“Poverty is a great enemy to human happiness,” wrote the British essayist Samuel Johnson. “It certainly destroys liberty and makes some virtues impracticable and others extremely difficult.” Johnson’s understanding of the threat that poverty posed to London in the 18th century holds no less true for Washington, D.C. in the 21st.

As scores of Georgetown students rack up thousands of community service hours, write policy-relevant senior theses and work tirelessly for anti-poverty non-profits, many say that they do what they do because they want others to be happy and empowered—they want others to have a chance.

As members of a university community, we are in a privileged position to give the disadvantaged and underserved in our community that chance. From sophisticated statistical software to well-stocked libraries and top-notch faculty, we Georgetown undergraduates have unique tools at our disposal that can enable us to combat the toughest urban problems, from transportation to poverty, crime and education.

But all too often, public policy research focuses largely on the assessment of current policies and lacks much-needed originality. We need an “organic intellectual”—someone who comes from a disadvantaged or underserved population and has a particular knowledge and understanding of that community that your typical academic or public servant does not—at the policy table. (The idea of organic intellectualism is attributed to the writing of Antonio Gramsci, an Italian Marxist who spent most of his life in prison.)

For example, consider the intensification of urban poverty. The standard responses to poverty in the United States call for relocation and mixed-income communities. Section 8 relocation vouchers provide poor families with a subsidy to relocate to wealthier communities. But in our neediest cities, the voucher waitlist is too long to accommodate many of the people it is supposed to serve.

The second innovation, Homeownership Opportunities for People Everywhere (HOPE VI), proposes to destroy public housing and to build mixed-income housing in its place. This well-intentioned approach of inclusive gentrification also falls short; only one-third of the newly built housing is allotted to people of the former housing project. While these policies help those lucky enough to get a voucher or a HOPE VI dwelling, something else must be done for those that don’t.

I am part of a team of student-researchers, which, under the wing of Professor Sam Marullo, has searched for complements to Section 8 and HOPE VI. Instead of going to the library to find answers, we went directly to low-income communities to ask residents how to best develop their communities.

Through our engagement with organic intellectuals in these communities, Georgetown sociologists learned about the remarkable potential that faith-based organizations have in developing affordable housing and other critical community assets for the community.

I remember speaking to a pastor and his congregation after a service about his interest in developing affordable housing in his neighborhood. He spoke particularly eloquently about the support that community members offered for faith-based development, calling his church a “lighthouse in the middle of the ‘hood;” a neighborhood beacon that provided not only spiritual but community direction by presenting plans for better housing, playgrounds and community centers along with parenting classes and after-school programs. By listening to him and scores of other voices in the community, Georgetown has since become a pioneer of faith-based development and gloves-off community involvement in the business, legal and development worlds.

In partnership with Enterprise Community Partners and East of the River Police and Clergy Partnership, Georgetown sociologists continue to put organic intellectuals in charge of change and the diverse resources needed to make a difference. What is emerging at Georgetown University is a new way of looking at policy, a more democratic way of understanding the issues that plague our underdeveloped communities and a collaborative approach between academics, professionals and community members.

Students need more resources to facilitate such an innovative policy approach. With the founding of the Innovative Community, Housing, and Economic Development Initiative by students in the Carroll Fellows Initiative (www.ichedi.org) and a proposal for a Faith-Based Community Development Resource Center awaiting approval from University officials, the future looks particularly bright for the growth of community-centered development policy. By creating these much-needed resources, we are taking an important step away from the poverty that Samuel Johnson wrote about, and toward a future of happiness and liberty for all.

Source: georgetown voice.com