Movement or Moment?

Maybe it was the heat that prompted the Case Foundation to wade into a heated issue: whether the millions of dollars that have been funneled into service and civic engagement programs have made a difference in how Americans are involved in civic life. Had "getting involved" become a daily part of people's lives?  

That question was tougher than figuring out how many trees were planted, rivers cleaned up, or people voted. To find the answer, we interviewed people who've been writing about service and civic engagement, thinking about it, and doing it in real communities. They said yes, there is a deep tradition of service in America. The catch? Many people still feel powerless to do anything about the important things affecting their lives -- things like what happens in their schools, decisions about zoning or land use, or where their taxes are spent.  

It turns out that this isn't just a "feeling." It's a fact, according to recent studies showing that Americans feel more isolated than ever before and dismayed about what they see as the country's drift away from democratic and civic values and toward a culture of celebrity, partisanship and ideologically driven politics, and materialism.  

In July 2006, the Case Foundation documented these trends in a white paper, Citizens at the Center. The paper suggests that embedding civic engagement more deeply in communities will require going beyond asking people to just plug into programs that encourage people to "do good." Instead, the paper calls for creating civic spaces that draw in diverse groups of people -- community leaders, legislators, activists, religious leaders, educators, businesspeople, and others with different backgrounds, political views, and experiences -- to talk about what concerns them, decide which are priorities, and then take action together to address them.  

The result? Civic cultures that encourage longer-term and broader involvement in civic life. Deeper connections with community -- among and for the entire community, not just parts of it. And a voice for people who need and deserve one.

A nuanced concept, yes. But unfeasible? No way. It's happening all across the country in small towns, big cities, in states, and nationally.

Right now, groups like the National League of Cities, National School Boards Association, National School Public Relations Association, National Civic League, League of Women Voters, American Planning Association, and NeighborWorks America are exploring and advocating citizen-centered approaches to public problems. A new group, the November 5th Coalition, is encouraging presidential candidates to engage with citizens and citizens with their elected officials in more authentic, reciprocal, productive, citizen-centered ways -- now and after the election.  

Meanwhile, the Project for Public Spaces has worked in 2,000 communities in 47 states and 26 countries to improve parks, markets, streets, transit stations, libraries, and countless other places, using a citizen-centered approach to design interactive public spaces that revitalize communities. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is emphasizing citizen-centered approaches to ecosystem protection and restoration through community involvement and resources that support a range of citizen-initiated projects -- from children's health to clean air campaigns.  

At the state level, groups like Common Sense California have convened citizen-led deliberations that have produced a set of public priorities that local communities are now taking steps to enact. One of those is a Citizens Initiative Review process through which groups of citizens review, evaluate, and make recommendations about pending ballot proposals that are often written in policy-speak, rather than plain English.  

At the local level, towns are opening the doors of their firehouses and school gyms to bring people -- including those who disagree -- together to negotiate diverse interests to identify the "common good." From Rochester, N.Y., where 6,000 residents are working with policymakers to make joint land use decisions; to Eugene, Ore., where hundreds of residents worked with city council members to craft a new city budget; to towns in Minnesota, where groups of parents are making Sundays "sports-free" days by replacing soccer practices with family time. One effort, Horizons, is now in 163 communities, where entire neighborhoods are coming together to explore sources to alleviate poverty and taking action steps to eradicate it. 

But they're not just occurring in physical settings; they're happening in digital spaces, thanks to technology's ability to connect people at the touch of a keypad. Idealist.org's Imagine! initiative has used the Internet to connect thousands of people all over the world who are now meeting to work on issues affecting their communities and, in some cases, entire countries. MySpace is holding town halls to give young people the chance to engage in unfiltered discourse with candidates, rather than being spoon-fed canned sound bites.

Like many citizen-centered efforts, these efforts are building community leadership in ways that move decision-making from the hands of a few to the participation of the many by acknowledging that everyone has something to contribute. But do they represent the rumblings of civic renewal?  

It's hard to say, because citizen-centered work isn't easily categorized and, thus, tends to fly under the radar. It's not left or right, Democrat or Republican, rich or poor, rural or urban, or black or white. Nor is it a "top-down" or "bottom-up" approach. Although it's partly being driven by people who are tired of being left out and are asking to be let in, it's becoming attractive to public institutions and leaders who are tired of trying to solve public problems without the same levels of funding, public trust, and legitimacy they used to enjoy.  

All this makes citizen-centered work an approach that isn't easily pigeonholed, much to the exasperation of those seeking easy answers or magic bullets. In fact, it could be argued that the same complexity that befuddles some about citizen-centered work is what makes it effective: its ability to transcend the silos that often keep good people and good ideas from sparking something bigger than themselves. It does that by starting from an open-ended premise that assumes no ideological, political, or intellectual position, preferring to let citizens themselves decide what they will do and how. And that means all citizens, not just those who are already passionate about politics or volunteering, or the experts and professionals who've traditionally made the decisions.  

That's a subtle but powerful shift from how our institutions tend to operate, how we think about leadership, and how we view the role of citizens in our democracy. It's time to name this work, support it, and lift it up so those engaged in it can see themselves as part of a larger movement, and, ultimately, serve as the catalysts for expanding it.  

The Case Foundation is trying to do just that, but it can't do it alone. After all, this isn't some pie-in-the-sky romanticized vision of civic engagement. This is the rolling-up-your-sleeves, hard, and often tough work that should occur in a healthy democracy -- one that walks the talk of being "by and for the people." And that means all the people, starting with you and me.