Empowerment and community participation: Does gender make a difference?

Social Work Research | December 01, 2000 | Itzhaky, Haya; York, Alan S. | The study discussed in this article examines the effects of client participation on empowerment, with special emphasis on gender. A group of community activists in a low-income neighborhood in central Israel was assessed by community participation on three scales and their perceived empowerment on two scales. The findings suggest different relationships between types of participation and empowerment by gender. Gender did not have a significant main effect on empowerment, and its effects only became evident when it interacted with participation. This article discusses the nature of empowerment and its measurement and analyzes the connection between participation and empowerment. Because male and female respondents appeared to reach empowerment in different ways, the implications for workers in the helping professions are examined. Key words: community participation; empowerment; gender The study discussed in this article examined the relationship among community participation, personal empowerment, and gender. Although there are studies that show no differences between men and women on either participation or empowerment, this is not in accordance with our experience. Moreover, some studies, in which all or most of the respondents were women, clearly postulate differences between men's and women's empowerment and involvement in the community. We therefore examined a group of community activists, a population not sufficiently studied in the literature, and attempted to find the differences in the way men and women participate in and achieve different kinds of empowerment. EMPOWERMENT LITERATURE Empowerment as a concept in the helping profession has been recognized under several guises for many years. Its operational and conceptual definitions, however, are still being formulated. It is used as a goal or outcome--feeling powerful, worthy of self-esteem, competent--and as a process, both personal and professional, other-oriented--modifying personal and structural conditions to allow people to achieve power and empowerment (Perkins & Zimmerman, 1995; Swift & Levin, 1987; Zimmerman, 1995). Zimmerman (1990a) argued cogently that "psychological empowerment" is far more than just a personality variable. It refers to individuals and their ability to cope, but does not ignore ecological, cultural, and structural influences. It includes intrapsychic variables such as motivation, self-efficacy, and locus of control but puts them in ecological and cultural contexts. Solomon's (1976) definition of empowerment practice emphasized removing blocks to power or their effects ("learned hopefulness" in the phrase of Zimmerman, 1990b). We use the definition preferred by Perkins and Zimmerman (1995): "a process by which people gain control over their

lives, democratic participation in the life of their community, and a critical understanding of their environment" (p. 570). This definition emphasizes the essential connections between empowerment and ecology (Serrano-Garcia & Bond, 1994; Trickett, 1994), and stresses the connection between them through a feeling of control. What are the essential elements of psychological empowerment and, particularly, which of them can be and have been measured? Zimmerman and Rappaport (1988) used a number of personality, cognitive, motivational, and behavioral variables: internal locus of control, chance control, belief in powerful others, control ideology, self-efficacy, sense of mastery, perceived competence, political efficacy, desire for control, civic duty, leadership, alienation, community activities, and level of involvement in organizations (see also Zimmerman, 1990b). Zimmerman and Zahniser (1991) emphasized sociopolitical control and developed variables of leadership competence and policy control. Zimmerman et al. (1992) added perceived effectiveness of actions and perceived difficulty of problems. (See Zimmerman, 1995, for a summary of the state of the art.) In more neighborhood-oriented studies, Chavis and Wandersman (1990) added "the importance of the block," sense of community, neighboring relations, sense of personal and group empowerment, perceived block problems, and block evaluation and satisfaction. In a similar study, Perkins et al. (1990) included victimization in a crime, communitarianism (in addition to sense of community) and other social environmental predictors. Feldman and Stall (1994) included "appropriation of homeplace" as a type of empowerment and Saegert and Winkel (1996) also emphasized how collective activities, including "material transformation of the environment," are part and parcel of empowerment. Saegert (1989), on the basis of her study of black women neighborhood leaders, concluded that empowerment is not at root an individual process but part of the process of collective empowerment. In summary, empowerment includes personal, community, and environmental elements in interaction with each other. A review of studies of both psychological and community empowerment shows that empowerment and the older term of client or community participation are closely related to each other, although Itzhaky and Schwartz (1998) found that not all the elements of empowerment are affected by all the elements of participation. Does some kind of participation inevitably lead to empowerment? Li Tseng-lu (1977), using some of the variables identified in the studies mentioned earlier as elements of empowerment (attitudes to participation, communication dimensions, and space resources), found that actual resident participation was correlated strongly with positive attitudes toward community, leadership, and participation. Zimmerman and Rappaport (1988) found strong relations between measures of community involvement and participation and measures of psychological empowerment. They concluded that psychological empowerment connects perceived competence, motivation to take action, and actual participation for the public good. In his model of learned hopefulness, Zimmerman (1990b) supported the theory that, although participation directly reduces alienation, it also directly affects empowerment, which, in turn, reduces alienation. Thus, participation directly and indirectly increases empowerment, although the causal path between them is unclear. This

theory, according to Zimmerman (1990a), is supported by the findings of Prestby et al. (1990) and Chavis and Wandersman (1990). Speer and Hughes (1995), in their analysis of community organizing, found that the relationship among community, organizational action, and individual development or empowerment is of a reciprocal or dialectical nature. Most scholars posit that participation comes before empowerment. Saegert and Winkel (1996) postulated "that empowerment as reflected in individual attitudes and actions is the consequence rather than the cause of collective action at the building level," although in their analysis they found that the relationships and their directionality were more complex (p. 521). Bond and Keys (1993) found that the empowerment of different groups in an agency was enhanced by their working together collaboratively. Rich et al. (1995), drawing up a path to community empowerment or disempowerment, showed that citizen participation is an essential element of all the four types of empowerment they identified: formal, intrapersonal, instrumental, and substantive. However, some degree of "intrapersonal empowerment" may be "a

Introduction Poverty is a multi-faceted phenomenon, defined (and explained) as a situation in which a person lacks the necessary capabilities and entitlements to satisfy his or her basic needs and aspirations. From this point of view, the fight against poverty must consist in establishing entitlements that will allow the poor access to the material, social, and spiritual means to develop their capabilities. Thus, it becomes necessary to focus on empowerment of the poor as the crucial requirement for a sustainable solution to poverty and hunger. Empowerment is defined here as the ability of people, in particular the least privileged, to: (a) have access to productive resources that enable them to increase their earnings and obtain the goods and services they need; and (b) participate in the development process and the decisions that affect them. These two aspects are related; one without the other is not empowerment.

Empowerment means sharing power as equals. One cannot empower someone else. Although one may offer to share power or decision-making, the other party must stand as an equal and have the desire, skills and legal mandate to share that power. Most situations of shared power go unnoticed. They are situations where groups partner with one another for a common goal. Some partnerships however, are particularly notable because they go across sectors, borders, disciplines or cultures
The following is an excerpt from Volume 29, Issue 2 (September 2001)Empowerment and Public Participation Nola-Kate Seymoar, Ph.D. Constructive- Citizen participation