Background to the Research

• Single-identity work, which entails addressing community relations at an intra-community level, is proffered by community relations professionals as an alternative to contact, where contact is either not possible or likely to be ineffective. The aim of this research is to focus on single identity work and to comment on its contribution to the process of improving community relations in NI. Specific objectives are as follows:
  • to construct a typology of single-identity projects which reflects the content and scope of work undertaken;
  • to examine factors which enable or inhibit single identity groups to engage in contact as perceived by community relations practitioners who fund/facilitate single identity projects;
  • to suggest ways in which community relations practitioners can maximise the potential of single identity work;
  • to highlight good practice and to offer recommendations to funders.
    

Research Approach

• Qualitative data gathered through 7 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with key actors responsible for funding single identity projects.
• Case studies of 4 single identity projects selected on the advice and guidance of the CRC. These were: the Archway Project (Derry); the Ulster/Scots Project (Ards); the Newtownabbey Community Relations Group and Armagh Inter-Churches Project. These projects were seen as broadly representative of different approaches to single identity community relations in NI.
• The focus group method was used as a means of engaging participants and facilitators in an informal discussion about project aims, implementation issues and outcomes. In all, 16 project participants took part in focus group sessions across the four cases.
• A questionnaire, containing open-ended questions, to facilitators of single identity projects identified by CRC and Community Relations Officer's in District Councils to elicit information on the range and scope of activity undertaken and views on potential for success. Nineteen projects were identified and questionnaires were returned from ten.
• A questionnaire, containing open-ended questions, to the director of the CRC aimed at gathering information on the implications of single-identity work for different approaches to community relations.
  

Main Findings

• Projects which currently make the most contribution to the achievement of community relations objectives through intra-community work are in the category of concurrent single identity/cross-community relations. This approach maximises the potential of intra-community work by providing a 'safe retreat' for the discussion of contentious issues and an imperative for community relations (the commitment to a concurrent cross-community agenda).
• The challenge for funders is to recognise the potential for concurrent single-identity cross-community work either within a district or between like-minded groups in different areas of NI. The programme-driven approach suggested by some respondents is a mechanism through which this can be achieved. Its focus is the co-ordination of all local-level resources in an effort to achieve the broader objectives of community relations and community development.
• If the programme-driven approach is seen as a viable alternative to the current 'one-off' approach to funding, then there are implications for participating groups. Specifically, that they have a clear commitment to mutual understanding, manifest in short, medium and long-term targets, for the work they undertake. This can be more difficult for some types of single-identity community relations work than others.
• Against the background of a programme-driven approach, the real value of personal development single-identity work lies in the early stages of a programme. It can allow community groups, intent on the achievement of community relations objectives, the space to reflect on and explore the reasons for their involvement, and time to focus on expected outcomes.
• Facilitation is the key to single identity work which can contribute towards an achievement of mutual respect and an increased awareness of diverse cultural traditions. A pre-requisite, however, is that facilitators are sufficiently skilled and confident in their own ability to constructively address problems of prejudice, stereotypes and division, through the personal experiences of participants. The skills required are often those of stress and trauma counselling, in addition to mediation and the ability to locate negative experiences within the broader context of the NI conflict.
• Most groups make applications for single-identity community relations funding with the aim of undertaking 'own' culture validation work. Supporting such work, however, has serious opportunity costs for community relations practitioners with limited funding resources. The challenge for funders is to convince groups of the value of the concurrent approach. In some cases, this may be a matter of persuading groups to embrace a more comprehensive community relations agenda. If this is done sensitively, then the perceived threat of such work for groups can be minimised.
• Critical incident, political and some cultural traditions single-identity work have least potential to achieve community relations objectives. In all of these cases, the priority is with intra-community development and there is very little incentive to understand or engage with the 'other community'.

Recommendations

• Single-identity work has the potential both to reduce sectarian attitudes and to generate divisions. Thus funders should consider endorsing a more proactive, programme driven approach, which will, by definition, exclude those groups which seek funding for projects unlikely to contribute towards the achievement of improved community relations in NI.
• Groups should be encouraged where possible to 'twin' with other community groups in their district which have similar interests but which represent different religious, political and cultural persuasions. This can facilitate the concurrent approach to identity work.
• Where twinning is not possible, funding should be conditional on a group's willingness to support objectives which emphasise respect for cultural diversity and to engage in cross-community contact in the longer term.
• Groups should be monitored on a frequent basis so that assessors can note whether targets and objectives are being met and how groups are progressing towards mutual respect, tolerance and cross-community contact.
• Training should be provided for community relations practitioners and or/funders to clarify how a more proactive approach (which aims to both draw on and co-ordinate existing local level resources) can contribute towards the achievement of community relations. Good practice within CRC, as an Intermediary Funding Body for the dissemination of monies under the European Special Support Sub-programme 6, could provide the foundation for such training.
• Facilitation is a key element of successful single-identity work; it is therefore essential that facilitators undergo specific training to enable them to assist groups in moving onwards from personal development to achieve community developments.
• Due to time and resource constraints this research presents only a partial examination of single-identity work in NI. A more comprehensive audit is needed to assess the full extent of the single identity approach in NI and an evaluation of its contribution to community relations objectives. Allied to this, a forum should be established for the dissemination of good practice in single-identity community relations work.
• The researchers recommend the term 'intra-community relations work' as an alternative to 'single-identity work'. It is believed that this term more accurately describes the nature of the work being undertaken. 'Identity' is complex and multifaceted and the term 'single identity' disguises the multi-dimensional characteristic of cultural identity.