on the role & future of calgary’s community associations
Clicks: 79
ID: 148515
2016
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
23.4
/100
79 views
19 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #7 of 11 articles by views in natural resources journal
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Calgary’s 151 volunteer-run, non-profit community associations (CAs) need updated and clearly defined roles as they strive to deliver programs and services to their neighbourhoods, and advocate in local planning issues. With a council-driven mandate to begin a review of CAs’ roles in community representation, The City of Calgary has a prime opportunity to help them to better deliver local government to the people whose interests they represent. This paper is intended to inform The City’s review by examining the forces at play in Calgary’s network of CAs, such as the need to maintain aging infrastructure, competition with residents associations and The City itself in providing recreational amenities, misaligned expectations in local planning and volunteer burnout. The paper explores the neighbourhood association systems in Seattle and Portland, two cities that undertook large-scale institutional formalization in the late 1980s and 2000s, respectively, and outlines best practices that are applicable to the local context. Potential solutions to the problems CAs face involve partnering with local businesses and other community-oriented organizations, bringing together CAs into a district-based system that elevates neighbourhood decisions above the block-face – aggregating multiple perspectives up to The City and directing money and resources down to individual neighbourhoods – and generally moving beyond the present system which focuses primarily on neighbourhood livability. The City of Calgary needs to decide the extent of its own future involvement in community governance, and this paper provides several prospective methods from which to choose. Including strengthening the support services already provided, taking a leadership role in neighbourhood representation, or downloading authority and resources to a dedicated third-party, such as the non-profit Federation of Calgary Communities. Key to governance is reviewing how the system is funded. If the role of CAs is valued, then dedicated funding needs to extend beyond facility maintenance. Furthermore, creating opportunities to support CAs partnering with residents associations – instead of competing – would aid in resolving problems faced by CAs connected with funding, resources, space-sharing, amenities and volunteers. Calgary’s CAs have come a long way from the informal community “get-togethers” of the early 20th century. As they continue to evolve, The City must take charge to prevent existing problems from languishing, and strengthen CAs’ ability to provide the programming and services Calgarians expect and enjoy.
| Reference Key |
conger2016theon
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Brian W. Conger;Pernille Goodbrand;Jyoti Gondek |
| Journal | natural resources journal |
| Year | 2016 |
| DOI |
https://doi.org/10.11575/sppp.v9i0.42604
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.