The chapters in this book have each examined different approaches to building community power through organizations and participatory processes. Some of these approaches represent long-standing and widespread forms of practice (e.g., community organizing, neighborhood associations, participatory urban planning) that are continuously evolving. Other approaches are more emergent or are currently spreading to more localities (e.g., action civics, participatory budgeting) and are exerting influences on existing organizations and forms of practice. Research into each of these approaches varies accordingly, with some approaches having a robust foundation of research-based insights and others that have only recently become the focus of empirical studies. The contributors to this book are at the forefront of advancing research on each of these types of community empowerment processes. Many of them are doing so from an action research orientation, in collaboration with the organizations, initiatives, and networks that are establishing and supporting these efforts.

Community-engaged research (CEnR) has moved from the fringes to the mainstream of academic research, particularly that which orients to goals of social, racial, and health equity. The construct of empowerment, which encompasses interconnected processes at the level of the individual, the organization, and the community, can be used to understand the mechanisms by which CEnR may contribute to improvements in equity and justice. This chapter introduces and describes a conceptual model for empowerment in CEnR that synthesizes ideas and empirical advances from community psychology and public health. We use the model to examine the processes by which social power can be built and exercised through CEnR at multiple levels of analysis, suggesting that the power that comes from community-led and grassroots community organizing processes has the greatest significance for equity-based CEnR and ultimately for goals of equity- and justice-focused social change.

Rising poverty, shrinking economic opportunities, disengaged citizens and contentious public discourse, and racial inequality have become some of the greatest challenges communities are confronting. In efforts to maximize participation in addressing these issues, universities, community organizations, corporations, local government entities, and foundations are, independently or collaboratively, devoting resources to develop local leadership capacities. This chapter examines these community leadership development efforts and details two cooperative extension programs in a Midwestern US state. Through analysis of these case examples, the chapter offers a vision for how to reimagine community leadership programs so that they are more responsive to the complexity of current and emergent community challenges. An argument is made that US university extension services, because of their strong ties to local communities and networks nationwide, are well placed to support community leadership development that promotes community-identified strategies to address a wide range of local issues among diverse stakeholders. Insights from this chapter can inform future research and influence the design and implementation of community leadership development programs around the world.

The field of youth organizing emerged in the 1990s, as nonprofit organizations began engaging low-income youth of color, aged thirteen to nineteen, in political education and community organizing work while also providing developmental supports, such as academic tutoring and mental health resources. Over the last thirty years, the field has expanded rapidly. This chapter discusses the unique features of youth organizing and identifies trends in the field, including the growth in different kinds of youth organizing groups, the rise of coalitions, and changes in the demographic makeup of participants. It then presents a case description of a long-standing youth organizing group, Asian/Pacific Islander Youth Promoting Advocacy and Leadership (AYPAL), based in Oakland, California. Next, the chapter reviews the literature addressing how youth organizing promotes the psychological empowerment of its participants and builds community power situationally, institutionally, and systemically. It concludes by highlighting the implications of this research and suggesting opportunities for future scholarship.

Comprehensive citywide planning is a practice that many cities undertake regularly. In theory, the principles laid out in citywide plans can help guide the distribution of public and private investments that shape the future development of that city. In recent years, many major cities have been incorporating equity goals and frameworks into planning efforts in attempts to close long-standing racial gaps. Although urban planning, as a field, has espoused goals of participation and shared power in development decisions, power and influence is often concentrated among wealthier households and institutions. Participation in planning processes often involves conflict between opposing interests, and development outcomes are often inequitable. Comprehensive planning has the potential to change some development rules and processes that lead to inequitable outcomes, but this is contingent upon shifting power and influence away from wealthy and elite citizens and institutions. Research on power and empowerment is critical to understanding how influence is manifested through planning policies and processes. The City of Chicago’s “We Will Chicago” plan provides a case example of how city planning processes attempt to engage stakeholders in developing a vision and goals that align with traditionally marginalized groups.

In their rich history, community-based educational spaces (CBESs) have afforded communities room to build young people’s critical consciousness, to organize for social change, and to create learning environments that foster a political – and, in certain respects, a more meaningful – education. Broadly speaking, CBESs meet the specific needs of communities, such as providing access to food and opportunities for learning and identity exploration. In this chapter, the authors overview the scholarly literature related to CBESs and their power-building features that facilitate community power and psychological empowerment processes, as well as the tensions in CBESs that can hinder power-building. Amid this discussion, the authors highlight Urban Underground, a CBES in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, as an organization that exemplifies the humanizing education, youth empowerment, and power-building possible within CBESs. Through this chapter, the authors contend that CBESs have the power to bring about social change in their communities and spur transformative change for those they serve.

Youth-infused community coalitions engage youth and adults in addressing complex issues at the local level. Coalitions tend to engage young people when the issues they address pertain to the youth population in their community. This chapter provides an example of a youth-infused community coalition located in Appalachian Ohio that seeks to promote the health and well-being of community members. Youth engage directly with adults on the coalition to review data, identify root causes of problems in their community, and implement strategies to address these issues. We detail how participating in youth-infused community coalitions facilitates the growth and development of youth and their communities and then identify three features critical to facilitating community power and psychological empowerment in youth-infused community coalitions: member representation, decision-making processes, and opportunity role structure.

Community coalitions promote empowerment by providing pathways for residents and organizations to gain and apply new skills, grow in leadership, and play an active role in calling for and creating community change. Coalitions create synergy through strategic pooling of diverse and complementary perspectives, connections, and resources. This chapter provides a brief overview of coalitions and how they operate as a community change mechanism by providing a structure to create changes in policies, systems, and environments. We present a case study of the California Healthy Cities and Communities initiative in which leaders in twenty communities with underserved or vulnerable populations were empowered to address environmental and structural determinants of community well-being. Next, we review the literature on how coalitions have been studied as a mechanism for community empowerment across disciplines and levels of empowerment. We conclude with recommendations for future research, including a greater focus on equity and understanding community change processes.

The Chinese government launched a nationwide policy campaign regarding neighborhood governance in the early 2010s. The state-led movement served both to strengthen state legitimacy and enhance community development. But how it contributed to community empowerment or disempowerment is little examined. This chapter attempts to review the extant literature on the campaign from a community empowerment perspective. Implications and suggestions for future research are also included.

Neighborhood associations are geographically bound, grassroots organizations that rely on volunteer membership and direct participation to identify and address issues within their neighborhood. Often these groups serve as intermediaries between residents and local decision-makers, such as government officials, developers and business owners, and providers of public goods and services. As a case example, we describe the Minneapolis Neighborhood Revitalization Program (NRP), launched in 1990. The NRP is a notable long-standing attempt to bolster the role of neighborhood associations in municipal governance. It demonstrates many of the potential benefits as well as the challenges of neighborhood associations as vehicles for locally scaled democracy. After this, we examine dynamics of community power and empowerment processes in neighborhood associations and make recommendations for practice and future research.

Community organizing within local faith-based institutions (churches, synagogues, mosques, etc.) is now widespread in the US and has seen adoption in several other countries. As congregation-based organizing has grown and matured as a field over four decades, leaders have drawn strong connections between the social and political goals of community organizing and the religious traditions and values of the participating congregations. This blending of organizing practices and religious traditions has been crucial to the success of this approach. This chapter describes some of the practices that congregation-based community organizing initiatives employ to build power among residents who are actively participating in defining and deciding how to alter the systems that affect their lives. A statewide organizing federation (PICO California) and the reflections of influential organizer Jose Carrasco serve as a case example of the intertwining of interfaith values with a power-based organizing approach.

This chapter examines the power and empowerment processes taking place in immigrant organizing and activism, primarily in the US. Immigrant youth activism around the Federal DREAM Act provides a case example. The youth whose activism and organizing seek the passage of this act are often referred to as “the DREAMers.” The discussion of the DREAMers is followed by a synthesis of interdisciplinary literature on immigrant community power and psychological empowerment processes. The chapter concludes with recommendations for policymakers, politicians, and social science researchers. Policymakers need a better understanding of the effects of their decisions on the large, heterogeneous group of noncitizen immigrants whose lives are interconnected with those of US citizens (e.g., undocumented parents of citizen children). Social scientists should pay attention to the similarities and differences between immigrant and refugee organizing and activism and should engage in collaborations with immigrant community leaders on mutually beneficial research.