New community governance in small rural towns: the Australian experience

O’Toole, Kevin; Burdess, Neil

doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2004.01.002

Cited by 53 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Partnerships between the voluntary sector and other public partners or private partners are becoming increasingly common (Lowry 1995;Maddock and Morgan 1998;O'Toole and Burdess 2004). In a rural context, geographic isolation and the diseconomies of scale can make partnerships very attractive in order to maintain services (Asthana et al 2002).…”

Section: Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such complexity often demands information, support, or assistance from a range of sources and institutions. At the same time, there has been a movement in government policy to encourage voluntary organizations to develop partnerships with government departments, the private sector, service providers, and other voluntary organizations in order to qualify for funding programs (Borgen, 2000;Bradford, 2003;Osborne and Flynn 1997;O'Toole and Burdess 2004;Zahner 2005). Partnerships with local government or other local service providers were encouraged to demonstrate that the voluntary organization is proposing activities that have wide appeal and legitimacy in the community (Radin and Romzek 1996;Wall and Gordon 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Deployment of Partnerships by the Voluntary Sector to Address Service Needs in Rural and Small Town Canada

Halseth

Ryser

2007

Voluntas

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Service restructuring trends since the 1980s have resulted in the downsizing or closure of many services in rural and small town Canada. In response, voluntary groups have been filling some of the emerging service gaps. Services, however, often are directed at complex problems that demand information, support, or assistance from a range of sources and institutions. For voluntary groups, this underscores a need to partner with other groups, organizations, or service providers. At the same time, voluntary organizations are increasingly encouraged to develop partnerships with public or private partners in order to qualify for government funding. This study tracks 29 voluntary organizations in four rural and small town places across Canada to explore the development and maintenance of partnerships (both local and non-local), as well as the types of networks, resources, and expertise for which partnerships were used. The findings indicate that while voluntary organizations feel that local partnerships are more important, partnerships with groups outside of these places are equally developed. Partnerships were used to expand networks, obtain expertise, and access a range of resources to assist in daily operations and delivery of services. The increase in partnerships with groups outside of these communities, particularly with non-local service providers, will have important implications for voluntary organizations and policy makers.

show abstract

Section: Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Deployment of Partnerships by the Voluntary Sector to Address Service Needs in Rural and Small Town Canada

Halseth

Ryser

2007

Voluntas

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With this belief, the community governance creates a common ground for community people and institutions through participation, building social capital, central-local relationships and connect community desired needs to recourses and services delivery mechanism (Bovaird, 2007;Gaynor & O'Brien, 2011). Some authors (Goss, 2000;O'Toole & Burdess, 2004) believe that community governance is an outcome of the 'minimal state' approach of the higher levels of government and the desire of local community groups to ensure a sustainable level of services for their communities.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the governance framework, community governance focuses on leading, facilitating, collaborating and bargaining both within and without the local community (O'Toole & Burdess, 2004). This system espouses to reduce the cost of governments for providing development assistance; government are enforced to promulgate the community driven policies (Wallace, 2012); and encourage community to shift the community from bureaucratic pathology to social cohesion (Cantle, 2005).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants of Community Governance for Effective Basic Service Delivery in Nepal

Acharya¹

2016

Dhaulagiri

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community governance is an approach of shift from governmentality to governance. This is more flexible approach extends beyond government, and the place of its agencies, to a greater sharing of power between the state, the market and civil society via new network and partnership structures. This paper analyses the determinants of community governance at the grassroots level in Nepal for the efficient delivery of basic services based on primary data sources. 110 locally constituted community based organisations were selected for an organisational survey. Additionally, three focus group discussions and 40 in-depth interviews were employed for information collection. A multiple linear regression model was used for data analysis, which revealed 12 variables such as Inclusive participation (X1), Empowerment of the people (X2), Transparency and accountability (X3) Enabling environment (X4), Practice of local democracy (X5), Service effectiveness (X6), Service integrity (X7), Social capital development (X8), Institution building (X9), Community mobilisation (X10) Planning, implementation, and monitoring (X11), Coordination, linkage, and partnership (X12) are significantly influencing governance practice. Results indicated a 14 percent variance between dependent and independent variables. This shows the overall practice of governance at the community level was malfunctioned, which can be attributed to a number of factors. First, many community-based organisations (CBOs) do not adopt governance mechanisms in their approach to development. Second, Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology Vol. 10, 2016 |167 despite a crisis in governance, some CBOs have participated in the service delivery process. Third, this crisis has been a foremost obstacle in the working culture of CBOs. This analysis further explores the problem from the perspective of socio-economic structure, power politics and interests, institutional issues, and capacity and resource constraints.

show abstract

“…As such, the MPB epidemic, and the corresponding economic threat, is a variable which assisted C-CBAC' s formation. Various sources document how rural places respond to threats or crises by forming a committee or group to address the issue (Fitchen 1991;O'Toole and Burdess 2004). This rural collective response is attributed to small population size and patterns of daily living in rural and small town places.…”

Section: The Mountain Pine Beetle Epidemicmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Changing Governance of Rural Regional Development: A case study of the Cariboo-Chilcotin Beetle Action Coalition.

Zirul¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New community governance in small rural towns: the Australian experience

Cited by 53 publications

References 7 publications

The Deployment of Partnerships by the Voluntary Sector to Address Service Needs in Rural and Small Town Canada

The Deployment of Partnerships by the Voluntary Sector to Address Service Needs in Rural and Small Town Canada

Determinants of Community Governance for Effective Basic Service Delivery in Nepal

The Changing Governance of Rural Regional Development: A case study of the Cariboo-Chilcotin Beetle Action Coalition.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About