to some he was a patri-
otic hero! (Sixty Minutes Program, 16/8/98). Knowing history and making
the connections is a key part of community development. This knowledge
is not always available in the mainstream media and can only be passed
through alternative information and in networking between sectors of the
community. Some of the connecting can be in the form of ‘virtual com-
munities’ through technology such as the internet (Holmes, 1997). The chal-
lenges for community work in terms of education are great and there is a
need for a more broad based approach to knowledge and a resistance of
only technical and skills based focus.
Gender is an important theme for the future. This century witnessed the
mass movement of women into the workplace which has represented an
economic shift as well. The economic shift is moreover being accompanied
by a cultural shift. Women’s ways of operating, managing and coping are
gaining prominence in the spheres of public and private life. The relations
between men and women, between public and private and between families
and industries are being renegotiated. A number of writers have pointed to
the issues facing the identity of men in contemporary society as women
demand equality (Pease, 1999; Saco, 1992). Community work is faced with
challenges in helping communities negotiate these roles, definitions of
masculinity and femininity and to shape society in which gender injustice is
reduced.
Having achieved so called individual freedom, especially in Western
societies, there is now a realization of the need to move away from indi-
vidualist standpoints to more collective ways of working and doing. Com-
munity work faces the challenge of changing mindsets to look at individual
and collective responsibility and to examine the linkages between the whole
and the parts. This means beginning to examine interconnectedness and

COMMUNITY WORK PARTNERSHIPS IN A GLOBAL CONTEXT 13
interdependence between the various roles individuals play such as parents,
citizens, and consumers. These connections are vital in understanding our
roles as individuals and where we ‘fit in’ and how we can take control of
factors which impact on our lives and society.
Participation, citizenship rights and the notion of democracy is being chal-
lenged. Participation in certain areas at Presidential elections of countries
such as USA can be as low as twenty percent. Presidents elected with minor-
ity participation therefore can dictate to the world. In many countries there is
a complete disillusionment with the electoral and democratic processes. The
struggle for citizenship or social rights have become a must to secure means
of survival for many individuals or groups. Despite this participation in social
rights activities is less and empowering processes within our mainstream
institutions are abandoned. Democracy in the sense of majority rule is a no
longer acceptable solution which post modern thinking has highlighted. The
situational positions of different sections of society and of minorities are often
ignored in mainstreaming and genuine participation is prevented. Social
justice must be about social rights, entrenched as citizenship rights.
Time and the impact of technologies are important considerations. Time
has become visible as a resource, something to be conserved and used well.
We are becoming aware of the timeframes in which we operate. The two
dominant decision making techniques are elections and the consumer
market, which are both very short term and driven by the interests of a few.
These decision making processes need considerable challenge from com-
munity work. Often the majority of communities ‘consent’ to these systems
through what Gramsci (1977) calls hegemony. Technologies accelerate the
decision making process and the rate at which things become obsolete very
fast. This further limits the opportunity to impact on the decision making
process and assists in clouding power imbalances in society through a
massive influx of information, change and reaction. Yet all societies depend
on a capacity to act in the long term interest which may last longer. Current
systems have biases against the future which has harmed the development
within societies and have produced unsustainable conditions. While tech-
nologies pose a major challenge they also offer some potential. There is a
higher level of communication made possible by information technology
and greater travel potential. The technologies can be utilised to gain greater
understanding of what other people are doing about their oppressive situ-
ations. For example in the 1998 strike at ports in Queensland, the trade
union at the centre of the dispute was able to obtain support from inter-
national unions and trace the owners of the ships through the Internet.
Other marginalised groups are able to bring their issues before international
audiences such as indigenous people and the environment movement. A
level of greater organisation and partnerships are possible at an unprece-
dented scale. Much more effort needs to be put into supporting structures
and organisations that work at the global level in the areas of human rights,
workers rights, economic sustainability and the environment.

14 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JOURNAL VOL. 36 NO. 1 2001
In the new era there is new jargon and symbols. This is disseminated by
the various form of media. The language is impersonal and distancing. For
example, the term people is replaced by human resources. The distancing
enables rationalisation of services, acceptability of wars and killing or mini-
mising carnage, stereotyping of certain groups (terrorists, drug pushers)
without much public distress. The middle class in many countries use certain
type of language as an indication of social status, wear clothes with certain
labels and eat in western style restaurants. Words and images are used to
legitimate attacks on social rights, include and exclude certain groups and
repress any resistance. Another trend is where the traditional meanings
attributed to words and symbols take on new meaning. It is where oppos-
ing ideological views can use the same language. There is a need to reclaim
the language and symbols in the public domain and the politics associated
with the language.
Finally there is the issue of trust. There is a crisis in trust in governments,
central institutions of society and in processes. Societal success depends on
trust, on people’s capacity to shape their world and to work with others.
Networks are emerging which are often based on certain interests and when
no longer there, the network disappears. In community work practice, it is
often the funded worker which holds groups together, and trust is a key part
of collaboration and participation. The challenge is to build communities,
structures and systems which individuals and groups trust, be a part of and
own, regardless of what funding is available to it.
Where To From Here?
Although the social, political and economic landscape of the world is chang-
ing it is not all negative. The changing environments offer opportunities for
justice and sustainability. The processes of deterritorialisation, mentioned
above, offers niches not only for capital and goods but also for human
potential to develop. This is where the concept of ‘globalisation from below’
is useful, and discussed by the authors of the CDJ Special Issue Vol. 35
No. 4. As they indicate it means looking at community development at an
international level which refutes the primacy of the economic agenda, the
supremacy of free markets and competition but rather focuses on social
justice values, human rights and sustainable environments and communities
(see also Brecher & Costello, 1994).
Globalisation from below is to establish a clear global agenda with global
structures but with initiatives of ordinary people. This requires an analysis of
local and national contexts in the light of global issues and the ability to tran-
scend the assumptions of national community work practice and policy. It is
crucial to make the connections across countries of the nature and cause of
social problems or issues which seem only pertinent to localised situations. It
also involves the need to promote an international consciousness which can
lead to international forms of organisation and community work practice.

COMMUNITY WORK PARTNERSHIPS IN A GLOBAL CONTEXT 15
There is a need for strong partnerships between community development
organisations. It is of utmost importance that structures are created which
enable the disadvantaged or marginalised sectors of the community to par-
ticipate directly. There is a need to establish a major community development
agency which supports empowering and social justice community develop-
ment with funding and resources. In many countries, while the rhetoric of
empowerment and community participation exists, there is in fact a cut back
to funding programs provided for communities to undertake development
work. Most funding in western societies is directed toward service delivery
and case management which has a narrow focus and can be easily be con-
trolled and monitored. The presence of such a global community develop-
ment agency opens up the possibility of many strategic partnerships. Such an
organisation will need to undertake support work which leads to the clarifi-
cation of the ideological basis of community development and assist in the
process of reclaiming the language and symbols of empowerment and social
justice. Such an agency also needs to look at the resource base for sustaining
activities globally. No longer can we rely on the national governments, phil-
anthrophic groups or charities and certainly not the corporate sector. Funds
need to be raised independently from sources which support social justice.
No matter what form the partnerships and collective action takes there
are fundamental dimensions which cannot be ignored. It is important to
draw upon some of these factors. Lee (1994) offers a number of factors
which serves as filter for such any global organisation; an agency which
takes: a historical view of oppression, an ecological view, an ethnic/race per-
spective, a feminist perspective and a critical perspective. These dimensions
highlight histories of social and political oppression, abuse of power, struc-
tural inequalities, the link between the personal and the political, racism and
classism, oppression of women, the linkages between the personal and the
political and link between the individual and social change. However, a
common vision requires debate, passion and energy. A new agency can
build enthusiasm and start the process of organisation. The responsibility to
work on strategic partnership building falls on us all. . . .
Hurriyet Babacan is a lecturer in Social and Community Studies at the Uni-
versity of the Sunshine Coast, Australia. Hurriyet has qualifications in Com-
merce,SocialWork and teaching and has extensive experience in social policy,
community work practice with disadvantaged groups and academic teaching.
Her areas of special interest are ethnic minorities and issues which affect
them, and has undertaken extensive research in a number of areas including
settlement needs of refugees and migrants, multiculturalism, racism, identity,
community relations, access and equity and social justice. She is currently the
president of Multicultural Development Association, a community managed
advocacy organisation.
Narayan Gopalkrishnan is a lecturer in Community Work and Community
Development at the University of the Sunshine Coast,Australia. Narayan has

16 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JOURNAL VOL. 36 NO. 1 2001
completed studies at the including commerce, business administration and a
fellowship program with the UN University in energy, environment, resources
and sustainability. Prior to migrating to Australia in 1998, Narayan had sig-
nificant experience in community development work in non-government
organisations in India. Focus of his work related to social, community and
economic development issues with rural and tribal communities. His research
interests include rural development, issues affecting tribal groups, genuine
participatory approaches, economic rationalism and globalisation.
Address for correspondence: Hurriyet Babacan, Lecturer in Community
Work, Faculty of Arts, University of the Sunshine Coast, Maroochydore DC
Old 4558, Australia
References
Appadurai, A. (1990) Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy
in Featherstone, M. (ed.) Global Culture: Nationalism, Globalization and Mod-
ernity, Sage Publications, London.
Babacan, H. (1996) Don’t Label Me a Nationalist, Asia Pacific Conference on Soci-
ology, Manila.
Barnes, C. & Mercer, G. (1995) Disability: Emancipation, Community Participation
and Disabled People, in G. Craig and M. Mayo (eds.) Community Empowerment,
Zed Books, London, pp. 33–45.
Brecher, J. & Costello, T. (1994) Global Village or Global Pillage: Economic Recon-
struction from the Bottom Up, South End Press, Boston.
Craig, G. (1998) Community Development in a Global Context in Community
Development Journal, Vol 33(1) pp. 2–17.
Etzione, G. (1995) Rights and the Common Good: The Communitarian Perspective,
St Martins Press, New York.
Featherstone, M. (ed.) (1990) Global Culture: Nationalism, Globalization and Mod-
ernity, Sage Publications, London.
Gutierrez, L., Parsons, R. J. & Opal Cox, E. (1998) Empowerment in Social Work
Practice, Brooks Cole Publishing Company, California.
Habermas, J. (1971) Toward a Rational Society, Heinemann, London.
Habermas, J. (1976) Legitimation Crisis, Heinemann, London.
Holmes, D. (1997) Virtual Politics: Identity and Community in Cyberspace, Sage,
London.
Horne, D. (1992) What’s Wrong With Economic Rationalism? Allen and Unwin,
Sydney.
Ife, J. (1995) Community Development: Creating Community Alternatives – Vision,
Analysis and Practice, Longman, South Melbourne.
Kenny, S. (1994) Developing Communities for the Future: Community Development
in Australia, Thomas Nelson Australia, South Melbourne.
Lee, J. (1994) The Empowerment Approach to Social Work Practice, Columbia Uni-
versity Press, New York.
Mulgan, G. (1997) Life After Politics, New Thinking For The Twenty-First Century,
Fontana Press, London.
Mayo, M. (1994) Communities and Caring, Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Pease, B. (1999) Deconstructing Masculinity, Reconstructing Men, in Pease, B. &

COMMUNITY WORK PARTNERSHIPS IN A GLOBAL CONTEXT 17
Fook, J. (eds) Transforming Social Work Practice, Allen and Unwin, Sydney, pp.
97–112.
Pilger, J. (1998) Hidden Agendas, Vintage, London.
Pusey, M. (1991) Economic Rationalism in Canberra, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Saco, D. (1992) Masculinity as Signs: Poststructural, Feminist Approaches to the
Study of Gender in Craig, C., Men Masculinity and the Media, Sage, Newbury
Park.
Shiva, V. (1993) Monocultures of the Mind, Zed Books, London.
Smith, J. D., Rochester, C. & Nessey, R. (1995) An Introduction to the Voluntary
Sector, Routledge, London.
Solomos, J. & Back, L. (1996) Racism and Society, Macmillan Press Ltd, London.
Stalker, P. (1997) Refugees and Migration, One World Guide, USA.
Theobald, R. (1997) Reworking Success: New Communities at the Millennium, New
Society Publishers, Canada.
Twine, F. (1994) Citizenship and Social Rights, Sage Publications, London.
World Development Movement (1997) Pulling Up the Drawbridge: The Multilateral
Agreement on Investment, June.
Woudhuysen, J. (1997) Before We Rush to Declare a New Era in Mulgan, G. (ed.)
Life After Politics, New Thinking For The Twenty-First Century, Fontana Press,
London, pp. 352–360.