PROCEEDINGS FROM

THE DELTA IN GLOBAL CONTEXT WORKSHOP

MAY 27-28, 2005

DELTA STATE UNIVERSITY CLEVELAND, MS

Prepared by Alan W. Barton, Ph.D.

Sponsors: Institute for Community-

Based Research

Oxfam America

Mississippi Association of Cooperatives

THE DELTA IN GLOBAL CONTEXT

THE DELTA IN GLOBAL CONTEXT

PROCEEDINGS FROM THE

DELTA IN GLOBAL CONTEXT WORKSHOP

MAY 27-28, 2005 DELTA STATE UNIVERSITY

CLEVELAND, MS

Prepared By

ALAN W. BARTON, Ph.D. July 10, 2005

iii

CONTENTS Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Sponsors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Workshop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Session 1: Welcome Greetings from the Institute for Community-Based Research, John Green . . . . . . . . 4 Workshop Topics, Alan Barton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Greetings from the Mississippi Association of Cooperatives, Ben Burkett . . . . . . . . . 5 Greetings from Oxfam America, Jaeda Harmon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Session 2: Setting the Stage Achieving Social Change Through Participation and Action, Anna Kleiner . . . . . . . . 6 Session 3: Education and Workforce Development Brain Drain Distressing the Delta Dollar, Catherine Cannatella . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Workforce Perceptions: Employer Assessment of the Workforce in a Mississippi Delta County, Todd Holt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Working for Community Improvement in Bolivar, Coahoma and Quitman Counties, Josephine Rhymes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Session 4: Unemployment and Poverty Changing Opportunities for the Poor in the Rural Mississippi Delta, Judy Maynard and Michael Timberlake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 St. Gabriel Reaches Out: A Community Center Attempting to Address Poverty, Sister Donald Mary Lynch and Carla Ross . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Session 5: Plenary Address The Communities of Opportunity Program for Achieving Social Change, Lynn McGee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Session 6: Agriculture and Rural Development Food Sovereignty in the Mississippi Delta, Jesse Strassburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Cooperative Community Development: Grassroots Development in an Era of Globalization, Ben Burkett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 The Globalization of Agriculture: Effects on Social and Natural Systems in Rural Communities in Jamaica, Paulette Meikle-Yaw . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Session 7: Culture and Development Heritage Tourism in the Local and Global Context, Alan Barton . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Session 8: Health Care Mississippi and the Global Obesity Epidemic, Mitch Morris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Session 9: Keynote Address The Wealth and Health of the Delta, Art Cosby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Session 10: Leadership and Development Stability and Differences in Black and White Rural Community Leadership Structures in Two Mississippi Delta Towns, Josh Stovall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Leadership Development, Social Networks and Community Involvement: An Evaluation of a Mississippi Delta Leadership Program, Donielle Lovell . . . . . . . 41

iv

Session 11: Community-Based Initiatives Introduction to Fetterman’s Foundations of Empowerment Evaluation, Jesse Strassburg . 46 Collaborative Partnerships and Block Parties as Community Empowerment, Alkie Edwards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 The Cleveland Youth Council: Using Civic Engagement as a Tool for Youth Empowerment, Sarah Leonard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Communication Network Development to Address Health and Human Service Gaps, Starr Parker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Session 12: Alternative Frameworks Community Development as Collective Action and Social Movement: An Alternative Approach to Conceptualizing Our Work, John Green . . . . . . . . . 49 World Café . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Next Steps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Appendix A: Call for Papers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Appendix B: List and Index of Workshop Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Appendix C: Abstracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Appendix D: Photos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

v

TABLES AND FIGURES Tables Table 1: Total Population and Percent Change for 11 Delta Counties, 1920-2000 . . . . . . . . . 5 Table 2: Common Approaches to Participatory Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Table 3: Intent to Move by Age and Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Table 4: Summary of Workforce Perceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Table 5: Characteristics of the World System and the Periphery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Table 6: Weight and Body Mass Index for a 5’9” Individual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Table 7: Number of Ties Represented in Each Sociogram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Table 8: Overall Demographics of Delta Emerging Leaders Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Table 9: Creation of Networks Among Delta Emerging Leaders Respondents . . . . . . . . . . 43 Table 10: Measures of Community Involvement Among Delta Emerging Leaders Respondents . . 44 Table 11: Three Dimensions of Social Movements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Figures Figure 1: Median Household Income for 18 Delta Counties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Figure 2: Cut and Sew Factories, Briefly the Basis of Levee County’s Manufactring Boom . . . . . 14 Figure 3: Characteristics of Comprehensive Community Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Figure 4: Overlap of High AFDC Dependence and High Unemployment in Southern Rural Development Region Nonmetro Counties, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Figure 5: A Cooperative Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Figure 6: Farmer Cooperatives Help Members Produce and Market Their Crops . . . . . . . . . 22 Figure 7: Price for Bananas Relative to the Consumer Price Index, 1960–1999 . . . . . . . . . . 23 Figure 8: Glocalization and Sustainable Communities in the Global Market Place . . . . . . . . . 24 Figure 9: National Heritage Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Figure 10: Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults, 1991 – 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Figure 11: Two Views on the Relationship Between Income and Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Figure 12: Average Life Expectancy, 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Figure 13: Life Expectancy at Birth in the United States, 1900 – 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Figure 14: Life Expectancy at Birth by Race in the United States, 1900 – 2001 . . . . . . . . . . 36 Figure 15: Age Adjusted Mortality Rates for Mississippi Delta Non-Metropolitan Areas and for the United States, 3 Year Averages, 1968 – 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Figure 16: Additional Deaths in Mississippi Delta Non-Metropolitan Areas, 3 Year Averages, 1968 – 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Figure 17: Sociograms of Leaders in 2 Delta Communities, 1996 and 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Figure 18: Cleveland Youth Council Participants Engaging in Youth Empowerment Projects . . . . 47 Figure 19: Strategic Theoretical Model Linking Micro and Macro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

THE DELTA IN GLOBAL CONTEXT A Workshop on How Globalization is

Reshaping the Mississippi Delta, Informed by Community-Based

Research, Practice and Development

BACKGROUND The Delta in Global Context workshop began as a series of conversations between two professors of Community Development at Delta State University (DSU) in the Spring of 2003. Alan Barton and John Green shared an interest in sustainable development, including a concern for social justice as an important dimension of community sustainability in a globalizing economy. These conversations initially led to a course offered in the Fall of 2003 titled The Delta in Global Context, and team taught by Dr. Barton and Dr. Green. This course’s success engendered discussions on further collaborative efforts. Building on the Delta in Global Context course, the two professors initiated a degree option in sustainable development in DSU’s Community Development M.S. program. They also discussed advancing a research agenda on the effects of globalization on communities in the Mississippi Delta region. Their primary interest was on how local groups were changing as a result of global-level economic forces, so they agreed that it would be important to include local residents in all aspects of this research. They decided to organize a workshop to initiate a discussion among researchers and practitioners on how globalization was reshaping the Mississippi Delta. Serendipitously, representatives from Oxfam America learned of the plans for the workshop, and offered to serve as a sponsor. The Mississippi Association of Cooperatives joined as a sponsor as well. With funding in place, the organizers prepared a Call for Papers, and scheduled the workshop for May 2005. The local host would be the Institute for Community-Based Research, a collaborative program of the Division of Social Sciences and the Center for Community and Economic Development at Delta State University. A number of groups and individuals expressed interest in participating in the workshop, and as paper proposals arrived, a set of themes emerged. These included workforce development, health care, culture and heritage, sustainable development and the role of cooperatives in community development. The workshop was structured to highlight these themes.

TOPICS The Delta in Global Context workshop draws together three elements: globalization, community-based research, and the Mississippi Delta. Globalization – the increasing integration of the human race at a global scale – provides a theoretical basis for this workshop. Our primary goal is to understand how processes of globalization are playing out at the local level. The nature of these processes is contested, however, and this workshop provided an opportunity to discuss and better understand the definition, or multiple definitions, of this term. Community-based research is the

2

methodological approach used to understand the effects of globalization on the Delta. Community-based research combines knowledge generation and community development, by incorporating research subjects into the design and implementation of a research project. This is an appropriate approach as one of the primary goals of this workshop is to include practitioners in the research process, including setting the research agenda. The area of application is the Mississippi Delta. The Delta is a distinct geographical region, but it is also a region with its own cultural identity and economic conditions. Broadly defined, the Delta encompasses the areas within the Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley that border the river, including portions of seven states: Illinois, Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Mississippi and Louisiana. These regions are characterized as rural, agricultural and poor. Within the state of Mississippi, the region known as the Delta refers to the large Yazoo-Mississippi floodplain in the northwest corner of the state. This area lies wholly or partly within 19 counties, and is easily recognizable by its flat topography, distinct ecosystems, and agricultural landscape. Culturally, the people living in these counties are among the poorest in the U.S., are comprised mostly of African Americans, have relatively low levels of educational achievement, produce an exceptional number of artists and writers, and highly value family and religion.

PARTICIPANTS A total of 34 people participated in the Delta in Global Context workshop (see Appendix B), including researchers and graduate students from six universities, and community developers from a variety of agencies. Most of the participants were from the Delta region in Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana and Tennessee, although a few participants traveled from other areas of the U.S. to attend. Since this event was organized as a workshop, most participants also gave presentations. Presenters are profiled below. All who attended contributed to the workshop through group discussions, but several participants from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and from Delta State University did not present their work to the rest of the group. Participants representing the USDA Agricultural Research Service’s (ARS) Delta Nutrition Intervention Research Initiative (Delta NIRI) project included Beverly McCabe Sellers, who is Research Coordinator based in Little Rock, AR; Victoria Thompson, post-doctoral researcher for the USDA ARS; Flavelia Stigger, Research Technologist at the University of Arkansas-Pine Bluff and a community liaison representative for the Delta NIRI project in Marvel, AR; Willie Allen, Program Coordinator for the Marvell NIRI; and Diane Sims, Outreach Assistant for the Marvell NIRI. Participants from Delta State University that did not give presentations include Albert Nylander, Chair of the Division of Social Sciences; Myrtis Tabb, Senior Administrator for Special Projects and instructor of Community Development; Pamela Moore, Visiting Scholar in Community Development and former Regional Director of the U.S. Program at Oxfam America; Victor Mikebanyi Ruhimbya, graduate student in Community Development; and Justina Garcia, from Melrose Park, IL, who will start as a graduate student in the Community Development program at Delta State in the Fall of 2005. Ray McGee of the Mississippi Association of Cooperatives also attended the workshop on Friday.

SPONSORS The Delta in Global Context workshop was sponsored by three organizations, which share common missions for grassroots organization, social justice and democratic participation. All three organizations have identified globalization as an area of interest, and have expressed the belief that we need to better understand the connections between a globalizing economy, corporate and

3

government practices, and local communities. This workshop provides an opportunity to advance this objective. The Institute for Community-Based Research is a collaborative program of the Division of Social Sciences and the Center for Community and Economic Development at Delta State University (ICBR 2005). Founded in 2003 by Dr. John Green, the Institute engages in grassroots research and development projects that help community groups identify and answer questions that enhance local livelihoods. Research topics include employment, poverty, health care, environment, food security, and cooperative organizations. The Institute establishes partnerships between community groups, DSU faculty and graduate students, and other interested parties to carry out research using a variety of strategies. Partnering organizations are underserved by the research community and lack the technical, human or financial resources to carry out research on their own. Activities of the Institute for Community-Based Research offer partnering groups training and technical assistance with question formulation, research design, methods of inquiry, data analysis, and reporting. Institute projects also offer Delta State students the opportunity to develop and strengthen research, outreach, and educational skills through work with community groups to directly address social problems. Projects link community groups, nonprofit associations, government agencies, and educational institutions. Oxfam America, based in Boston, MA, is an affiliate of Oxfam International, the international development and relief organization (Oxfam 2005). Oxfam America takes the position that local people offer the best solutions to local problems, and therefore forges enduring partnerships with local organizations to deliver development programs and emergency relief services. Oxfam America works with local groups, but also advocates for social justice at the global level, emphasizing issues such as fair trade, workers’ rights, arms control, the rights of small farmers, community finance, access to land, peace and security, equality of women, and rights for indigenous and minority groups. For example, Oxfam America assists small farmers by providing assistance in gaining access to higher value markets, by developing sustainable production techniques, by diversifying production for better nutrition and security, by supporting democratic organizational structures such as cooperatives, and by helping excluded groups gain an understanding of their basic rights. But they also target corporations to advocate fairer prices for produce and recognition of farmworkers right to organize, and they lobby the U.S. government for legislation to protect farmworkers. The Mississippi Association of Cooperatives (MAC), based in Jackson, MS, was established in 1972 to provide support to limited resource and minority cooperative organizations statewide (MAC 2005). MAC currently coordinates thirteen local farmer co-ops, housing co-ops, and credit unions. MAC is affiliated with the Federation of Southern Cooperatives/Land Assistance Fund, and is a local partner of Oxfam America. The Association responds to the needs of its member organizations by raising funds and providing loans to member organizations, and by advocating for policy favorable to organizational goals. The Association assists member organizations with production, marketing, technical assistance and training. Assistance to farmer cooperatives has concentrated on production of sweet potatoes, okra, peas, kale, watermelon and other crops, and in addition to income these crops have provided better nutrition and health to members. The Association also assists member groups with marketing strategies, including home delivery, farm stands, farmers markets, food distributors, and grocery

4

stores. They also work with partner organizations in other states to open new markets for members’ produce, and have sold their products in urban areas around the eastern U.S. In 1997, MAC chartered the Mississippi Center for Cooperative Development to offer training and technical assistance to local cooperatives.

WORKSHOP The Delta in Global Context workshop convened on Friday, May 27 and concluded on Saturday, May 28, 2005. Meetings were held in the Capps Archives on the DSU campus, and the plenary and keynote addresses were in the State Room in DSU’s H.L Nowell Union. PowerPoint slideshows from the presentations can be found on the World Wide Web at http://ntweb.deltastate.edu/vp_academic/ abarton/Research/Delta in Global Context/PowerPoints.htm. Session 1: Welcome The workshop convened with welcoming remarks by the co-organizers and sponsors. John Green, co-organizer of the Delta in Global Context workshop, kicked off the workshop by welcoming participants to Cleveland on behalf of Delta State University and the Institute for Community-Based Research, the host institution for the workshop. After reviewing the schedule and logistics for the workshop, Dr. Green introduced others involved in organizing the event. Alan Barton, workshop co-organizer, introduced the three elements that the conference would draw together: globalization, community-based research, and the Mississippi Delta. Globalization, the theoretical basis for the discussions and papers, is a complex phenomenon, but by way of introducing the topic Dr. Barton emphasized five aspects of globalization. First, globalization as it is currently practiced involves integration under a capitalist market at a global level. Second, using the capitalist model, production and consumption are increasingly standardized and homogenized. Third, the world is stratified into core and peripheral areas, which may be nations or regions within a nation.

Figure 1: Median Household Income for 18 Delta counties

Source: Kersen 2002

5

Table 1: Total Population and Percent Change for 11 Delta counties, 1920-2000 Fourth, globalization entails the diffusion around the world not only of a capitalist economic system, but also of a world view and system of values particular to capitalism. And fifth, globalization entails a weakening of national states and increasing control by transnational corporations. The approach to research employed at this workshop is provided by the community-based research model. Community-based research is a participatory approach in which the subjects of a study help to shape its goals and design. Community-based research begins with the premise that knowledge is rooted in experience and resides among members of a particular community. Finally, empowerment of local actors, through participation in a research project and by gaining a voice so that their views and perspectives are heard, is an important objective of a community-based approach to research. The area of application for this workshop incorporates the geographical area known as the Mississippi Delta. On a broad scale, the Delta incorporates the floodplains along the Mississippi River in the Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley, a region that covers portions of seven states: Illinois, Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Mississippi and Louisiana. Within the state of Mississippi, however, when residents speak of the Delta they are referring to an area more accurately called the Yazoo-Mississippi floodplain. This region includes portions of 19 counties in the northwestern corner of the state,. The Delta is as much a cultural construct as a geographical locality. As in the other states along the river, this region of Mississippi exhibits distinct characteristics, including high rates of poverty and outmigration. Figure 1 summarizes the persistent poverty that characterizes the Delta region. The median income for Delta households has consistently lagged behind not only the rest of the U.S., but is substantially lower than the rest of the state of Mississippi. Table 1 demonstrates that the region’s population has declined due to outmigration since 1940. Dr. Barton then reviewed the themes for the workshop, which formed the basis for the individual sessions and papers. The themes were selected by the organizers based on the abstracts submitted by participants, and they reflect current policy concerns in the Delta as well as areas of specialty of researchers and practitioners in the region. The five themes are: education, workforce development, underemployment and poverty; agriculture and sustainable development; culture and heritage preservation; health status and access to health care services; and leadership, collaboration and cooperative alternatives. Ben Burkett, the State Coordinator of the Mississippi Association of Cooperatives (MAC), welcomed participants on behalf of his organization, which is one of the sponsors of this workshop. The Mississippi Association of Cooperatives is an umbrella group of 13 small agricultural co-ops in Mississippi, and a member of the Federation of Southern Cooperatives. The MAC is interested in

6

understanding the relationship between small farming in Mississippi and other countries, and has partnered with Oxfam America to study farming in Africa, Asia and Central America. Mr. Burkett highlighted some of the changes in farming in Mississippi, noting the impact of cotton subsidies, and reduction in acreage planted in watermelon, okra and snow peas in Mississippi. Jaeda Harmon is a Program Officer for the U.S. Program of Oxfam America, another workshop sponsor. Ms. Harmon welcomed participants on behalf of Oxfam. She defined Oxfam’s mission as ending poverty around the world, and said the challenges are to understand and put a face on the local impacts of globalization and to understand the commonalities between communities in the Mississippi Delta and other communities in places like Central America, East Asia, Africa and South America. In their work, Oxfam America addresses alternatives for a more just system, and how those negatively impacted by economic forces can have a voice in the processes that shape their conditions. Following greetings from organizers and sponsors, participants introduced themselves to the rest of the group. Session 2: Setting the Stage Anna Kleiner of Southeastern Louisiana State University presented the first paper of the workshop, entitled “Achieving Social Change Through Participation and Action: An Analysis of Community-Based Research and Related Theoretical Perspectives.” Dr. Kleiner’s objective was to provide a better understanding of community-based research. She framed her talk around four provocative questions: Historically, how has social change occurred in your community? Who usually wins, and who loses? When research is conducted, who usually generates and uses the “knowledge?” And how do we respond to the impacts of globalization and achieve desired social change? Dr. Kleiner described globalization as corporations sourcing the planet for profit, looking for cheap labor and a relaxed regulatory environment. One way we observe this in communities is local governments that offer tax incentives to attract new business or to retain existing businesses. Government and business have frequently collaborated to advance the growth machine of capitalism, relying on outside interests. Historically, grassroots mobilization has not been involved in community development very much. According to Dr. Kleiner, globalization is not going to go away; so the question communities must face now is how can those who have traditionally been marginalized by this system find ways to share in its benefits. Community-based research offers citizens an opportunity to be players in the globalizing economy, and to have a voice in their communities, so that they are not merely overrun by the powerful government and business interests in their community. Historically, research has been tied to the powerful interests, as researchers in universities have established the research agenda and formed the research questions. More and more, in public research universities private money is driving the research agenda, and the knowledge generated from such research is privileged and protected within the scientific community. This system leaves behind the interests of local communities. Dr. Kleiner described community-based research as the synthesis of a variety of participatory research strategies (see Table 2), all of which share a concern for equity and justice in the research

7

Participatory Research in Community Development (Selener; SPRA)

Action Research in Organizations and Education (Dewey; Selener; Whyte)

Rapid Rural Appraisal and Rapid Participatory Appraisal (Chambers; Pretty; Townsley)

Participatory/Empowerment Evaluation (Coombe; Dugan; Fetterman)

Table 2: Common Approaches to Participatory Research

process. These approaches aim to democratize knowledge, sharing it among many groups. Drawing on these various strands, community-based research expresses four overarching goals. The first is to take a participatory approach to research, sharing decision-making power and ownership of the process and products with the communities involved in the research. This is a means of democratizing the processes of knowledge generation and the use of knowledge gained through research, and altering the traditional power structures that frequently determine winners and losers in processes of social change. The second goal is to ground problem identification and solutions in everyday experience, rather than abstract theory. Community-based research counteracts the historic trend in research towards outsiders defining problems for communities by incorporating local residents in the process of generating research questions. The third goal is to promote grassroots mobilization, self-reliance, empowerment and emancipation. This is done by providing many groups access to the research process; if people lack access, they will be dependent on others to set the research agenda. Research can be an avenue of democracy, by providing a means to participate in decisions through democratic processes. The fourth objective is to take action to change social and economic conditions, and thereby facilitate processes through which people can improve their lives. Strategies to implement change through the existing political system should be informed by research generated within the community itself. Several important issues arise in the implementation of a community-based research strategy. One is the role the researcher plays in a community. Community-based researchers take a co-learner stance, operating as catalysts and facilitators by sharing information on how to do research. A second issue is the validity and reliability of data collected through community-based processes. One way to validate research findings is to have subjects evaluate and review the results of a research process. A third, important issue is the authenticity of participation – who participates, and how do they participate? Is a cross-section of the community represented, including contrary opinions, or does a powerful leader select like-minded individuals and empower them to participate? Authenticity of participation can be assessed by considering who is benefiting by participating. Finally, who do policy-makers respond to? They rely on researchers to inform their decisions, and they respond to the people that they hear from. Community-based research provides a valid means of communicating a wider variety of interests and ideas to policymakers. Three ways that researchers and practitioners can engage in productive action in the Delta include a variety of research techniques, active involvement in the policy process, and greater collaboration between community organizations, and with public and private institutions. Community-based researchers employ a wide variety of techniques to accomplish the goals of empowerment, local-knowledge generation, and mobilization. Some of these include focus groups, interviews, asset

8

mapping, needs assessment, and surveys. A holistic approach combines qualitative and quantitative analysis, which provides a more complete picture of social change and its effects. Discussion following Dr. Kleiner’s presentation highlighted ethical aspects of community-based research. In response to one question, Dr. Kleiner noted that it probably would be necessary in many situations to involve established organizations, such as universities, to help you get the process of community-based research started. From the perspective of universities, however, there may be problems, particularly at large universities, where institutional research boards (IRB) may not understand the goals of community-based research. It may be helpful for applied researchers to get involved with their university’s IRB, and act as proponents of community-based research done in ethical ways. This allows the researcher to educate others about community-based research and to demonstrate that community-based research is an ethical approach. One participant noted that in a large university, it may be useful to separate behavioral from medical research in the institutional review system, so that applied research is judged on its own merits. Another significant tension is that at some universities, community-based research is not as highly valued in tenure and promotion reviews, and this tends to steer researchers into other approaches. Regional universities may be more supportive of community-based research because they have a closer relationship to the communities in their regions. The issue of tenure also affects the ability of junior faculty to dedicate substantial time to a given research project, and requires researchers to forge relationships that allow them to produce research results in an expedient fashion. Session 3: Education and Workforce Development The primary topic of the morning sessions was employment. Three presenters gave papers on education and workforce development in the Delta. Catherine Cannatella considered the effects of outmigration on employment in the region; Todd Holt examined how employers perceive workforce characteristics in one Delta county; and Josephine Rhymes reviewed a variety of programs in the Mid-Delta region to improve the capacity of workers and to link workers and employers. Catherine Cannatella, a graduate student in the Community Development program at Delta State University, led off with a paper entitled “Brain Drain Distressing the Delta Dollar.” She defined the problem as “the outward migration of talented and educated individuals from the Delta” and argued that this phenomenon “impairs social and economic growth and development, which perpetuates the existing poverty.” Development is hindered as a result of what Ms. Cannatella called the “Distressed Delta Dollar (DDD).” After reviewing indicators of poverty in the Delta region, Ms. Cannatella discussed globalization in terms of the “new economy.” Two elements characterize the new economy: the globalization of business and the revolution in information technologies. Historically, the Delta has employed a strategy of attracting outside business to the region, and has brought in high production but low wage industries. But the Delta must continuously adapt to changes in the new economy. The new economy requires more emphasis on identifying and solving problems, by applying knowledge to build more flexible systems that allow creative, critical and analytical thinkers in particular contexts to solve problems. People who can link problem identifiers and problem solvers are important in the new economy. Is the current corporate driven system benefiting the Delta? If not, what can we do to change this? Brain drain, also called human capital flight, refers to the emigration of talented individuals to other jurisdictions due to conflict, lack of opportunity, or health hazards where they live. This concept

9

traditionally has been applied to peripheral areas. It impedes economic development by depleting the best and brightest, affecting the educational system, the infrastructure, research and development, and entrepreneurism. The brain drain is a selective process; frequently it is college graduates who are the first to leave. In this study, Ms. Cannatella tested the extent to which the Delta was suffering from a brain drain. Using data from the 2003 Delta Rural Poll, a telephone survey of 809 households in eleven Delta counties conducted in October and November of 2003, Ms. Cannatella examined the relationship between migration, education and age (see Table 3). According to this survey, 15.5% of respondents indicated they intended to move in the next year. About 50% of these had some college, and those aged 30 and younger were significantly more likely to say they expected to leave their community within one year. When asked if it was likely that they would still live in their community in five years time, 27.5% said it was unlikely, with nearly half of those (13.0% of the total) indicating that it was highly unlikely. A cross-tabulation of intent to move in five years by education showed a slightly higher rate for those with some college, although the difference was not statistically significant. A significantly higher number of respondents under age 30 said they planned to move within five years, however. One of the reasons the Delta is experiencing a brain drain is that the educational system is inadequate. The system is not preparing students with the analytical skills that they need to thrive in

Table 3: Intent to Move by Age and Education

Count/ % of Educ. Category

Years of Formal Education

Less

Than 9th Grade

9th to 12th Grade

H.S. Diploma/

equivalent Some

College Associate

Degree Bachelors

Degree Graduate/

Professional Degree

Total

Plans to Move from Current Community in Next Year

6 8.7%

31 17.1%

24 15.7%

28 19.3%

7 11.1%

20 15.0%

9 14.8%

125 15.5%

Unlikely to Live in Current Community in 5 Years

4 5.8%

44 24.3%

38 24.8%

59 40.7%

17 27.0%

46 34.6%

14 23.0%

222 27.5%

Count/ % of Age Category

Age

18-21 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-64 65 or More Total

Plans to Move from Current Community in Next Year

21 65.6%

37 33.3%

21 15.3%

20 12.4%

15 10.2%

0 0.0%

11 5.8%

125 15.5%

Unlikely to Live in Current Community in 5 Years

20 62.5%

56 50.4%

37 27.0%

51 31.7%

31 21.1%

6 19.3%

21 11.1%

222 27.5%

Source: 2003 Delta Rural Poll N = 809

10

the new economy, so students are going elsewhere for college. Research suggests they are unlikely to return. The Delta faces a quandary, however, as the transition to a new economy requires that Mississippi develop both jobs and workers simultaneously. In the past, industries have located in the Delta, but then have left because they could not find the trained workforce that they required. Without these jobs, however, it is difficult to dedicate money to training and then to retain a highly trained workforce. One way to initiate this shift is to move from subsidies to investment as a basis for economic development. Investment should be targeted; rather than trying to spread the wealth over the region, target clusters of industry in particular locations and encourage investment in these areas. Another recommendation is to target industries that can operate in rural areas. Telecommunications and high tech industries are suitable to rural areas, for example. Also, nurturing existing businesses to retain and grow them is important, as are investments in research and education. In marketing and public relations, the first step needs to be convincing local residents that the Delta has many positive amenities; too often, people that live here do not recognize the positive qualities, and this makes it more difficult to sell these to outside industries. Some states use “brain gain” marketing to sell their positive qualities to others. Such a campaign should promote more than just economic advantages. Factors such as a clean environment, open space, cultural diversity, recreation, low crime, quality health care, child care, good cultural and educational opportunities, low cost housing, and other amenities can be marketed to attract businesses. Discussion following Ms. Cannatella’s talk focused on business incubators as a model for targeted investment-based growth. Incubators provide shared infrastructure and services in an area to attract business investment. Clarksdale has a proposal in the works right now to develop an incubator, and others in the Delta are considering this model. Todd Holt, another Delta State graduate student, presented a paper based on his M.S. thesis. The paper was called “Workforce Perceptions: Employer Assessment of the Workforce in a Mississippi Delta County.” Mr. Holt’s objective was to understand the implications of globalization on the workforce of the Delta, looking at factors such as the retention and recruitment of industrial firms. Historically, firms have viewed the Delta as a good place to locate because of the abundance of cheap land and labor. Today, however, increased access to overseas low-skill and low-wage labor forces overseas has led to firms to relocate elsewhere, with devastating repercussions on the economy of rural areas of the South such as the Delta. Some areas have the highest unemployment rates in decades. Mr. Holt was particularly concerned with understanding how different types of firms perceived the workforce in the Delta region, in the context of globalization. This would inform policies to counteract the loss of jobs in the Delta. He distinguished perceptions among firms introducing technology vs. those not introducing new technology, firms that have been in the region for awhile compared to firms new to the region, and manufacturing vs. service-providing firms. Companies that have stayed in the U.S. emphasize intellectual capital and new technology. These firms’ strategic planning focuses on innovation through research and development. Rather than standardized production and mass marketing, these companies aim for specialized production and niche markets. They require a well-trained, flexible workforce that can solve problems and make independent decisions. Companies that have been in the region longer (over 25 years) tend to spend less money on research and development and have an older workforce. They tend to operate under the low-skill, low-wage model, and are at risk of relocating. Younger companies emphasize

11

News Technology Years in Community Type of Company

No/Yes 25 or less/26 or more Manufacturing/Service

Availability No ≈ Yes New > Old Man. < Serv.

Quality No > Yes New < Old Man. > Serv.

Stability No > Yes New > Old Man. ≈ Serv.

Productivity No < Yes New < Old Man > Serv.

Table 4: Summary of Workforce Perceptions

technology, and require a more skilled worker. Manufacturing now is the largest sector in the economy of the Delta, but manufacturing companies are likely to relocate, either overseas or to urban areas, while service industries in the Delta tend to fall into sectors that do not use or produce technology. Based on these insights, Mr. Holt expects that companies that are not introducing new technology, older companies and firms in service industries would have a higher perception of the workforce in the Delta. Mr. Holt collected data on companies in one Delta county, and company representatives were interviewed by community leaders. Four variables were used to measure company perceptions of the workforce: quality, stability, availability and productivity. Mr. Holt presented his results, summarized on Table 4. He found that companies introducing new technologies rated the quality and stability of the workforce lower, although they rated the productivity higher. Newer companies rated availability and stability of the workforce higher than older companies, and manufacturing companies rated quality and productivity higher than service providers. According to the perceptions of company managers, it is clear that quality and skills of the workforce is a problem in this county. In order to retain these companies, it is necessary to develop a skilled workforce. Discussion following Mr. Holt’s presentation highlighted the importance of education in developing a skilled workforce. One participant noted the paradox between this presentation and the previous presentation. Mr. Holt suggests that the problem lies with the workforce, that companies are leaving because there are not enough well-trained workers in the Delta, while Ms. Cannatella suggested that workers are leaving because of lack of opportunities in the Delta. Mr. Holt noted that manufacturing companies look for quality schools, a quality workforce and quality of life when making decisions about where to locate their firms. Enhancing the educational system would help recruit and retain companies. But, better jobs would enhance the educational system. The question is how to break the cycle. The third paper in this session was presented by Josephine Rhymes of the Tri-County Workforce Alliance. Ms. Rhymes discussed the community development activities that her organization is carrying out in Bolivar, Coahoma and Quitman counties, in part carried out through community-based research in alliance with Delta State University. The purpose of the Tri-County Workforce Alliance is to develop a competitive workforce, reduce unemployment and promote systemic change within the educational system.

12

The Tri-County Workforce Alliance has a variety of projects in place. Their “Carpentry for Women” program emerged from a survey that found many women wanted to enter the construction industry, which provided higher wage opportunities than traditional jobs open to females such as secretarial work. The public policy initiative aimed at workforce improvement involved a community-based research project. Using focus groups with underemployed and unemployed workers and telephone interviews with employers, they tried to reach common ground on why it is that people in the county are out of work. From this research, they developed a curriculum for workforce training, which they gave to a class of 33 students. At the end of one year, 14 of these students are still at the jobs they acquired as a result of this program. They now want to extend this curriculum to other programs statewide. Other projects include after school tutorial programs; education-oriented parent rallies; CHOICES program; Pathways to Collaboration; Groundhog Job ShadowDday; Industry and Education Day; legislative forums; and community forums. The Tri-County Workforce Alliance partners with a variety of local educational, government and non-profit organizations, allowing them to extend their sphere of influence, to access information and other resources from a variety of sources, to network and build relationships, to increase long-run productivity, and to engage communities and empower people. One potential partner, for example, is Head Start, and they are currently negotiating with them to increase transportation in rural areas. Head Start has busses they use to bring kids to their programs, but they sit idle most of the day. The Alliance wants to use these as feeder busses to bring people from rural areas to busses in town that can deliver them to their workplaces. They also offer small grants to community- and faith-based groups, which help people with workforce training. Collaborating with partners reduces duplication of services, and allows people to share their knowledge and skills with others to develop a broader understanding of leadership in community organizations. Collaborative partnerships are empowering and create an appreciation for diversity. Following Ms. Rhymes presentation, there was a general discussion of workforce issues in the Delta. The discussion returned to the “chicken-and-egg” issue of training workers to attract companies versus providing opportunities so workers will seek training. Mr. Holt cited research in other states, such as Utah and Florida, where they have chosen to invest in workforce training rather than in offering subsidies to employers, and have found this an effective strategy for going providing high quality, high wage jobs in their communities. Another participant cited the example of a company in Clarksdale that undertook its own workforce training, and has been very successful at retaining its workers. These sorts of investments produce an upward cycle, as higher wages allow workers to circulate more money in the community. By contrast, companies that receive tax incentives and that provide low skill, low wage employment tend to leave the area as soon as the incentives dry up. Part of this requires a rethinking of how we conceptualize these things; too often, politicians view tax breaks as an investment, but increasing spending on education as an expense. Session 4: Underemployment and Poverty Two papers focused on the relationship between employment and poverty. Judy Maynard and Michael Timberlake highlighted characteristics of globalization, and described how these have shaped the history of one county in the Tennessee Delta. Sister Donald Mary Lynch and Carla Ross of the St. Gabriel Mercy Center in Mound Bayou, MS, reported on a variety of community development projects implemented in this historic community.

13

Judy Maynard of the University of Tennessee-Martin and Michael Timberlake of the University of Utah presented a paper entitled “Changing Opportunities for the Poor in the Rural Mississippi Delta.” Dr. Timberlake began by noting that global processes shape local conditions (see Table 5). How a region is “plugged into” the world system affects community, politics, economics and culture at the local level. There may be a tension between these global forces and communities, and even resistance by community groups, but in the long run the global processes tend to win. Globalization is not a new process; it has existed for at least 500 years, starting small and encompassing a larger and larger portion of the world by incorporating new areas. The formation of the periphery occurs as areas are incorporated into the world capitalist system in a subordinate position to the dominant capitalist organizations, such that a hierarchical system of core-periphery (or “rich/poor,” “North/South,” etc.) relationships are formed; regions such as the Delta can be conceptualized as an “internal periphery” within a core nation. The European-based world system is organized on the logic of capitalist markets, profits and competition. Inequities are not necessarily shaped by the malevolent schemes of “evil capitalists;” they are the product of people doing what they have to to stay in business. Peripheral areas historically have been sources of raw materials and agricultural products, which has resulted in extreme inequities as land and wealth have been concentrated in a few hands and large masses have people have formed poorly paid agricultural or mining workforces. With globalization, workers are not limited to agriculture or mining anymore. These processes characterize the Mississippi Delta, and other internal peripheries in the U.S. such as Appalachia, the Rio Grande Valley, and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Like the periphery in general, the Delta’s legacy includes concentration of wealth and land, and a poor and insecure labor force. Maynard and Timberlake began studying these processes in four Delta counties in the late 1980s, and more recently they have returned to one of these counties for follow-up work, which they will report on today.

Table 5: Characteristics of the World System and the Periphery

Characteristics of the World System •European-based •500 year history •Has continuously grown through “incorporation” •Hierarchically organized (e.g. core/periphery, rich/poor, more developed/less developed, First World/Third World, North/South, “internal peripheries”) •Follows the logic of capitalism (profits, markets, competition among producing firms) •The logic of capitalism provides the underlying incentive for various social changes, which in turn shape the opportunities people have to earn a living

Characteristics of the Periphery •Areas outside of the world system are incorporated such that they are economically subordinated to the dominant capitalist organizations of the core •Many “periphery” areas were sources of raw materials and colonial agricultural products •Socially, this was reflected in extreme concentration of wealth and land, and in a relatively large, sometimes coerced, and always poorly paid agricultural/mining labor force

14

Dr. Maynard used Levee County, one of the 219 counties in the greater Mississippi Delta region, to illustrate how globalization affects local areas. On January 31, 2005, the last manufacturing plant in Levee County closed and moved to a non-union area of the south outside the Delta. This event resonated well beyond the 55 workers that lost their jobs, creating a painful awareness among county leaders and residents that the area was caught in a downward economic spiral, without any mechanism to stop it. And Levee County is not atypical of rural areas in the industrial world, as many have been negatively affected by the restructuring of the global economy in the form of corporate farming, off-shoring, lay-offs, outsourcing, downsizing, and plant closings. Like other Delta counties, historically farming formed the basis of Levee County’s economy. African-American and white farm laborers lived and worked on plantations, although they were separated spatially, culturally and socially. Producing conditions of antagonism among workers is a common technique used by elite groups to maintain power and control. Racism persists today, although residents frequently deny it. The farmers historically formed the dominant political force in the county, by controlling county boards and undermining other non-agricultural community development projects and opportunities. Beginning in the late 1940s, newly mechanized agricultural technologies and chemicals led to radical changes in the county’s economy, and ultimately harmed the working class as farm jobs, businesses and county revenues declined. Agricultural policies and economic recessions also threatened the agricultural economy, forcing many small farmers to sell their farms. One result of this was out-migration; Levee County lost over 50% of its residents between 1950 and 2000. Today, farming accounts for about 2% of jobs in the county, down from 11% in 1980. Large farm owners, however, were able to respond to changes in the global economy, and replaced cotton production with soybeans, which they could export and increase their profits and landholdings. Levee County now has many of the largest and most valuable farms in Tennessee, although the per capita income in the county as a whole is among the lowest in the state. Levee County experienced a brief industrial boom during the 1960s, as manufacturing plants relocated into the county. The plants that moved to rural areas like Levee County were significantly different than those that moved to urban areas. Rural manufacturing tends to be non-union, lower wage, lower skill, more routine, less diverse and less complex than urban manufacturing. In Levee County, the predominant industry that moved there were cut and sew factories, which employed mostly women, and according to residents were vital to the community. This lasted for about twenty

Figure 2: Cut and Sew Factories, Briefly the Basis of Levee County’s Manufacturing Boom

15

years, but during the 1980s, the factories left Levee County and moved to Mexico and Asia. These jobs were replaced by service sector jobs, which had lower wages and benefits than the manufacturing jobs, and resulted in downward mobility for many county residents and downward structural mobility for the county’s economy. The per capita income is now $11,000, 60% of county residents have incomes below $25,000, and one-fourth live in poverty. Furthermore, one third of the children in the county live in poverty, in part because 60% of all births in 2003 were to single mothers, and over half of single female heads of households live in poverty. This is due in part to the restructuring that has made services the basis of Levee County’s economy, as these services employ primarily females, and many males have migrated away from the area. Today, only 40% of the county’s population are males, and only 34% among the 25 to 30 year old cohort. To reverse the downward spiral facing Levee County, local leaders and residents must recognize and confront directly the obstacles that keep the county in the internal periphery. These include high rates of poverty, low educational achievement, “fractionalization” by race and class, and national policies and leaders that leave places like Levee County marginalized. Discussion of this paper started with the concept of the trickle down effect; large farmers in Levee County were doing well, so why wasn’t their success reaching the masses? Dr. Maynard noted that the large farmers received large subsidies, which is the true welfare system in the region. She also noted that Levee County is unusual and isolated, as surrounding counties do not suffer from conditions of poverty to the same extent. The St. Gabriel Mercy Center in Mound Bayou, MS, engages members of this historic Delta community in a variety of development and self-help projects. Sister Donald Mary Lynch, the director of the center, and Carla Ross, assistant director, discussed the activities of their center in a presentation entitled “St. Gabriel Reaches Out: A Community Center Attempting to Address Poverty.” The St. Gabriel Mercy Center began in 1997, as part of the St. Gabriel Parish which was founded in 1949. The Center “seeks to promote and participate in establishing a system of services aimed at increasing quality of life and human dignity for residents of Bolivar County and other established areas. This involves collaboration and coordination with a wide variety of public and private organizations to address issues relating to the unmet education, social and health service needs of children, youth and adults.” Mound Bayou was founded in 1887 by freed slaves, who had worked on the plantation owned by Kentucky attorney Joe Davis, the brother of Jefferson Davis. Two slaves purchased 4,000 acres from Joe Davis and established the town of Mound Bayou, which thrived for many years. At its high point, the town had 9,000 residents, 50 businesses, two hospitals, and a Baptist seminary, and served as a safe haven from African Americans who were being lynched in the region. Today, there are 2,100 residents, and essentially no businesses. The Catholic Church entered Mound Bayou in 1948, and various groups of missionaries worked through the church to establish a school and other services. The St. Gabriel Center was founded in 1997, and the Sisters of Mercy arrived in 1999 to establish a community center and provide services to the community. St. Gabriel is funded primarily from foundation grants. St. Gabriel community development programs include “Parents as Teachers,” with three certified parent educators that visit homes to teach parents of children up to age 3 about child development; an After School Program, which uses tutors from Delta State and the high school to tutor students age 6 to 18; a Senior

16

Outreach Program, which brings seniors to the community center for two hours, four days a week for a variety of activities, including exercises, games, speakers, health care, and monthly field trips; the Mound Bayou branch of the Bolivar County Library is located at the St. Gabriel Center, which serves as a good resource for the community and for the students in the After School Program; St. Gabriel’s Closet is a thrift store that opened in 2002, and that sells items that have been donated to the Center, including toys, clothes, and household items; a GED Program which offers classes, primarily to young adults, and has produced 16 GED recipients since 2002; the Mercy Computer and Learning Lab is located in Indianola, and offers classes to adults and children on typing, software, and other computer skills; the Job Opportunities Program assists young people in finding things to do, and the Basic Emergency Needs program provides funds to people that cannot pay utility bills, for example, and that combines with the Jobs Program to find people stable sources of income. Discussion following Sister Donald Mary and Ms. Ross’s presentation focused on the degree of public participation in the St. Gabriel Center’s strategic planning. The Center collaborated with DSU faculty and students to carry out a series of public meetings with community members to determine the perceived needs, then engaged in a planning process that incorporated the public input. This proved to be a useful learning experience for many of the participants. One lesson is that public participation involves more than meetings and focus groups with community residents; once these have been completed, it is necessary to take the information that was gathered and do something with it. In the case of the St. Gabriel Mercy Center, this involved an extensive and detailed planning process. It may also involve preparing publications, which benefit the researchers but also inform others of what the organization is doing. A general discussion on the topics from the morning presentations ensued. Some of the problems that emerged during the morning sessions were compared to other impoverished regions in developing countries. Poverty produces similar issues and requires similar responses in many places. Those working with impoverished populations must deal with the political structure, with financial issues, and must find ways to help poor people who can’t pay for services. It’s necessary to find the key sources of revenue that can help alleviate poverty. It is also necessary to find linkages between an area’s independent economy and the global economy. What sustains the Delta’s economy, to some extent, is welfare payments to agribusiness and welfare payments to poor families, but rather than facing up to this and finding ways to build a healthy and sustainable regional economy, much of the policy dialogue is framed to deflect these issues, by discussing welfare queens, or northern farmers taking food out of the mouths of African farmers. As stakeholders in a rural economy, we need to change the dialogue and ask ourselves how we can create a sustainable rural economy that allows us to lead wholesome, healthy lives, within the institutions that matter to us most. Session 5: Plenary Address The Plenary Address was given by Lynn McGee of the Foundation for the Mid South in Jackson, MS. Josephine Rhymes introduced Ms. McGee, describing her as “willing to help, open to change, respectful in her approach whatever it is she is doing, she keeps the faith and she is a true humanitarian, and she is my friend.” Ms. McGee spoke on “The Communities of Opportunity Program for Achieving Social Change.”

17

The Foundation for the Mid South is a regional non-profit organization that promotes racial, social and economic equity in Mississippi, Arkansas and Louisiana. Focusing on economic development, education, and families and children in the region’s communities, the Foundation invests in people and strategies that build philanthropy and makes grants to worthwhile community development projects. Since 1990, the Foundation has stimulated over $150 million in investment in the region. The goal of the Communities of Opportunity (COO) initiative is to establish a long-term, sustainable, asset focused, resident-driven community change initiative in two Delta communities, one in St. Francis County, Arkansas and on in Leflore County, Mississippi. The starting point is building relationships and social capital among and between residents and resource-holding institutions. The Foundation aims to stimulate comprehensive community change, as outlined in The Aspen Institute book Voices from the Field II: Reflections on Comprehensive Community Change (Kubisch et al. 2002). Comprehensive community change is an initiative aimed to produce deep-seated systemic change (see Figure 3). This requires that the Foundation serves as a catalyst to bring communities together. Comprehensive community change must be comprehensive; it must incorporate all key stakeholders. Planning is carried out by community members themselves, based on the baseline data collected in the community and serving the interests of local residents. The community change initiative relies on government structures and collaborative partnerships within the community. We must realize that we are connected to others in the community, in the region, in the state and in the nation, and must work to strengthen those bonds. While planning using a community change initiative is based in the community, the process also relies on support from outside organizations, particularly for research, training, and technical assistance. This can form the basis of partnerships with other groups. Sometimes it is difficult to see what needs to be done in your own community without the benefit of an outside perspective. The community initiative also aims to forge partnerships with political and economic leaders, irregardless of who is in power. Some people think social change requires sweeping those who hold office out and bringing in different leaders, but this is unrealistic. Community development groups must learn to work with those in positions of power to advance their own interests. Finally, the comprehensive community

Figure 3: Characteristics of Comprehensive Community Change

► An initiative rather than a project or program ► The financial and technical support is provided by funders serving as the catalyst for bringing

communities together ► The community change initiative involves an explicitly comprehensive approach ► The community change initiative promotes deliberate, community-based planning established on

the interests of community residents ► The community change initiative relies on governance structures or collaborative partnerships

within the community ► The community change initiative draws on external organizations for training, technical

assistance, research, and other supports ► The initiative seeks partnerships between the community and external sources of political and

economic power ► The initiative includes a learning component

Source: Kubisch et al. 2002.

18

change initiative includes a learning component, for example, by sharing experiences with groups from other parts of the country. To illustrate the value of a learning approach, Ms. McGee told stories from her travels in South Africa. One young community developer told her that either he is creating an intervention, or he is creating an interruption. Community developers must recognize when they don’t have solutions for local people. Outside interventions can be positive, but can also impede local development, particularly if they create expectations that they are not prepared to meet. If community developers don’t have something immediate to offer community members, it is better to avoid interrupting their lives. In order to incite comprehensive community change, the Foundation acts as the enabler in the development process; COO communities must be willing to build on the willingness of community members to work together on their own behalf. The COO initiative built the workforce initiative that Ms. Rhymes spoke of earlier, addressing issues of diversity and building relationships in addition to workforce issues. The COO focuses on economic development, leadership development, community development, and educational improvement and reform. In order to be considered as a COO pilot site, a community must be willing to address its serious social problems, must demonstrate a strong economic base, must possess a committed community leadership willing to work across race, age, class, gender, and organizational lines, must be committed to increasing the power of low-wealth residents, and must be willing to reach a consensus on the goals and strategies for community change. The Delta COO pilot project lasted for 18 months, beginning in November, 2003. The initial planning phase lasted for four months, and consisted of interviews with people to ascertain the perceived problems and needs. In March, 2004, the project began a Smart Communities orientation, based on an approach developed by Suzanne Morris, then continued using the LeadershipPlenty model, also developed by Ms. Morris. Trainers were oriented to the model, then returned to their communities to conduct the modules in their communities on asset mapping. Trainers were matched with other trainers to develop support systems across communities. In the late summer of 2004, a retreat was held with traditional leaders and the leaders developed in this program. This retreat focused on building relationships and issues of racism. Late in 2004, the COO project released requests for proposals for various grants, to build partnerships with various organizations. The participants in the LeadershipPlenty training then participated in community liaison training, learning how to conduct surveys and focus groups, which they administered between December, 2004 and February, 2005. A second round of funding proposals was collected in February, and by May the various strands were tied together into a comprehensive community plan. The COO common council was organized through a general town meeting, and has been operating for about two months. Priority areas proposals for funding were due in June, and would be awarded in September, 2005. Session 6: Agriculture and Rural Development The first session in the afternoon was on agriculture and rural development and featured three speakers. Jesse Strassburg is a program manager for Heifer International, and has worked in the greater Delta region. Ben Burkett is the State Coordinator for the Mississippi Association of Cooperatives, one of the sponsors of the Delta in Global Context workshop. Paulette Meikle-Yaw is a Ph.D. candidate at Mississippi State University and a native of Jamaica.

19

Jesse Strassburg, who is a graduate student in the Community Development program at Delta State University in addition to his work with Heifer International, led off and spoke about Heifer International’s Delta Initiative in a presentation entitled “Food Sovereignty in the Mississippi Delta.” Alleviating hunger and poverty is an important aspect of Heifer International’s mission, and one of their goals is to reduce food insecurity. Food insecurity, according to the USDA (2005), is the “limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods or limited or uncertain ability to acquire acceptable foods in socially acceptable ways.” Poverty increases food insecurity, which affected 36 million people in the U.S. between 1995 and 1998, 40% of which were children. When we consider that the food intentionally discarded during agricultural production and from grocery stores and restaurants could feed 49 million people a year, it appears that food insecurity is the product of our food policies and not our productive capacity. This becomes clearer if we look at who is affected by food insecurity: race and ethnicity, region of residence, educational level, household structure, and age all are factors that affect the chances that someone will live in a food insecure environment. Fourteen percent of Mississippi households are in food insecure conditions, the highest rate among states in the southeastern United States. Furthermore, employment is insufficient as an indicator of food security. For example, transfer payments to needy families have been shown to reduce food insecurity, and following welfare reform in 1996, it has been found that former welfare recipients struggle with food insecurity at a higher rate than welfare recipients. According to Kuhn, LeBlanc and Gunderson (1997):

“Decreases in transfer payments to poor families will have significant effects on food production, consumption, and nutrition. Lower transfer payments will lead to reduced expenditures on food, changes in the kinds of food consumed, and reduced expenditures on other goods by low-income households.”

As shown in Figure 4, prior to welfare reform the Mississippi Delta had high unemployment and high reliance on federal welfare payments; thus, the region is at high risk for elevated food insecurity as these families leave welfare rolls and enter an environment where jobs are scarce.

Figure 4: Overlap of High AFDC Dependence and High Unemployment in Southern Rural Development Region Nonmetro Counties, 1994

20

The Food Sovereignty movement puts the issue of food insecurity in the Mississippi Delta into a global context. According to the People’s Food Sovereignty Network (2002), food sovereignty is:

“the right of people to define their own food and agriculture; to protect and regulate domestic agricultural production and trade in order to achieve sustainable development objectives; to determine the extent to which they want to be self reliant; to restrict the dumping of products in their markets; and to provide local fisheries-based communities the priority in managing the use of and the rights to aquatic resources. Food Sovereignty does not negate trade, but rather it promotes the formulations of trade policies and practices that serve the rights of people to food and to safe, healthy and ecologically sustainable production.”

Food sovereignty is a relatively recent movement that has brought together many non-governmental organizations, and the United Nations has picked up the concept as well. The concept focuses on the right of local communities to exercise control over the production and distribution of food in their regions, with the goal of making these practices more just and sustainable. Concentrating on food sovereignty allows local communities to address issues of food security within a context of globalization, and to counteract to some degree the control over food exercised by large corporations and the government. How can we address food insecurity before it occurs? To increase food security among low-income households, it is necessary to implement a comprehensive approach designed to gain sovereignty over the production and trade of food products. Comprehensive food security addresses the access to healthy food by low income households and the self-reliance of communities to provide for their own food needs. Heifer International promotes comprehensive food security programs that concentrate on land tenure and ownership, training, and markets. Land tenure issues have been important in the South, particularly to minority farmers. Heifer has micro credit loans, leadership training, and projects to keep youth on family farms. Training uses demonstration farms, farmer-to-farmer training, and training programs with partners. Marketing emphasizes alternative crops (e.g. fruits, vegetables, nuts, honey, Christmas trees, spices), direct sales through farmer markets and cooperatives, and value added processing (e.g. canned fruits and vegetables, cane syrup, cider, candies). Mr. Strassburg ended his presentation by showing slides of two projects carried out in the Delta region of Arkansas. One set of slides illustrated the evolution of a Heifer International project and the results that can be achieved. The other showed a DSU course that collaborated with Heifer to carry out a community-based research project. Discussion on Mr. Strassburg’s presentation focused on alternative fuel systems. As Heifer is an organization that emphasizes environmental responsibility, one potential form of alterative production could be ethanol or other biofuels. Mr. Strassburg mentioned discussions that had occurred on this topic, but not projects to date. Ben Burkett of the Mississippi Association of Cooperatives gave a presentation on black farmer cooperative development called “Cooperative Community Development: Grassroots Development in an Era of Globalization.” Mr. Burkett introduced the notion of a “community-based cooperative,” which is a community-based organization which is organized as a cooperative business. Community-based cooperatives have evolved from traditional farmer, small-scale service and consumer cooperatives, “poor-people’s cooperatives,” and civil rights organizations. They follow the same

21

Figure 5: A Cooperative Network principles as all co-ops: open membership, one person-one vote, limited return on investment, benefits distributed according to use, on-going education, a community-level focus, and a commitment to social and environmental justice. Another form of cooperative organization that the Mississippi Association of Cooperatives works with is credit unions. Credit unions provide a means of pooling people’s money so they can lend it to each other. They are democratically organized, they have “members” rather than “customers” as a bank would, and they provide services and loans at low interest rates. Most of the capital in credit unions is developed by the members. Mr. Burkett gave case examples of the characteristics of a few of the cooperatives that are members of MAC. MAC collaborates with the Federation of Southern Cooperatives, which was established in 1967 and has its offices in Georgia. Five states have state associations in the Federation, and 58 cooperatives and 17 credit unions are members. The Federation provides training, direct assistance, community development and networking, rural-to-urban marketing connections, research and advocacy. Connections between MAC, its member organizations, and the Federation of Southern Cooperatives are illustrated in Figure 5. These networks provide excellent opportunities to develop cooperative capacity through a variety of programs. The development of farmers markets, for example, focuses on the needs of both producers and consumers and allows for networking through programs such as the WIC Farmers Market Nutrition Program and the Seniors Nutrition Program. Advocating fair trade occurs by developing rural-to-urban marketing networks. MAC members traveled to Cuba three years ago to establish ties there, and as one of the fruits of that visit, last year farmers planted ten acres of black beans, a common

22

Figure 6: Farmer Cooperatives Help Members Produce and Market Their Crops

crop in Cuba. They will market those this year, and if everything goes well the plan to plant 300 acres of black beans in the coming year. Fair trade emphasizes sustainable development practices, fair prices to produces that cover costs plus a living wage, and partnerships between rural producers and urban consumers. As one example of rural-urban partnerships, last June MAC established a contract with Caesars Entertainment to sell their products to them. On your next visit to the Grand Casino, you’ll taste products from Mississippi cooperatives. Mr. Burkett answered a couple of questions on the crops that MAC cooperatives grow, then discussion turned to ways to retain small farmers in the Delta. Mr. Burkett noted differences between Delta farmers and farmers from the “hills.” One is that Delta farmers are not interested in growing crops unless they can do so on large acreages. Some Delta farmers are interested in growing vegetable crops, but on a large scale. MAC does produce some crops organically, such as herbs, and there is a demand for these products. Paulette Meikle-Yaw, a graduate student at Mississippi State University, presented a paper entitled “The Globalization of Agriculture: Effects on Social and Natural Systems in Rural Communities in Jamaica.” Ms. Meikle-Yaw’s presentation provides a context for comparing processes in the Delta with another area in the global periphery. Her purpose is to explain how the external forces have persistently influenced the use of natural resources and restructured the socio-economic systems of small rural agricultural producers, and the global policies and institutions maintain this system, and the socio-economic, socio-cultural and environmental impacts of the production and export of agricultural products from rural communities in Jamaica. More and more Jamaican farmers are being drawn into the global economy and are producing export crops, but they are cultivating on hillsides, which leads to environmental destruction and problems with mechanization. At the same time, some of these communities are negatively affected by importation of certain agricultural commodities. Why is it important to study the impact of globalization on small Jamaican villages? And can residents of these villages affect global policies? Globalization radically transforms conditions in these remote rural communities. These areas are often overlooked in the processes of homogenization that globalization entails. These areas are already vulnerable; in Jamaica, the incidence of poverty has always been highest in rural areas. According to the 2001 Jamaica Survey of Living Conditions, 24.1% of rural households were in poverty, compared to rates of 7.6% in

23

Figure 7: Price for Bananas Relative to the Consumer Price Index, 1960–1999 Kingston and 13.3% in towns. Globalization exacerbates these conditions, as these areas tend to be the losers in the inequality spurred by global competition. One of the central arguments made by those advocating the globalization of agriculture is that trade liberalization will increase food production and bring prosperity to farmers, alleviating conditions of poverty and hunger. In the study she is reporting on here, Ms. Meikle-Yaw identifies the socio-economic, socio-cultural and ecological consequences at the community level of fruit exports from Jamaica. To address this question, she examines the origin of economic dependency and associated land degradation in Jamaica, and asks if the overseas retail price of agricultural commodities reflect their real costs in Jamaica. She considers this in a framework of equity, asking who should absorb externalities in the global market place, and what are the hidden costs associated with agricultural exports in the livelihood activities and quality of life in small rural Jamaican villages. Data for this study are drawn from field work in over 20 rural Jamaican communities between 1990 and 2000. Ms. Meikle-Yaw considers conditions in rural Jamaica from the perspective of world-systems theory, which describes the global systems of inequality engendered by the spread of capitalism. According to this theory, the most powerful and affluent nations form the global core, a set of countries that are intermediate in their wealth, political autonomy and economic diversification form the semi-periphery, and the most powerless nations with undifferentiated economies that rely on primary products form the global periphery. The peripheral countries exist in a relationship of dependency to the core centers of global capitalism, and engage in unequal terms of trade that requires them to export primary products to the core, then import more expensive manufactured products from those areas. Places like the Mississippi Delta are internal peripheries to core countries; the villages she studied are peripheral areas in a peripheral country. While there are some obvious similarities, an interesting side question is the extent to which areas like the Delta and rural Jamaica share similar conditions. Ms. Meikle-Yaw noted that per capita income in the U.S. is $37,800, while in Jamaica annual per capita income is $4,100. In both cases, the peripheral nature of the economies are constructed by

24

Figure 8: Glocalization and Sustainable Communities in the Global Market Place

25

outside forces. Colonial rule initiated the integration of Jamaica into the global economy; however, Britain did not promote broad-based industrial development in Jamaica, which positioned Jamaica in a dependent position from the early stages of its global integration. These forces have continued today, as decisions over Jamaica’s economy are made in response to the dominant economic powers. Under these conditions, rural agricultural communities face difficulties achieving consistent economic growth. Small farmers see their earning potential and quality of life decrease, as prices for their commodities stagnate in the face of rising costs for consumer goods (see Figure 7). Such factors frequently go unnoticed, as small farmers in peripheral areas are disregarded both in the theory and practice of globalization. In addition to the costs borne by local farmers, trade liberalization incurs environmental costs on peripheral areas as well. This is another factor that is overlooked in economic theories of globalization. Ecological conditions in Jamaica exacerbate the effects of trade liberalization on the environment. For example, small farmers producing for global markets deforest hillsides to produce crops, but heavy rainfalls leads to devastating soil erosion of watersheds. This also increases siltation of watercourses and increased flooding downstream. In 1995, deforestation was occurring at a rate of 24,700 acres per year, resulting in a loss of over 80 million tons of topsoil each year. All 26 watershed management areas in Jamaica are severely degraded. Agricultural chemicals produce another environmental challenge. For example, chemically coated non-biodegradable polythene bags are used on banana plants, then left in the fields where they enter watercourses and distress aquatic organisms. Trade liberalization has interrupted social systems in rural areas as well. The “higgler” or middleman was an important agent of social integration in rural areas. Not only did this person facilitate economic transactions, but he was also the source of news from the outside world. Traditionally, higglers bought from local farmers and sold to local consumers, but with the globalization of agriculture, the higgler now acts as an agent for importers and exporters. The social network system that depended on the higgler in rural villages has been lost. In sum, the current structure of the banana trade in the global market is not sustainable, nor does it provide a viable means of long-term survival for rural communities in the periphery. Cheap bananas in the industrialized countries come at the cost of socio-economic dislocation and environmental damage in producing countries. For sustainable communities, the price of bananas in the world market should reflect the real costs of bananas at the various stages of the production process. Structural changes in the global economy are essential to protect vulnerable social and natural systems. Rural communities in poor countries should limit their participation in the globalization equation unless they can have some control over long-term eco-development in their regions and can garner benefits for families living in these communities. How can this work? Figure 8 presents a model of a global structure that would enhance the chances for sustainable rural communities in peripheral countries. In this approach, more attention is paid to sustainability at the community level, in particular by balancing local economically sustainable development (stable businesses, local production, local use) with concern for socio-cultural (community traditions, civic organizations, social responsibility) and environmental (conservation of natural resources, living within a region’s carrying capacity) factors. In addition, more attention needs to be paid to achieving balanced trade between communities, local and regional markets, and global markets.

26

Ms. Meikle-Yaw ended her presentation by showing photos from rural areas Jamaica that illustrated the conditions she described. In the discussion following her presentation, the point was raised that maybe all farmers belong to the global periphery; however, Ms. Meikle-Yaw pointed out that large farms in the U.S. receive subsidies to produce, which is forbidden in Jamaica by World Trade Organization rules. If subsidies were eliminated, however, we would be at risk of not producing enough food, reducing food security. This raised the question of the future of agriculture in places like the Mississippi Delta. We recognize that subsidies to northern farmers are not a panacea, but what are the alternative and challenges? What are the terms for an on-going conversation on these issues? Of course, capitalism has drawbacks which we have discussed, but there are goods as well. Small farmers in Jamaica could not produce enough food to feed the country, and agribusiness has made it possible to produce enough food to feed people. However, the subsidy system has its drawbacks. For example, our agricultural system is not set up in a way to produce enough food for people to meet the requirements for a healthy diet, such as 5 to 9 servings of fruit and vegetables per day. Dr. Green noted that Ms. Meikle-Yaw’s presentation helps us contextualize the situation in the Delta, and also highlights that the solutions to some of the larger global issues of trade liberalization are those being presented at this workshop, such as the work of the Mississippi Association of Cooperatives. Session 7: Culture and Development Alan Barton of Delta State University’s Community Development program spoke about a proposed heritage area in the Mississippi Delta region in a paper entitled “Heritage Tourism in the Local and Global Context.” Using heritage as a means of community development has become popular in recent years, particularly in the eastern U.S. This has been institutionalized by the federal government through the creation of the National Heritage Area designation, administered by the National Park Service. Several states have similar programs, and many local areas area developing regional heritage areas without federal or state designation as a means of attracting tourists and income to their region. Dr. Barton started by having participants write down their definition of “heritage” and what aspect of Delta culture and heritage they thought would be most attractive to tourists. Words that participants used to characterize the concept of heritage include history, knowledge, tradition, stories, background information, identity, culture, origins, lifestyle, physical environment, passed on from generation to generation, events, continuity, and timeless. The concept of heritage tourism presents a paradox. Heritage is essentially a local phenomenon, part of the traditions of a community; however, once it becomes a means of attracting business from tourists, it takes on a commercial nature. As it becomes a commodity, it loses its authenticity. The commodification of heritage through tourism ties it into global markets, and into the worldview of global corporate capitalism. But a focus on heritage itself, on what is local and authentic, represents a resistance to the homogenizing effects of globalization. Participants were asked to contrast local and global elements of heritage. Words that participants used to describe the local/global dichotomy include authentic/commercial, community/market, personal/institutional, stagnant/dynamic (or vice versa), diversity/homogenized, values history/values future, family/materialism, and politics/economics. The issue of stagnant vs. dynamic produced an interesting debate. On the one hand, local areas are more rooted in tradition and therefore slower to change than the rapidly changing, market-oriented global system. On the other, globalization generates standardization,

27

which isn’t changing, whereas things are constantly changing within local systems. Looking at heritage, which is essentially a local phenomenon, local culture is changing, whereas when this is marketed as a story at the global level, the story persists even as conditions at the local level change. Of course, creating dichotomies of this nature reduces a wide variety of social action into broad categories, whereas there really exists a continuum between the local and global realms within which heritage can be understood. Tourism is a significant industry in the United States, and is growing in importance in Mississippi. According to the Travel Industry Association of America, tourism accounts for 7.3 million jobs nationwide, with an annual payroll of $162 billion, estimated expenditures of $600 billion, and estimated tax revenues of $100 million. Within Mississippi, tourism has become an important industry in the last fifteen years, accounting for 91,500 jobs and an annual payroll of $1.6 billion. Estimated direct sales in the state total $5.7 billion, state tax revenues from tourism are estimated at $450 million, and local tax revenues at $144 million. Much of the growth in tourism in Mississippi stems from the gaming industry that has built casinos along the Gulf Coast and the Mississippi River. Building on the tourism infrastructure that gaming has brought to the state, three regions of the state are developing heritage tourism areas. The Gulf Coast was designated a National Heritage Area in December, 2004, the Mississippi Hills area centered in Oxford has an active heritage program in progress, and several groups in the Mississippi Delta region have been developing heritage as a basis for community development and are seeking designation as a National Heritage Area. Participants reviewed characteristics of Delta heritage that would attract tourists to the region. Some that were discussed include the musical history (blues, jazz, rock & roll); the food, such as barbecue and catfish; plantations and the story of King Cotton; the land and the Mississippi River; wildlife, hunting, and outdoor recreation; literature, great authors, and other well-known figures; civil rights; historic communities and family stories; Civil War history; the Great Migration; folk art; and Native American culture. The federal government supports heritage tourism in areas with stories of national significance through the National Heritage Areas program, administered by the National Park Service (NPS). According to the NPS:

“A National Heritage Area is a place where natural, cultural, historic and recreational resources combine to form a cohesive, nationally distinctive landscape arising from patterns of human activity shaped by geography. These patterns make National Heritage Areas representative of the national experience through the physical features that remain and the traditions that have evolved in the areas. Continued use of the National Heritage Areas by people whose traditions helped to shape the landscapes enhances their significance.” (NPS 2005)

There are currently 27 National Heritage Areas, including one in the state of Mississippi (see Figure 9). National Heritage Areas have two objectives. First, to conserve local examples of culture, history and regional identity. Second, to provide funds and technical expertise to encourage local economic development, primarily through tourism. National Heritage Areas are designated by Congress, in response to local initiative. They are managed by local entities, such as state agencies, private commissions, or private voluntary organizations. In order to get federal designation, local groups must demonstrate widespread support and public involvement from local groups and commitment from key local constituents, as well as cultural resources of national significance. The National Park

28

Source: NPS (2005)

Figure 9: National Heritage Areas

Service acts as a facilitator for the site, rather than as a patron as in the case of national parks and other federal designations. The Park Service provides technical expertise, and through the federal government, access to funding for a period of approximately fifteen years. Community-based research can play a valuable role in the process of designating a national heritage area. According to the National Park Service, “federal designation depends upon Congressional support, whether the region’s resources are nationally important and the degree to which the public is engaged in and supportive of the designation” (NPS 2005). Community-based research can contribute to establishing compliance with these criteria by identifying important resources, stories, and interpretive and educational opportunities; by generating a better understanding of local conditions, preferences and possibilities; by establishing partnerships with local agencies and service providers; by building community support for the designation; by clarifying perceptions about the designation; and by empowering local residents participating in the heritage project. On this last point, heritage areas not only conserve and market an area to tourists, but they also build local pride in a region’s culture and traditions. This can be empowering to local residents, especially in peripheral areas where people have internalized a sense of low self-worth. A wide-ranging discussion followed Dr. Barton’s presentation. First, the group discussed the interface between the casinos and heritage tourists. There are clear differences between casino tourists and heritage tourists in terms of length of stay, how much money they spend and where they choose to spend their money – for example, heritage tourists are more likely to patronize local businesses, while casino tourists spend more money in large chains and conglomerates. In Tunica, a county in the

29

northern Delta with several casino resorts, there is interest in expanding their business into heritage tourism, by providing heritage-based opportunities for tourists whose primary interest may be gambling or golf. In particular, the new Tunica River Park museum provides a good overview of the area’s history and traditions. The site includes a nature trail and a riverboat cruise so visitors can get a hands-on experience. A discussion then ensued on the Tennessee Civil War heritage area, which encompasses the entire state of Tennessee, although the heritage area focuses on the history of the civil war in Tennessee. Typically, heritage areas are developed along corridors, such as waterways or highways, so that tourists can drive along a highway and stop to see several sites, for example. Another interesting aspect of the Tennessee heritage area is that it is managed by Middle Tennessee State University, a model that we may emulate in the Mississippi Delta if Delta State University is selected as the local lead entity in a Mississippi Delta National Heritage Area. The discussion then turned to the Delta Rural Poll, a telephone survey administered by Dr. Barton through the Center for Community and Economic at DSU. In February, 2005, 1,009 respondents answered several questions regarding their perceptions on developing heritage tourism at various types of sites in the Delta, as well as whether they had visited such sites in the past. This provides us with data that complements community-based research efforts, and that can establish an interest in seeing heritage tourism developed in the Mississippi Delta. Quantitative research can also show the impact of heritage areas, and whether designation as a National Heritage Area draws in more tourists. Heritage areas show a tremendous amount of growth potential, both in the state of Mississippi and nationally. The first national site was designated in 1984, but most of the current sites have been created since 1996, and in the last couple of years interest has increased rapidly. In Mississippi, recent efforts have created the nationally recognized site on the Gulf Coast and a locally managed site in the Hills area, as well as the site in the Delta. In addition to the efforts to create regionally based heritage areas, there are numerous historic and cultural sites around the state operating independently that also serve to attract heritage tourists. The many nationally significant stories in the Delta provide an excellent opportunity for community development based on sharing these stories with visitors. Session 8: Health Care Mitch Morris is the Program Director for the Mississippi SHINE1 project at the Aaron E. Henry Community Health Center in Clarksdale, MS. Mr. Morris spoke on “Mississippi and the Global Obesity Epidemic.” He started by defining terms; Table 6 summarizes weight and Body Mass Index (BMI) characteristics for a person of average height. Body Mass Index measures a person’s weight in relation to height. A BMI of 25 to 29.9 is considered overweight, while a BMI of 30 or greater is considered obese. The obesity epidemic, according to Mr. Morris, is global in nature. Of the current world population of 6.4 billion, over 1 billion adults are overweight, and over 300 million are obese. This epidemic is not limited to industrialized countries; in South Africa, one-third of all men and half of all women are overweight, in Morocco, forty percent of the population is overweight, in the Middle East, twenty-five percent are overweight, and in Kenya, twelve percent are overweight. In the U.S., there has been a

1 Strategies for Health Improvement and Network Expansion.

30

Weight (Pounds)

Body Mass Index (BMI) Result

< 124 < 18.5 Underweight

125 – 168 18.5 – 24.9 Healthy Weight

169 – 202 25.0 – 29.9 Overweight

> 203 > 30.0 Obese

Table 6: Weight and Body Mass Index for a 5’9” Individual

dramatic increase in obesity in just a few years, and in 2001 the Surgeon General declared obesity an epidemic. Today, two-thirds of U.S. adults are overweight, and thirty percent (over 60 million) are obese. Furthermore, sixteen percent of American children and teens (over 9 million) are overweight. From 1991 to 2003, the number of obese adults doubled, and the number of overweight Americans increased by an average of 1% each year since 1980 (see Figure 10). All the data suggest that the U.S. is the heaviest country in the world. Obesity is a public health issue because it is a risk factor for many ailments, including hypertension; Type 2 diabetes; heart disease; stroke; gallbladder disease; osteoarthritis; sleep apnea and respiratory problems; endometrial, breast, and colon cancer; and depression and low self-esteem. In 2005, over 500,000 people will die from diseases associated with obesity. Obesity also has financial ramifications. The costs associated with the epidemic of overweight people in the U.S. are estimated to exceed $120 billion per year. This is due in part to the health care costs associated with obesity, which are 36% higher than for adults of normal weight. For diabetes, a disease that correlates with excess weight, annual health care costs average $13,000 per individual, compared to $2,600 for non-diabetic individuals. The costs associated with obesity affect everyone, as Medicare and Medicaid cover over half of these costs. Mississippi is the fattest state in the fattest country. Over two-thirds of adults in Mississippi are overweight, and over one-fourth are obese. Only 38% get the recommended amount of physical activity, and as a result, Mississippi ranks first in the nation in deaths from heart disease and first in young adults with diabetes. In 2000, the annual state costs associated with obesity were estimated at $757 million. What has caused this dramatic rise in obesity? There are a number of factors that have combined to increase the incidence of obesity. The first is personal responsibility. On average, Americans eat 200 calories more per day than 10 years ago. Over a period of 2 weeks, 200 extra calories a day can lead to a one pound increase in weight, which translates to 25 pounds per year. Americans eat too much bad food, not enough good food, and too much in general. While individuals are responsible for their own health, there are many influences that encourage an unhealthy lifestyle. One is the food industry itself. The restaurant industry employs 12 million people, with annual sales of $440 billion. Half of the money Americans spend on food is eaten outside the home, and these meals tend to be less healthy, with larger portions, than home-cooked meals. Portion sizes in restaurants and convenience stores have gotten much larger. Soft drinks are available in half-gallon cups, fast-food

31

Percent of Adult Population with BMI ≥30

Obesity = BMI ≥30, or about 30 pounds overweight for a 5’4” person Source: BRFSS/CDC 2005

Figure 10: Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults, 1991 – 2003

32

restaurants advertise “super-size,” “biggie-size,” and “value-size” meals, and “all-you-can-eat” buffets are popular. Fast food has become a cultural phenomenon, serving meals that are high in fat, salt, sugar and calories. Yet, 30% of U.S. children aged 4 to 19 eat in a fast food restaurant on a typical day, and 20 to 25% of all Americans eat fast food each day. Children typically eat 126 calories more in a fast food meal. The diet industry has benefited from weight gain, and has contributed to the problem. Weight gain occurs slowly, and weight loss must occur slowly as well. Attempts to lose weight quickly by drastically reducing calories usually result in more weight gain, as the body goes into starvation mode and conserves every calorie. Television plays an important role in the increase in obesity in the U.S. In fact, according to Dr. Steven Gortmaker of the Harvard School of Public Health, “the best single behavioral predictor of obesity in children and adults is the amount of television viewing; the relationship is nearly as strong as what you see between smoking and lung cancer” (Lambert 2004). Sedentary activity accounts for only 1/3 of this effect, however; the remaining 2/3 is due to changes in eating habits, driven by advertising on TV. Outside of television viewing, industrial society encourages a sedentary existence. Many jobs require long periods of sitting, cities are designed for cars, not walking or biking, and many modern convenience, from elevators to riding mowers, encourage people to sit rather than walk. Children sit in front of a computer or television, take a bus or car to school, and even have wheels on their backpacks. Policy also contributes to the obesity epidemic. The Food Pyramid used from 1992 – 2004 suggests 6 to 11 servings per day of bread, cereals, rice and pasta, more than any other group. These are high-glycemic carbohydrates, which drive obesity and diseases such as Type II diabetes. This pyramid was developed by the Department of Agriculture (USDA), not a health agency such as the National Institute of Health (NIH) or the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).2 It can be argued that the pyramid was developed in response to heavy lobbying by agribusiness. In addition, billions in subsidies are provided for grains like corn and wheat, which are used to produce products such as corn sweeteners and refined wheat-based snacks. There are no subsidies for healthier items like fruit, vegetables, beans and nuts. As a result, there is higher consumption of less healthy food, which is less expensive. School policies and practices enable increased incidence of obesity as well. Reduced hours in physical education, fast-food style cafeteria menus, soft drinks and candy in vending machines, and snack food advertisements in school, some of which is tied to raising funds for schools, encourage lifestyle choices that lead to obesity. Poverty also contributes to obesity. Cheaper foods tend to be lower in quality, and poorer neighborhoods lack access to safe walking routes and exercise facilities. Mississippi has the highest incidence in obesity (26%) and of poverty (23%) in the U.S. Families using food stamps may go through cycles in which they overeat when food is available, then go through periods of food restriction. This leads to the same effect as dieting; as the body goes into starvation mode, this cycle leads to weight gain over time. Lower educational levels also correlate with higher incidence of obesity. Finally, the medical and health care industry bears some responsibility, because they have been slow to respond to this problem. For much of the public, part of the problem stems from ignorance, but people who provide health care services on a daily basis know about the problem, and yet they don’t

2 A participant pointed out that the Food Pyramid was developed jointly by the USDA and the DHHS.

33

look any different than anyone else. Like the population as a whole, many health care professionals have been unable to make the necessary changes to counteract obesity in their own lives, and have been slow to address this as a public health issue as well. Addressing this issue requires a multifaceted response. At the level of individuals and families, people must understand the relationship between lifestyle, weight and health status. Some people don’t make the connection between eating a bag of chips for dinner and poor health. Individuals must choose to make lifestyle changes such as better eating and shopping habits, increased physical activity, and support of community food sources. Schools and communities must institute nutrition education, and reinstitute physical education classes on a regular basis. School kids need to understand the connections between diet, physical activity, and health. Corporations and businesses can benefit from a basic wellness program, which incorporates health education and a company sponsored exercise program. The returns from such programs are high, in the form of reduced sick time, higher productivity, and fewer health claims. Governments must encourage greater investment in education and preventative health services. More screenings will catch diseases at early stages, avoiding the high costs of treatment for acute diseases. Another issue is regulating the insurance industry, requiring them to treat obesity as a disease rather than a risk factor and to cover treatments for obesity. This saves money down the road. For example, gastric bypass surgery is expensive, but cheaper than long-term treatment for diabetes and other ailments due to obesity; in most cases, losing weight cures diabetes. All of these policies require public and industry support. The Mississippi SHINE project is funded by the federal Office of Rural Health Policy. Most of the funding is subcontracted to local agencies in a 41 county service area, along with technical assistance to establish community-based health networks. These increase collaboration, reduce duplication of efforts, reduce competition, and bring people together to set a collaborative agenda and effectively provide health care to their service area. Much of the focus is on obesity and associated problems, such as diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. Most of the on-the-ground work is through education and outreach, sponsoring community health fairs and screenings, and increasing awareness of common health problems. The Mississippi SHINE project is also drafting a legislative agenda, to impact the state policy discussion, and is developing a research agenda, which will increase the effect at the regional and state level. Following Mr. Morris’ presentation, he showed a moving multi-media program produced by the Mississippi SHINE project. The program introduced the Mississippi SHINE project and some of its local affiliates, and suggested various ways to think about what Mississippi means to different people. Mississippi SHINE promotes progress, diversity, health, and hope for the state of Mississippi. Session 9: Keynote Address During Friday’s dinner, participants enjoyed the Keynote Address from Dr. Art Cosby, Director of the Social Sciences Research Center and professor of sociology at Mississippi State University. Dr. Cosby started by presenting copies of his recent book to the Center for Community and Economic Development and the Division of Social Science at DSU. The book is entitled About Children: An Authoritative Resource on the State of Childhood Today, and compiles 47 chapters from renowned experts on childhood. This is the Social Science Research Center’s effort to have an impact on the life of children in the U.S. today. Each chapter includes links to websites, to make the book more interactive. They also are in discussions about creating a PBS show based on the book.

34

Dr. Cosby’s address is entitled “The Wealth and Health of the Delta.” In 1992, Dr. Cosby edited the book A Social and Economic Portrait of the Mississippi Delta. The book included a section in which professors from a variety of disciplines wrote about economic development and what could be done to improve the economy in the Delta. One of the contributors was Mississippi writer Willie Morris, who wrote “No matter what the future brings, it will always be a place where the land, the soil, with all that this implies in human intercourse, are prized over all else. The Mississippi Delta will be the last place on earth to be paved over.” Dr. Cosby wrote a chapter for this section of the book as well, in which he speculated about the future of the Mississippi Delta. Themes in his chapter included global trends towards free markets, decentralization and democratic solutions; increasing international and global competition; more attention to market-based solutions to social problems, coupled with an awareness of the limits of government; greater concern for environmental quality; and a national shift from a bi-racial to a multi-ethnic society. In 1992, Dr. Cosby did not write about health, but today he would add this theme, equal in weight to the others, as a significant concern facing the Mississippi Delta. Dr. Cosby drew upon the demographic insights of Harvard University economist David E. Bloom. Bloom argues that a traditional perspective on improved health suggests that increased stocks of capital produce higher incomes, and these lead to improved health as more money provides better access to food, clean water, sanitation and health care. However, Bloom has shown that this is not a simple cause-effect relationship; rather, income and health are mutually reinforcing (see Figure 11). Indicators of improved health care, such as life expectancy, lead to higher levels of income. For example, when you get a ten year gain in life expectancy in a country, you get a one percent increase in income growth every year. Dr. Cosby discussed the potential of applying this research to sub-national regions and communities, using the Mississippi Delta as an example.

Figure 11: Two Views on the Relationship Between Income and Health

35

Source: HRSA 2000

Figure 12: Average Life Expectancy in the United States, 2000 Dr. Cosby noted that the Mississippi Delta is an area that persistently lags behind the rest of the nation in health indicators. Life expectancy is probably the best single indicator of the health of a region. Dr. Cosby uses 80 years life expectancy as the benchmark, then looks at regions and considers how many years are lost from the 80 year baseline, and these provide a comparative measure of the health of that region. He showed data for life expectancy from 1990 to 2000, which suggests that the Delta has among the lowest life expectancy rates in the country (see Figure 12). The health patterns found in the Delta are comparable to Indian reservations, which account for the low levels of life expectancy in some areas of the western U.S. Looking at this historically, they found that regions with lower life expectancy persist, although life expectancy for the nation as a whole increased steadily throughout the 20th century (see Figure 13). This trend in improved life expectancy holds for minority groups as well, as shown in Figure 14. Although African-American life expectancy is consistently lower than life expectancy for the population as a whole, it shows the same trend of steady improvement for the entire 20th century. These increases in life expectancy correlate with decreases in the annual death rate, which is a measure of the number of deaths per 100,000 population in a year. How do indicators of health in the Delta compare to these national statistics? Dr. Cosby used the broad Mississippi Delta region, which consists of over 200 counties along the lower Mississippi River. He showed data for metropolitan areas in the region, such as New Orleans and Memphis, and for rural counties as well. Both showed an interesting trend, evident in Figure 15, which shows the data for rural areas in the Delta. From the late 1960s until the mid-1980s, the Delta had higher mortality rates than the nation as a whole, but showed a parallel downward trend, indicating a similar improvement in health both regionally and nationally. Around 1984 o 1985, however, the lines begin to diverge, and the mortality rate for Delta counties does not decrease as rapidly as for the rest of the

36

Source: Arias 2004

Figure 13: Life Expectancy at Birth in the United States, 1900 – 2001 country. This trend is evident in both the urban data (not shown3) and the rural data, although it is stronger in the rural data and in fact, mortality essentially flattens out and remains steady after 1985 in the Delta counties, while it continues to decrease nationwide. By the late 1990s, this trend translates to an additional 2,500 deaths a year over the national average in the urban Delta counties, and about 4,500 extra deaths a year in rural Delta counties compared to the national average

Figure 14: Life Expectancy at Birth by Race in the United States, 1900 – 2001

Source: Arias 2004 3 To view all of the charts from Dr. Cosby’s presentation, see his PowerPoint slides on-line at http://ntweb.deltastate.edu/vp_academic/abarton/Research/Delta in Global Context/PowerPoints.htm.

37

Source: Arias 2004

Figure 15: Age Adjusted Mortality Rates for Mississippi Delta Non-Metropolitan Areas and for the United States, 3 Year Averages, 1968 – 2001

(Figure 16 shows the data for rural counties). The rural Mississippi Delta may be the first place in the United States where health stopped improving. This is a finding that deserves substantial attention. More research is necessary to explore why it is that health is not improving in the Delta. Some questions that need to be addressed include: Is this a temporary or a sustained trend? What role does racial disparity play? Would an analysis of causes of death clarify this trend? Regarding the issue of race, the national trend for African Americans nationwide showed continued improvements in health throughout the 1985 – 2001 period, so this does not seem like it explains the discrepancy in the Delta.

Figure 16: Additional Deaths in Mississippi Delta Non-Metropolitan Areas,

3 Year Averages, 1968 – 2001

Source: Arias 2004

38

Dr. Cosby reviewed the slides showing increasing obesity that were shown earlier in the day by Mitch Morris. The same geographic area where the trend towards improving health disappears is the “epicenter” of the obesity epidemic. While this does not prove that obesity is a factor, it certainly suggests that obesity would be a good candidate to investigate as a causal factor in the Delta case. The Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dr. Julie Gerberding, has said “obesity has roughly the same association with chronic health conditions as does 20 years of aging.” Chronic diseases, particularly those associated with obesity, would be a good starting point to explain why the mortality rate in the Delta has not declined for the past twenty years. Dr. Gerberding also noted that “the speed with which obesity has increased can be explained by changes in society that have increased calorie intake and reduced energy expenditure.” People’s genes have not changed over the past thirty years; social changes are the best candidates to understand why obesity has become a global epidemic. Social scientists are the best equipped to develop explanations for this phenomenon, and this presents a tremendous opportunity to make a meaningful contribution. Further research questions that need to be addressed include: Is the trend in the Delta a consequence of the obesity epidemic? Does this trend represent the leading edge of a more widespread problem for the United States as a whole? What are the implications for the health and the wealth of the Mississippi Delta region? This last question reiterates the original question asked in this presentation; how do regional trends differ from national trends, and how can we explain these differences? Discussion following Dr. Cosby’s presentation focused on the quality of people’s diets. One participant pointed out that people, even if they were poor, still used to have gardens in their homes, and had a healthier diet. Today people eat junk food. Dr. Cosby noted that one only need consider the quality of fast food to see its role in obesity, and we eat a lot of fast food. People have probably gone from diets that were not very good to diets that are awful. Dr. Cosby pointed out that the basis of wealth in the U.S. is hard work, and many people have sacrificed control of our food at the family level in order to generate greater wealth. For example, as more women work and people work longer hours, they generate more wealth that they can convert into larger houses, cars, and things like that. Food deserts, a concept used to describe places where healthy food is unavailable, are increasing. In many areas, the only place to get fresh vegetables now is in large supermarkets. Convenience stores and small mom and pop stores no longer have fresh produce. If you live some distance from a large supercenter, your ability to get fresh fruits and vegetables is diminished. One of the participants cited a study they did that found that children’s caloric intake in the Delta was similar to the nation as a whole, and African American diets also are similar in the Delta and nationwide. White residents of the Delta, however, consumed a less healthy diet than their counterparts at the national level. Dr. Cosby noted that if you look at race and gender differences in obesity rates, African American women had much higher rates than other groups. Finally, Dr. Cosby noted that current studies suggest that being overweight is not so bad, but being obese is highly problematic. He is currently doing a study on the relationship between obesity and chronic pain. People that are normal weight and overweight experience chronic pain at roughly the same rates, but when you get into the obese population, they report chronic pain at a higher rate, and the greater the level of obesity, the more likely the person will experience chronic pain. Dr. Cosby believes similar patterns will emerge for a variety of ailments.

39

Session 10: Leadership and Development Saturday morning opened with a session on leadership in the Mississippi Delta. Both presenters are graduates of the Community Development Masters program at DSU. Josh Stovall will enroll in a Ph.D. program at Brigham Young University in the Fall, 2005, and Donielle Lovell is currently working on a Ph.D. at the University of Missouri. Both studied leadership in the Mississippi Delta for their M.S. theses. Josh Stovall presented a paper entitled “Stability and Differences in Black and White Rural Community Leadership Structures in Two Mississippi Delta Towns.” Mr. Stovall studied two Mississippi Delta towns, which he calls Lee and Franklin, and which are typical of towns in the Delta; both have a majority black population and both have about 2,000 inhabitants. This study contributes to a body of leadership research in these communities since 1996, and Mr. Stovall hoped to update information on community development efforts in these communities and document change in the communities and in the leadership structure. He also wanted to know about the networks of individual leaders, whether they socialized with each other, whether they worked together on community projects, and how they perceived community development. Mr. Stovall used a positional-reputational approach, which relies on community members to identify leaders and to pinpoint their influence. Leaders were people who could get things done, or who could prevent things from getting done. Surveys of community members produced a list of the top 15 leaders in each community, who were conceived as the leadership structure in each town. These individuals were then interviewed to assess their networks, perceptions and attitudes. Among the top 15 leaders in Lee in 2004, four were black males, one was a white female, and ten were white males. This is a similar distribution as in 1996; at that time four were black males, two were white females, and the rest were white males. In Franklin in 2004, two leaders were black females, three were black males, and ten were white males. This compares to one white female, two black males and twelve white males in 1996. Black females make up the largest demographic group in both communities, but did not appear as leaders in these studies until 2004 in Franklin. Figure 17 shows sociograms of the connections between leaders for both towns in 1996 and 2004. These show social ties and community project ties among the 15 identified leaders in each community. These ties are summarized in Table 7. Leaders were asked their opinions of three community development issues. The first was whether the leaders were willing to bring in federal and state funding for community development projects. Both communities showed a high degree and an overall increase in the willingness of leaders to bring in outside funds. The second issue was the willingness of leaders to raise taxes. Overall, there was a modest increase in willingness between 1996 and 2004, although leaders in both communities were neutral on the issue of raising taxes. The third issue was willingness to bring in outside experts to do community development work. Both communities were neutral on this issue. Leaders in Lee showed a slightly greater willingness to rely on outsiders between 1996 and 2004, while the willingness decreased slightly among Franklin leaders. The leadership structures in both communities have changed little since 1996, with few ties evident between races. Blacks are better represented but are ranked lower in 2004 than in 1996. The leaders in these communities are getting older, and there is a lack of emerging young leaders in all

40

Light lines = social ties only Source: Stovall 2005 Dashed lines = community project ties only Dark lines = strong ties (both social & community project ties)

Figure 17: Sociograms of Leaders in 2 Delta Communities, 1996 and 2004

Table 7: Number of Ties Represented in Each Sociogram

Lee Franklin

1996 2004 1996 2004

Total Strong Ties 19 21 20 21

Community Projects with Strong Ties 17 19 16 16

Community Projects without Strong Ties 18 12 16 11

Total Strong Ties between Whites & Blacks 2 4 2 5

Community Projects with Strong Ties between White & Black Leaders 1 4 2 4

Community Projects without Strong Ties between White & Black Leaders 10 6 3 5

Source: Stovall 2005

41

2004 groups. Aging leadership signals a problem for future development in these communities. Leaders of different races are working with each other on community development projects more frequently, partly due to the nature of their work. Many are elected officials, and cannot choose who they work with. Leaders have an increasingly positive opinion on the role of federal and state funding in their community. Most leaders have a neutral opinion on raising taxes to benefit their community. Most Lee leaders have a neutral opinion regarding hiring outside experts to help with community work. Franklin leaders are somewhat favorable to outside experts working in their community. The lack of ties between leaders disrupts the utilization of resources which may be available to help solve community problems. Having mainly white leadership structures in towns with increasing black majorities maintains obstacles to developing effective leadership structures. Effective leadership structures must include significant representation from all segments of a community. Black females are seriously underrepresented in both Lee and Franklin. Leadership programs must address the social nature of leadership structures in order to effectively use available resources. Of particular interest in the Delta is the willingness of whites and blacks to socialize with each other, which may be a factor in why black leaders are not emerging in these communities. Discussion of Mr. Stovall’s presentation emphasized the intersection between family, race, age and community. Small towns frequently are run by one or two families; Mr. Stovall collected data on this, but did not discuss how families were represented in the leadership structures in these two communities. One participant observed that the aging leadership and lack of younger leaders that Mr. Stovall identified is evident in other Delta communities as well. In her community, they had more trouble recruiting young white leaders than young black leaders, and the most active leaders were elderly white females. Mr. Stovall noted that in the communities he studied, white leaders tended to emerge at an older age than black leaders. Donielle Lovell presented a paper entitled “Leadership Development, Social Networks and Community Involvement: An Evaluation of a Mississippi Delta Leadership Program.” Ms. Lovell discussed an evaluation that she conducted of the Delta Emerging Leaders (DEL) program, operated out of the Center for Community and Economic Development. Ms. Lovell was particularly interested in looking at community involvement and network development among participants in this program. Programs of this type not only develop capacity, knowledge and skills in emerging leaders, they also create linkages within communities, and link leaders to resources outside their immediate communities. Rural communities face a number of common challenges, including adapting to changing economic conditions, difficulties in mobilizing resources, and issues in leadership development. Resource mobilization is limited not only by difficulties in gaining access to outside resources, but also by the problem of building the capacity in leaders to organize for collective action. Leadership development issues include “burn out” of leaders, or stagnant leadership structures as discussed in the previous presentation, and the inability to sustain leadership efforts over time. Developing active leaders in communities is crucial to sustainable community development, and given this need leadership development programs have become a common means of addressing leadership capacity needs in communities. The Delta Emerging Leaders program, funded by the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, has trained 82 individuals in leadership skills since its inception in 1997. The program has graduated three classes,

42

each lasting two years. Graduates represent the 18 counties of the Mississippi Delta and are a diverse group by race, gender and economic status. The DEL curriculum focuses on leadership knowledge and skills, building capacity for community initiatives, creation of networks, and race relations, and is delivered to participating community developers through weekend retreats, traveling study tours, and action research projects. Because the program lasts for two years, it requires a substantial commitment by participants, adding to its value for participants. Weekend retreats center on different capacities and areas of leadership, including leadership knowledge and skills, building capacity for community initiatives, creating networks, and race relations. These topics are presented and discussed from the perspectives of education, public policy and economic development, within the social and cultural context of the Mississippi Delta. Action research teams investigate particular problems in Delta communities and strategize for action on these issues. Traveling study tours visit sites in the Delta, and both the state and national capitols. Ms. Lovell’s evaluation of this program focused on both the process and the outcomes of the DEL. Ms. Lovell assessed whether the DEL is using appropriate training methods given the diverse nature of the trainees. Participants come from various employment sectors, educational levels, races and socioeconomic statuses, and the leadership curriculum must be designed to reach all of these participants so each can gain and bring what they learn back to their communities. Ms. Lovell’s assessment of program outcomes focused on the extent to which program graduates have accessed the networks they built during training, both within their communities and among other leaders in the region. The evaluation was carried out using a participatory/empowerment framework. Program staff were involved in developing the evaluation tools and planning, so that the information collected would be useful to them in the on-going project. Data collection was accomplished through review of program documents, 23 qualitative interviews with randomly selected participants, observation of the leadership training, and a survey of all 82 program graduates. The survey was developed from common themes that emerged from the interviews. Program managers were also involved in developing the survey questionnaire.

Table 8: Overall Demographics of Delta Emerging Leaders Respondents

Source: Lovell 2004

43

Characteristics of the survey respondents are summarized in Table 8. Overall, 46 of the 82 program participants responded to the survey, for a response rate of 56%. One-third of respondents were from the most recent class, 44% from the second class, and 23% from the first class. Nearly three-fourths were female, and the classes were divided fairly evenly among African Americans and Caucasians. All participants had some college, and 47.7% had a professional degree. Over 40% had incomes above $75,000 per year, while less than 20% had incomes below $35,000. The process of network creation was a theme that emerged from the qualitative interviews. Graduates of the program reported that they had developed strong ties with others during the program, and they could look to these regional contacts for assistance. Close social ties were established among participants as well. The program also gave participants confidence that they could establish organizational networks in their communities, and also helped participants establish political ties. Survey results reinforce what was learned through the qualitative interviews. The survey was an important element in this evaluation, because it allowed project managers to compare groups to be

Table 9: Creation of Networks Among Delta Emerging Leaders Respondents

Source: Lovell 2004

44

sure that all of them were being served by the DEL program. Given the diversity of the participants, it was valuable to measure this in an objective manner to assess the effectiveness of the curriculum. Table 9 shows indicators for creation of networks and responses for all three classes combined. Comparing the classes, mean responses showed only a slight difference across these indicators. There also was little difference in mean scores by race or educational level. This suggests the curriculum was achieving the goals upon which it was based. Community involvement was another theme that emerged from qualitative interviews with DEL participants. Community involvement was represented by activities such as the creation of the Greenville, MS Balloon Festival, an empowerment zone information session, and community assessments. The Greenville Balloon Festival was started by a DEL group, and continues as an annual event today. None of the original members currently is on the festival’s board, but the event continues. One of the classes took a trip to visit other empowerment zones, to see how other groups were utilizing the resources provided. They organized an information session, but they found difficulties accomplishing anything due to resistance from the leaders of the local empowerment zone. Several participants created community assessments following their participation in the DEL program, and intended to take the results to civic leaders to let them know what businesses needed to improve the community. These events helped develop leadership capacity, and gave DEL participants a venue to become involved in local political and community processes. They were able to develop a degree of understanding of community development and gain stature, which is an important part of the process of recruiting new leaders in these communities. Table 10: Measures of Community Involvement Among Delta Emerging Leaders Respondents

Source: Lovell 2004

45

Table 10 summarizes survey results on community involvement. Using a scale created by combining these indicators, group comparisons showed African Americans were more involved in their communities than white respondents, although the difference was not statistically significant. Means for both groups were fairly high. There was only a slight difference by educational level, and each subsequent class showed a higher degree of community involvement, although the difference between classes was not significant. The results suggest that the curriculum is appropriate for the diverse group that the DEL program trains, indicated by both the qualitative interviews and the quantitative surveys. No significant differences could be detected by race, educational level, or DEL class, for measures of network creation and community involvement, so it appeared the curriculum was reaching all of the diverse groups to produce similar results. Furthermore, results of this evaluation show that DEL graduates have utilized the networks created through the program and have been active within their communities. These results help us understand the potential impact the leadership development programs can have on the resource mobilization needs of communities. These programs help create leadership capacity, but they can also do much more, if the curriculum is designed in an appropriate manner. A well-designed curriculum structure can lead to the creation of diverse and usable networks, that both lead to community involvement and encourage greater community involvement. An effective curriculum can also create linkages to outside agencies resources. Many leadership development programs fail to take these additional steps; they are effective at developing individual skills, but they do not help participants create the social capacity for effective leadership. The DEL serves as a model for a more comprehensive approach to leadership development. Ms. Lovell also reflected on the value of a participatory framework for evaluation. Participatory evaluation allows for a much more nuanced and contextualized understanding of the products of a program such as DEL than a traditional pre- and post-test evaluation format. A participatory framework gives the evaluator the means to capture multiple realities and achieve a deeper understanding of what is going on, but researchers must also consider the validity and reliability of their results. Using multiple methods and triangulation brings more confidence to the results generated through a participatory evaluation. Discussion following Ms. Lovell’s presentation covered some of the specifics of the DEL projects. She clarified that the DEL program has ended, but has been succeeded by a similar program that focuses on the Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi Delta. She also discussed how leaders were recruited into the program, a crucial aspect of the project’s success. She noted that they’ve focused on younger leaders, in the 35 – 40 age range, and that they’ve mixed people in traditional leadership positions, such as school superintendent, with others in more non-traditional roles. The second class seemed to have a different dynamic than the other two, a point Ms. Lovell had made in her presentation, and during the discussion she speculated that this may have resulted from the fact that this group took a trip to Washington, DC early in their program, which built friendships and a more relaxed atmosphere early in the program. The other two groups did not take a trip to Washington until near the end of their program. The timing of events like this can have an effect on all aspects of the program.

46

Session 11: Community-Based Initiatives Four current or recent graduate students in the Delta State University program in Community Development engaged in a modified round-table discussion of projects they have been involved in around the Delta. Each gave a short presentation, followed by a more general discussion among the students and with the group as a whole. Jesse Strassburg began with a presentation entitled “Introduction to Fetterman’s Foundations of Empowerment Evaluation.” This strategy, designed by David M. Fetterman, advocates a three-stage process for thinking about evaluation. The first stage is developing a mission, next is taking stock of the program’s current strengths and weaknesses, and finally, setting goals for the future and helping participants develop strategies for accomplishing the organizational goals. Empowerment evaluation encompasses five dimensions: training, facilitation, advocacy, illumination, and liberation. The evaluator acts as facilitator, responsible for ensuring that the evaluation process advances rather than making judgments about the project. Part of the process involves training, as the goal is to have program participants carry out the evaluation themselves. Engaging in this process builds commitment to the organization, leading to members becoming advocates. This process of illumination, as members take control of group processes, leads to empowerment and liberation. Alkie Edwards spoke on the topic of “Collaborative Partnerships and Block Parties as Community Empowerment.” Mr. Edwards started by offering a definition of collaboration, which he borrowed from David Chrislip (2002). Collaboration is “the mutual beneficial relationship between two or more parties who work towards common goals by sharing responsibility, authority and accountability for achieving results.” Collaboration is more than communication, knowledge or information; it is a relationship that helps each party achieve its own goals. Collaboration creates shared visions and joint strategies, to address concerns that go beyond the purview of any one party. Sarah Leonard gave a presentation entitled “The Cleveland Youth Council: Using Civic Engagement as a Tool for Youth Empowerment.” The Cleveland Youth Council is a project sponsored by the W.K. Kellogg Foundation’s Youth Innovation Fund, a national initiative to promote youth empowerment through civic engagement. Cleveland is one of eight sites in the country with this program, and the only site in a rural area. The initiative encourages young people to act as planners and decision-makers, addressing public issues, problems and concerns. Components of a youth civic engagement project include community awareness and context, youth/adult partnerships, youth voice. Community awareness and context includes research on the community, using focus groups, surveys and discussion groups. It also includes visits to other sites. Youth/adult partnerships includes a consortium of key adult allies, such as organizations committed to youths, having adult members on the council’s board, and having a site coordinator to act as adult mentor and a bridge between youth and adults. Youth voice includes making young people comfortable expressing their ideas and opinions, adults listening and taking young people seriously, and genuine involvement and participation in civic projects. Projects of the Cleveland Youth Council include Get on Board, an initiative to create a skate park in town; P.E.E.R.S., or People Encouraging Everyone to do the Right Stuff, in which members are using recycling to generate funds for a scholarship for one graduating senior; Chamber of Commerce committees with youth members; Superintendent’s and Principal’s Youth Advisory Councils; and the

47

Figure 18: Cleveland Youth Council Participants Engaging in Youth Empowerment Projects What It Is?!? youth newsletter, which they are trying to connect with one of the local newspapers as a regular column or insert for young people. The goal of the Cleveland Youth Council is to empower young people (Figure 18). Some quotes from participants on the value of the program include:

“I don’t think many kids really know what they could do…a lot of people could bring a lot of different stuff to the table.” “We can take over as teenagers and make this world a better place.” “[We] can make changes. It’s basically knowing who to talk to and build partnerships with.” “We need to show that we care about what the youth are doing in our community. You don’t have to be a certain age to make a difference.” “Be the leaders of tomorrow today!”

Discussion following Ms. Leonard’s presentation clarified who the youth were that were involved. Sixteen young people participated over the past year, and they were selected to represent a diverse cross-section of Cleveland’s youth population. They include students from both the public and private schools, as well as home-schooled students, and include a balance in characteristics such as race, gender, socioeconomic status, and educational achievement. Starr Parker, a recent graduate of DSU’s Community Development program, gave a presentation entitled “Communication Network Development to Address Health and Human Service Gaps.” Underserved populations in health and human services include the working poor, pregnant women,

48

children and the elderly. The most disadvantaged groups are those in rural areas and those with limited resources. Many rural areas lack needed services, and rural dwellers are frequently unaware of the services that do exist. The key stakeholders in this are government agencies, health and human services providers, insurance providers, and citizens as taxpayers and service users. According to a needs assessment conducted in the Delta in 2003, access to adequate health care services is limited in the Mississippi Delta due to its high cost coupled with limited availability of funds and/or insurance coverage by users, to the small number and location of professional health care staff, to the lack of availability of transportation, and to the lack of physicians providing specialty care. Ms. Parker proposed that networking among health care providers would improve access to health services, particularly among underserved groups in the Mississippi Delta. Telemedicine provides a means of networking, using telecommunications technology. Telemedicine can be used for medical diagnosis, patient care, patient counseling, and clinical training of students and residents in the health professions. Telemedicine was first used in 1959, but it has seen increased application and use since 1990. Today, computer technologies and the internet can be used to connect service providers and patients. Some of the challenges with telemedicine include funding, lack of necessary infrastructure in rural areas, lack of competent staff, and reluctant doctors. Ms. Parker noted that telemedicine is only one small part of on-going efforts to increase access to health services in rural areas. The floor was then opened up to general discussion of these projects. The first point concerned telemedicine in Arkansas, and one participant made the point that this program was designed to increase networking with physicians, which was detrimental in some situations. The program was very successful at improving nutrition and other ancillary health services, but the funding agency demanded more focus on physicians. The funding structures could prove to be a drawback in such programs. Another participant initiated a discussion on leadership training as a part of higher education. She noted the high school students in the Cleveland Youth Council valued their contact with students in other areas, and some of the DSU graduate students have had similar experiences with graduate students in international development at Brandeis University. Students commented on their experience with this program, and found it to be mutually beneficial. One student commented that the DSU students have a lot of field experience, which the Brandeis students appreciated. They were particularly interested in the participatory approach that many DSU students use in their research and practical projects. There was an extensive discussion of the value of organizations working in a collaborative fashion in the Delta, such as the Tri-County Workforce Alliance and the Dreyfus Health Foundation. These are organizations that have demonstrated a commitment to democratic, collaborative development. They make continuous efforts to include the public in their planning, and they are open to questioning and evaluating their own programs, always with the goal of improving their projects. The value of collaborative development was highlighted by another participant, who compared community development projects in the Delta with those in Africa, where he had experience. He noted that in the Delta, there is much more emphasis on creativity and adaptability, rather than a complacent, receptive attitude found in many peripheral regions. Networking across countries would likely benefit both sides, and this participant expressed an interest in creating a collaborative program

49

between Africans and Deltans. Another participant with experience in Africa noted that education in English-speaking Africa is very hierarchical. This is a barrier to implementing participatory approaches in Africa. A trans-national alliance would be very helpful in developing a different approach to community development in rural areas in Africa. Africans import many books, and many ideas, but Africans do not apply those to create something new in their communities. New technology can be applied effectively to create these networks; mobile phones can connect people almost anywhere in the world, and allow for frequent communication. There was some support for the idea of creating international partnerships, if funding could be found. In the bigger picture, generating ideas of this nature is exactly the purpose of this meeting. Hopefully, alliances formed during this workshop will continue and allow all kinds of collaborative work at the local, regional, national, and international levels in the future. The conversation returned to the topic of youth leadership. One participant expressed the idea that leadership cannot be taught; some individuals embody qualities that make them effective leaders. These individuals can then go to the university and learn particular skills to become better leaders, but not everyone would benefit from a leadership training program. Many people are only interested in working as a means of getting a paycheck, not as a calling. Ms. Leonard noted that the Cleveland Youth Council was careful about who they recruited into the program, looking for individuals who showed the desire that would likely lead to success. This desire can be found in a lot of different individuals, however, and many “non-traditional” candidates could benefit from leadership training. Another participant noted that much of the discussion has focused on non-profits, and the need to recruit young people into these organizations, but that these groups could also look to experienced leaders in the private sector looking for more meaningful employment as well. The Mississippi Association of Cooperatives has leadership development programs, and has recruited veterans of the civil rights movement who are now applying the lessons they learned to cooperative development. Connecting efforts like cooperative development, youth leadership training, or international networking to larger movements such as the civil rights movement can make the experiences more meaningful for many people. Session 12: Alternative Frameworks Dr. John Green tied together the themes of the workshop in a presentation entitled “Community Development as Collective Action and Social Movement: An Alternative Approach to Conceptualizing Our Work.” Dr. Green discussed how we conceptualize our work. We tend to think about our work in terms of projects and funding cycles, but we also have to think about our work in broader terms. Our work as community developers is part of a broader social movement, aimed at fomenting collective action. We are change agents, no matter what our particular role in a project, and this forms a common identity for community developers. Dr. Green will present a theoretical framework for thinking about our work in these terms. Why do we need a theoretical framework? Community developers take pride in being “doers” rather than “thinkers,” yet there are ways we can orient our practical work to theory. As a practical matter, theory helps us make sense of our world and the actors in it. In addition, theory gives us a handle on what we do as development workers. Development is a contested concept, and through our work we take a stand on what development means, to us and to the communities we work with. Being able to express our understanding of development is in essence the construction of a theory.

50

How can we conceptualize our action? The notion of collective action is used by economists to refer to collaboration among two or more people based, to some extent, on shared means and ends. Collective action is frequently necessary in economic theory to produce public goods. Sociologists tend to be more interested in collaborative work that creates social movements. Social movements incorporate broader objectives than collective action, and are produced by broad coalitions of informal and formal organizations. Karl Polanyi’s concept of a double movement is an example of how a sociologist might understand social movements. Polanyi said that people resist changes that do not align with their needs and ideas about what society should be. This resistance is expressed through efforts at change, which can be negative, such as through hate groups, or which can be positive, such as community development. Table 11 sums up three dimensions of social movements. One dimension is the political and economic constraints and opportunities available to those seeking change. Constraints and opportunities are a function of the broad political and economic characteristics of a particular time and place, of the characteristics of social actors involved in the process, and of how people perceive the contradictions in structures and processes. Globalization can be considered the broad characteristic of our time, and we want to address who the insiders and outsiders are in this process, and what globalization means to different groups. A second dimension is mobilization and organization. Issues tied to mobilization and organization include how the organizational infrastructure is developed, how resources are accessed, how different organizations can complement each other, and how groups can communicate with each other. The third dimension is grievance and collective action frames. Essentially, this deals with perceptions. Do people take issue with the structure within which they operate? Do they see it as a problem and something that needs changing? And do they think they can do something about it? This provides a sense of collective action, or the ability to do things together. This theoretical approach may be interesting as an academic exercise, but it is also important to consider how we can put this framework to practical use.

Table 11: Three Dimensions of Social Movements

Dimensions Issues of Interest

Political-Economic Constraints and Opportunities

Broad political-economic characteristics of time and place Social actors as “insiders” or “outsiders” Perceived contradictions in structures and processes

Mobilization and Organization

Organizational infrastructure Access to and use of resources Complementary organizational structures Communication networks

Grievance and Collective Action Frames

Social actors’ understanding of prevailing structures and processes Claims and frames concerning what needs to be done Social actors’ identities and roles

51

Figure 19: Strategic Theoretical Model Linking Micro and Macro One way to address this issue is to consider how we can affect larger-scale structures and processes. Throughout this conference, we have been focusing on actions oriented at smaller-scale groups, such as communities in the Delta. Can these actions make a difference to society as a whole? Can these coalesce into larger social movements? Figure 19 suggests how our everyday lives and community action can connect to macro-level structures and processes. This model suggests that mediating institutions, which interface between the local and global dimensions, are important agents of broader social change. For example, many small farmers in Mississippi in the middle part of the 20th century felt conditions were not favorable, so they began organizing into community cooperatives. These served important functions at the local level, but did not address larger structural issues that conditioned their opportunities and constraints. As they traveled around and talked to other farmers, they began to realize that various communities were responding in similar ways to similar conditions. Eventually, they were able to organize into larger, mediating groups such as the Mississippi Association of Cooperatives and the Federation of Southern Cooperatives. These serve the functions of mediating institutions for black farmers in the South. The challenge we face now is how we can form these mediating institutions in a globalizing world, to have a meaningful voice in shaping how globalization plays out and what globalization means at the local level. What are the constraints and opportunities in the Delta? Constraints in the Delta include a history of race- and class-based conflict; consolidated landownership; persistent poverty; environmental conflicts; traditional approaches to community development (e.g. race to the bottom); global pressures; and disinvestment. These constraints are very real to many people. Everyone who has tried to accomplish collective action of any form in the Delta has heard someone respond “this is the Delta,” which is a way of accounting for the many constraints evident in the region. The Delta has a strong regional identity and many residents who feel a deep-seated attachment to place; a rich cultural history in literature, music, and food; a history of people struggling for change; and many community-based organizations providing outreach, education, direct services and advocacy.

52

There are many examples of how Deltans have used these opportunities to improve their lives. The Civil Rights movement presents a good example of how local action was converted into a social movement. The War on Poverty was more than a federal program, it was local people who were given an opportunity, and who took it to work for change in their communities. Increased attention on education as the basis of development is a relatively recent phenomenon, as we’ve discussed in this workshop. The traditional approach has been to court low-wage jobs to the region; replacing this approach with one that emphasizes a trained labor force improves people’s lives. Sustainable agriculture, cooperative development, community health clinics and heritage preservation are other areas where we see organized local action in the Delta. All of these issues, taken together, form the basis for a movement towards sustainable development. Right now, these are very fragmented, but they give us a foundation to build from. There are some questions we may want to consider. Are these movements separate from or a part of the process of globalization? Perhaps through our work, we are shaping how globalization plays out in our region. Are the efforts that we have talked about at this workshop merely an adaptation to the dominant system, or do they represent an effort to create something different? Our efforts are important to our communities, but we need to think of them as proactive movements to construct a different order as well. Finally, we must recognize the constraints that we face and address them. This takes us back to the policy process, and what policies are needed to promote and secure better livelihoods for people in our region and around the globe. We want to support policies that reduce the constraints and increase the opportunities. To do so, we must think about our work from a local perspective, but we must also conceptualize our work in a global context as well.

WORLD CAFE The last event of the workshop was a “World Café” discussion. Participants broke into groups, and each discussed a specific question pertaining to the workshop theme for fifteen minutes. The topics of discussion were: (1) Culture and heritage (Alan Barton); (2) Agriculture, natural resources and sustainable development ; (3) Collaboration and cooperative alternatives (Anna Kleiner); (4) Health and health care (Sarah Leonard); (5) Underdevelopment as related to workforce and education (Catherine Cannatella). Following the discussion, each group reported back to all participants. Catherine Cannatella reported for the group that discussed workforce and education. This group started by considering grassroots-initiated solutions. We may have our own ideas about why people are dropping out of high school, for example, but we need to hear from the people who are having the problems with education to understand what needs aren’t being met and why they think the educational system is failing them. This assessment can then form the basis for finding solutions to the problems. One approach might be developing partnerships. Once you get the information from the grassroots assessments, then you search for partners that can assist with the particular dilemmas that are identified. Partners may be local groups, corporations or international groups. The third topic this group discussed was maintaining linkages with community. The Delta has high out-migration and a problem with brain drain. We need to find ways for people to connect with their communities. Promoting and marketing the region to local residents will develop a stronger connection and can increase the likelihood that people will stay connected to their communities. Josh Stovall reported on agriculture, natural resources and sustainable development. This group discussed research needs on these topics. First, how can farmers in the Delta market their crops

53

outside the region and even outside the U.S.? Of particular interest would be smaller farmers and nontraditional crops. Second, how can we address the concentration of seed stock into the hands of a few companies? Part of this would be understanding how seeds are being marketed. Third, how can we establish policies that are beneficial to the Earth? Fourth, how can we link sustainable development organizations around the world? Jesse Strassburg reported on collaboration and cooperative development. They discussed who is driving the organization of cooperative organizations, and how to implement cooperatives and engage participation. The first step would be researching the process of cooperative development, to better understand the challenges in organizing cooperatives. Ideally, participants in the process would be involved in the research themselves. Next, look for ways to build a social movement or social change from these processes. Finally, engage in the policy process to stimulate change. Donielle Lovell reported on the discussion on health and health care. Transportation is an important issue in this realm, so that people can get to the doctor or hospital. There are groups that will provide transportation to anyone, but they are not widely known. For example, the Bolivar Council on Aging will give anyone a ride to a doctor, but younger people may not think to call an organization with that name. Better communication is necessary to raise awareness of existing opportunities. Another crucial need is to identify gaps in health care coverage, such as people who make too much money to qualify for federal health care, but who cannot afford health insurance. We need to identify what groups of people fit into these categories. There is also a need for data to better identify trends in health care around the Delta, such as the obesity trends that we saw yesterday. It would be interesting to see how the Delta stands on issues such as the obesity epidemic. Alan Barton reported on the discussion on culture and heritage. First, people in the Delta don’t really appreciate their own culture, traditions and heritage; they tend to devalue or downplay these characteristics. This is perhaps tied to perceptions among Deltans that much of what is known about the region nationally is negative. It is important to find ways to build up people’s sense of identity and to recognize the good things about the Delta, and to share these stories outside the region. The term heritage itself is problematic in the Delta, as some groups tie this term to images such as the Confederate battle flag or the mascot at Ole Miss, which may be offensive to other groups. It may be necessary to use a term other than heritage, or even better, to redefine the term heritage in the public mind so that it carries more positive connotations, and erase some of the racial divide that is strong in the Delta. The group also discussed the use of oral histories and living history as means of developing a sense of heritage in the region. Oral histories are a research technique that involve conversations with generally elderly people, who tell their personal version and recollections of important events. One of the values of this approach is that young people can be trained to take the oral histories, and this provides an opportunity for them to learn these stories and to carry traditions on across generations. There is a sense that young people are losing the traditions, but if university students, for example, were given oral history assignments, this would keep traditions alive. Living history is an interpretive technique that involves recreating a particular period and story through reenactment. People use the dress and language of the period to recreate an historical time and event, and this is a way of perpetuating traditions.

54

NEXT STEPS Alan Barton proposed immediate steps that this group can take to continue the ideas and alliances we have formed in this workshop. One of the ideas behind convening this meeting was to produce a formal document that would extend the lessons learned in the Delta to a broader audience. These proceedings provide everyone with a brief summary of the events and discussions at the workshop, but we would like to collect chapters from participants as well, to create a book on the topic of globalization and the Mississippi Delta. We propose a format that highlights the linkages between theories of globalization and practice in the Delta. We would like each chapter to contextualize a practical or community-based project in the Delta within a perspective on globalization. Perhaps a researcher and a practitioner could join together and co-author each chapter, to extract a vision of globalization and the Delta rooted in practice. This would allow both parties to reflect on their thoughts and actions, and broaden their approach to the topic. We would hope to complete this project within one year.

EVALUATION At the end of the workshop, participants were invited to send comments and evaluations to the organizers. Several participants responded. One of the participants said:

“The workshop brought together a healthy mix of academics and practitioners who aptly analyzed the impacts of globalization on a range of local development issues. The diversity of the topics presented opened my eyes to the impacts of globalization on the structural and functional aspects of various sectors in the region.

“I left the workshop with a wealth of knowledge and with an improved perspective on the challenges and opportunities relating to poverty, underdevelopment, workforce development, and education in the region. In addition, I had the opportunity to make invaluable contacts with practitioners and academics in the field of rural sociology and community development.

“Although I found that there was not sufficient time to develop questions and flesh out the issues raised by the presenters in the individual sessions (particularly with regard to their implications for the Delta), the ‘take home assignment’ and last session were particularly useful in providing us with the opportunity to think through and synthesized the overarching issues.”

Another participant said:

“I just wanted to share with you both how wonderfully enlightening the conference was on community development in the Delta and community-based research at Delta State. Your department seems to be very well poised to tackle the seemingly daunting task of community development in the Delta. The practical student experiences are yet another testament to the commitment of the University to developing the region. It appears the activities of DSU extend beyond heritage preservation and are in fact interventions - not interruptions - as your activities educate the regional, national and global communities on the endless possibilities within the Delta. The one word that came to mind was ‘altruism’. You all are truly admirable!

55

“For next year's conference, try to maintain the attention to timing throughout the conference that was appreciated Friday morning.”

A third respondent noted:

“First and foremost, I must thank [the] sponsors for providing ‘The Delta in Global Context’ workshop. This conference provided a wealth of information which would otherwise be lacking by other means. “Perhaps due to being an outsider of the Delta, I find myself missing several key pieces to puzzle - so to speak. This, of course, serves as an impetus for future research. I did find the Delta's bi-racial society perplexing. I found myself asking, ‘given the current world stage, how can a society be this bi-racial? Is it a matter of ignoring the outlier (minority)? If taken into consideration, what effect do these minorities have in the region? Basically, if we see evidence for out migration, can we expect to see in migration? If so, who are these immigrants?’ Unfortunately, answers were hard to come by. “I also found it saddening that … positive comments about the Delta were seldom heard. As an observer, it seemed that there is little pride in being a Deltan - something that is observable from outside the Delta as well. Perhaps in due time, Deltans will reevaluate the gem that is at their feet. Although my initial interest in the Delta was purely academic, I found something that was by far much more lasting - a fertile land at a crossroads. “I would like to thank you once again for all that I have gained during this conference. I found a new awareness and a rekindling of my own social responsibility. This may seem like an exaggerated comment but my life has changed for the better because of my trip to Cleveland. “I look forward to reading the proceedings once they become available.”

Another participant said:

“Thanks for the opportunity to participate in the workshop. I thought it was terrific. I was impressed with your program and Delta State.”

Another comment from a participant was:

“Just wanted to share some thoughts about the conference: Informative, interesting, and enjoyable. The diversity of the papers presented a broad mosaic of the Delta with its many problems and possible opportunities. But most importantly, I found the conference empowering in just being around so many people who are so passionate about their work. Thank you both for creating this opportunity.

We are pleased that the feedback on the workshop was so positive, and we hope that people can apply some of the lessons in their work and form new alliances and partnerships with others that they met at this event.

CONCLUSION The many practitioners and academics that came together over this day and a half of discussion, reflection, sharing, and critical thought surely came away with a richer and deeper understanding of their work and their lives in the Mississippi Delta. The workshop provided participants with many

56

opportunities for formal and informal conversation, and all members of the group embraced this wholeheartedly. The thoughtful group discussions, and the diverse and informative presentations, generated a variety of ideas and established the basis for working partnerships. The dialogue on how globalization is reshaping the Delta has begun, and it should now be the goal of all who participated to bring more parties and viewpoints into this conversation. The organizers of this workshop, the Center for Community and Economic Development at DSU, and the Institute for Community-Based Research stand ready to contribute through our work with our community partner organizations, and through new alliances and partnerships. But the real work is much broader. The various groups that came together for this workshop need to build their own partnerships as well. Through these alliances, workshop participants will have the ability to educate their communities about globalization, and the opportunities it opens up as well as the constraints it imposes. These groups need to continue these discussions into the future, and keep abreast of changing conditions and their effects on Delta communities. The great value of community-based research is that the knowledge it produces comes through processes of democratic participation, and the processes that create the knowledge also create the relationships necessary to put that knowledge to work. Through community-based research, we can redefine the meaning of “internal periphery,” moving the Delta from a position of dependency in the world economy to a more positive condition in which residents take pride in their traditions, find meaning in their work and engage in their communities. Achieving this condition requires creative leadership and entrepreneurship to produce a vibrant economy; good health care and agriculture so people can choose a healthy diet; opportunities for education, training and personal growth so young people can build a future; and a collaborative and tolerant attitude so people can construct relationships, partnerships and institutions. All of these are elements that create strong and empowered communities. This Workshop Proceedings provides a means of sharing information from the workshop with others in Delta communities. The book project will keep communication going among workshop participants, and provides an opportunity for continued collaboration. These, however, are a beginning. What other ways can we devise to institute community-based research and community development practice which puts Deltans in a position to shape their place in the globalizing world, to control the conditions in which they live, and to work to create new, more equitable, more sustainable social forms?

57

SOURCES Arias, Elilzabeth. (2004). “United States Life Tables, 2001.” National Vital Statistics Reports. Vol. 52, No. 14. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr52/nvsr52_14.pdf. BRFSS/CDC. (2005). “Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults Between 1985 and 2003.” Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, Centers for Disease Control, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/trend/maps/. Chrislip, David D. (2002). The Collaborative Leadership Fieldbook. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. HRSA. (2000). “Community Health Status Report.” Health Resources and Services Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC. Available at: http://www.communityhealth.hrsa.gov. ICBR. (2005). “Institute for Community-Based Research.” Available at: http://ntweb.deltastate.edu/ vp_academic/jgreen/Institute_CBR/Institute_for_Community_Based_Research.htm. Kaiser Family Foundation. (2005). “statehealthfacts.org.” Available at: http://www.statehealthfacts.kff.org/. Kersen, Thomas M. (2002). The Changing Delta, 1990 to 2000. Social Science Research Center, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS. Available at: http://www.ssrc.msstate.edu/ Publications/TheChangingDeltaFinal.pdf. Kubisch, Anne C., Patricia Auspos, Prudence Brown, Robert Chaskin, Karen Fulbright-Anderson, and Ralph Hamilton. (2002). Voices from the Field II: Reflections on Comprehensive Community Change. The Aspen Institute. Washington, DC. Available at: http://www.aspeninstitute.org/AspenInstitute/files/ CCLIBRARYFILES/FILENAME/0000000114/voicesIIbook.pdf. Kuhn, B., M. LeBlanc, and C. Gundersen. (1997). “The Food Stamp Program, Welfare Reform, and the Aggregate Economy.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 79(5):1595-99. Lambert, Craig. (2004). “The Way We Eat Now.” Harvard Magazine, Vol. 106, No. 5. Available at: http://www.harvard-magazine.com/on-line/050465.html. Lovell, Donielle M. (2004). The Utilization of Leadership Development Programs to Enhance Community Leadership and Facilitate Community Change: An Evaluation of the Delta Emerging Leaders Program. M.S. Thesis, Community Development, Delta State University, Cleveland, MS. MAC. (2005). “Mississippi Association of Cooperatives.” The Rural Coalition/SuperMarketCoop, Washington, DC. Available at: http://www.supermarketcoop.com/mac.htm. NCHS. (2005). “National Center for Health Statistics.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Hyattsville, MD. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/. NPS. (2005). “National Heritage Areas.” U.S. National Park Service, Washington, DC. Available at http://www.cr.nps.gov. Oxfam. (2005). “Oxfam America.” Oxfam America, Boston, MA. Available at: http://www.oxfamamerica.org. People’s Food Sovereignty Network. (2002). “People’s Food Sovereignty.” Available at: http://www.peoplesfoodsovereignty.org/index.html.

58

Roberts, Genevieve. (2004). “Global Obesity Epidemic: Out of Control.” New Zealand Herald, November 1. Available at: http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/hunger/economy/2004/ 1101obesity.htm. Stovall, Michael Joshua. 2005. Stability of and Differences in Black and White Leadership Structures Over Time in Two Rural Mississippi Delta Towns. M.S. Thesis, Community Development, Delta State University, Cleveland, MS. United Health Foundation. (2004). “America’s Health: State Health Rankings – 2004 Edition.” United Health Foundation, Minnetonka, MN. Available at: http://www.unitedhealthfoundation.org/shr2004. U.S. Census Bureau. (1995). “Population of Counties by Decennial Census: 1900 to 1990.” Compiled and edited by Richard L. Forstall. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Washington, DC. U.S. Census Bureau. (2005). “Mississippi Quick Facts.” U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Washington, DC. Available at: http://www.census.gov. USDA. (2005). “Food Security in the United States: Community Food Security.” USDA Economic Research Service, Washington, DC. Available at: http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/FoodSecurity/ community/.

59

APPENDIX A: CALL FOR PAPERS

The Delta in Global Context:

A Workshop on Community-Based Research, Practice and Development

Delta State University in Cleveland, MS May 27– 28, 2005

Globalization is reshaping our world. Corporate-driven capitalism is shifting production and consumption on a global scale and diffusing an economic rationality to the most remote corners of the planet. In its wake, organizational structures and cultural worldviews and practices are changing, and some believe this is producing social transformations equal to the industrial revolution. There is no doubt that globalization has brought benefits; however, these benefits have been unevenly distributed. These uneven effects have certainly been felt across nations, but discontinuities can be observed within both core and peripheral countries as well. The Mississippi Delta is a region that combines persistent poverty and staggering wealth. The area’s rich alluvial soils have supported agricultural systems ranging from the large plantations during the era of “King Cotton,” to small sharecropper farms, to today’s large-scale agribusiness. A legacy of underdevelopment has left Delta counties with some of the highest poverty rates of any counties in the U.S. On average, over 30% of the population in the Delta’s core counties lives in poverty, compared to the national average of 12.4%. The area has also experienced industrial restructuring from both sides. First, manufacturing plants relocated to the Delta as they left the northern industrial areas to take advantage of the South’s more relaxed business environment and non-unionized labor force; later, these same plants began leaving the Delta in search of even more favorable economic circumstances overseas, a process that continues today. If globalization’s effects are experienced unevenly in the U.S., it is likely that the Delta is an area that will be slow to see globalization’s benefits. Reasoned consideration of these issues is of great importance for community and regional development efforts. Community-based research is a framework that combines participatory and action-oriented strategies of research to inform the development process. The framework offers the potential to add a deeper, grounded and applied understanding of the complex relationship between globalization and the Delta. This workshop will bring together researchers and practitioners interested in examining the dynamics of globalization in the Mississippi Delta region. Workshop themes will include:

--Underdevelopment, education and workforce improvement --Health status and access to services --Agriculture, natural resources and sustainable development --Culture and heritage preservation --Collaboration and cooperative alternatives

The workshop will offer an opportunity to share experiences, refine ideas, and deliberate how globalization is reshaping the Delta and potential paths for development. Participants are encouraged to contribute a paper and deliver a presentation that draws connections between issues in the globalization debate and experiences in the Delta. Papers will be collected for publication in a

60

workshop proceeding. Presenters should submit a 250–500 word abstract by March 4, 2005. Non-presenters are also invited to participate and engage in these important conversations. The workshop will be hosted by the Institute for Community-Based Research (Division of Social Sciences/Center for Community and Economic Development) and the Delta Rural Poll (Center for Community and Economic Development) at Delta State University. The Mississippi Association of Cooperatives/Mississippi Center for Cooperative Development is co-sponsor and co-organizer of this event. The workshop will be held on the DSU campus in Cleveland, Mississippi, in the heart of the Mississippi Delta. If you are interested in participating in this workshop, please contact the organizers at: Dr. Alan Barton Dr. John Green Tel: (662) 846-4097 Tel: (662) 846-4069 Fax: (662) 846-4099 Fax: (662) 846-4099 E-mail: abarton@deltastate.edu E-mail: jgreen@deltastate.edu Mailing Address: c/o Division of Social Sciences, Box 3264, Delta State University, Cleveland, MS 38733.

61

APPENDIX B: LIST AND INDEX OF WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS

List of Participants

Name Organization Address Contact

Willie W. Allen

USDA ARS, Delta NIRI

P.O. Box 963 Marvell, AR 72366

(870) 829-1114 wallen@uaex.edu

Alan W. Barton

Delta State University, Division of Social Sciences

DSU Box 3264 Cleveland, MS 38733

(662) 846-4097 abarton@deltastate.edu

Ben Burkett

Mississippi Association of Cooperatives

P.O. Box 22786 Jackson, MS 39225

(601) 354-2750 benburkett@earthlink.net

Catherine Cannatella

Delta State University, Comm. Development Graduate Program

P.O. Box 603 Lake Village, AR 71653

(870) 265-6275 katarina603@hotmail.com

Art Cosby

Mississippi State University, Social Science Research Center

P.O. Box 5287 Mississippi State, MS 39762

(662) 325-8587 Arthur.Cosby@ssrc.msstate.edu

Alkie Edwards

Delta State University, Comm. Development Graduate Program

1506 Herrin St. Clarksdale, MS 38614

(662) 624-4710 aledwards75@hotmail.com

Justina Garcia 10305 McLean Ave.

Melrose Park, IL 60164 (847) 455-0948 jgarcia@lakebook.com

John Green

Delta State University, Division of Social Sciences

DSU Box 3264 Cleveland, MS 38733

(662) 846-4069 jgreen@deltastate.edu

Jaeda Harmon

Oxfam America, U.S. Regional Office

26 West Street Boston, MA 02111

(617) 728-2508 jharmon@oxfamamerica.org

Todd Holt

Delta State University, Comm. Development Graduate Program

DSU Box 3134 Cleveland, MS 38733

(662) 846-4866 tholt@deltastate.edu

Sarah Leonard

Delta State University, Comm. Development Graduate Program

1302 Avery Cleveland, MS 38732

(662) 846-4495 sleonard@deltastate.edu

Anna Kleiner

Southeastern Louisiana University, Dept. of Sociology & Criminal Justice

SLU 10686 Hammond, LA 70402

(985) 549-2006 Anna.Kleiner@SELU.edu

Donielle M. Lovell

University of Missouri, Dept. of Rural Sociology

301 Tiger Lane, Apt. 221 Columbia, MO 65203

(573) 446-8330 dmlq49@mizzou.edu

Sister Donald Mary Lynch St. Gabriel Mercy Center P.O. Box 824

Mound Bayou, MS 38762 (662) 741-3255 moundbayou@tecinfo.com

62

Judy L. Maynard

University of Tennessee-Martin, Dept. of Sociology & Anthropology

Martin, TN 38238 (731) 881-7522 jumay@bellsouth.net

Beverly J. McCabe Sellers

USDA ARS, Delta NIRI

900 S. Shackleford Rd. Suite 509 Little Rock, AR 72207

(501) 954-8882 bmccabe-sellers@ spa.ars.usda.gov

Lynn McGee

Foundation for the Mid South

1230 Raymond Rd. Box 700 Jackson, MS 39204

(601) 863-0491 ljmcgee@fndmidsouth.org

Ray McGee

Mississippi Association of Cooperatives

6075 Ferncreek Circle Jackson, MS 39211

(601) 354-2750 Ray_McGee2003@yahoo.com

Paulette Meikle-Yaw Mississippi State University P.O. Box 5287

Mississippi State, MS 39762 (662) 325-9166 pmeikle_yaw@soc.msstate.edu

Pamela D. Moore

Delta State University, Division of Social Sciences

DSU Box 3264 Cleveland, MS 38733

(662) 846-4080 pdmoore@deltastate.edu

Mitch Morris

Aaron E. Henry Community Health Center

P.O. Drawer 1216 Clarksdale, MS 38614

(662) 624-4292 msshineproject@yahoo.com

Albert B. Nylander

Delta State University, Division of Social Sciences

DSU Box 3264 Cleveland, MS 38733

(662) 846-4066 anylandr@deltastate.edu

Starr Parker USDA Rural Development 406 N. M.L. King Jr. Dr.

Cleveland, MS 38732 (662) 846-1448, ext. 122 Starrthesparkles@aol.com

Josephine Rhymes

Tri-County Workforce Alliance

P.O. Box 1348 Clarksdale, MS 38614

(662) 627-3011 tcwa_clarksdale@yahoo.com

Carla Ross St. Gabriel Mercy Center P.O. Box 824

Mound Bayou, MS 38762 (662) 741-3255 clr_sgmc@yahoo.com

Victor Ruhimbya

Delta State University, Comm. Development Graduate Program

DSU Box 647 Cleveland, MS 38733

(662) 846-3905 victormikebanyi@yahoo.com

Diane D. Sims

USDA ARS, Delta NIRI

P.O. Box 963 Marvell, AR 72366

(870) 829-1114 dsims@uaex.edu

Flavelia E. Stigger

USDA ARS, Delta NIRI

Dept. of Human Sciences Mail Slot 4179 UAPB Pine Bluff, AR 71601

(870) 575-8818 stigger_f@uapb.edu

Josh Stovall

Delta State University, Comm. Development Graduate Program

P.O. Box 101 Belen, MS 38609

(662) 326-7843 stovall62@hotmail.com

Jesse Strassburg Heifer International 302 S. Bolivar Ave.

Cleveland, MS 38732 (662) 843-3870 jesse.strassburg@heifer.org

63

Myrtis Tabb Delta State University Kent Wyatt Hall 254

Cleveland, MS 38733 (662) 846-4023 mtabb@deltastate.edu

Victoria J. Thompson

USDA ARS, Delta NIRI

1100 Bates #2033 Houston, TX 77030

(713) 798-6752 vthompson@spa.ars.usda.gov

Michael Timberlake

University of Utah, Dept. of Sociology

380 S. 1530 East, Rm. 301 Salt Lake City, UT 84112

(801) 581-8132 timber@soc.utah.edu

Index of Participants

Name Pages

Willie W. Allen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2, 72 Alan Barton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1, 4, 26, 53 Ben Burkett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 20, 72 Catherine Cannatella . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 52, 71 Art Cosby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33, 71 Alkie Edwards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46, 70, 72 Justina Garcia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2, 71 John Green . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1, 3, 4, 49, 70, 72 Jaeda Harmon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5, 70 Todd Holt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 71 Sarah Leonard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46, 72 Anna Kleiner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 70 Donielle Lovell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41, 53, 71, 72 Sister Donald Mary Lynch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15, 71 Judy Maynard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13, 70 Beverly McCabe Sellers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2, 72 Lynn McGee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16, 70 Ray McGee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Paulette Meikle-Yaw . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 72 Pamela Moore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Mitch Morris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29, 71, 72 Albert Nylander . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2, 70 Starr Parker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47, 72 Josephine Rhymes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11, 71 Carla Ross . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15, 71 Victor Mikebanyi Ruhimbya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Diane Sims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Flavelia Stigger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Josh Stovall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39, 52, 71 Jesse Strassburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19, 46, 53, 72 Myrtis Tabb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Victoria Thompson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2, 71 Michael Timberlake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13, 70

64

APPENDIX C: ABSTRACTS

Heritage Tourism in the Local and Global Context Alan Barton, Ph.D. Division of Social Sciences Delta State University Mississippi has increasingly turned to tourism as a means of economic development; however, to date the state has relied primarily on gaming to attract tourists. The Delta’s significant cultural and natural history provides an opportunity to complement gaming-based tourism by developing heritage tourism as an engine of economic growth. Furthermore, heritage tourism provides opportunities for community development, by fomenting pride in the region’s traditions among residents. The National Heritage Areas program of the National Park Service offers an opportunity to preserve local heritage sites and develop a public relations program to attract tourists. Commercializing local heritage transforms it into a commodity, however, and brings with it the logic of global capitalism. Brain Drain Distressing the Delta Dollar Catherine Cannatella Graduate Student in Community Development Delta State University Utilizing available statistics and data to analyze the social and economic conditions experienced in the Mississippi Delta, the purpose of this paper is to promote discussion and debate about the concept of the Mississippi Delta “brain drain” as a relevant factor impeding social and economic development. With the emergence of a global market place, the Delta must begin to appraise itself within a global framework and address concerns accordingly. In the global market place where knowledge is the key to being a player, it is imperative to promote, retain, and attract a well-educated workforce. Accepting brain drain as a legitimate dilemma with global dimensions allows courses of action to be designed to deter the exodus of the young, talented and educated people of the community as well as enticing those from outside the community to migrate to the Delta. Community Development as Collective Action and Social Movement: An Alternative Approach to Conceptualizing Our Work John Green, Ph.D. Division of Social Sciences Delta State University Community development has a reputation for more “doing” than abstract “thinking,” yet there have been some broad-based attempts to construct theoretically informed approaches to professional practice. This presentation follows suit, conceptualizing community development work as “collective action” and “social movement.” Literature on these theoretical perspectives is reviewed, followed by a discussion of community development in the Mississippi Delta viewed through this lens. Examples are drawn from the community-based cooperative movement and efforts to improve access to health care.

65

Workforce Perception: An Assessment of the Workforce in a Mississippi Delta County Todd Holt Graduate Student in Community Development Delta State University Due to Globalization, the Mississippi Delta has witnessed vast changes in the companies of the area. These changes include production methods, products produced, services provided, and expectations of the available workforce. This study was geared at assessing these changes, and the influence they have had on employers’ perceptions of the workforce. These study examined workforce perception by evaluating differences between service providers and manufactures, the number of years the company had been established in the county, and if the company had introduced new technology into production. This presentation will discuss the findings of this research. St. Gabriel Reaches Out Sister Donald Mary Lynch, RSM Carla Ross, M.S. St. Gabriel Mercy Center Mound Bayou, Mississippi Mound Bayou is a town in the heart of the Mississippi Delta. It was founded in 1887 by freed slaves and became a flourishing town of 9,000 people with fifty businesses. Today it is depressed with few businesses and 2,100 people, 85% of whom live on government subsidy. St. Gabriel Mercy Center responds to these needs by providing community services. Programs include Senior Outreach, After School, GED Classes, Branch of the Bolivar County Library, Thrift Store, Computer Classes, Assistance to Basic Emergency Needs, and much more. These services are provided with money from donations and grants and in partnership with other community agencies. In light of continuing economic challenges and the place of this underdevelopment Delta community in the process of globalization, these services take on increasingly significance. Achieving Social Change Through Participation and Action: An Analysis of Community-Based Research and Related Theoretical Perspectives Anna M. Kleiner, Ph.D. Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice Southeastern Louisiana University Participatory research methods and approaches for conducting community-based research in the context of sustainable community development have expanded in recent years in response to the effects of globalization. Participation in the research process has been placed in the forefront of efforts to empower people to increase the quality of life in their communities. Authentic participation in the research process enables people to implement their own process of dialogue, action, analysis, and social change. Several approaches to participatory action research are discussed in this paper, with an emphasis on the utility of community-based research as a strategy for mitigating the adverse effects of globalization.

66

Globalization of Agriculture: Effects on Social and Natural Systems in Rural Communities in Jamaica Paulette Meikle-Yaw, Ph.D. candidate Department of Sociology, Anthropology and Social Work Mississippi State University To obtain a share in the global agricultural economy increasing amounts of hillside land in Jamaica has been cultivated with export crops with the result of increasing disruption of the natural ecosystems. As a parallel, the small farming economy is being negatively affected by the importation of certain crops under trade liberalization. At the same time, local communities’ right to economic self-determination is impeded by global power structures. In this paper, I analyze socio-economic, socio-cultural and environmental impacts of the production and export of various agricultural products from Jamaica and global policy responses formulated to maintain this system. Drawing on qualitative information I obtained from several participatory field studies and extended participant observation research conducted between 1990 and 2000 in rural farming communities in Jamaica, I address impacts of the globalization of agriculture and external forces that have persistently influenced the use of natural resources and the structure of local small farming communities. I also examine of origins of economic dependency, and associated impacts on vulnerable social and natural systems in Jamaica. The final segment of the presentation examines implications of the findings in Jamaica for the Mississippi Delta region. Mississippi and the Global Obesity Epidemic Mitch Morris Aaron E. Henry Community Health Center Clarksdale, MS In the Untied States, 65% of the adult population is either obese or overweight. However, this problem is not unique to America. The World Health Organization states that Obesity has emerged to become a global epidemic. More than 1 billion adults are overweight and at least 300 million of them are clinically obese. In South Africa, obesity levels approach those of the US, with one in three men and more than one in two adult women either overweight or obese. In Morocco 40% of the population is overweight and roughly 25 % of people living in the Middle East are obese or overweight. The US is often recognized as the fattest country in the world, and Mississippi is often recognized as the fattest state in America. This notoriety presents much more than an image problem. Obesity appears to be the primary risk factor for developing a long list of chronic and debilitating diseases. These include diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and various types of cancer. Mississippi is tied with Alabama for the highest prevalence of adults diagnosed with diabetes, is 49th in cardiovascular deaths, and ranks 40th in cancer deaths. Research has demonstrated that obesity dramatically increases the risk of developing these, and other, ailments. The cumulative effect of these and other health problems adds up to the second highest premature death rate. Now consider one of the healthiest states, Hawaii. Hawaii shares a 3-way tie with Colorado and Massachusetts for the least obese state. As a result, it also enjoys a much lower prevalence of diabetes, as well as the lowest rates of cardiovascular deaths, cancer deaths, and total mortality.

67

Research has demonstrated an inverse relationship between the prevalence of obesity and socioeconomic status. In addition to the highest percentage of obese residents (26%), Mississippi also has the highest percentage of residents living below 100% of the Federal Poverty Level (23%). Of the three least obese states, Hawaii ranks 13th, with 18% of residents below the poverty line, Massachusetts ranks 30th with 14% living in poverty, and Colorado ranks 39th with only 13% below 100% FPL. This discussion seeks to further investigate the relationship between obesity and poverty, as well as potential solutions to this growing health crisis. Promoting Worker-owned Businesses through Community-based Research and Education Ajamu Nangwaya Cooperative Development Specialist Federation of Southern Cooperatives/Land Assistance Fund This paper will make the case for and outline a community-based education and participatory action research approach that is needed to support the emergence of worker cooperatives and other worker-owned businesses in the Mississippi Delta region and other similarly-situated rural communities. Addressing the chronic economic and social underdevelopment challenges of this region, in a substantive manner, is not possible if the researchers and practitioners do not have the redistribution of power, community participation, and capacity-building training as central organizing goals. In order to adequately respond to the economic and social dislocation of globalisation the alternative and transformative response from the community and community-based organizations must, out of necessity, be robustly economic and participatory-democratic in its expression. Cooperatives and workers’ cooperatives in particular are the alternative instruments for local and regional economic development. However, we are advancing an organizational form (worker cooperative) which is ideologically incongruent with mainstream economic and business ideas and practices, and the hegemonic thinking that has been inculcated into the consciousness of the majority. The economically marginalized are not excluded from this general conformity to the belief that privatized capital is the principal way to organize economic production or activities. It is for this very reason that it is necessary to engage in community-based participatory research and community-based education (popular education programs for adults, and capacity-building training to facilitate the knowledge, skills, and attitude for worker ownership). Community members are usually aware of some of the assets and liabilities that serve to engender or thwart community economic development. By engaging in community-based and participatory research we are privileging and advancing an epistemological framework that places the community or the people who will be affected by a policy or initiative as central actors in knowledge creation and validation. This paper will argue for a participatory action research that will equip researcher-cum-participants with the knowledge and skills necessary to the effecting of a research project. We will explore the benefits and challenges of using this research approach in economically and socially marginalized communities. This type of community-based research aimed at promoting worker ownership should ascertain the predisposition of the relevant stakeholders to this economic vision.

68

Capacity-building education and training is central to the worker ownership project in economically marginalized communities in the Mississippi Delta region. One of the hallmarks of underdevelopment in the region is the lack of access to quality formal education by African Americans and the poor. A transformative community-based education will confront a number of issues: teaching and fostering cooperative entrepreneurship, creativity, innovation, and risk-taking; capacity building training for some of the personnel of community-based organizations; integrating the personnel from academia into the faculty; the extent and possibility of “credentialising” the learning outcomes; the financing of the project; basic adult educational upgrading and community-based, multi-stakeholder evaluation. Stability and Differences in Black and White Leadership Structures Over Time in Two Rural Mississippi Delta Towns Josh Stovall, M.S. Delta State University This study examined leadership network structures and network ties of the top 15 community leaders in two rural Mississippi Delta communities in 1996 and 2004 (combined N=60) . Assessing each leader’s network ties and their relative strength helps determine the avenues through which resources may benefit the community. The importance of leadership networks and their role in transforming economic, informational, and other resources into positive community action is addressed. Information was generated through a survey and personal interviews. Basic characteristics of leaders’ networks, their opinions on community development topics, and the changes that may have occurred over time were documented. The two communities were found to have racially fragmented structures in both years. The lack of communication across structures, and the dominance of strong ties lessened the likelihood of there being adequate resources available to effectively solve community problems, or complete community projects. Little change in the overall structures was found, and a lack of young, emerging leadership in both towns portends trouble in dealing with community problems. Both communities experienced an aging leadership structure that ranked black leaders lower than in 1996, even with an increase in black representation within the structures themselves. Analyses of attitudinal variables regarding development issues were also conducted. This analysis did not find support for several long held beliefs on white and black positions regarding taxes, government help, and the use of outside experts in community work. These results will hopefully inform future development efforts and make them more successful in the area. This Delta-based longitudinal study identifies structural factors in rural leaders’ social networks as they relate to rural community development. Its approach differs from that of most community development studies in that it shows how rural communities operate, and how they differ over time. These findings highlight the importance of identifying the structure of leadership in which leaders act. This must be understood by community developers in rural communities in order to produce meaningful change. If this does not occur, practitioners will likely run into the obstacle of the existing leadership structure, and will often be unsuccessful in their attempts to bypass it in their work.

69

Community-Based Initiatives in an Era of Globalization: A Roundtable This roundtable discussion will present four topics that address the opportunities and challenges of empowerment-based development in the Mississippi Delta in this era of globalization. Introduction to Fetterman’s Foundations of Empowerment Evaluation Jesse Strassburg Delta State University Collaborative Partnerships and Block Parties as Community Empowerment Alkie Edwards Delta State University Civic Engagement as Youth Empowerment Sarah Leonard Delta State University

Communication Network Development to Address Health and Human Service Gaps Starr Parker Delta State University

70

APPENDIX D: PHOTOS

Lynn McGee

Anna Kleiner

Albert Nylander Jaeda Harmon Alkie Edwards

Michael Timberlake, Judy Maynard

John Green

71

Todd Holt, Donielle Lovell, Josh Stovall

Art Cosby

Sister Donald Mary Lynch

Carla Ross, Sister Donald Mary Lynch

Josephine Rhymes Catherine Cannatella Justina Garcia

Workshop Participants Victoria Thompson, Mitch Morris

72

Mitch Morris DSU Community Development Graduate Students

Donielle Lovell Beverly McCabe Sellers Ben Burkett

Alkie Edwards, Jesse Strassburg, Willie Allen Starr Parker John Green

Sarah Leonard

DSU Community Development Graduate Students at Dinner

Paulette Meikle-Yaw

Comments on this report are welcome. Please contact the author at:

Dr. Alan W. Barton Delta State University

Division of Social Sciences Kethley Hall 201F

DSU Box 3264 Cleveland, MS 38733

(662) 846-4097 abarton@deltastate.edu

http://ntweb.deltastate.edu/vp_academic/abarton

Copies of this report are available at: http://ntweb.deltastate.edu/vp_academic/abarton/Delta in Global Context/DGC Proceedings.pdf