Developing Partnerships In The Community

Cooperation is the key to identifying organizations and helping them become harmonious in the community. People will not cooperate on things they can do by themselves (Anderson, 1990). Thus, to induce massive cooperation, informal networking is a recommended option. An HIV Awareness Fair would reduce the stigmatization of people with HIV and help them interact with non HIV people in an open manner. In order for people to cooperate from both sides, it is important to identify what both organizations interests are. Anderson's (1990) Postulate 3 states, that organizations will insist on becoming involved when activities "are perceived as serving the actual or potential good of the whole community."

In order to create an emphasis on egalitarian CD amongst HIV and Non-HIV persons, it requires good relations and communication within the community. After multiple steps of ensuring trust and communication between the parties, informal networking could be a solution to racism, For instance, there could be celebrations created such as ethnic festivals and parades to teach others about the culture. Informal networking spreads within the community and facilitates communication across barriers. Town hall meetings, and such are instrumental in identifying organizations and assisting them to prosper. An example of the Bristol Festival Against Racism succeeded partially because it was based on "trust and respect" over several years in the community to allow for open and easy participation from community members. The Festival created a buzz of news reporting, "communal cooking," educational workshops, "political debates," "religious services," "performing arts," and other cultural expressions (Gilchrist, 1998). To gain the benefits of a successful festival, organizers must be transparent and hold meetings open and public. Informal networking is better than the structural appeals, for the status quo create a deal of dissent. Finding a safe place for both sides to meet is an opportunity to learn about each other. A festival is good example of informal networking to meet the cause. Reciprocity is the main ingredient to bake this cake.

Allowing a mosque at Ground Zero could help with the assimilation of cultures; however, there is much animosity towards the subject. The informal networking was recommended by Gilchrist (1998) as one of the final measures.

Gilchrist (1998) recommends many of steps in the process in this particular order, "recognition," "tolerance," "information exchange," "dialogue, empathy," "mediation," "shared commitment," "negotiation," "trust," "coalition," "alliances," and "resolution and justice." After the latter stage has been reached, informal networking may have a better result. Gilchrist (1998) provides a framework for conflict resolution. Some of the steps may not be necessary for Muslims who want to build the mosque because Muslims are not in conflict with the West. If Al-Qaeda wanted to build a mosque, that would need conflict resolution mediators.

Egalitarian is an ideal outcome. Conflict resolution starts with understanding other perspectives, values and culture. CD can be achieved using a festival along with many mediation steps in which the ultimate goal is an egalitarian system. Some say egalitarian systems are unattainable. Even the U.S. has not had a completely egalitarian system. The U.S. history may serve as a testament to the worthiness of the egalitarian ideal, Even though it was written into the Declaration of Independence, two centuries saw the extension of the vote to non-land owners, then an end to slavery, then women suffrage, and further progress in the mid-twentieth century in the rights of minorities. Even today some states do not allow a vote for people who have been incarcerated.

Egalitarian is a goal worth continuously striving for, but history may have shown that no two people can be completely equal.

Decentralization needs to be accompanied with guarantees for community control. District governments need to pass regional regulations to guarantee the existence of community participation to eradicate corruption. There needs to be coordination between districts and one goal platform of corruption prevention. Public resources are already scarce and corruption can cripple growth and development; thus, decentralization is a key to preventing corruption. "In 2006, there were 265 corruption cases involving local legislative bodies with almost 1,000 suspects handled by prosecutorial offices across Indonesia. In the same year, the same offices had 46 corruption cases implicating 61 provincial Governors or District Heads." The fact that corruption occurred was That was neither unusual nor unexpected. What was surprising was the amount of powerful people who had trials and convictions. Without decentralization, these prosecutions may have not occurred. Over 73 billion Rupiah (approximately US$8 million) was stolen in one high profile case.

Decentralization has brought about shifts in power relations not only between the centre and the regions, but also between the branches of government at regional level. But, most commonly, all sides have taken the chance to embezzle funds for self-enrichment. Opportunities for corruption have been opened up further by the enactment of inconsistent regulations governing local budgets by the national and regional parliaments, regular 'cooperation' between the legislative and executive bodies as well as low levels of public participation and control in local governance. Parties who discovered and reported the cases included ordinary villagers, NGOs and NGO coalitions and, prominently, the aggrieved and disaffected: companies that missed out on lucrative contracts, politicians overlooked for pre-selection and competition from rivals seeking political advantage.

In the Pontianak case, for instance, a contractor who found indications of corruption in the local parliament preferred to report to a local NGO rather than the police or district prosecutors. Of the ten cases studied for this report, two resulted in acquittals, two indictments were rejected and six resulted in criminal convictions in the first instance courts. Where a criminal conviction was secured, sentences were often lightweight and usually less than demanded by the prosecutors. In only two of these (Blitar and Madiun) have the sentences been executed.

An article from the World Bank, "Fighting Corruption in Decentralized Indonesia." The authors agree that decentralization leads to corruption prevention but without community participation, this will not occur. Most of the parties who discovered and reported the Indonesian corruption cases included "ordinary villagers, NGOs and NGO coalitions..." (Rinaldi, Purnomo, Damayanti, 2007).

With decentralization opportunities for corruption have been opened up further by the enactment of inconsistent regulations governing local budgets by the national and regional parliaments, regular 'cooperation' between the legislative and executive bodies as well as low levels of public participation and control in local governance (Rinaldi et al., 2007).

In short, there are always opportunities for corruption whether centralized and decentralized. (Rinaldi, Purnomo, Damayanti, 2007) (Rinaldi et al., 2007)

Rinaldi, T., Purnomo, Damayanti, W., (2007). Fighting Corruption in Decentralized Indonesia. Case Studies on Handling Local Government Corruption. The World Bank. Retrieved on October 3rd 2010 http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTJUSFORPOOR/Resources/FightingCorruptioninDecentralizedIndonesia.pdf * Gilchrist, A. (1998). A more excellent way: Developing coalitions and consensus through informal networking. CD Journal, 33(2), 100-108. * Anderson, R.C. (1990). Community cooperation and development. Sociological Practice, 8, 133-144 * Gaye, M., Diouf, L., & Keller, N. Moving towards local Agenda 21 in Rufisque, Senegal. Available at http://www.iied.org/docs/urban/local21s_wp06.pdf. * Eade, D. (1997). Chapter 6: Investing in organizations in Capacity building: An approach to people centered development. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Oxfam. * Gilchrist, A. (1998). A more excellent way: Developing coalitions and consensus through informal networking. CD Journal, 33(2), 100-108. Anderson, R.C. (1990). Community cooperation and development. Sociological Practice, 8, 133-144. - http://www.adobe.com/go/adc_css_layouts.