(Gray and McAnulty, 2006 ). Backed by the
InternationalFundforIreland, there were also attempts to develop
shared neighbourhoods across Northern Ireland, with statutory agencies
working hand in hand with local communities to establish shared spaces
(Goodlad et al., 2005 ). But there was recognition
that these initiatives had to have grass-roots support and could not be
forced on communities who
I RELAND ’ S
With remittances dwindling in importance over the course of the
twentieth century, initially the impact of Irish diasporic philanthropy and
return migration on the economic development of the country was given
priority. Ireland has a very poorly developed indigenous philanthropic
landscape, but has been successful in cultivating philanthropy in the diaspora.
The Ireland Funds, InternationalFundforIreland (IFI), and Atlantic
Philanthropies (AP) are prime examples. Over the past thirty years, the
-up practice was
already being attempted (Gallagher and Carlisle, 2009) was carried out
to inform the project.
A proposal to promote the establishment of school networks and
explore effective models of collaboration was supported by Atlantic
Philanthropies and the InternationalFundforIreland. The project
would invite schools to participate in the project by establishing networks on the basis of the following parameters:
• The network had to work towards sustained, regular engagement
between the schools.
• This engagement would focus on core curricular activities.
promote regeneration through community participation, such as the Belfast Action Teams and Making Belfast Work, and
through international initiatives to promote the British–Irish peace
process such as the InternationalFundforIreland (Acheson and
Williamson, 1995). After 1994, international support for the emergent peace process also imported changing European approaches to
diversity into funding and policy in Northern Ireland, encapsulated
in the a spiration of the PEACE programme to ‘deal with the legacy of
conflict while taking the opportunities arising from