International journal of community well-being最新文献

This article lays out the contours of a novel approach to social change and interactions, based on the organic interplay of individuals, institutions, countries and the global society. This approach is based on the POZE paradigm, which posits that change starts inside and is nurtured from the outside in - both for individuals and for durable social change. Such a holistic perspective is crucial to build society as it emerges from the Pandemic. COVID-19 is a reminder that humans around the World are fundamentally all the same; the result of 4 dimensions - soul, heart, mind and body, which find their expression in  aspirations, emotions, thoughts and sensations. These 4 dimensions constantly interact and influence each other in ways that reflect the 4-dimensional dynamic that shapes our collective existence. Individuals are the micro dimension that stands at the center of everything else. Forming part of various institutions, from families to parties, individuals are constitutive components of the meso dimension. Individuals and institutions form countries and economies, the macro-dimension. These dimensions in addition to nature and supra-national institutions form the meta-dimension. A constant interplay connects and determines what happens in each dimension and what derives from it. To thrive in the post-pandemic world, we must understand and optimize this interplay. This is the point of departure for the argumentation laid out in this article. The prevailing systemic imbalance in which many lack the means to cover their basic needs can only be addressed by planting the C-Core (completion, compassion, creativity, cooperation) at the center of human interactions. When we bring risks, responsibility and real opportunities together in one coherent framework whilst applying the proposed twice 4-dimensional paradigm-shift a set of concrete recommendations appears. Looking at individuals, and institutions, the article concludes with suggestions to seize this moment and shape not merely a response to the crises, but to lay the ground for a new social contract. In the past the C in C-Suite stood for Chief, the upper part of the leadership ladder in an institution. In the future that C must represent C-Core qualities.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42413-021-00110-0.

The Department of Community Development and Applied Economics at the University of Vermont embraces a transdisciplinary approach to community development education that provides students with real world experiences through community-engaged learning opportunities. The department was originally formed by an administrative decision that merged three departments in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences intending to save financial resources. Over 25 years, we have developed a transdisciplinary approach that fills gaps that exist between disciplines that have yet to be closed while engaging with a variety of community partners to co-produce solutions to promote positive change. This article describes the evolution of our transdisciplinary curriculum that integrates a three-phased approach to service-learning. This framework enables faculty to offer appropriate service-learning experiences that provide meaningful interactions between students and community partners. CDAE has both honed and expanded curricular offerings to meet student interest and to better address community-based issues at the local, national, and global level.

Modern Treaties are presented as a means for improving the lives of First Nations, Inuit, and Métis peoples in Canada by providing specific rights, and negotiated benefits. However, the positive impacts of Modern Treaties on Indigenous well-being are contested (Borrows and Coyle 2017; Coulthard 2014; Guimond et al. 2013; Miller 2009; Poelzer and Coates 2015). Developing a more transparent, consistent, collaborative and contextual way of measuring well-being relevant to the cultural realities of Modern Treaty beneficiaries is an important step for generating comparative methods that could systematically demonstrate whether, and under what conditions, such agreements can effectively reduce socio-economic disparities and improve the quality of life of Indigenous communities. The authors first examine previous attempts at measuring Indigenous well-being, then reflect on well-being in relation to the Modern Treaty context. Subsequently, the authors provide an example from one Self-Governing Indigenous Government, the Nisga'a Lisims Government, to collect well-being data through the Nisga'a Nation Household Survey using a mixed quantitative-qualitative method developed through a culturally grounded and participatory approach.