Community Action
The story so far:
Reporter Max Wahlter has been visiting the sustainable city of Porena (see earlier journeys). It certainly seems to be sustainable with its food grown everywhere, where people walk everywhere and its clever approach to transport. However, the thing people keep saying is: " Yes sure, but how did they get there. THAT is the challenge. Not to be put off, in this chapter MAX asks to participate in such a process. What he finds is an amazing array of tools for communities to create lasting sustainable change. Don't believe it? Then read on ...
Preamble
The assignment is to go to a place where people come together in groups to cooperate to find solutions to sustainability issues across all aspects of a particular administrative area. I would like to visit a place that demonstrates a methodology for it. We have covered working together toward sustainability from several aspects, but just this aspect has not been covered. It would be great if we could do that, especially using Imagestreaming.
Tapescript
I am on the bench in the departure hall. I see the leaves on the plants behind me, reminding me of earlier trips to PORENA. A lift to my right with large 'wings' on either side invites me in. I push the 'up' button, enter the lift and look out the window on the left side.
'Go on, press the green one!' someone says.
We ascend very fast. I feel the G forces on me. The lift is enclosed in some kind of high tower parallel to a rock face which rushes past me. The whooshing of hydraulics in the background make it like a fairground ride. It stops, and the doors open onto a walkway over to a mountain side. It is extremely high up, and I get wobbly legs as I walk over it. The lift has followed the sheer rock face of a mountain. A brick entrance in front beckons. It looks like a portal to a castle, but there is a smaller door where people seem to be going in.
'Do you charge entrance?' I ask the uniformed man at the door. He shakes his head. The place looks like a tourist attraction. I buy a guide map.
'I'll show you the way,' the guy behind me says.
'Thank you.'
I like it when people help out in image streams.
We exit onto a cobbled square. I am invited into some kind of town meeting. People are seated in rows looking at a facilitator standing at the front. I find myself being impatient to follow proceedings and mumble something about when they are going to get started.
'Be quiet, it will work, sit down. No need to take notes,' says the guy next to me.
The facilitator starts; 'Welcome everyone to the meeting. Anyone new here?'
I put my hand up. He nods and pulls a map down from the roof. This is the area we have to work with. The map is huge, covering the entire target area. Everyone studies the map. People come up and put coloured yellow sticky notes on the location most appropriate for an asset or concern. I watch. Cool idea.
Everyone chips in. Air quality is put on the side as a general concern, as well as a specific note over the city. Someone puts wind power out on an island as an asset. The map is quite full of sticky notes. Everyone sits back and looks. What have we got? The assets and concerns get categorized and worked on. Assets are red. Concerns are yellow.
Why are assets red? No answer yet.
The facilitator gets major categories, or themes, written down on the flip chart to the right side of the map. Concerns on the right, assets on the left. It's like a café type of workshop where everyone works in small groups at round tables.
Each category relates to specific location points on the map. For each concern category the next step is to look at behaviours. I ask about assets but understand they are left for the moment. One behaviour related to air quality is driving in the city, I see. Something to do with acceleration and fuel use. Now we have to rank the behaviours in terms of contribution to the concern. This is going quickly. It is put onto a flip chart. Behaviours are ranked to each concern and each concern is related to a location in the area.
Now, we match behaviours and assets in separate groups. We move to sit at small tables. Each table has a concern and ranked behaviours to work on. I join in the 'driving in the city' one.
The behaviour is 'Putting your foot on the accelerator.' If you do not put your foot on the accelerator you never burn any fuel. Why DO people put their foot on the accelerator`? We look at it systemically.
Maintaining a continuous traffic flow at a low speed 30 km/h would discourage acceleration and driving fast, thus reducing emissions. So that would be the task to stop the behaviour. Not really eliminate but reduce. The next step is to establish a reasonable level of behaviour to reduce to.
'Pay attention - this goes quickly,' someone says.
It is not reasonable to reduce goods transport, but reducing the number of private journeys is. Nothing else related to 'Putting your foot on the accelerator'? Next step: what kind of assets could be brought to this?
The group brainstorms: universities, schools, interest groups, nice walks, parks, a boat, a barge, water in the canal, water, railways transport, else? Under physical assets they list bicycles, bike paths, a computer controlled traffic light system, etc.
We now have a list of the assets that could be brought in to solving the problem. A reasonable behaviour to aim for gives a steady 30km/h and reduction of journeys by 10%.
Next, presentation of the challenge.
'I can't believe how fast this went - only ten minutes,' I exclaim. '
You're new here aren't you?' someone says to me.
Ok next stage. We don't stop – it must go quickly. Now a presentation from each group, as each posts their flip-chart onto the wall.
'Why did we not talk about alternative fuels?' I ask in plenum.
'No-one thought to mention it.'
'Well, I am taking it up now' I reply.
They write it up on a flip-chart for remaining items.
The behaviour-cantered approach calls for you to specify a behaviour that is reasonable. Take putting alternative fuel in your car or truck. As there is no alternative fuel to put in your car we cannot treat the point as a legitimate challenge.
I get the feeling that although this kind of meeting is focused on what is achievable today, one output might be issues, impulses etc for the experts to take up for longer term approaches. I suspect long term approaches are going on in parallel with this process.
Next, people are walking around having a break looking at the answers which have been put up on the flip-charts. The problem is at the top, the negative effects of behaviour on the right side, assets on the left. In the middle is the 'how can we' and 'what is a reasonable goal to aim for'.
We look at these. I notice the expert group. They are available to help with figures and facts. They have helped with what is reasonable. They represent different departments. I see there is no lack of knowledge about different aspects.
Let me record some of the issues as I sip on a glass of green spirogyra. On the right is a chart about drinking soda drinks. To the right of that, the number of liters a day, on the left as an asset, research organization, companies that sell drink dispensing machines, TV, bicycles, Internet, CD's . The challenge is to encourage people to cut down on fizzy drinks and drink more water instead.
How do we do this now? We need to regroup. People choose where they want to work, but representatives must be brought in. The asset reps must be engaged and knowledge reps available. I start to see the flow. One group hands the work on to the next one.
First though, there is a vote as to which challenges to prioritise. Everyone gets some sticky circular labels. They put these red blobs on the paper for the concern they feel is most important to address.
People go round voting. Experts cannot vote because they are biased (they are itching to vote). I cannot vote as I am not a member of the community. I can watch. Fuel is one, soda is the other and the last is growing your own vegetables. The vegetables one impacts the transport one. Now we have three things to work on. This is where Imagestreaming comes in, each person takes a partner and they sit down at the round tables.
I mumble how Imagestreaming about Imagestreaming is difficult.
'It is not!' says someone behind me says; 'hang in here!'
Each pair works on a problem. I see a guy talking aloud:
'I see this place with pots growing in their house and vegetables and there is an ornament and it's a vegetable pot as well. You buy it from the local supermarket as a kit with instruction leaflet. You could also call it a local - grow your food at home - shop.'
His friend had one Imagestream too. They have described it to each other. Now they scribble furiously, getting it down on paper. To get it all down they drawing pictures and diagrams in pencil on one A4 sheet of paper. The numbers of solutions are gigantic. People are taping them up on the wall.
Each solution is photographed digitally to be made available on the web. That will make up the end of round one somehow. We need to rest, take time to reflect and not go further. The mind must work with this, but we need to look at the solutions and come back and re-group for the next sessions the next day.
It would be fun to join in the next session the next day. It looks like people take their rest rather seriously. So I need to take my rest seriously because the solutions are all there. We have come to cognition (understanding the issues and mechanisms), we need to go next to co-ordination and collaboration.
Well that was fun. What about the web? All info goes on the web so people can go in and see the results, it is all documented. One digital picture per flip chart/paper. The other things will be used later. The A4 paper solution preserves the inview/overview stability of the process.
As I take my leave I decide to see if I can take the stairs for the exercise.
Follow-up to tapescript.
What surprised me
• How fast it can go.
• The focus on behaviour as a lever.
• The use of what we can do now instead of looking at (as I have seen many do) new technology.
• The insight into the importance of rest.
• Lean documentation.
Verification needs
• I wonder what it would cost to print up such a map. I will ask around.
• I'm a little unsure about the ranking of behaviour process. Is that done using the voting stickers or another method?
• No mention of constraints in the problem solving challenge formulation. I am unsure the problem is formulated succinctly enough to evoke 'sweet spot' solutions.
• Asset engagement. I get the idea the sticker changes colour from supposed assets to engaged assets.
Questions remaining
Interested as to how they 'sold in' this event. Subject for a new visit? Fascinated as to what the next step will be.
Practical uses seen already:
I will try describing my inventions in pencil and paper on one A4 and scanning them in. The idea of quick processes bringing concrete deliverables before the end of the day is helpful. Lean documentation is a great idea I could use in many contexts. Especially as my mobile phone has a camera in it!
Next week:
Max continues to find ways to organise volunteers across the board.
Fossil Fuel
stevehinton
