spirituality within the sustainable livelihoods model...

SPIRITUALITY WITHIN THE SUSTAINABLE LIVELIHOODS MODEL OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

By

KIRSTEN HAHN

Integrated Studies Final Project Essay (MAIS 700)

submitted to Dr. Mike Gismondi

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts – Integrated Studies

Athabasca, Alberta

August, 2016

SPIRITUALITY WITHIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 2

ABSTRACT

This paper explores the relationship of spirituality to community development and the sustainable livelihoods model. Community development encompasses elements of economic, cultural, social, and individual change. Spirituality is also identified as a critical element for individual and social change. Currently, spirituality is situated within the personal asset area of an adapted sustainable livelihoods model. Specific research exploring the relationship between spirituality and the sustainable livelihoods model has not been found, yet spirituality is seen to play a significant role in adult education, transformative learning, and community development. Spirituality should be emphasized more within the sustainable livelihoods model to create a more holistic approach to community development.


Table of Contents

Abstract .................................................................................................................................... 2 Research Question .................................................................................................................. 5

Key Terms ............................................................................................................................... 6 Analysis .................................................................................................................................... 8

Discussion .............................................................................................................................. 13 Interdisciplinary Approach and Challenges ................................................................................ 16

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 17

References .............................................................................................................................. 19


Spirituality Within the Sustainable Livelihoods Model

of Community Development

Community development is a broad, interdisciplinary field that facilitates community and

social change across a variety of contexts. The sustainable livelihoods model is used within the

field of community development around the world as a tool for reducing poverty in communities.

Spirituality is gaining prominence across several areas of research, including community

development. In this paper I will explore the sustainable livelihoods model of community

development and examine how it addresses spirituality. This topic is especially relevant to me

because the non-profit agency I work for uses the sustainable livelihoods approach in both a

community and individual context. Spirituality is identified in one asset area within the

sustainable livelihoods approach. I am curious about whether or not the sustainable livelihoods

model is sufficiently holistic and comprehensive in its approach to spirituality and the potential

role that spirituality plays in community and social change. Throughout the MAIS program I

have studied holistic approaches to community change within community development, adult

education, and transformative learning for social change. I have developed a greater awareness

of the significance of spirituality to community change. My hope is that in exploring the

theoretical model of sustainable livelihoods as well as the theoretical approach of spirituality in

community change, I will gain insight into how these two approaches are or could be integrated

in community development.

I currently work in community development in Calgary. The non-profit agency where I

am employed adheres to an asset-based approach to community development and has adopted

the sustainable livelihoods framework as one of our tools. The community development context I

am most familiar with is urban and place-based, where we serve specific neighbourhoods that


face a number of challenges due to their geography, socio-economic factors, and other

vulnerabilities such as high crime or gang activity. Our work focuses on strengthening

community assets through building up the skills of residents, increasing accessibility to local

resources, and supporting residents to create the community they envision. While the sustainable

livelihoods approach provides a strong framework for considering assets beyond finances, I have

often wondered if it sufficiently includes less tangible assets that may fall under cultural or

spiritual areas. In this paper, I will explore spirituality in more depth and consider its place

within community development as a whole and within the sustainable livelihoods approach more

specifically.

I am planning to examine two theoretical models, sustainable livelihoods and spirituality,

within the context of community development. By drawing on existing research, I will clarify

and define key terms, highlight the insights that each model brings to community change, and

raise questions about what may be missing in each approach. I will then consider how these

theories may be integrated to provide a more holistic model of community development.

Research Question

I first became interested in this topic when I was part of a research project in my

workplace that incorporated the Indigenous Medicine Wheel into the sustainable livelihoods

model. A key component of the medicine wheel is the balance of the physical, mental,

emotional, and spiritual elements of a whole person. Through the research process we became

aware of the value of drawing attention to the spiritual element and its implications on client

resilience. As a result of participating in this project, I became curious about the role that

spirituality could play within the broader community change process specifically in relation to


the sustainable livelihoods approach. My research question is: does the sustainable livelihoods

model of community development sufficiently address spirituality?

Key Terms

Community development is a broad area that includes urban, rural, local, and

international contexts. There are several definitions for community development and some

include concepts of community economic development, community organizing, and social

change. For the purposes of this paper, I am defining community development as, “the planned

evolution of all aspects of community well-being (economic, social, environmental and cultural).

It is a process whereby community members come together to take collective action and generate

solutions to common problems” (Frank & Smith, 1999, p. 6). From my perspective, the role of

the community members is key to the community development process and the role of the

community development professional practitioner is to empower and support the community

members to bring about sustainable change.

Spirituality is another concept that has been used in a variety of contexts. At times,

spirituality refers to religion, faith, and beliefs around meaning, purpose, and realms beyond the

physical. Crisp (2010) describes spirituality within the context of social work as, “our needs and

desires for meaning, identity, connectedness, transformation and transcendence, which may or

may not be associated with a specific religious framework” (np). In this way, spirituality is not

tied to any one particular worldview, but encompasses a way of being on an individual level, as

well as a way of interacting with the world. Lunn (2009) also calls for a broad perspective on

religion and spirituality when she discusses its potential role within community development.

Lunn (2009) claims that:


Religion is multifaceted and not only includes institutionalised religion but also personal

beliefs and practices, spirituality and faith. It varies considerably between continents,

countries, regions and communities, and its influence is specific to each locality. This

broader conceptualisation creates the potential for religion to be one of the mechanisms

for social development—or, in critical theory terms, emancipation and human

flourishing. (p. 948)

Within this paper, I will use the term spirituality to refer to the concept of the beliefs and

practices that an individual or community holds relating to their meaning, identity, purpose, and

connection with others and the world. Locality and geographic place also play a significant role.

Local physical, social, cultural, and community influences impact how spirituality is lived out.

Frederickson and Anderson (1999) explain that, “it is through one’s interactions with the

‘particulars’ of a place that one creates their own personal identity and deepest-held values” (p.

22). Spirituality influences the local community and the local community influences spirituality.

The Sustainable Livelihoods (SL) model is a community development approach that is

based on asset building as a means of understanding poverty and working towards poverty

reduction. The SL framework looks at people’s strengths and how they can be used to achieve

positive livelihood outcomes, in spite of vulnerabilities that could impact their external

environment (“Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets,” 1999).

The SL approach falls within Asset-Based Community Development (ABCD), rather

than needs-based community development. The main idea behind ABCD is that communities

create economic opportunity by identifying and using their own existing assets to propel them

forward (Mathie & Cunningham, 2002, 2005). ABCD contrasts with needs-based community

development, which focuses on the deficits in a community and then attempts to fill the gaps.


Analysis

In my work within a non-profit agency in Calgary, we use the SL framework as outlined

by the Tamarack Institute for Community Engagement (“Sustainable Livelihoods Framework,”

n. d.). The SL model initially came out of the United Kingdom and has been adopted in various

international contexts globally. The Women and Economic Development Consortium adapted

SL to a Canadian context where the five key asset building blocks include financial, human,

physical, personal, and social assets (Murray & Ferguson, 2001). The most notable change to the

model is the replacement of the natural asset building block with the personal asset building

block. Murray and Ferguson (2001) explain that they adjusted the SL model to increase gender

sensitivity and the practical applicability of the framework in Canada (p. 15). The agency where

I work has adopted this framework and has completed some unpublished case study research that

indicates that culture should be included as an additional asset area.

The SL model is used to provide field practitioners with a mental model with which to

analyze community members’ strengths. Using the identified strengths, practitioners work with

community members to develop action plans. The role of spirituality within SL will be examined

more closely in the Discussion section.

Sustainability is a term with a long history associated with community, national and

international development (Krishna, 2012). Essentially, sustainability means that the current

needs of individuals and communities should be met in a way that allows future generations to

meet their needs as well. Within the SL framework, maintaining a focus on sustainability means

that future livelihoods cannot be ignored while securing livelihoods today.

The concept of livelihood can be defined as “the means of gaining a living, including

livelihood capabilities, tangible assets, and intangible assets” (Chambers & Conway, 1992, p.9 as


quoted in Brocklesby & Fisher, 2003, p. 186). SL is ultimately focused on reducing poverty by

increasing individual and community assets within five areas: social, personal, physical, human,

and financial. No single asset area can sufficiently increase livelihood outcomes, but a range of

assets is needed for people to move towards greater economic sustainability (“Sustainable

Livelihoods Guidance Sheets,” 1999). Table 1 outlines the five asset areas and provides

examples of the factors that could fall within each asset area. In its existing form, the SL model

includes spirituality within the context of personal assets. This means that spirituality is viewed

as a personal asset that impacts the individual, rather than the community as a whole.

Table 1

Sustainable Livelihoods Five Asset Building Blocks

Assets Factors Social Assets Cooperation

Networks, interconnectedness Family support Friendships Relationships of trust/ exchanges Partnership and collaboration Political participation

Personal Assets Motivation Self-esteem Self-confidence Self-perception Emotional well-being Assertiveness Spirituality

Physical Assets Child/elder care Secure shelter Clean affordable energy Information Banking and access to related services Basic consumer needs, e.g. local grocery store and other services Affordable transportation Tools and equipment Natural resources Air and water quality


Human Assets Skills (including technical and interpersonal) Knowledge Ability Employability and earning power Good health Leadership

Financial Assets Income from productive activity (employment/ self-employment) Available finances/ savings Regular inflow of money from: • Government transfers • Family • Gifts • In-kind Credit rating Access to credit

(Adapted from Murray & Ferguson, 2001, p. 17)

While many governments and non-governmental organizations have adopted the

sustainable livelihoods model, there have also been some criticisms of this approach. Krishna

(2012) identifies and promotes the strength of sustainable livelihoods as a model for human

development in international settings and identifies elements that need further examination

within a well-established SL model such as gender-related development. One interesting finding

is that the sustainable livelihoods model does not align with the principles, ethos, and values of

community development work (Brocklesby & Fisher, 2003). Brocklesby and Fisher (2003) raise

a number of questions about how well the sustainable livelihoods model fits within the context of

community development. These questions include:

• Does the SL approach truly have a ‘people-focus’ where human agency, practices, and social

organization are as important to people’s livelihoods as capital assets?

• Is local knowledge and participatory thinking emphasized clearly enough within the SL

model, where knowledge falls within only the human asset area?


• Does an emphasis on capital assets lead to a simplistic understanding of sustainable

livelihoods and social change?

• Does the SL model work within the local community context without addressing power

relations?

• Does SL allow opportunities for community-level practice to develop broader points of entry,

engagement, and activity beyond the broad environmental factors that impact people’s lives?

• Does SL invite people to the community development table or does the jargon and

assumptions behind the SL approach exclude non-development people from engaging in the

dialogue? (Brocklesby & Fisher, 2003).

While more research is needed to address these questions, it is worth considering these

factors when applying the SL model within a community development context and, in particular,

in considering if the SL model sufficiently addresses spirituality.

When it comes to spirituality and community development, interesting research shows

that there are important similarities between spirituality and community development including a

focus on wellbeing and the relationship between the individual and the collective (Chile &

Simpson, 2005). Other research has concluded that current theories of community development

do not sufficiently address spirituality (Ver Beek, 2000). By integrating community

psychological and theological perspectives, Dokecki, Newbrough, and O’Gorman (2001) have

developed a framework for spirituality encompassing human development and community

development as two sides of the same coin. In addition, I have found research on spirituality and

transformative change in adult education, which is closely tied to community development

(Tisdell & Tolliver, 2003). The research on spirituality and community development I have


explored spans a range of disciplines and will support the interdisciplinary approach to my

research paper.

In the field of adult education, the concept of deep social change is linked to

transformative education. The field of transformative education emphasizes that learning goals

must go beyond simple personal change. Transformative education challenges the status quo to

bring about greater social justice (Mezirow, 1981). Spirituality is a critical component to such

social change. Miller (2002) explains that “from a spiritual perspective, learning does not just

involve the intellect; instead, it includes every aspect of our being including the physical,

emotional, aesthetic, and spiritual” (p. 97). Transformative adult education is linked to

community development. Community development is about social, economic and cultural

change for the good of all in a particular community. Community development requires adults to

encounter new ideas that inform behavioural and attitudinal changes. Further, spirituality is

critical to community development.

Maton (2001) recognizes, “...that religion and spirituality are central strands of the

tapestry of community and individual life” (p. 607). Further, Maton (2001) asks, “How can we

understand people in everyday context, the problems of social and community life, and the

potential of communities to bring resources to bear to address these problems, without including

spirituality and religion as an integral part of the discourse?”(p.607). Hodges (2002) emphasizes

that the complex nature of human beings includes the spiritual dimension. If community

development is to achieve its transformational goals, spirituality is one of the dimensions that

must be considered.

In considering the link between spirituality and community development, Ver Beek

(2000) argues that, “people’s spirituality is integrally interconnected with the decisions they


make regarding their development and that developmental interventions often change people’s

spirituality and society without encouraging reflection upon or gaining consent to those changes”

(p. 41). Ver Beek argues that spirituality is not sufficiently addressed within the context of

community development and perhaps one way to change this is to consider spirituality in the

same way indigenous knowledges are considered. Specifically, outside development

practitioners can learn about the local knowledge system through discussion, observation, and

participation. Practitioners then create opportunities for residents to reflect on their goals and

how their practices and beliefs could help or hinder them from accomplishing their goals.

Finally, the residents can decide on their goals, plan to achieve them, decide what assistance may

be needed, and the role of their traditions and knowledge in the process (Ver Beek, p. 41). In

their discussion on the similarities and interconnection of spirituality and community

development, Chile and Simpson (2005) argue that the practice of community development

workers must be “non-discriminatory, inclusive, working towards achieving balance and

sustainability, empowerment and the expression of power by all communities” (p. 329). The role

of the community development practitioner seems key in ensuring spirituality is sufficiently and

appropriately addressed within the community development process.

Discussion

I have provided an overview of the research on the SL approach to community

development, the link between spirituality and community development, and the placement of

spirituality within the SL framework. The SL model is used within a variety of contexts around

the world and has been implemented in Calgary as a tool of asset-based community

development. The main purpose of the SL approach is to build up the assets of the community in


order to work towards poverty reduction. Community development requires local, community

residents to participate in the process of community change.

Ver Beek (2000) suggests that indigenous, local knowledge in all areas of development,

including spirituality, should be included in the development process. This aligns with the

questions that Brocklesby & Fisher (2003) raise around whether the SL approach sufficiently

emphasizes local knowledge and participation within its process. I raise the additional question

of spirituality in relation to SL. Perhaps more emphasis on spirituality within the context of

incorporating local knowledge into asset building is needed for the SL model to be more

effective within community development.

Within the SL model outlined above, spirituality is considered a factor within the

personal asset area. Considering the importance that spirituality may play within the broader

process of community development, is it given sufficient prominence within the SL model? The

role of spirituality goes beyond the personal and the SL model could be strengthened if it

recognizes spirituality as a key contributor to community change. Hodges (2002) explains that,

“...the spiritual dimension is an innate component of the human experience and acts as a lynchpin

to link one’s spirituality to other dimensions of life” (p.110). The other dimensions of life

include the social, cultural, physical, and economic dimensions.

Spirituality and its contributions to social change issues should not be minimized. The

role of the local community and the community development practitioner is critical for giving

spirituality a more prominent place in the community development process. Ver Beek (2000)

states that:

If development is truly about strengthening people's capacity to determine their own

values and priorities, and to organise themselves to act on these, then researchers and


practitioners must recognise the importance of spirituality in people's lives, seek to better

understand it, address it openly, and give people the opportunity and the power to decide

how both their development and their spirituality will and should shape each other. (p.

41-42)

Practitioners need to recognize the importance of spirituality and its significance for

personal and community change. In particular, practitioners need to consider that spirituality

should be given emphasis beyond its placement as one factor within the personal asset category

of SL. Enhancing practitioner knowledge in the area of spiritual factors beyond the personal will

require additional professional development opportunities. The need for more targeted

professional development becomes a consideration for future research and development. In

addition, local communities should be empowered to address spirituality within their context.

Lunn (2009) argues that local development needs and spirituality are critical to sustained social

change:

It is in the process of self-determination that communities will find emancipation from

current conventional development models and engage with development which is

appropriate and sustainable. Such development alternatives will be locally relevant,

community-based and bottom-up as opposed to the dirigiste and top-down development

of the past. (p. 948)

Both the local community and the community development practitioner are essential to

and must work together to achieve the successful integration of spirituality and community

development.


Interdisciplinary Approach and Challenges

Community development and spirituality are inherently interdisciplinary. Many

theoretical models that address community development and spirituality also incorporate a

number of disciplinary theories and approaches. In my research I have encountered a number of

disciplinary perspectives that address community development, sustainable livelihoods, and

spirituality. These disciplines include economics, psychology, theology, social work, and

sociology. Throughout this paper I have gained greater insight into the interdisciplinarity of

community development, SL, and spirituality.

Several challenges emerged in the process of examining my research question in an

integrated way. One challenge that I encountered is the multiple definitions of spirituality. At

times the term spirituality incorporates religion, theology, cultural practices, and personal beliefs

and is highly contested. For the purpose of this paper, I identified a broad concept of spirituality;

however, further research is needed to develop a common understanding and definition of

spirituality. While I have examined spirituality in relation to SL, I found no research exploring

this specific relationship. Further research is needed to investigate the role of spirituality in SL.

Community development incorporates a wide range of methodologies and theories. In

this paper, I have focused on a portion of the community development process and specifically

looked at the SL approach to community development. Perhaps other methodologies and theories

of community development incorporate spirituality differently than those I have explored here.

In addition, community development and SL have a strong economic focus. I have not directly

addressed the impact of spirituality on economic development. SL is an approach to poverty

reduction; further research is required to understand the role of spirituality in poverty reduction


and community economic development. Perhaps one way this could be explored is through the

concept of social economy (Restakis, 2006) and its emphasis on reciprocity, ethical economics,

or what some call the solidarity economy. Restakis (2010) suggests that social and spiritual

stability requires economic reciprocity, that is when an act of sharing a good or service with

another results in a reciprocal act of sharing. He goes on to highlight that a social economy

requires the principal of reciprocity in order for social needs and social development to take

place. He suggests that this kind of social relationship is not only based upon a powerful

emotional dimension, it is also spiritual.

Conclusion

In this paper I explore spirituality and the complex ways it is understood and applied

within community development. I link the role of spirituality in community development, adult

education and transformative learning. Community development requires adult education in

order for transformative change to occur and spirituality is a key component in the social change

process. Sustainable livelihoods as a specific form of community development is criticized by

several researchers. The model requires refinement. While the sustainable livelihoods approach

has some shortcomings, it remains an important, practical model for community development. I

argue for greater recognition of spirituality in the sustainable livelihoods model and have

suggested several ways to support such recognition.

Spirituality cannot be ignored as a community asset. It is a powerful motivator and driver

for individuals and communities. Spirituality linked with the other asset areas within SL can

serve to make a more holistic model of community development. By integrating the existing

research on spirituality, sustainable livelihoods, and community development, I have come to a


deeper understanding of the significance of spirituality in community development.


References

Brocklesby, M. A. & Fisher, E. (2003). Community development and sustainable livelihoods

approaches – an introduction. Community Development Journal, 38 (3), 185-198.

Chile, L.M. & Simpson, G. (2004). Spirituality and community development: exploring the link

between the individual and the collective. Community Development Journal, 39 (4), 318-

331.

Crisp, B. R. (2010). Spirituality and Social Work. Burlington, VT: Routledge.

Department for International Development. (1999, April). Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance

Sheets. Retrieved from

http://www.eldis.org/vfile/upload/1/document/0901/section2.pdf

Dokecki, P.R., Newbrough, J.R., & O’Gorman, R.T. (2001). Toward a community-oriented

action research framework for spirituality: community psychological and theological

perspectives. Journal of Community Psychology, 29 (5), 497-518.

Frank, F. & Smith, A. (1999). The community development handbook: a tool to build community

capacity. Hull, Quebec: Human Resources Development Canada. Retrieved from

http://publications.gc.ca/collections/Collection/MP33-‐13-‐1999E.pdf.

Frederickson, L.M. & Anderson, D.H. (1999). A qualitative exploration of the wilderness

experience as a source of spiritual inspiration. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19

(1), 21-39.

Hodges, S. (2002). Mental Health, Depression, and Dimensions of Spirituality and Religion.

Journal of Adult Development, 9(2), 109–115.


Krishna, S. (2012). Redefining Sustainable Livelihoods. In Gender, Development and Social

Change: Women Reclaiming Sustainable Livelihoods  : Spaces Lost, Spaces Gained.

Basingstoke, GB: Palgrave Macmillan.

Lunn, J. (2009). The role of religion, spirituality, and faith in development: a critical theory

approach. Third World Quarterly, 30 (5), 937-951.

Mathie, A., & Cunningham, G. (2003). From clients to citizens: Asset-based Community

Development as a strategy for community-driven development. Development in Practice,

13(5), 474–486. http://doi.org/10.1080/0961452032000125857

Mathie, A., & Cunningham, G. (2005). Who is Driving Development? Reflections on the

Transformative Potential of Asset-based Community Development. Canadian Journal of

Development Studies / Revue Canadienne D’études Du Développement, 26(1), 175–186.

http://doi.org/10.1080/02255189.2005.9669031

Maton, K. I. (2001). Spirituality, religion, and community psychology: Historical perspective,

positive potential, and challenges. Journal of Community Psychology, 29(5), 605–613.

Mezirow, J. (1981). A critical theory of adult learning and education. Adult Education, 32 (1), 3-

24.

Miller, J.P. (2002). Learning from a spiritual perspective. In E. O’Sullivan, A. Morrell, & M.A.

O’Connor (Eds.), Expanding the boundaries of transformative learning (pp.95 - 102).

New York: Palgrave.

Murray, J. & Ferguson, M. (2001). Women in transition out of poverty. Women and Economic

Development Consortium. Retrieved from

http://www.canadianwomen.org/sites/canadianwomen.org/files/PDF%20-‐

%20ED%20Resource%20-‐WIT-‐asset.pdf.


Restakis, J. (2006). Defining the Social Economy – the BC Context. British Columbia

Cooperative Association. Retrieved from

http://bcca.coop/sites/bcca.coop/files/u2/Defining_Social_Economy.pdf.

Restakis, J. (2010). Humanizing the Economy: Co-operatives in the Age of Capital. Gabriola,

B.C.: New Society Publishers.

Tamarack Institute for Community Engagement (n. d.). Sustainable Livelihoods Framework.

Retrieved from

http://tamarackcommunity.ca/downloads/vc/Sustainable_Livelihoods.pdf.

Tisdell, E.J. & Tolliver, D.E. (2003). Claiming a sacred face: the role of spirituality and cultural

identity in transformative adult higher education. Journal of Transformative Education, 1

(4), 368-392.

Ver Beek, K. A. (2000). Spirituality: a development taboo. Development in Practice, 10 (1), 31-

43.

spirituality within the sustainable livelihoods model...

Documents