This article quotes Megan Boler, a professor of media studies and philosophy of education at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE) at the University of Toronto, who will be speaking at our 2008 conference on "Is the Place for Our Stories Really Shrinking? New Media and Canadian Voices."
Clikc on the title to read the article.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Don't Think of a Maverick!
This article is by George Lakoff, founder of the Rockridge Institute. He will not be coming to the 2008 conference, but his cohort, Joe Brewer, will be.
Despite being about the American presidential election, this article covers some of the concepts of "framing" that Joe will be discussing at the conference.
Click on the title to read the article.
Despite being about the American presidential election, this article covers some of the concepts of "framing" that Joe will be discussing at the conference.
Click on the title to read the article.
Taking social media to school
One topic of our 2008 conference, The Moral of the Story: Art, Culture, Media and Politics, will be social media.
Although not a conference speaker, rabble.ca columnist, Wayne MacPhail, discusses some of the possibilities in this article.
Click on the title to go to the article.
Although not a conference speaker, rabble.ca columnist, Wayne MacPhail, discusses some of the possibilities in this article.
Click on the title to go to the article.
Isabel Allende: Tales of passion
This is a talk given by Isabel Allende to TED. She will not be speaking at our 2008 conference, The Moral of the Story, but we hope our conference will touch upon what she is discussing.
Author and activist Isabel Allende discusses women, creativity, the definition of feminism -- and, of course, passion -- in this talk.
Click on the title to go directly to this video.
The Moral of the Story: Art, Culture, Media and Politics
Parkland's 12th Annual Fall Conference
The Moral of the Story: Art, Culture, Media and Politics
November 14-16, 2008
University of Alberta Campus, in Edmonton
Featuring...
Multimedia keynote:
Sol Guy (tentative) - New media cultural storyteller
Closing speaker:
Tariq Ali - Historian, novelist, filmmaker, political campaigner, and commentator
Why do we talk about what we talk about?
* Media
* Language
* Activist Art
* Politics in Fiction
* Alternative Media
What should we be talking about?
* Stories, Myths and Metaphors: Changing the Way We Think
* Knowing How We Think
* The Stories in the Words We Choose
Find out more and to download the ticket/registration form: www.ualberta.ca/parkland
Political change for the common good
The Moral of the Story: Art, Culture, Media and Politics
November 14-16, 2008
University of Alberta Campus, in Edmonton
Featuring...
Multimedia keynote:
Sol Guy (tentative) - New media cultural storyteller
Closing speaker:
Tariq Ali - Historian, novelist, filmmaker, political campaigner, and commentator
Why do we talk about what we talk about?
* Media
* Language
* Activist Art
* Politics in Fiction
* Alternative Media
What should we be talking about?
* Stories, Myths and Metaphors: Changing the Way We Think
* Knowing How We Think
* The Stories in the Words We Choose
Find out more and to download the ticket/registration form: www.ualberta.ca/parkland
Political change for the common good
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
From Crisis to Hope: Building Just and Sustainable Communities Discussion Sessions
Parkland Institute held its 11th annual fall conference, From Crisis to Hope: Building Just and Sustainable Communities, November 16-18, 2007 at the University of Alberta Campus
For more about what was covered in this conference visit our website at: http://www.ualberta.ca/~parkland/conference/2007/
This year, for the first time, we invited participants to have facilitated small group discussions and to share summaries of what they discussed.
Below is what each group submitted. Feel free to submit your comments on the summaries.
Opinions expressed in this blog reflect the views of the participants and not necessarily those of the Parkland Institute. This is a moderated blog.
For more about what was covered in this conference visit our website at: http://www.ualberta.ca/~parkland/conference/2007/
This year, for the first time, we invited participants to have facilitated small group discussions and to share summaries of what they discussed.
Below is what each group submitted. Feel free to submit your comments on the summaries.
Opinions expressed in this blog reflect the views of the participants and not necessarily those of the Parkland Institute. This is a moderated blog.
Community Discussions: Transitions to Post-Carbon Economy II
1. What will be some specific challenges for your community as energy from fossil fuels becomes more scarce and expensive?
- Basic Needs – For example, heating costs can accentuate poverty
- The stark individualism in our society: Uncertainty, instability, violence.
- Government acknowledgement impending difficulties
- Mobilization of the grassroots to influence policy-making (citizens’ mindset)
- Cultural shifts may form a foundation for addressing the specific challenges of the end of the fossil fuel age.
2. Assuming that the energy transition is going to involve fundamental change to living standards in wealthy countries, how can democracy help or hider the process?
- “First past the post” doesn’t work
- Reclaiming public and civic space: we are all “people/citizens”
- Freedom and democracy depend on each other
- Communication, dialogue and discourse provide for a community which makes adaptation bearable,
3. Where do you think will be the safest place to live during the energy transition? What would be the best place to live if you wanted to have a positive impact on the process?
- The safest place to live is a psycho-spiritual, cultural place of cooperative, dynamic living in symbiosis with the geophysical place. (“To not go away but build positively where we are.”)
- The best place to live if you want to have a positive impact is one of genuine, open, and accommodating of emergent realities.
- Basic Needs – For example, heating costs can accentuate poverty
- The stark individualism in our society: Uncertainty, instability, violence.
- Government acknowledgement impending difficulties
- Mobilization of the grassroots to influence policy-making (citizens’ mindset)
- Cultural shifts may form a foundation for addressing the specific challenges of the end of the fossil fuel age.
2. Assuming that the energy transition is going to involve fundamental change to living standards in wealthy countries, how can democracy help or hider the process?
- “First past the post” doesn’t work
- Reclaiming public and civic space: we are all “people/citizens”
- Freedom and democracy depend on each other
- Communication, dialogue and discourse provide for a community which makes adaptation bearable,
3. Where do you think will be the safest place to live during the energy transition? What would be the best place to live if you wanted to have a positive impact on the process?
- The safest place to live is a psycho-spiritual, cultural place of cooperative, dynamic living in symbiosis with the geophysical place. (“To not go away but build positively where we are.”)
- The best place to live if you want to have a positive impact is one of genuine, open, and accommodating of emergent realities.
Community Discussions: Spending Our Time Differently
Every bullet point is the comment of each member of the group (it might be redundant some time).
What do you do to "get away from it all"? (keeping in mind the main theme post carbon)?
- riding bike in the river valley, mountains (Kananaski); boating, walking, concerts, canoe, reading.
- Private time, volunteering, travel
- Involve NGO’s
- Self-employed and do not have free time but more spontaneous activities;
Sunday, what happened to free time?
- Family day in Alberta used to be Sundays
- Farmer, walks every morning with his wife
- Time to work, conferences, sees life as a series of free time; learning as much as you can.
- Community media- work is leisure time work is ding what she loves anyway photography, writing.
- Improving community, running;
- Retired but occasionally goes back to teaching main interest is family.
- Feels working mothers should be recognized for work they are doing; Even though children are grown up now helps the next generation. Get together wit other women and share experience. Would like to go back to rural life.
Is an art gallery or theatre or concert hall just another way of going to church/temple/mosque?
- Through arts you connect with something larger
- Sports is another way at replacing spiritual for some people;
- Virtual connecting internet.
- Values of church – care, love, interdependence, would be hard to replace. Creation is a gift to everyone life is very rich.
- All these organizations are institutions church, justice in love, learning into schools. Want to be free to choose where learning come from. Foresees these institutions breaking down in the future and we need to get back to learning.
- We need to prepare the ground for the next generation.
- University’s used to be a starting place for art and revolution.
- Distance learning is becoming prevalent which also separate us.
- Travel by train – slows down pace makes travel pleasant.
What rituals do you include in your life with family and friends? (Keep in mind past carbon world)
- Special occasions – birthday, Christmas – gift exchange.
- We seem to be stuck in what society expects in our rituals –even if we do not necessary believe in it (xmas)
- A lot of the rituals are very commercial.
- Family reunions in a post carbon world will be very difficult
o We want to know about our roots and the meaning of family
o Family help us understand who we are
- History of ancestors – need or urge to trace.
- Gender – women seem to e the ones who carry on the rituals. Organize the family dinners, send out the xmas cards. Etc.
- Before the 60’s or 70’s families used to get together once weekly and get to know each other and the children got to know each other.
- Used to be more dependants on communities because travel was more difficult. So families got to know one another because they needed each other.
- Meals together with family, food is central to gatherings.
- Eating together leads to relationships – very bonding.
- Ritual of getting together to cook or can food
- Coffee is always on – family gathers a lot all live very close together. Sit in circle and visit and talk;
- Rituals around death – funeral or celebration of life are we losing the rituals of death.
- Rituals around birth –
- Traditional music, food; do people just come for the entertainment or the food. We don’t learn or talk about death in general.
What do you do to "get away from it all"? (keeping in mind the main theme post carbon)?
- riding bike in the river valley, mountains (Kananaski); boating, walking, concerts, canoe, reading.
- Private time, volunteering, travel
- Involve NGO’s
- Self-employed and do not have free time but more spontaneous activities;
Sunday, what happened to free time?
- Family day in Alberta used to be Sundays
- Farmer, walks every morning with his wife
- Time to work, conferences, sees life as a series of free time; learning as much as you can.
- Community media- work is leisure time work is ding what she loves anyway photography, writing.
- Improving community, running;
- Retired but occasionally goes back to teaching main interest is family.
- Feels working mothers should be recognized for work they are doing; Even though children are grown up now helps the next generation. Get together wit other women and share experience. Would like to go back to rural life.
Is an art gallery or theatre or concert hall just another way of going to church/temple/mosque?
- Through arts you connect with something larger
- Sports is another way at replacing spiritual for some people;
- Virtual connecting internet.
- Values of church – care, love, interdependence, would be hard to replace. Creation is a gift to everyone life is very rich.
- All these organizations are institutions church, justice in love, learning into schools. Want to be free to choose where learning come from. Foresees these institutions breaking down in the future and we need to get back to learning.
- We need to prepare the ground for the next generation.
- University’s used to be a starting place for art and revolution.
- Distance learning is becoming prevalent which also separate us.
- Travel by train – slows down pace makes travel pleasant.
What rituals do you include in your life with family and friends? (Keep in mind past carbon world)
- Special occasions – birthday, Christmas – gift exchange.
- We seem to be stuck in what society expects in our rituals –even if we do not necessary believe in it (xmas)
- A lot of the rituals are very commercial.
- Family reunions in a post carbon world will be very difficult
o We want to know about our roots and the meaning of family
o Family help us understand who we are
- History of ancestors – need or urge to trace.
- Gender – women seem to e the ones who carry on the rituals. Organize the family dinners, send out the xmas cards. Etc.
- Before the 60’s or 70’s families used to get together once weekly and get to know each other and the children got to know each other.
- Used to be more dependants on communities because travel was more difficult. So families got to know one another because they needed each other.
- Meals together with family, food is central to gatherings.
- Eating together leads to relationships – very bonding.
- Ritual of getting together to cook or can food
- Coffee is always on – family gathers a lot all live very close together. Sit in circle and visit and talk;
- Rituals around death – funeral or celebration of life are we losing the rituals of death.
- Rituals around birth –
- Traditional music, food; do people just come for the entertainment or the food. We don’t learn or talk about death in general.
Community Discussions: Transitioning to a Post-Carbon Economy I
1. What will be some specific challenges for your community as energy from fossil fuels becomes more scarce and expensive?
- Lifestyle has to change. Most Canadians heat with natural gas and we will soon be running out of it.
- Pay a carbon tax
- who benefits from the high price of oil? primarily the share holders.
- IPCC global summit - probable outcome will be a recommendation for carbon tax. Capture excessive profit and put the money into renewable energies.
2. Assuming that the energy transition is going to involve fundamental change to living standards in wealthy countries, how can democracy help or hider the process?
- Democracy is flawed because of the need to fundraise for political campaigns. Public finance for public governance. We need proportional representation.
- Try to solve problems expected 30 years down the road. How do you sell that to the public and be re-elected?
- Global warming effects can be seen here in Edmonton. Look at the river valley.
- City design: small communities to hold together the larger community, less transportation. Need higher density housing. Need to educate people on high density living! (start with the children) Learning is part of life.
3. Where do you think will be the safest place to live during the energy transition? What would be the best place to live if you wanted to have a positive impact on the process?
- The safest place would be medium density community.
- Best place to live is a green community or to live close to the legislature to protest and inform. We need the public and politicians to get together for a freen, efficient future and must be global. We need educationfor the citizens as an antidote to apathy.
- Lifestyle has to change. Most Canadians heat with natural gas and we will soon be running out of it.
- Pay a carbon tax
- who benefits from the high price of oil? primarily the share holders.
- IPCC global summit - probable outcome will be a recommendation for carbon tax. Capture excessive profit and put the money into renewable energies.
2. Assuming that the energy transition is going to involve fundamental change to living standards in wealthy countries, how can democracy help or hider the process?
- Democracy is flawed because of the need to fundraise for political campaigns. Public finance for public governance. We need proportional representation.
- Try to solve problems expected 30 years down the road. How do you sell that to the public and be re-elected?
- Global warming effects can be seen here in Edmonton. Look at the river valley.
- City design: small communities to hold together the larger community, less transportation. Need higher density housing. Need to educate people on high density living! (start with the children) Learning is part of life.
3. Where do you think will be the safest place to live during the energy transition? What would be the best place to live if you wanted to have a positive impact on the process?
- The safest place would be medium density community.
- Best place to live is a green community or to live close to the legislature to protest and inform. We need the public and politicians to get together for a freen, efficient future and must be global. We need educationfor the citizens as an antidote to apathy.
Community Discussions: What We Eat II
1. What does the term “local food system” mean to you?
For most participants, a local food system means food that is produced, processed and accessible locally.
2. In what ways do you or could you contribute to the development of more sustainable food systems?
As consumers, buy local as much as possible.
As citizens,
-get political locally to preserve land for agriculture. e.g. Check out land trusts
-get political and object to the current globaization of the food system
Campaign or get involved in other ways to see that children learn about the origin of their food and how it can be produced.
Set up food coop stores.
3. If Alberta were to become food self sufficient within 5 – 10 years, what major changes would have to take place?
More arable land needs to be preserved for agriculture
More food would need to be processed locally, as well as grown and produced locally.
More support would need to be provided for small farmers instead of supporting and subsidizing factory farms.
We need to ensure that every one receives a living wage for their work, so they can afford to purchase local food.
Our government would need to develop a national food policy to ensure food security.
Our local and provincial governments would need to develop land use policies to preserve more land for agriculture.
For most participants, a local food system means food that is produced, processed and accessible locally.
2. In what ways do you or could you contribute to the development of more sustainable food systems?
As consumers, buy local as much as possible.
As citizens,
-get political locally to preserve land for agriculture. e.g. Check out land trusts
-get political and object to the current globaization of the food system
Campaign or get involved in other ways to see that children learn about the origin of their food and how it can be produced.
Set up food coop stores.
3. If Alberta were to become food self sufficient within 5 – 10 years, what major changes would have to take place?
More arable land needs to be preserved for agriculture
More food would need to be processed locally, as well as grown and produced locally.
More support would need to be provided for small farmers instead of supporting and subsidizing factory farms.
We need to ensure that every one receives a living wage for their work, so they can afford to purchase local food.
Our government would need to develop a national food policy to ensure food security.
Our local and provincial governments would need to develop land use policies to preserve more land for agriculture.
Community Discussions: Governance
We began after introductions with the question whether there are other questions that also needed to be addressed. We agreed that the question of the legitimacy of the rules that are made has to be raised also and that it is tied to questions about the process of making regulations which is involved in question #3.
Question 1 How much regulation is too much?
It depends on to whose benefits the regulations are? Are there principles that could guide how much regulation? Trade deals which can trump domestic regulation in Canada are too much regulation! Another reason to regulate is to ensure uniformity of standards so citizens know when they buy a product or use a service it will meet a minimum standard.
One key question is whether or not the behaviour or actions we wish to regulate affects others. If that action has costs for others ie causes harm for another individual or the community or the commons (eg the ecosystem) then it should be regulated in the public interest. We must also distinguish regulations which seek to regulate what people or corporations should not do from those that try to tell you what you must do. For example, should there be a regulation that says you must vote or must eat healthy food? Some regulations, such as a requirement that a government balance its budget is phoney regulation because the government can change the law when it wishes.
We need to address the question also of individual freedom and issues such as privacy. One key issue is information. Citizens need to have a right to know, for example, what is in their food. If we expect them to make good choices they need to know what is in food.
Accountability must also be stressed. If government has a regulation we need to hold them accountable as to whether it is achieving its goal. There must be independent feedback on the extent of compliance.
Question 2 What role should voluntary compliance play?
In the case of voluntary compliance it is even more vital that we have an independent feedback mechanism to measure whether the regulation is achieving its objective. A good example are inspections of trucks and school buses where spotchecks found that a large proporation were not meeting standards. There should not be volutary compliance when those being regulated can commercially benefit from skirting the regulations or concealing violations. There is clearly a conflict of interest.
Voluntary compliance is also not appropriate when there are public health and safety issues at issue. For example the case of Walkerton and water standards was used as an example where voluntary compliance would be inappropriate. Where we use voluntary compliance we also need to ensure that there is adequate information and education and a strong community that is on the alert and helps ensure compliance, for example, in the usage of local parks. There is an argument to made that people will not change their behaviour voluntarily especially if it is inconveniant and only change when they have to. How we decide whether voluntary compliance or enforcement is necessary depends on the severity of the threat to either people ( in terms of harm) or the broader public good ( including the broader commons) In addition as the recent case of continuing care facilities indicate, voluntary compliance is inadequate where there are vulnerable populations or groups who cannot protect themselves.
While enforcement of regulations does have a cost we need to pay attention to how we measure costs. The cost of not enforcing, for example if we destroy a watershed or a river or the environment has to be measured too. In other words the cost of not enforcing a regulation may be very high.
Question 3 How can we ensure that business input into the policy process does not overwhelm it?
We agreed that this is really a question of the process of making rules and regulations and whose voice gets heard in the process and who does not. A first step is to Kill Bill 46, in other words when a resource project is being reviewed citizens must have a right to have input and have their voices heard. Ministers must also be held accountable and tell the truth, the example used was the attempt to deny the health impacts in Fort Chip of oilsands development. Key principles of the process must include real transparency and accountability.
The bigger issue is one of how representative our government really is? It is often elected with less than half of the votes cast and does not represent the real preferences of citizens. First past the post electoral systems need to be changed. There must be reform as well in Alberta of campaingn finance regulation which allows business to fund a party campaign and expensive ads. There was also a concern that the Westminister style parliamentary system which gives premiers and cabinets a lot of power and this needs to be changed.
At the municipal level we also need to address how people are treated in a re-development process. For example the inner city poor are often marginalized, unorganized and have no voice when projects are developed and they are displaced. There must be a requirement that all who are impacted by a project have a voice and are consulted. While the final decision might not satisfy all it is important to the legitimacy of the decisions which are made. The decision process must always be an open and transparent one.
Boards and things like environmental hearings must allow for intervenors and all those affected to be heard or the process will not be seen or be legitimate. The public must be included and all discussion and processes or approval must be open.
One thing we as citizens can do in the short term is to monitor and document and expose what boards are doing. We must also organize and pressure government. We need to go to forums and use them as much as we can as groups to get our voice heard and use the media to expose what is happening and raise our concerns. We can also use demonstrations and protests to make our voice heard.
Question 1 How much regulation is too much?
It depends on to whose benefits the regulations are? Are there principles that could guide how much regulation? Trade deals which can trump domestic regulation in Canada are too much regulation! Another reason to regulate is to ensure uniformity of standards so citizens know when they buy a product or use a service it will meet a minimum standard.
One key question is whether or not the behaviour or actions we wish to regulate affects others. If that action has costs for others ie causes harm for another individual or the community or the commons (eg the ecosystem) then it should be regulated in the public interest. We must also distinguish regulations which seek to regulate what people or corporations should not do from those that try to tell you what you must do. For example, should there be a regulation that says you must vote or must eat healthy food? Some regulations, such as a requirement that a government balance its budget is phoney regulation because the government can change the law when it wishes.
We need to address the question also of individual freedom and issues such as privacy. One key issue is information. Citizens need to have a right to know, for example, what is in their food. If we expect them to make good choices they need to know what is in food.
Accountability must also be stressed. If government has a regulation we need to hold them accountable as to whether it is achieving its goal. There must be independent feedback on the extent of compliance.
Question 2 What role should voluntary compliance play?
In the case of voluntary compliance it is even more vital that we have an independent feedback mechanism to measure whether the regulation is achieving its objective. A good example are inspections of trucks and school buses where spotchecks found that a large proporation were not meeting standards. There should not be volutary compliance when those being regulated can commercially benefit from skirting the regulations or concealing violations. There is clearly a conflict of interest.
Voluntary compliance is also not appropriate when there are public health and safety issues at issue. For example the case of Walkerton and water standards was used as an example where voluntary compliance would be inappropriate. Where we use voluntary compliance we also need to ensure that there is adequate information and education and a strong community that is on the alert and helps ensure compliance, for example, in the usage of local parks. There is an argument to made that people will not change their behaviour voluntarily especially if it is inconveniant and only change when they have to. How we decide whether voluntary compliance or enforcement is necessary depends on the severity of the threat to either people ( in terms of harm) or the broader public good ( including the broader commons) In addition as the recent case of continuing care facilities indicate, voluntary compliance is inadequate where there are vulnerable populations or groups who cannot protect themselves.
While enforcement of regulations does have a cost we need to pay attention to how we measure costs. The cost of not enforcing, for example if we destroy a watershed or a river or the environment has to be measured too. In other words the cost of not enforcing a regulation may be very high.
Question 3 How can we ensure that business input into the policy process does not overwhelm it?
We agreed that this is really a question of the process of making rules and regulations and whose voice gets heard in the process and who does not. A first step is to Kill Bill 46, in other words when a resource project is being reviewed citizens must have a right to have input and have their voices heard. Ministers must also be held accountable and tell the truth, the example used was the attempt to deny the health impacts in Fort Chip of oilsands development. Key principles of the process must include real transparency and accountability.
The bigger issue is one of how representative our government really is? It is often elected with less than half of the votes cast and does not represent the real preferences of citizens. First past the post electoral systems need to be changed. There must be reform as well in Alberta of campaingn finance regulation which allows business to fund a party campaign and expensive ads. There was also a concern that the Westminister style parliamentary system which gives premiers and cabinets a lot of power and this needs to be changed.
At the municipal level we also need to address how people are treated in a re-development process. For example the inner city poor are often marginalized, unorganized and have no voice when projects are developed and they are displaced. There must be a requirement that all who are impacted by a project have a voice and are consulted. While the final decision might not satisfy all it is important to the legitimacy of the decisions which are made. The decision process must always be an open and transparent one.
Boards and things like environmental hearings must allow for intervenors and all those affected to be heard or the process will not be seen or be legitimate. The public must be included and all discussion and processes or approval must be open.
One thing we as citizens can do in the short term is to monitor and document and expose what boards are doing. We must also organize and pressure government. We need to go to forums and use them as much as we can as groups to get our voice heard and use the media to expose what is happening and raise our concerns. We can also use demonstrations and protests to make our voice heard.
Community Discussions: Where We Live II
1. How far from work is too far?
It seems this is of more interest to people who are from smaller towns. Those who have lived in Edmonton and Calgary for a while just get used to traffic, while those from Vancouver and Toronto see less congested roads.
Would love to live close to work, but inner city is too expensive and there is not much green space near transit. Want to raise children in safe neighbourhoods, but these are in the suburbs, where public transit is poor.
Used to be able to go to school, play sports, and shop in your community. Now you can’t.
Rent hikes prevent people from putting roots down and living near work. How much choice do you have living near work when you are mid to low income?
In Berlin (Germany) the public transit is inexpensive and accessible (can walk to). Many people, including families, do not have a personal vehicle.
Many people’s jobs require a car and the ability to drive on a moments notice around the city throughout the day. Many people change jobs often, should you have to move each time?
Ideally should be able to get to work walking or a short bike ride. In reality for most, riding public transit to work should take less than 30 minutes. Suggestions on how much time it should take driving to work ranged from less than 10 minutes to as high as 20 minutes.
2. How do we reconcile the contradiction between where we live and what we know?
Ideal village with almost all amenities doesn’t exist, the choice isn’t available.
Need to price energy at real cost.
Planning departments need to be re-energized.
Would people accept living near factories? Living near factories would encourage citizens to demand more eco designs. How responsive would factories be? People moved to the suburbs in the first place to get away from the factories.
Significantly increase the number of community gardens.
In each village within the city, need to reconnect with food and work. Revitalize food festivals and nature festivals. Create workplaces that constantly strive to minimize waste, pollution and disturbance in the community.
Each ideal design for new communities seems to morph into a watered down version resembling the same old communities it tried to be different from.
Communities need to accommodate multiple income levels.
There needs to be transparency and accountability between City Councillor donation sources from developers and the approvals from Council to build new sprawling communities. Decisions are about money. The few people with money seem to be making the big decisions.
Divest ourselves of the big box amenities and invest in more amenities sized for the community.
3. In the very long term are cities viable places to live?
Not as they are now.
Will have to grow more food within the city. Will have to grow animals’ food in the place where the animals live.
Increase densities to make public transit more viable.
Keep waste in communities, not in landfills outside of the city, so communities have an incentive to minimize waste.
For cities to become more sustainable, citizens need to make intentional decisions, politicians need to become leaders, and we need to re-tell past success stories for inspiration. We need to take advantage of another window of opportunity to make real changes. Jane Jacobs warned us to change 50 years ago, but we didn’t listen. Will we this time?
It seems this is of more interest to people who are from smaller towns. Those who have lived in Edmonton and Calgary for a while just get used to traffic, while those from Vancouver and Toronto see less congested roads.
Would love to live close to work, but inner city is too expensive and there is not much green space near transit. Want to raise children in safe neighbourhoods, but these are in the suburbs, where public transit is poor.
Used to be able to go to school, play sports, and shop in your community. Now you can’t.
Rent hikes prevent people from putting roots down and living near work. How much choice do you have living near work when you are mid to low income?
In Berlin (Germany) the public transit is inexpensive and accessible (can walk to). Many people, including families, do not have a personal vehicle.
Many people’s jobs require a car and the ability to drive on a moments notice around the city throughout the day. Many people change jobs often, should you have to move each time?
Ideally should be able to get to work walking or a short bike ride. In reality for most, riding public transit to work should take less than 30 minutes. Suggestions on how much time it should take driving to work ranged from less than 10 minutes to as high as 20 minutes.
2. How do we reconcile the contradiction between where we live and what we know?
Ideal village with almost all amenities doesn’t exist, the choice isn’t available.
Need to price energy at real cost.
Planning departments need to be re-energized.
Would people accept living near factories? Living near factories would encourage citizens to demand more eco designs. How responsive would factories be? People moved to the suburbs in the first place to get away from the factories.
Significantly increase the number of community gardens.
In each village within the city, need to reconnect with food and work. Revitalize food festivals and nature festivals. Create workplaces that constantly strive to minimize waste, pollution and disturbance in the community.
Each ideal design for new communities seems to morph into a watered down version resembling the same old communities it tried to be different from.
Communities need to accommodate multiple income levels.
There needs to be transparency and accountability between City Councillor donation sources from developers and the approvals from Council to build new sprawling communities. Decisions are about money. The few people with money seem to be making the big decisions.
Divest ourselves of the big box amenities and invest in more amenities sized for the community.
3. In the very long term are cities viable places to live?
Not as they are now.
Will have to grow more food within the city. Will have to grow animals’ food in the place where the animals live.
Increase densities to make public transit more viable.
Keep waste in communities, not in landfills outside of the city, so communities have an incentive to minimize waste.
For cities to become more sustainable, citizens need to make intentional decisions, politicians need to become leaders, and we need to re-tell past success stories for inspiration. We need to take advantage of another window of opportunity to make real changes. Jane Jacobs warned us to change 50 years ago, but we didn’t listen. Will we this time?
Community Discussions: Where We Live I
To answer the question, “How far from work is too far to live?” our discussion group looked at a broad range of perspectives:
How is our health or relationships affected by working outside of our community?
Do we choose this? Or are we just buying into the package that the provincial government, developers, and corporations mandate, and which media sells?
It is a multi-complex issue. Specialized work can take us far from our families for long stretches at a time. But if the work gives us purpose and the pay is satisfactory, time away from home is more manageable. On the flip side, consider the perspective of one individual in the discussion group, who is sixty, and who spent the past eight months sleeping outside after her rent doubled to $1300. As it is with people of modest means, she had little choice but to live close to where she works, as her work was finding food, a place to wash, and other resources that we cannot be far from. Overall, it was felt that work is too far from home when we feel burdened by the absence of family and neighbourhood or when we come to miss them too little. In measurements of time, travelling over half an hour to work by public transit may be too far. Eventually, the ritual daily commute gets us thinking that our wealth, food, water, and even our love is elsewhere, rather than right where we stand. Our land, no longer sacred, becomes a stranger to us, as the wealthy claim it as their own. To reconcile the distancing, communities can reorganize and customized. Micro communities can choose specific ownership styles, home styles, business styles, land to grow food, and other resources to be distributed among the members. Net Zero communities aimed at eliminating waste are recommended. Ultimately, we must bring back a sense of ownership, not just of land, but of our own life expressions. We do this by asserting that our work, community, and environment reflect our values. It is another way of getting closer to home. As it sits, our cities are not viable. Without pragmatic and reflective change, our cities are at risk of collapse, like a house of cards on a crumbling foundation.
How is our health or relationships affected by working outside of our community?
Do we choose this? Or are we just buying into the package that the provincial government, developers, and corporations mandate, and which media sells?
It is a multi-complex issue. Specialized work can take us far from our families for long stretches at a time. But if the work gives us purpose and the pay is satisfactory, time away from home is more manageable. On the flip side, consider the perspective of one individual in the discussion group, who is sixty, and who spent the past eight months sleeping outside after her rent doubled to $1300. As it is with people of modest means, she had little choice but to live close to where she works, as her work was finding food, a place to wash, and other resources that we cannot be far from. Overall, it was felt that work is too far from home when we feel burdened by the absence of family and neighbourhood or when we come to miss them too little. In measurements of time, travelling over half an hour to work by public transit may be too far. Eventually, the ritual daily commute gets us thinking that our wealth, food, water, and even our love is elsewhere, rather than right where we stand. Our land, no longer sacred, becomes a stranger to us, as the wealthy claim it as their own. To reconcile the distancing, communities can reorganize and customized. Micro communities can choose specific ownership styles, home styles, business styles, land to grow food, and other resources to be distributed among the members. Net Zero communities aimed at eliminating waste are recommended. Ultimately, we must bring back a sense of ownership, not just of land, but of our own life expressions. We do this by asserting that our work, community, and environment reflect our values. It is another way of getting closer to home. As it sits, our cities are not viable. Without pragmatic and reflective change, our cities are at risk of collapse, like a house of cards on a crumbling foundation.
Community Discussion Submissions: What We Eat I
Collective answers were given to the following questions:
Q. What does the term “local food system” mean to you?
A. The 200 mile diet. A “mostly local food system”, with some things from abroad. It means whatever is needed for community to be sustainable. Eating seasonal food. Small-scale (not industrial/factory farming, which could also be “local”). Direct producer-consumer relationships (no middleman). Allowances for small-scale producers to grow a little bigger, to serve more people. Smaller stores, with more possibility of personal relationships to store owners. Stores accessible by foot or bus. Good quality food, high nutrition content. Both urban and rural lands in use for food production. Use of renewable energy-powered greenhouses. An evolving phenomenon, a progression from some local with some imported to completely local, with discovery of new local food sources through horticultural research (non-GMO).
Q. In what ways do you or could you contribute to the development of more sustainable food systems?
A. Create more TIME, so people can start gardening. Promote community agriculture. Address psychological and cultural barriers to gardening and food preserving work (eg. weeding, canning). Realize urban areas can also be used for growing food (eg. empty lots)…be a “guerrilla gardener”! Use a “laddering strategy” to overcome institutional barriers…negotiate with institutions to begin purchasing small amounts of local food. Get public institutions to buy locally, to begin to develop infrastructure for a local food economy. Form food co-ops. Develop underground storage facilities for food storage during winter. Practice square-foot gardening (for use of small spaces).
Q. If Alberta were to become food self-sufficient within 5-10 years, what major changes would have to take place?
A. Chip away at advanced capitalism, and return decision-making power to local citizens (eg. remove the “Inc” from the Calgary Chamber of Commerce). At a minimum, public institutions should buy local. Triple the number of small organic farms. Give specific grants or tax incentives for small farms and co-ops. Demand information be made public (what are feedlots feeding our cattle?) More information on labelling about where food comes from. Cut the middleman, whenever possible. Create local direct food distribution systems. Supply funding for transition to organic, and funding to REMAIN organic. Free tuition to organic farmers’ children (since some don’t make enough income to receive tax incentives). Make food security a public policy issue. Create a Food Security Plan, focussing on self-sufficiency, to address disaster scenarios. Create a Food Charter for Alberta cities, similar to other cities such as Vancouver. Hold Farmers’ Markets on University Campuses. Connect environmentalists--young and old! Link groups such as Greater Edmonton Alliance (pushing for a living wage) together towards food self-sufficiency. Join forces! Permit more action-oriented assignments in academic courses (eg. don’t just create written materials; buy land, grow food, talk to people!)
Q. What does the term “local food system” mean to you?
A. The 200 mile diet. A “mostly local food system”, with some things from abroad. It means whatever is needed for community to be sustainable. Eating seasonal food. Small-scale (not industrial/factory farming, which could also be “local”). Direct producer-consumer relationships (no middleman). Allowances for small-scale producers to grow a little bigger, to serve more people. Smaller stores, with more possibility of personal relationships to store owners. Stores accessible by foot or bus. Good quality food, high nutrition content. Both urban and rural lands in use for food production. Use of renewable energy-powered greenhouses. An evolving phenomenon, a progression from some local with some imported to completely local, with discovery of new local food sources through horticultural research (non-GMO).
Q. In what ways do you or could you contribute to the development of more sustainable food systems?
A. Create more TIME, so people can start gardening. Promote community agriculture. Address psychological and cultural barriers to gardening and food preserving work (eg. weeding, canning). Realize urban areas can also be used for growing food (eg. empty lots)…be a “guerrilla gardener”! Use a “laddering strategy” to overcome institutional barriers…negotiate with institutions to begin purchasing small amounts of local food. Get public institutions to buy locally, to begin to develop infrastructure for a local food economy. Form food co-ops. Develop underground storage facilities for food storage during winter. Practice square-foot gardening (for use of small spaces).
Q. If Alberta were to become food self-sufficient within 5-10 years, what major changes would have to take place?
A. Chip away at advanced capitalism, and return decision-making power to local citizens (eg. remove the “Inc” from the Calgary Chamber of Commerce). At a minimum, public institutions should buy local. Triple the number of small organic farms. Give specific grants or tax incentives for small farms and co-ops. Demand information be made public (what are feedlots feeding our cattle?) More information on labelling about where food comes from. Cut the middleman, whenever possible. Create local direct food distribution systems. Supply funding for transition to organic, and funding to REMAIN organic. Free tuition to organic farmers’ children (since some don’t make enough income to receive tax incentives). Make food security a public policy issue. Create a Food Security Plan, focussing on self-sufficiency, to address disaster scenarios. Create a Food Charter for Alberta cities, similar to other cities such as Vancouver. Hold Farmers’ Markets on University Campuses. Connect environmentalists--young and old! Link groups such as Greater Edmonton Alliance (pushing for a living wage) together towards food self-sufficiency. Join forces! Permit more action-oriented assignments in academic courses (eg. don’t just create written materials; buy land, grow food, talk to people!)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
