There was a conversation on Radio 4′s Thinking Allowed last week about recent research on participation. John Mohan from the Third Sector Research Centre was talking about the Centre’s use of Citizenship Survey data to identify what they are calling the ‘civic core’. This refers to the small segment (less than 10%) of the population responsible for a disproportionate level of voluntary work, charitable donations, and participation in civic groups.  

In response, professor Su Maddock questioned what gets left out of the picture when data is based solely on the Citizenship Survey. She challenged listeners to think about participation in different ways – not just in terms of traditional volunteering, which she describes as ‘doing to’ but also mutual organisations and social entreprises, which she described as ‘doing together.’  An expanded understanding of participation could mean that the ‘civic core’ is greater than what the Citizenship Survey would suggest. I was interested in the language of ‘doing to’ vs ‘doing together,’ and the questions this distinction raises about the differences between the two models.

The second story which caught my eye was a blog post in The Guardian about the launch of a new report on participation in neighbourhood websites by Networked Neighbourhoods. The study looked at participation on online forums in Brockley, East Dulwich, and Harringey. It found that these forums were seen by the residents and council representatives as largely positive channels through which residents could meet others in the neighbourhood and gain a sense of power around local decision-making, and both residents and council staff could acquire and share information. It also highlighted what many respondents found challenging about these types of sites: complaint. This raises questions about how neighbourhood website structure and site moderators can encourage meaningful debate and discussion, of which anger and discontent can be perfectly healthy parts, without letting what the report calls ‘aggressive negativity’ stiffle the exchange.

The programme ”seeks to understand how (and to what extent) various information technologies and their applications -including mobile phones, text messaging (SMS), the Internet, blogging, GPS, and other forms of digital technology – are enabling citizens to advance freedom, development, social justice, and the rule of law”.

Some of the presentations given at the seminars, which were organised by the programme, are available online. More details can be obtained here.