Protecting the global commons: citizens do it better than economics

The winners of this year’s Nobel prize for economics have rewarded research into effective governance which lies outside traditional economic models.

In particular, laureate Elinor Ostrom has shown how community-driven projects can be more efficient than privatisation or nationalisation. User-managed examples of common property – rivers, woods, lakes etc – derive better outcomes than predicted by standard [economic] theories.

I have long thought this to be the case, but had never thought to wonder whether it could be proven.

Olstrom makes the link between citizens organising to protect an important asset, and climate change: “A lot of people are waiting for more international co-operation … there is this assumption that there are public officials who are geniuses, and that the rest of us are not.”

Links:

Guardian news article

Nobel prize committee citation for Elinor Ostrom

 

Encouraging sustainable behaviour

What helps people adopt sustainable behaviours?

It has long been known that information is not enough when it comes to campaigns on obesity, smoking, teenage pregnancies etc – and the same is true for promoting efforts against climate change.

Research suggests that some messages work better than others (http://coinet.org.uk/news/2009-10-06/psychology-sustainable-behaviour). By way of summary:

1. People don’t worry about things they can’t see (or even imagine). Doomsday scenarios don’t work. More succesful are messages which talk about pollution, or about the things they care about: their health, their family, their happiness.
2. Sometimes people know they have to change but don’t know how to. Community Based Social Marketing (see also this explainer), created in response to non-effective “information-only” campaigns, identifies a goal, behaviour to support that goal, and situations that will trigger the behaviour. If… then… For example, to change to catching the bus on Fridays: IF it’s Thursday evening, THEN set the alarm for earlier next morning; IF an umbrella is by the door, THEN it won’t matter if it’s raining, etc.
3. Use social norms positively. If people are told that their behaviour is socially approved (rather than simply receiving a pat on the back) they are more likely to continue it.
4. Those who make a public commitment are more likely to stick to it in the longer-term. Even a sticker in a window or on the phone makes a difference. And those who feel supported by friends and colleagues are more likely to change their behaviour than those who try to go it alone.
5. Financial interest can prompt pro-environment behaviours – but it won’t on its own make people be pro-environment at other times if financial reasons are absent. It makes people view themselves as ‘the sort of person who saves money’; they don’t switch to thinking of themselves as ‘the kind of person who acts sustainably’.

I find this an interesting list. I could imagine saying: I work with people who are responding to what’s happening in their communities, and in the places they go on holiday to. If you’re interested in reducing your energy use, then come along to our “sharing ideas” event. And so on. There are much better ways than these sentences, of course; this is just a start for me.

I’m also interested to learn whether these type of messages work in other situations too – for example, inviting members of an organisation to engage in a change process or a conflict resolution process (“This is about helping make the office a happier place…”; “Tell us about the changes you’d like to see…”).

Can you comment from your own experience with organisations?

Star formation and partnership-building

The Reflection Nebula

My current desktop photo is an image of the Reflection Nebula, taken by the Hubble Space Telescope. The description from the www.hubblesite.org says in part: “The bright, young star left of center gives the nebula its brightness. The gas and dust of the nebula is left over from the star’s formation.”

I love the concept of stars-in-the-making: an ageless incremental process of gradually combining dust together which might eventually gather enough mass to collapse and ignite.

I’m using this image to represent a process I observed last week: the potential forming of a new voluntary sector consortium. In the room were three people from a particular area of service delivery, acting in the belief that they needed to work closer together with a view to winning statutory contracts which may emerge in the future.

As the discussion deepened, they began facing the questions which confront all consortia-in-the-making:

• Are we designing something for our wider network to engage in, or will it be just us? What are our loyalties to other network members?

• What do we do about organisations we don’t want to join – are we an open or a closed group? Are we open to organisations outside the Third Sector?

• What standards should we expect of each other as members?

• Are we in this process for the benefit of service users, or is our main motive to ensure the survival of our organisations?

These are tough questions, and if properly explored would help towards strong relationships between those ultimately involved in the consortia. In Framework we have long experience, in the UK and abroad, of supporting and creating quality relationships. A strong basis for partnerships is open communication, particularly about the issues which are likely to be most difficult. This means risk-taking, accompanied by an inward search to be clear about one’s own motives and priorities.

All this is easier to write about than to embody in daily life. Ultimately, Framework is a one kind of consortia – a network of potential competitors joining together for mutual benefit. Which isn’t to say we get it right internally all the time!; but we’ve learnt never to stop working on the relationships between us.hs-2000-10-a-pdf

In-store book printing

Now this is a neat idea: a local bookstore-based printing machine that prints on demand from a catalogue of 500,000 titles. And that catalogue is just for starters – it will top a million by this September.

As The Guardian reports, the Espresso Book Machine offers a viable alternative to ordering books online – so long as the price is right.

Once York (UK) gets its own version, I want one that will print .pdf’s from off the web. I baulk at printing off an 80-page document, and anyway there is something profoundly off-putting for me about a lengthy home-printed document. Having a proper bound version instead – £5 per publication sounds fair – would give me a proper-looking document which I’m far more likely to actually read.

Drawing out climate change

The 2008 Ken Sprague Fund’s annual political cartoon competition was on the theme of of global warning and our threatened environment. This cartoon was one of the prize-winning entries, drawn by Tawan Chuntraskawvong of Thailand.

The cartoon depicts not just our present predicament, but also the world-view which holds our society in thrall and which allows our predicament to worsen.

You can see all the shortlisted entries and winners here, although a smaller selection is easier to view at The Guardian’s website.

Living as though other people matter

In a previous post I listed some of the many ways in which we are connected to each other. It posed the challenge: yes, but so what? This article is a start in saying Well, how about this what.

A great anti-connector are the negative aspects of the global economy. Whilst paradoxically it binds consumers and producers into what can be strangling economic relatioships, what’s really happening is a deconnectivity. The attitude that frequently accompanies globalistation – that those who are rich enough are free to to get whatever they want – means that the deeper, felt sense of connection is lost.

This, to me, is the greatest charge against globalisation. It enables us to live as though people don’t matter. The rich can buy, consume and relax in ways that ignore the consequences on others: the destruction of environments to produce the goods, and exploitation of workers so that others may have luxury on the cheap.

We must live as though other people do matter. We’re all in the same boat on this planet, and we all have a stake in our mutual survival. The environmental state of the world is perhaps the biggest example of how we need radical changes to how we collectively think. The personalised impact of globalisation on individuals, families and societies, is another. The militarism of politics is yet another.

Einstein is reputed to have said, “The significant problems we have cannot be solved at the same level of thinking with which we created them.”

No greater validation of that quotation exists today than the response required to our global situation. We are all connected. And, there is a “so what”. The So What is to bring awareness and a response to those connections into what we do.