Top of Form

01784891186031 FORID:10

UTF-8

Search JOE

Bottom of Form

• HOME
• JOURNAL
• GUIDELINES
• ABOUT JOE
• CONTACT
• NATIONAL JOB BANK
• Current Issue
• Back Issues
• Search
• Subscribe
October 1999 // Volume 37 // Number 5 // Commentary // 5COM1

Empowerment: What Is It?

Abstract
Many use the term empowerment without understanding what it really
means. A literature review resulted in no clear definition of the concept,
especially one that could cross-disciplinary lines. This article defines
empowerment as a multi-dimensional social process that helps people
gain control over their own lives. It is a process that fosters power in
people for use in their own lives, their communities and in their society, by
acting on issues they define as important. The Connecticut People
Empowering People program uses this definition to connect research,
theory, and practice.

Nanette Page
Former Connecticut PEP Facilitator
Flint, Michigan
Cheryl E. Czuba
Extension Educator, Community Development, Families
University of Connecticut Cooperative Extension System
Haddam, Connecticut
Internet address: cczuba@canr1.cag.uconn.edu
For many in Extension, empowerment is the goal we have for our
programs and the volunteers, participants, or clients with whom we work.
But what is empowerment? How can we recognize it? Evaluate it? Talk
about it with others who are interested in empowerment? Our recent
literature review of articles indicating a focus on empowerment, across
several scholarly and practical disciplines, resulted in no clear definition of
the concept across disciplinary lines. Many using the term cope with its
lack of clear, shared meaning by employing the concept very narrowly,
using only their specific scholarly discipline or program to inform them.
Others do not define the term at all. As a result, many have come to view
"empowerment" as nothing more than the most recently popular buzz
word to be thrown in to make sure old programs get new funding.
We maintain that empowerment is much more than that. Empowerment is
a process that challenges our assumptions about the way things are and
can be. It challenges our basic assumptions about power, helping,
achieving, and succeeding. To begin to demystify the concept of
empowerment, we need to understand the concept broadly in order to be
clear about how and why we narrow our focus of empowerment for
specific programs and projects (specific dimension or level, etc.) and to
allow discussion of empowerment across disciplinary and practice lines.
Understanding empowerment became a critical issue for us as we
grappled with the task of sharing the People Empowering People (PEP)
program with Extension faculty across the country.
Understanding Power
At the core of the concept of empowerment is the idea of power. The
possibility of empowerment depends on two things. First, empowerment
requires that power can change. If power cannot change, if it is inherent in
positions or people, then empowerment is not possible, nor is
empowerment conceivable in any meaningful way. In other words, if
power can change, then empowerment is possible. Second, the concept of
empowerment depends upon the idea that power can expand. This
second point reflects our common experiences of power rather than how
we think about power. To clarify these points, we first discuss what we
mean by power.
Power is often related to our ability to make others do what we want,
regardless of their own wishes or interests (Weber, 1946). Traditional
social science emphasizes power as influence and control, often treating
power as a commodity or structure divorced from human action (Lips,
1991). Conceived in this way, power can be viewed as unchanging or
unchangeable. Weber (1946) gives us a key word beyond this limitation
by recognizing that power exists within the context of a relationship
between people or things. Power does not exist in isolation nor is it
inherent in individuals. By implication, since power is created in
relationships, power and power relationships can change. Empowerment
as a process of change, then, becomes a meaningful concept.
A brief exercise makes the importance of this discussion clear. Quickly, list
three words that immediately come to mind when you hear the word
power. For most people, words that come to mind when we think about
power often revolve around control and domination. Focusing on these
aspects of power limit our ability to understand and define empowerment.
The concept of empowerment also depends upon power that can expand,
our second stated requirement. Understanding power as zero-sum, as
something that you get at my expense, cuts most of us off from power. A
zero-sum conception of power means that power will remain in the hands
of the powerful unless they give it up. Although this is certainly one way
that power can be experienced, it neglects the way power will remain in
the hands of the powerful unless they give it up. Although this is certainly
one way that power is experienced, it neglects the way power is
experienced in most interactions. Another brief exercise highlights the
importance of a definition of power that includes expansion. Answer the
question; "Have you ever felt powerful?" Was it at someone's expense?
Was it with someone else?
Grounded in an understanding that power will be seen and understood
differently by people who inhabit various positions in power structures
(Lukes, 199 4), contemporary research on power has opened new
perspectives that reflect aspects of power that are not zero-sum, but are
shared. Feminists (Miller, 1976; Starhawk, 1987), members of grassroots
organizations (Bookman & Morgen, 1984), racial and ethnic groups
(Nicola-McLaughlin & Chandler, 1984), and even individuals in families
bring into focus another aspect of power, one that is characterized by
collaboration, sharing and mutuality (Kreisberg, 1992).
Researchers and practitioners call this aspect of power "relational
power"(Lappe & DuBois, 1994), generative power (Korten, 1987),
"integrative power," and "power with" (Kreisberg, 1992).This aspect
means that gaining power actually strengthens the power of others rather
than diminishing it such as occurs with domination/power. Kreisberg has
suggested that power defined as "the capacity to implement" (Kreisberg,
1992:57) is broad enough to allow power to mean domination, authority,
influence, and shared power or "power with." It is this definition of power,
as a process that occurs in relationships, that gives us the possibility of
empowerment.
Understanding Empowerment
Empowerment is a construct shared by many disciplines and arenas:
community development, psychology, education, economics, and studies
of social movements and organizations, among others. How
empowerment is understood varies among these perspectives. In recent
empowerment literature, the meaning of the term empowerment is often
assumed rather than explained or defined. Rappoport (1984) has noted
that it is easy to define empowerment by its absence but difficult to define
in action as it takes on different forms in different people and contexts.
Even defining the concept is subject to debate. Zimmerman (1984) has
stated that asserting a single definition of empowerment may make
attempts to achieve it formulaic or prescription-like, contradicting the very
concept of empowerment.
A common understanding of empowerment is necessary, however, to
allow us to know empowerment when we see it in people with whom we
are working, and for program evaluation. According to Bailey (1992), how
we precisely define empowerment within our projects and programs will
depend upon the specific people and context involved.
As a general definition, however, we suggest that empowerment is a
multi-dimensional social process that helps people gain control over their
own lives. It is a process that fosters power (that is, the capacity to
implement) in people, for use in their own lives, their communities, and in
their society, by acting on issues that they define as important.
We suggest that three components of our definition are basic to any
understanding of empowerment. Empowerment is multi-dimensional,
social, and a process. It is multi-dimensional in that it occurs within
sociological, psychological, economic, and other dimensions.
Empowerment also occurs at various levels, such as individual, group, and
community. Empowerment, by definition, is a social process, since it
occurs in relationship to others. Empowerment is a process that is similar
to a path or journey, one that develops as we work through it. Other
aspects of empowerment may vary according to the specific context and
people involved, but these remain constant. In addition, one important
implication of this definition of empowerment is that the individual and
community are fundamentally connected.
Interconnection of Individuals and Community
Wilson (1996) pointed out that recently, more researchers, organizers,
politicians and employers recognize that individual change is a
prerequisite for community and social change and empowerment (Speer &
Hughey, 1995; Florin and Wandersman, 1990; Chavis & Wandersman,
1990). This does not mean that we can point the finger at those with less
access to power, telling them that they must change to become more like
"us" in order to be powerful/successful. Rather, individual change
becomes a bridge to community connectedness and social change
(Wilson, 1996).
To create change we must change individually to enable us to become
partners in solving the complex issues facing us. In collaborations based
on mutual respect, diverse perspectives, and a developing vision, people
work toward creative and realistic solutions. This synthesis of individual
and collective change (Wilson, 1996; Florin & Wandersman, 1990; Speer &
Hughey, 1995) is our understanding of an empowerment process. We see
this inclusive individual and collective understanding of empowerment as
crucial in programs with empowerment as a goal. It is in the critical
transition, or interconnection, between the individual and the communal,
or social, that programs such as ours, People Empowering People, can be
invaluable for people and communities.
Empowerment and PEP
The People Empowering People (PEP) program uses the definition of
empowerment to connect research, theory, and practice. The Connecticut
PEP program builds on theory of critical adult education developed by
Friere (1970), Horton (1989), and others. PEP focuses on the strengths of
people, providing opportunities and resources for people to gain
experiences and skills while they also gain control over their lives.
Underlying this process is mutual respect between participants,
facilitators, advisory committee members, and others involved in the
program. PEP opens to participants the recognition of their own values
and beliefs, and encourages expression of their own issues as they define
them. The focus is on the connection between individual action and
community action, encouraging individual change through training
sessions and discussions, and supporting community action through
participants' efforts to change their communities. While we cannot give
people power and we cannot make them "empowered," we can provide
the opportunities, resources and support that they need to become
involved themselves.
In conclusion, we see empowerment as a multi-dimensional social process
that helps people gain control over their own lives. It is a process that
fosters power in people for use in their own lives, their communities, and
in their society by acting on issues that they define as important. In PEP as
in Extension we strive to teach people skills and knowledge that will
motivate them to take steps to improve their own lives -- to be
empowered.
References
Bailey, D. (1992). Using participatory research in community consortia
development and evaluation: lessons from the beginning of a story.
American Sociologist, 23 (4), 71-82.
Bookman, A., & Morgen, S. (Eds.). (1984). Women and the politics of
empowerment. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Chavis, D., & Wandersman, A. (1990). Sense of community in the urban
environment: A catalyst for participation and community development.
American Journal of Community Psychology, 18 (1), 55-81.
Florin, P., & Wandersman, A. (1990).An introduction to citizen
participation, voluntary organizations, and community development:
insights for empowerment through research. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 18(1), 41-54.
Friere, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Translated by M.B. Ramos.
New York: Seabury Press.
Horton, A. (1989). The Highlander Folk School: A history of its major
programs. Brooklyn, NY: Carlson Publishers.
Korten, D.E. (1987). Community management. West Hartford, CT:
Kumarian Press.
Kreisberg, S. (1992). Transforming power: Domination, empowerment,
and education. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Lappe, F.M., & Dubois, P.M. (1994). The quickening of America: Rebuilding
our nation, remaking our lives. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,Inc. Publishers.
Lips, H. (1991). Women, men and power. Mountain View, CA: Mayfeld.
Lukes, S. (1994). Power: A radical view. London: Macmillan Press Ltd.
Miller, J.B. (1976).Toward a new psychology of women. Boston: Beacon
Press.
Nicola-McLaughlin, A., & Chandler, Z. (1984; 180-201). Urban politics in
the higher education of black women: A case study. In Bookmen & Morgen
(Eds.). Women and the politics of empowerment. Philadelphia: Temple
University Press.
Rapport, J. (1984). Studies in empowerment: Introduction to the issue.
Prevention in Human Services, 3, 1-7.
Speer, P.W., & Hughey, J. (1995). Community organizing: An ecological
route to empowerment and power. American Journal of Community
Psychology, 23 (5), 729-748.
Starhawk (1987). Truth or dare. San Francisco: Harper and Row.
Weber, M. (1946). From Max Weber. H.H. Gerth & C.W. Mills (Eds.). New
York: Oxford University Press.
Wilson, P. (1996). Empowerment: Community economic development
from the inside out. Urban Studies, 33(4-5), 617-630.
Zimmerman, M.A. (1984). Taking aim on empowerment research: On the
distinction between individual and psychological conceptions. American
Journal of Community Psychology, 18(1), 169-177.
Copyright © by Extension Journal, Inc. ISSN 1077-5315. Articles appearing in the Journal
become the property of the Journal. Single copies of articles may be reproduced in electronic
or print form for use in educational or training activities. Inclusion of articles in other
publications, electronic sources, or systematic large-scale distribution may be done only with
prior electronic or written permission of the Journal Editorial Office, joe-ed@joe.org.
If you have difficulties viewing or printing this page, please contact JOE Technical Support
© Copyright by Extension Journal, Inc. ISSN 1077-5315. Copyright Policy

Value

January 03

Atithi Devo Bhava

This is a saying in Sanskrit, the ancient Indian language, which means “guests are
equivalent to gods”. This is demonstrated whenever a guest stays with an Indian family.
It has become a part of popular culture and is an ethos that has achieved widespread
popularity. In earlier times, holy men wandered around the country spreading the word
of God and they were invited to spend a few moments to a night at a devotees place. It
soon became an opportunity for one upmanship with hosts trying to outdo the other in
what they could do for their guests. The common man picked up the true spirit and
provided the guests the first picking in whatever was available in the household before
sharing the rest with the family.

The first person to be served food would be the guest. They get the choicest morsels and
are urged to go in for more helpings. Anything the guest discusses becomes the topic of
conversation. Their clothes and luggage are handled with care and any washing or
mending needs are attended to promptly. The softest bed and cleanest linen is for the
guests and so is the best ventilated location to avoid any insects in the absence of air
conditioning. Any talk of leaving will only invite calls to stay on for another few days, and
yet another few days...it's definitely hard to part after enjoying good company.

All in all, the guest is treated like a God and is ever welcome in the home and hearts of
the hosts - Atithi Devo Bhava!

Interestingly, a recent government of India project sought to embrace this philiosophy

and I wish it all success - http://www.incredibleindia.org/newsite/atithidevobhava.htm

Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, meaning:

वसुधा, vasudhaa ( f.) means Earth.

'Vasudha' refers to the Earth or to the entire Creation, meaning the vast cosmos.
'Eva' means “certainly” or “verily.” 'Kutumbam' means a family or blood
relations, and kutumbakam technically means a little family. So here the Vedic
sages are saying that the entire world is truly just one family. The world is like a
small, tightly knit, nuclear family.

2) 'Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam' in Upanishad:

Maha Upanishad Chapter 6, Verse 72:

" अयं बनधुरयं नेित गणना लघुचेतसा

उदारचिरताना तु वसुधैव कुटुमबकं "

'ayam bandhurayam neti ganana laghuchetasam

udaracharitanam tu vasudhaiva kutumbakam'

'Only small men discriminate saying: One is a relative; the other is a stranger.
For those who live magnanimously the entire world constitutes but a family.'

3) Hitopadesha, 1.3.71:

'ayam nijah paroveti ganana laghuchetasam

udaracharitanam tu vasudhaiva kutumbhakam' |

’This is my own and that a stranger’ – is the calculation of the narrow-minded

For the magnanimous-hearts however, the entire earth is but a family'

4) 'Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam' concepts in other texts:

Panchatantra, 5.3.37.
The three recensions of vikrama-charita (Andhra 3.1, Jaina 17.3, Jaina-
shubhashIla 6.270).

Subhashitavalih (udarah.498.)

• Growth is a stage in development; it is a fact in single advancement of a

product.
Development in other hand is the general growth of something both in
fact and in figures
Development concludes growth; development is general advancement
in something, like a country.

Development in country factors the whole economy but growth facts a

particular sector in the economy
Therefore, Growth is advancing in one aspect of an economy (in human
by age and height) whiles Development is the general advancement in
all the aspect of ones economy (In Human, by wealth, ideas,
technology etc )

Comments

Top of Form

Add a comment...

9134804 440554 Add Comment

Bottom of Form

Sponsored Links

Need Hair Fall Solutions?

there is not much difference growth means increase in size, stature,cell number etc. development means
improvement of organs, increase in their efficiency of functioning that is generally accompanied by growth.

Growth usually refers to a noticeable increase in the size of the organism or a specific part of the
organism. It is usually macroscopically apparent, i.e. you can observe it with a naked eye.

Development is a broader term then growth. Growth is a type of development. Some developments
do not correlate with overall increase in size of the organism or its parts. For example, during early
human development (right after birth), the neurons in the brain start to make critical connections,
which give later adult functions, such as vision. This is considered as a DEVELOPEMENT, but it is
usually not regarded as growth, because 1) you can observe it without advanced instrument 2) it
doesn't cause increase of size of anything.