Building shared visions for sustainable communities

How much sustainability substance is in urban visions? – An analysis of visioning projects in urban planning

“…Yet, sustainability visions are more likely to consider also resilience if the visioning methods involve components that are informed by extensive local situation analysis, which sensitizes for case-specific historical contexts as well as problems, trends, and challenges. Consequently, all parties involved get informed so compromises and trade-offs can be negotiated adequately (Moss & Grunkemeyer, 2010;Resilience Alliance, 2010). Overall, these results indicate that careful knowledge preparation on individual and group levels are important methodical components whose interactions need to be explored in greater detail and carefully crafted when aiming for more sustainability substance in visions.…”

“…In general, participation and diversity of actors are understood to create (i) a common ground, (ii) heterogeneity of inputs, and (iii) a better recognition of sustainability principles (Moss & Grunkemeyer, 2010;Shipley et al, 2004). Structurally, these processes do not necessarily benefit from a large number of participants, and downsizing neither prevents inclusiveness nor leads to an underrepresentation of topics (Mathie & Greene, 1997).…”

“…For participants of visioning processes, intangible outcomes include: the capacity to engage in large group deliberations, consensus about targets for city development, and support for and willingness to participate in strategies to achieve visions, which can extend to the broader community. Tangible outcomes include visioning documents that are salient and legitimate to the community and which can be linked to internal city administration and documentation to facilitate implementation of strategies derived from visions (Costanza, 2000;French & Gagne, 2010;Lachapelle, Emery, & Hays, 2010;Moss & Grunkemeyer, 2010).…”

An Integrative Literature Review to Introduce Socio-Networked Learning

“…Organizational borders are real along with their behavioral and cognitive implications (Lyons, 1996;Moss & Grunkenmeyer, 2010). In this respect, the degree of interaction between the organizations may denote what behavior belongs to an organization and what behavior is related to other organizations (Dal Fiore, 2007;Jamali, 2004).…”

Social capital and rural community self-development: Understanding community satisfaction and its impact on entrepreneurial climate and community outcomes

“…Downtown business revitalization strategies offer social and economic advantages by providing a place where local residents can gather and local businesses can thrive (Moss & Grunkemeyer, 2010). Community developers must ensure that any self-development strategy imposed on a rural community will portray that community as a vibrant and sustainable place that interconnects the social, environmental, and economic interests of the community.…”