Baker E A, Teaser-Polk C
St. Louis University, School of Public Health, MO 63108, USA.
Health Educ Behav. 1998 Jun;25(3):279-83. doi: 10.1177/109019819802500304.
Goodman et al. have set us off on our journey to articulate and measure the dimensions of community capacity. While we have tried to identify some of the areas for future exploration, it is clear that this should be an ongoing process. Moreover, it is important that the process used to develop measures, assess capacity, and use the information to intervene be consistent with the intended outcome--building community capacity. In other words, at a minimum, the process should be cognizant of the history of the community, be participatory (i.e., incorporate the multitude of voices involved, particularly those of the community members themselves) and use the skills and resources available in professional, academic, and community settings. Perhaps most important, this dialogue must begin from a place of respect for the multitude of perspectives that need to be brought to bear to enhance community capacity to create healthful changes.
古德曼等人引领我们踏上了阐明和衡量社区能力维度的征程。虽然我们已尝试确定一些未来探索的领域,但很明显这应是一个持续的过程。此外,用于制定衡量标准、评估能力以及利用这些信息进行干预的过程,必须与预期结果——建设社区能力相一致,这一点很重要。换句话说,至少该过程应了解社区的历史,具有参与性(即纳入众多相关声音,尤其是社区成员自身的声音),并利用专业、学术和社区环境中现有的技能和资源。或许最重要的是,这种对话必须始于对众多观点的尊重,这些观点对于增强社区创造健康变化的能力至关重要。