• Journal of Convergence for Information Technology
• /
• v.9 no.3
• /
• pp.112-119
• /
• 2019

This study examined the role of citizen advocates in advocating for people with developmental disabilities. Citizen advocacy refers to activities that advocate and represent citizens on behalf of those who are socially vulnerable. The purpose of this study is to analyze the role concept of citizen advocates by conducting focus group interviews and dividing the 13 citizen advocates with developmental disabilities into 4 groups. It is divided into four main subjects and nine sub-themes. The main theme are 'Self-transformation of the parties', 'Restoring the rights of the parties', 'Being with the parties', and 'Expanding the world of the parties'. Sub-themes are 'Recognizing and solving the problem of self', 'Granting role to speak', 'Recovering the initiative of service use', 'Restoring the rights of existing (family and neighbor), "Preventing money harm" "Speaking instead", "Encouraging and petting people", "Promoting change in the community", and "Expanding the size of the world a little bit". Based on this, we discussed the importance of citizen advocacy as a preventive advocacy system, the relationship between citizen advocacy and professional advocacy system, the difference between volunteer and personal assistants and citizen advocacy, and considerations for citizen advocacy.

• Journal of the Korean Geographical Society
• /
• v.51 no.2
• /
• pp.269-281
• /
• 2016

This article problematizes and interrogates the idea of 'community' which is increasingly important in Korean urban policy-making. For the purpose, this article scrutinizes, and compares, how ordinary citizen participants and civil society activist organizations in a 'community garden' program of Seoul make sense of, utilize, and practice the policy concept. The neo-Faucauldian perspective of 'governmentality' is employed to understand the association between the community-focused policy program and neoliberalism, but Barnett's( 2005) call for 'bottom-up governmentality' is taken seriously in order to avoid any deterministic interpretation. On the basis of this eclectic perspective on governmentality, this article presents empirical findings that may suggest a contestation over community between ordinary citizens and civil society activists. More specifically, ordinary citizen participants prioritize place-based, on-the-ground community experiences that are built on common cultivation practices, whereas civil society activists tend to consider community garden as a teleological governmental technology generative of particular citizen subjects. Civic community garden advocacy as such aims to address social, economic, and spatial problems that neoliberalsim has produced, but it also appears to be in a close association with neoliberal urban policy. Thus, the community activism's meaningfulness lies in its active intervention to neoliberal urban policy, but a gap between ordinary practical achievements and civic activism can be a potential danger to urban community policy. On the basis of this discussion, this article asks more detailed investigations about the taken-for-granted positivity of urban community (re)vitalization programs, and also examinations on whether and how such projects generates emergent tensions between ordinary achievements and policy prescriptions.

• Journal of Environmental Policy
• /
• v.9 no.4
• /
• pp.125-154
• /
• 2010

Among the various contemporary issues that confront the nation or society, surely one of the most difficult to resolve are environmental disputes between government authorities, developers, local residents and advocacy groups. While such disputes can in some cases be the result of a selfish and illegal NIMBY("Not In My Back Yard") syndrome, they can also be an expression of rational and appropriate demands from local residents to preserve the ecology and quality of life for their communities, particularly with respect to the planning of "locally unwanted land uses(LULUs). Accordingly, rethinking NIMBYism entails several implications for planning of LULUs. Until the 20th century many planners considered only "functional rationality" in their decision making, in a confrontational "us versus them"process of "decide-announce-defend(DAD)". I believe, however, that a fair, voluntary, and negotiated process of alternative dispute resolution(ADR) based on consensus building is the means to resolving these disputes. A voluntary process is more desirable and feasible than a coercive one, making ADR well worth pursuing. From this perspective, I explore several factors which affect the resolution of environmental disputes. I suggest three main factors as follows: i) extension of citizen participation, ii) enhancement of equity, and iii) building of trust. Alternatives are presented based on these factors.