Value in the Eye of the Beholder
Excerpt #8 from
Beyond The Numbers: Inadequacies of Creative Placemaking Criteria
Just as an ecosystem has certain elements that need to be present in order for it to be determined an ecosystem, one of the characteristics of a thriving community is that it has certain assets or pays attention to certain assets in order to develop them. In 2004 Cornelia and Jan Flora with Susan Fey wrote Rural Communities: Legacy and Change in which they describe the Community Capitals Framework, which is currently being used by individuals and organizations in the community development field. This framework is based on identifying a community’s assets from a larger perspective. Because the word capital can be vague it is important to understand how they define the word to better understand their concept. “Capital is any type of resource capable of producing additional resources” and also “When those resources or assets are invested to create new resources, they become capital.” The first part of the definition implies that the potential of producing resources is enough to determine something as capital; however, the second part implies that the act of investing the asset is the point at which it is determined to be capital. This distinction implies two differing points at which something is determined to be capital. This confusion leads to the need for the next definition. The term utilized here is the term asset. An asset is defined as something that has value or worth. This definition raises further questions.
Deeming something an asset implies that it is useful or valuable in some way. In the context of community, these assets could be perceived as things that are useful or valuable to the community as a whole. They could also be perceived as things that are valuable on a more individual level that in turn becomes valuable to the community as a whole because of the eventual benefit. Either way, the way in which the asset is perceived to give benefit determines whether or not it is even deemed an asset. Which leads to how worth or value is determined and therefore, to whom is it considered useful or valuable and who determines what is useful or valuable to a community?
It is important to remember the broader concept of a community ecosystem when determining assets. Flora, Flora and Fey’s framework keeps the perspective broad and unrestrictive allowing a category for anything, either tangible or intangible, to have the potential to be considered an asset. “Based on their research to uncover characteristics of entrepreneurial communities, they found the communities that were most successful in supporting healthy sustainable community and economic development paid attention to all seven types of capital: 1) natural; 2) cultural; 3) human; 4) social; 5) political; 6) financial; and 7) built.” According to their definition of capital this would mean that the seven categories are things that both had potential and had been invested.
These seven categories do paint a more encompassing viewpoint. However, it is important to consider that, although relationships between the assets is mentioned, they still indicate looking at the individual parts because they are looking at the relationship between the parts as a way to increase assets. “In addition to identifying the capitals and the role each plays in community economic development, this approach also focuses on the interaction among these seven capitals as well as how investments in one capital can build assets in others.”
As pointed out by Sherry Salway Black in Redefining Success in Community Development: A New Approach for Determining and Measuring the Impact of Development, “The inherent flaw in using the scientific model to explain pieces of complex systems and make applications based only on parts of a whole is that significant relationships and connections are missed.” It is the blind men and the elephant all over again; failure to see the pieces as part of a whole negates the importance of them being connected. On the other hand, taking an ecosystem perspective can actually change what is deemed an asset and can also influence the allocated value of the asset in terms of the whole.
Charles Landry, an international expert on cities and creative development, offers another perspective on what is valuable in a thriving community with the statement,
“Successful cities seemed to have some things in common — visionary individuals, creative organizations and a political culture sharing a clarity of purpose. They seemed to follow a determined, not a deterministic path. Leadership was widespread, permeating public, private and voluntary sectors. It expressed itself in courageous public initiatives and often risky business investments, and in a tissue of interconnected projects whether for profit or the public good.”
He uses the word successful, but describes a more thriving perspective with the explanation of determined versus deterministic. His perspective also indicates a thriving community’s assets to be aligned with the principles of an ecosystem, with words such as permeating, and interconnected.
Copyright 2013