Collective Efficacy as a Key Context in Neighborhood Support for Urban Youth

Abstract

Neighborhood context, including the physical and social environment, has been implicated as important contributors to positive youth development. A transactional approach to neighborhood asserts that place and people are mutually constitutive; negative perceptions of place are intrinsically bound with negative portrayals of stigmatized groups, including youth. Adult perceptions of neighborhood youth may contribute to an increased sense of alienation and youth antisocial behavior. This study uses street‐intercept interviews with adults (N = 408) to examine the relationship between neighborhood conditions and adult support for neighborhood youth. A path model was used to examine the direct and indirect relationship of neighborhood constructs (safety, aesthetic quality, and walkability) on adult support for neighborhood youth. Neighborhood aesthetic quality and the walking environment were directly associated with adult support for youth, whereas perceived safety was indirectly associated. Collective efficacy partially explained these relationships. Findings support theorized relationships between people and places; improvements to neighborhood physical environment may directly impact resident adults’ perceptions of neighborhood young people.

Sociocultural Sustainability and the Formation of Social Capital from Community-based Tourism

“…The MI was 69.88, which is much higher than 5. S13 (more concern about opinions of the neighborhood) and was connected with S14 (more interested in what happens in the community), given a relatively higher MI (=29.09) as they are both elements which represent residents’ sense of community (Prince et al 2019).…”

Measurement of Social Processes at the Neighborhood Level in Baltimore City

“…However, these data can be biased based on the systemic overpolicing of areas inhabited by people of color. Other indicators are created from aggregate measures of neighborhood residents' perceptions on the social context of their neighborhood (Donnelly et al, 2016;Mujahid et al, 2007;Prince et al, 2019;Raudenbush & Sampson, 1999;Sampson & Graif, 2009;Sampson et al, 1997). While residents' perceptions are important for small-area research, their perspectives are often swayed by their own personal experiences within their neighborhood and individual biases (Mujahid et al, 2007;Raudenbush & Sampson, 1999;Sampson & Graif, 2009).…”

Habitar, pertenecer y participar: actitud hacia el barrio y participación ciudadana en Santiago de Chile

“…En este caso, nos referimos a la calidad de los espacios y de las oportunidades que se encuentran en el entorno más próximo a una persona, sin que se defina una delimitación rígida de lo que es un barrio -debido a las limitaciones que esto implica, sobre todo en los contextos urbanos contemporáneos. Aunque no sea clara la influencia del diseño físico de un barrio sobre el sentido de comunidad, algunos estudios muestran cómo la percepción barrial de una persona adulta parece tener una relación positiva con su disposición a comprometerse con la comunidad, gracias por ejemplo al aporte de características como calidad estética y caminabilidad (Prince et al, 2019). También la calidad percibida del equipamiento de un barrio, por ejemplo, sus espacios públicos y sus actividades comerciales, tiene una relación positiva con el sentido de comunidad (Francis et al, 2012).…”

“…Fuente: elaboración propia sobre datos Observatorio de Ciudades (2018) enero -abril 2021 es "mucho"); calidad percibida del barrio (preguntas: grado de satisfacción -conectividad; proximidad al lugar de actividad principal; proximidad a colegios de buena calidad; proximidad a áreas de comercio). condiciones de vivienda y entorno, salud y medioambiente, condiciones socioculturales, ambiente de negocios, condición laboral, conectividad y movilidad (Observatorio de Ciudades, 2018). El índice da un puntaje a cada comuna y las clasifica en tres rangos: superior, promedio e inferior.…”