LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Reynolds, J
Languages: English
Types: Doctoral thesis
Subjects:
The practice of engaging the ‘community’ has established presence in public health efforts to target inequalities. However, there remains a lack of critical consideration of how ‘community’ is conceptualised in delivering and evaluating participatory health interventions. This may contribute to the lack of conclusive evidence of the impact of 'community' engagement on health inequalities in the UK and elsewhere. This thesis explored how ‘community’ was enacted through an area-based, ‘community’ empowerment initiative in the UK, to contribute to approaches for evaluating the impacts of such interventions. Drawing on post-humanist, ontological perspectives and actor-network theory, I examined how ‘community’ was enacted through the delivery of the ‘community’ initiative in two areas. I conducted an ethnographic case study over 13 months between 2014 and 2015, and employed multiple qualitative methods to identify practices and conceptualisations constituting enactments of ‘community’. The research was conducted in parallel with a study evaluating the initiative’s impacts on determinants of health inequalities. ‘Community’ was enacted through ongoing ‘boundary work’; or, the assertion and negotiation of spatial, material and social boundaries around eligibility to contribute to and/or benefit from the initiative. Practices and values of the initiative contributed to positioning the individual as separate from the ‘collective’, and to constructions of the ‘community’ as a holistic but segmented entity. Finally, relations of disconnection – of ‘missing out’ – were identified as inherent to enactments of ‘community’ and to the process of aligning my ethnographic practice with evaluation research. These findings hold implications for theorising the pathways to improved health via collective empowerment, and processes of inclusion and exclusion in participatory initiatives. They indicate that evaluation practice must explore how the multiple ways of doing ‘community’ cut across the intervention-context divide, and consider the relevance of this for producing transferable evidence on engaging the ‘community’ to address health inequalities.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 8. Fragmented Relating: Positioning the Individual and the Collective ................................. 151 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 151 Part A: Individual Positioning and Trajectories............................................................................... 153 Individual positioning ................................................................................................................. 154 Individual trajectories.................................................................................................................. 159 Part B: Governing and Segmenting the Collective 'Whole' ............................................................ 167 Governing the collective-individual divide .................................................................................. 167 Segmenting the 'whole'............................................................................................................... 172 Interpretation.................................................................................................................................. 178 Harvey, D. (2009). Complexity and case. The SAGE Handbook of Case-Based Methods. D. Byrne and C. C. Ragin. London, UK, Sage: 15-38.
    • Hastrup, K. (2004). "Getting it right: Knowledge and evidence in anthropology." Anthropological Theory 4(4): 455-472.
    • Hastrup, K. (2005). "Social anthropology. Towards pragmatic enlightenment?" Social Anthropology 13(2): 133-149.
    • Hawe, P. (1994). "Capturing the meaning of 'community' in community intervention evaluation: Some contributions from community psychology." Health Promotion International 9(3): 199-210.
    • Hawe, P. (2015). "Lessons from complex interventions to improve health." Annual Review of Public Health 36(1): 307-323.
    • Hawe, P., A. Shiell and T. Riley (2004). "Complex interventions: How "out of control" can a randomised controlled trial be?" British Medical Journal 328(7455): 1561-1563.
    • Hawe, P., A. Shiell and T. Riley (2009). "Theorising interventions as events in systems." American Journal of Community Psychology 43(3-4): 267-276.
    • Hawley, A. H. (1986). Human Ecology: A Theory of Community Structure. Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press.
    • Hetherington, K. and J. Law (2000). "After networks." Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 18(2): 127-132.
    • Hillery, G. (1955). "Definitions of community: Areas of agreement." Rural Sociology 20: 111-123.
    • Hills, D. (2004). Evaluation of Community-Level Interventions for Health Improvement - A Review of Experience in the UK. London, UK, Health Development Agency. Available from: http://www.tavinstitute.org/projects/evaluation-of-community-level-interventions-for-healthimprovement-a-review-of-experience-in-the-uk-london-health-development-agency/. Accessed 10/04/16.
    • Hoggett, P. (1997). Contested communities. Contested Communities. Experiences, Struggles, Policies. P. Hoggett. Bristol, UK, Policy Press: 3-16.
    • Jewkes, R. and A. Murcott (1996). "Meanings of community." Social Science & Medicine 43(4): 555- 563.
    • Jewkes, R. and A. Murcott (1998). "Community representatives: Representing the “community”?" Social Science & Medicine 46(7): 843-858.
    • Jupp, E. (2013). "'I feel more at home here than in my own community': Approaching the emotional geographies of neighbourhood policy." Critical Social Policy 33(3): 532-553.
    • Kaszynska, P., J. Parkinson and W. Fox (2012). Re-thinking Neighbourhood Planning. From Consultation to Collaboration. London, UK, ResPublica / RIBA. Available from: https://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAHoldings/PolicyAndInternationalRelations/Policy/RIBAResP ublica-Re-thinkingNeighbourhoodPlanning.pdf. Accessed 31/05/16.
    • Kawachi, I. and L. F. Berkman (2003). Introduction. Neighborhoods and Health. I. Kawachi and L. F.
    • Berkman. New York, NY, Oxford University Press: 1-19.
    • Kearns, A. and M. Parkinson (2001). "The significance of neighbourhood." Urban Studies 38(12): 2103-2110.
    • Kelly, A. H., D. Ameh, S. Majambere, S. Lindsay and M. Pinder (2010). "`Like sugar and honey': The embedded ethics of a larval control project in The Gambia." Social Science & Medicine 70(12): 1912- 1919.
    • Kenny, A., J. Farmer, V. Dickson-Swift and N. Hyett (2015). "Community participation for rural health: a review of challenges." Health Expectations 18(6): 1906-1917.
    • Kernick, D. (2004). An introduction to complexity theory. Complexity and Healthcare Organization: A View From the Street. D. Kernick. Abingdon, UK, Radcliffe Medical Press: 23-37.
    • Kirkby-Geddes, E., N. King and A. Bravington (2013). "Social capital and community group participation: Examining 'bridging' and 'bonding' in the context of a Healthy Living Centre in the UK." Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 23(4): 271-285.
    • Klass, M. (1972). "Community structure in West Bengal." American Anthropologist 74(3): 601-610.
    • Klassen, J. A. and A. M. Feldpausch-Parker (2011). "Oiling the gears of public participation: The value of organisations in establishing Trinity of Voice for communities impacted by the oil and gas industry." Local Environment 16(9): 903-915.
    • Law, J. (2002). On hidden heterogeneities: Complexity, formalism, and aircraft design. Complexities: Social Studies of Knowledge Practices. J. Law and A. Mol. Durham, NC, Duke University Press: 116- 141.
    • Law, J. (2007). Actor Network Theory and Material Semiotics. www.heterogeneities.net. Available from: http://www.heterogeneities.net/publications/Law2007ANTandMaterialSemiotics.pdf.
    • Accessed 31/05/16.
    • Law, J. (2009). Actor network theory and material semiotics. The New Blackwell Companion to Social Theory. B. S. Turner. Chichester, UK, Wiley-Blackwell: 141-158.
    • Lawless, P. (2012). "Can area-based regeneration programmes ever work? Evidence from England's New Deal for Communities Programme." Policy Studies 33(4): 313-328.
    • Lawson, L. and A. Kearns (2010). "Community engagement in regeneration: Are we getting the point?" Journal of Housing and the Built Environment 25(1): 19-36.
    • Leatherman, S., M. Metcalfe, K. Geissler and C. Dunford (2012). "Integrating microfinance and health strategies: Examining the evidence to inform policy and practice." Health Policy and Planning 27(2): 85-101.
    • LeCompte, M. D. and J. P. Goetz (1982). "Ethnographic data collection in evaluation research." Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 4(3): 387-400.
    • Lee-Treweek, G. (2000). The insight of emotional danger: Research experience in a home for older people. Danger in the Field: Risk and Ethics in Social Research. G. Lee-Treweek and S. Linkogle.
    • London, UK, Routledge: 114-131.
    • Lewis, S. and A. Russell (2011). "Being embedded: A way forward for ethnographic research." Ethnography 12(3): 398-416.
    • Ling, T. (2012). "Evaluating complex and unfolding interventions in real time." Evaluation 18(1): 79- 91.
  • Inferred research data

    The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    Title Trust
    72
    72%
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Download from

Cite this article