Click here to download

Towards a new generation of community studies
Author/s: Alfredo Mela 
Year:  2016 Issue: 110 Language: Italian 
Pages:  15 Pg. 71-85 FullText PDF:  478 KB
DOI:  10.3280/SUR2016-110006
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 

The article starts by noting that community studies now seem an outdated kind of sociological research. The first part will examine the reasons for this loss of interest, linking it to the transformations that occurred in recent decades in the process of urbanization on a global scale. The second part will introduce some considerations that explain the conditions under which the study of individual territorial entities may also be relevant in the contemporary urban sociology. Such studies should focus not so much on the description of the social characteristics of specific communities, but rather on the analysis of the territorial capital and projects present in them.
Keywords: Community, urbanization, projects, territory, sociology, individuality.

  1. Abrahamson M. (2006). Urban Enclaves: Identity and Place in the World. 2nd edition. New York: Worth Publishers.
  2. Adorno T.W. (1967). Funktionalismus heute. Ohne Leitbild. Parva Aesthetica. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
  3. Allan G., Philippson C. (2008). Community studies today: urban perspectives. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 11, 2: 163-173., 10.1080/1364557080194088DOI: 10.1080/1364557080194088
  4. Arensberg C.M. (1954). The Community-Study Method. American Journal of Sociology, 60, 2: 109-124., 10.1086/22150DOI: 10.1086/22150
  5. Avallone G. (2010). La sociologia urbana e rurale. Origini e sviluppi in Italia. Napoli: Liguori.
  6. Bagnasco A. (1992). “Comunità”. In Enciclopedia delle Scienze sociali-Treccani.
  7. Bagnasco A. (1999). Tracce di comunità. Bologna: il Mulino.
  8. Banfield E.C. (1958). The Moral Basis of a Backward Society. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press.
  9. Bauman Z. (2001). Community. Seeking Safety in an Insecure World. Cambridge: Polity.
  10. Bell C., Newby H. (1971). Community Studies. London: George Allen & Unwin.
  11. Blanchot M. (1984). La Communauté inavouable. Paris: Les Éditions de Minuit.
  12. Brenner N. (2013). Theses on Urbanization, Public Culture, 25, 1: 85-114., 10.1215/08992363-189047DOI: 10.1215/08992363-189047
  13. Camagni R. (2009). Per un concetto di capitale territoriale. In Borri D., Ferlaino F. (a cura di). Crescita e sviluppo regionale: strumenti, sistemi, azioni. Milano: FrancoAngeli: 66-90.
  14. Casavola P. (2012). Dotazione e attivazione di risorse locali: patrimonio culturale e naturale, competenze scientifiche e saper fare nelle città italiane. In Casavola T., Trigilia P. (a cura di). La nuova occasione. Città e valorizzazione delle risorse locali. Roma: Donzelli: 13-56.
  15. Chevalier J.M., Buckles D.J. (2013). Participatory Action Research: Theory and Methods for Engaged Inquiry. Abingdon, New York: Routledge.
  16. Chiesi L., Costa P. (2016). Making territory through cultural mapping and co-design. How community practices promote territorialisation. In Dessein J., Battaglini E., Horlings L., (eds). Cultural Sustainability and Regional Development. Theories and practices of territorialisation. London-New York, Routledge: 146-161.
  17. Ciaffi D. (2015), Il ruolo del terzo settore nella società italiana che cerca ‘paricrazia’. In Arena G., Iaione C. (a cura di). L’età della condivisione. La collaborazione tra cittadini e amministrazione per i beni comuni. Roma: Carocci.
  18. Elias N. (1974). Foreword: Towards a Theory of Communities. In C. Bell, H. Newby, editors, The Sociology of Community. London: Frank Cass: ix-xli.
  19. Gans H. (2009). Some problems of and futures for urban sociology: Toward a sociology of settlements. City and Community, 8, 3: 211 - 19., 10.1111/j.1540-6040.2009.01286.DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6040.2009.01286.
  20. Governa F. (2014). Tra geografia e politiche. Ripensare lo sviluppo locale. Roma: Donzelli.
  21. Kavaratzis M., Ashworth G.J. (2005). City branding: An effective assertion of identity or a transitory marketing trick? Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 96, 5: 506-514., 10.1111/j.1467-9663.2005.00482.DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9663.2005.00482.
  22. Koolhaas R., Werlemann H., Mau B. (1994) S,M,L,XL. New York: The Monacelli Press.
  23. Krause M. (2013). The Ruralization of the World, Public Culture, 25(2): 233-248., 10.1215/08992363-202057DOI: 10.1215/08992363-202057
  24. Lincoln Y.S., Guba E.G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  25. Löw M. (2008). The Constitution of Space. The Structuration of Spaces Through the Simultaneity of Effect and Perception. European Journal of Social Theory, 11, 1: 25-49., 10.1177/136843100708528DOI: 10.1177/136843100708528
  26. Martinotti G. (2011). Dalla metropoli alla meta-città. Le trasformazioni urbane all’inizio del secolo XXI. In Dematteis G. (a cura di). Le grandi città italiane. Società e territori da ricomporre. Venezia: Marsilio: 25-76.
  27. Mela A. (2007). La città, oggetto non ovvio della sociologia. Scienze Regionali, 6, 3: 137-154.
  28. Mela A. (2015). Quale “filo rosso” di una sociologia del territorio? Sociologia urbana e rurale, 37, 107: 11-19.
  29. Nancy J.-L. (1986). La communauté désoeuvrée. Paris: C. Bourgois.
  30. Pahl R. (2005). Are communities communities in the mind? Sociological Review, 53: 621-640., 10.1111/j.1467-954X.2005.00587.DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-954X.2005.00587.
  31. Payne G., Williams M. (2005). Generalization in Qualitative Research. Sociology, 39: 295-314., 10.1177/003803850505054DOI: 10.1177/003803850505054
  32. Roy A. (2009). The 21-st Century Metropolis: New Geographies of Theory. Regional Studies, 43, 6: 819-830., 10.1080/0034340070180966DOI: 10.1080/0034340070180966
  33. Ryle G. (1949). The Concept of Mind. London: Hutchinson.
  34. Sassen S. (2014). Expulsions. Brutality and Complexity in the Global Economy. Cambridge (Ma.)-London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press., 10.4159/978067436981DOI: 10.4159/978067436981
  35. Scott A.J., Storper M. (2015). The Nature of cities: The Scope and Limits of Urban Theory. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 39, 1: 1-15., 10.1111/1468-2427.1213DOI: 10.1111/1468-2427.1213
  36. Singer A. (2012). Migration and the Metropolis. Practice to Policy. Lessons from Local Leadership on Immigrant Integration. Maytree Foundation.
  37. Soja E. (2000). Postmetropolis: Critical studies of cities and regions. Oxford: Blackwell.
  38. Soja E., Kanai M. (2006). The urbanization of the world. In Burdett R., Sudjic D. (editors). The Endless City: The Urban Age Project by the London School of Economics and Deutsche Bank’s Alfred Herrhausen Society. London: Phaidon: 54-68.
  39. Stacey M. (1969). The Myth of Community Studies. The British Journal of Sociology, 20, 2: 134-147.
  40. Wellman B. (1979). The community question. American Journal of Sociology, 84: 1201-1231., 10.1086/22690DOI: 10.1086/22690
  41. Wellman B, Carrington P., Hall A. (1988). Networks as personal communities. In Wellman B., Berkowitz S., (editors). Social structures: A network approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 130-184.
  42. Westerink J., Lagendijk A., Dühr S., Van der Jagt P., Kempenaar A., (2013). Contested Spaces? The Use of Place Concepts to Communicate Visions for Peri-urban Areas. European Planning Studies, 21, 6: 780-800., 10.1080/09654313.2012.66504DOI: 10.1080/09654313.2012.66504
  43. Wittgenstein L. (1953). Philosophische Untersuchungen. Oxford: Blackwell.

Alfredo Mela, Towards a new generation of community studies in "SOCIOLOGIA URBANA E RURALE" 110/2016, pp. 71-85, DOI:10.3280/SUR2016-110006


FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content