Transition Towns Forum: Forum: TransitionGroup: Cities

Transition Towns Forum: Forum: TransitionGroup: Cities - Recent Posts http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Transition Towns Forum: Forum: TransitionGroup: Cities - Recent Posts en Mon, 15 Mar 2010 06:09:16 +0000 audaye on "Working on an EDAP" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/working-on-an-edap#post-2935 Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:01:07 +0000 audaye 2935@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ On creating flawed documents and presenting them to council: have you read council documents? Seriously though this process of EDAP creation and transition is indeed a process, not just for the soloutions to be developed but to engage with your council and begin to bring them to an aligned way of thinking that fosters their increasing involvement and participation in the process of transition and the deliverable EDAP. the simple way to frame an EDAP then is to version it, this is a well used method not just with your software but with the IPCC report too. Of course nothing of that stature is to be designed by a local council, my point is to show that it's an acceptable framework for delivering concepts and important documents. The iterative approach can help also in these outputs, amongst others: Gradually and solidly develop a realationship with the council and create dialogue. Engage from early on those in the council with the ideas of edap and hand hold where reqd. on climate confusions. Build credibility through trust formed from known and respected intentions not just the quality of outputted work. Use the existing networks and resources of the council to help - as interations gain progressivley more standing - produce better planned soloutions. Begin to build stronger community / council considerations - i.e the council becomes aware of the strength of feeling on these issues adding to a democratic process. Good luck. Doly on "Working on an EDAP" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/working-on-an-edap#post-2934 Thu, 11 Mar 2010 20:55:30 +0000 Doly 2934@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Replies to a few specific points: >I wonder if frustration is being felt because the energy group feels it can’t get on with actual projects as a result of having to wait? No, that isn't the case in TB&H, the Energy Group started getting on with a number of projects a long time ago. >Perhaps it might be useful to get all the groups together and put all work to date on the table, almost like a big quilt. This has been suggested but it was never done. On the last Annual General Meeting all groups were invited to show on a table their work so far, but nothing was really discussed, it was just a showing. I proposed to do something similar to this proposal in a big general meeting this January, it was a "New Years Resolution" activity where I wanted to put all the resolutions that we had two years ago, when the initiative was quite young, and get people to give their opinion on how far we were on each of the proposals, if they were worth it, and propose new resolutions. But there was no time to do it in the end. This becomes more complicated because there are internal problems within the initiative. A meeting with all the groups may have tensions, and there's also that some groups are inactive and some people clearly are uncomfortable to let it show that there isn't as much activity going on as some people would like to pretend. >If you work on an EDAP and produce a document that is flawed you will set back the process (your Team will become discredited). So Ben's right if you intend to produce something definitive. I have never said anything about producing something definitive. In fact, I've always been uncomfortable with the idea of producing a document and saying: "Hey, there you are, that's the EDAP". I've always envisioned an EDAP as something more organic, a constantly evolving set of documents, in different media, rather a process than a result. >Have you considered bringing on board your local council to try to make this a formal consultation document? (ie prepared by you with the blessing of the Council with the eventual aim of it being used as the basis for discussion on what community action should be) TB&H is in touch with the local council, and in fact, there is already a document quite similar in scope to an EDAP that was produced by Bioregional in collaboration with the Council and with a consultation that included most of the local green groups, called "One Planet Living Plan". TB&H participated in this process, and I've always said I'd like to take this document as a starting point. I don't think it's really an EDAP because it's more like a list of recommendations rather than a plan, it has no timings or details on how any of these recommendations could actually come to happen. Jane on "Working on an EDAP" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/working-on-an-edap#post-2926 Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:04:49 +0000 Jane 2926@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Sonya, can your overall EDAP be viewed anywhere online? I would like to see what it looks like if possible. jon on "Working on an EDAP" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/working-on-an-edap#post-2925 Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:48:19 +0000 jon 2925@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ If you work on an EDAP and produce a document that is flawed you will set back the process (your Team will become discredited). So Ben's right if you intend to produce something definitive. On the other hand, if you're working on something that invites representation & comment, it's difficult for the plan to be scuppered but a much longer process. Have you considered bringing on board your local council to try to make this a formal consultation document? (ie prepared by you with the blessing of the Council with the eventual aim of it being used as the basis for discussion on what community action should be) Sonya on "Working on an EDAP" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/working-on-an-edap#post-2924 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 23:56:56 +0000 Sonya 2924@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Hi, Sonya Wallace here from Transition Sunshine Coast. We've just delivered Australia's first EDAP to our local council which covers an area of 330,000+ people. It contains almost 400 positive solutions and actions for building resilience across; food, water, waste, energy, built env and housing, infrastructure, transport and mobility, communication, health & wellbeing, education and reskilling, employment and economics, community governance (planning, advocacy), land stewardship and biodiversity and emergency preparedness. We had a small group of informed people working on this for a long time. It was sparked by a presentation David Holmgren did here in 2006 where he mentioned the Kinsale EDAP. I've worked for many years in state and local govt and thought it was a brilliant idea (this was pre-Transition Towns). Together with my permaculture teacher Janet Millington, we created a course (Time for an Oil Change) which brough together this initial group to start working on an EDAP for the Sunshine Coast Council region. Remember this was pre-TTs so we need to get a group together to get things started. This is the key. The interest was there, the council were newly elected on a green ticket and the focus was on climate change (and with some people peak oil). We went for it. The EDAP was never, ever meant to be a comprehensive complete document - it was always intended to be a starting point. A starting point for change, for cooperation between community and council, a starting point for awareness raising and information sharing that would ultimately lead to education and action. If we had waited until we got a much more inclusive representative group, we'd still be doing the community consultation and we wouldn't have delivered the document. The EDAP has gone to council's energy transition group, who will be forming their peak oil policy for the region - it has already been used for the draft climate change policy. We went where the energy was. We couldn't have followed the 12 steps, because a) they weren't out when we got started and b) they would have held us up. Our EDAP is the first for Australia and its a significant document - it's gone to council and is now in their planning and budget systems. In the end council were asking us for it. It's isn't complete in all areas - for example the health section is a little light on, only because we didn't have a lot of experts in that area on the course - but it is included (which is the most important thing) and we clearly state in there that the health and wellbeing section needs more attention and expert input. But I believe that if you wait, you'll lose momentum and energy. Do what you can with what you have, and just get it through doors - once the door is open, then we can add to it, discuss it, build on it, refine it and improve it, but get it on the table first and start talking to people about it and how important and EDAP can be for an area. I also found people couldn't visualise what an EDAP was until they saw the hard copy, then they 'got it' and loved it. Be honest about it, if you don't have a lot of expertise in a particular area, state that and note that it needs work - perhaps a community forum on the topic to build it up and improve that section. Let's get these EDAPs into systems. Let's make them professional, useful, and inclusive. Let's demonstrate the advantages of bottom up, top down cooperation to build resilience. Let's look to permaculture as to how to get our EDAPs out. Just like your edible resilent garden, have your big plan, but start small and the important thing is to get started, plants some seeds in fertile soil - find people who are receptive to this and seed good ideas with them. If you wait until you have everyone on board, I believe it will be too late - as Rob Hopkins said early on - we're building the systems around the people and when they ask what can we eat? We can show them the community orchards and community supported agriculture systems we've already put in place. I'm now starting on an EDAP for my home town of 800 people. It will be the first EDAP within the regional one and again, we'll open it to anyone who wants to contribute to it with positive solutions and actions that will build community and local resilience in the context of climate, energy, resource and economic uncertainty. I hope this helps and thank you for ready this far! Cheers, Sonya Wallace Transition Sunshine Coast Transition Town Eudlo. Jane on "Working on an EDAP" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/working-on-an-edap#post-2923 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 21:59:53 +0000 Jane 2923@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ This is an interesting question. I suppose my answer is that you can’t expect a totally cut and dried development as life just doesn’t work like that. I think the ideal is that as groups get off the ground and their work develops, it is a really healthy thing to get together and look at the plans of each in order to get an idea of the overall picture, a bit like putting a quilt together I suppose. The thing that worries me about following hard and fast rules is that a lot of good energy might be lost by waiting until a point where all the groups are ready. I have a suspicion that these EDAPS will turn out to be far more organic and free from hard and fast rules than was originally conceived, but nobody can know that yet. I wonder if frustration is being felt because the energy group feels it can’t get on with actual projects as a result of having to wait? If that is the case, I feel that important projects do not in themselves constitute the whole plan. Perhaps the energy group should point to where it thinks it might be headed, look at the first steps on that map and start to actually take them. The first steps are not the destination, but without them there can be no journey and no sense of whether the general direction feels right. Perhaps it might be useful to get all the groups together and put all work to date on the table, almost like a big quilt. Have fun doing it. Acknowledge that some groups have moved ahead more than others. See what projects could be started as first or further steps for each group without pre supposing anything vital about the overall EDAP. Agree a date to meet together again to think about further development of the quilt. Then go down the pub or somewhere to socialize together. Doly on "Working on an EDAP" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/working-on-an-edap#post-2922 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 20:02:28 +0000 Doly 2922@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Recently the Energy Group of Transition Brighton & Hove got an email from Ben saying among other things that: 1. a Transition Initiative isn't ready to even think of starting an EDAP if it doesn't have a fully rounded representation across of all the key areas - food, energy, transport, heart & soul, arts, housing, local authority liaison, economics & livelihoods etc 2. one of the prerequisites for starting an EDAP is that all the contributing groups - and that should include all the themed areas within an initiative - should: - have got a few projects under their belt - fully understand resilience and carbon reduction - are hooked into all the existing networks and groups that can contribute to that area On the other hand, about a year and a half ago I asked Shaun Chamberlin what he thought about starting the EDAP when some people wanted to start and others said they weren't interested in participating. His reply was: "I agree that if a group of people are ready to start EDAP work then they shouldn't feel held back - different Transition Initiatives have gone through the 12 steps in a number of different orders. They are guidelines more than hard rules." I remember that at the time, the Transition Network seemed very much in favour that all Transition initiatives should start thinking of doing an EDAP, and my understanding was that the Transition Timeline project started exactly to encourage them to get started. Based on that, the Energy Group and some other interested people in TB&H started working on the EDAP. And the Energy Group still very much wants to work on it. Some recent reactions by people on the Energy Group have been: "The Energy Group does generally tick those boxes Ben mentioned and the Energy Group's work on the EDAP is legitimate. As the Energy Group is the only one that has been working on it then its portion of the B&H EDAP could be presented to the main Transition B&H body for consideration as a work in progress - other sub-groups can then comment on it / add to it / be inspired by it / build on it or, well, even discount it!" "Use the Blitzkrieg method. If you meet an obstacle, bypass it." "Don't be put off by Ben, who projects his own attitudes on to others (such as TB&H) What Ben really means is: 'Ben isn't ready to start thinking about an EDAP'. That is OK. Ben doesn't have to start thinking about an EDAP. However, Ben has no right to stop others who have been thinking about an EDAP for years to produce an EDAP in the name of TB&H." I'd like to know your opinions on starting an EDAP. 1. Do you agree with Ben's statement? 2. If you do, what do you think the people who have already started on an EDAP should do? Are they supposed to stop? 3. If you think work in the EDAP should stop until the whole Transition initiative is ready, what if the people who have started working don't want to stop? Is the EDAP supposed to be a monolithic document that must be produced as a whole, or is there room for several drafts of several parts to be developed and discussed? I always envisioned the EDAP as a constant work in progress, always evolving, but Ben's view seems to imply something like all-or-nothing. As I have told you before, this issue has already caused tensions in TB&H, and it's one of the reasons the Energy Group is unhappy with other groups. People outside the Energy Group have tried to stop the work of the Energy Group on the EDAP on the grounds that the other groups aren't ready yet. Doly on "Questions on the evolution of Transition initiatives" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/questions-on-the-evolution-of-transition-initiatives#post-2836 Sat, 20 Feb 2010 11:38:37 +0000 Doly 2836@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Another reply that was sent by email from Transition Bristol: Have followed this with interest. I am currently one of the members of Transition Bristol team (all voluntary)and have been since beginning of 2008. We still have one Transition Bristol (although many other neighbourhood groups), if another with ostensibly the same function was to set up I think it would undermine greatly our collective ability to work with other organisations such as the city council, Universities, PCT etc. Others might reasonably ask, If those trying to build Transition projects cannot bare to co-operate with each other, then how can we we trust in their ability to work with us or recognise them as representative members of their own communities? We have had our fair share of interpersonal difficulties, frustrations and at times unworkable differences. If we grow as a group I would like to understand better tools to manage conflict and hope sharing experiences will help. So much of the historic problems in Transition Bristol seem to emerge from two related themes: 1. Getting something going in a fanfare of excitement and inspirational events and people is a different process to becoming an established long term working team and it takes different personal qualities. We struggled with resolving our own transition and shifting role within Bristol. We had great tension between past and future 'ownership' of Transition in Bristol and related actions. 2. It is very easy to set expectations of the group and the wider community too high, possibly due to a necessarily hyped style inherent in getting off to a good start. The gap between what can reasonably be achieved quickly by volunteers and the stated goal of something like creating an EDAP can be a source of tension. If the group can agree a way to keep moving and use the energy that such tensions create, and communicate well on their feelings about that tension, I think it may be valuable. BUT I think sometimes such conflict within a group is just too disruptive and setting up another group might make sense. However in terms of relating to the outside world it must surely be agreed that resultant splinter groups would have different functions either by theme or by locality and find a meaningful way to co-ordinate on the basics. If another was set up and take on areas we are having little traction on to date I would be very happy assuming they did not have a confusingly similar name. So my general point is work out your differences if at all possible and use the energy of conflict to create great ideas and action. If you can't do that, DON'T just set up a separate group with similar goals and name, but find a different niche. After all there is so much to be done. My comments: The issues in Bristol sound similar to the issues in TB&H, though I'm not entirely certain what is meant in point 1 - would be glad for further explanation. Certainly there have been issues around setting expectations too high, and I think the Transition training is partly responsible, it actively encourages what's probably unrealistically high expectations. I agree that if there was a split it makes sense to keep names distinctive and different enough that it doesn't confuse people too much. But my main question still remains: Could both groups still be considered Transition initiatives, be allowed to use "transition" in their name and receive support from the Transition Network? Or would one be transition while the other would not? ShaunChamberlin on "Questions on the evolution of Transition initiatives" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/questions-on-the-evolution-of-transition-initiatives#post-2826 Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:48:28 +0000 ShaunChamberlin 2826@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Hi Doly, Seems to me that what Ben meant by a "split" and what you mean are subtly different, which explains the apparent disagreement. You wrote that you disagree with Ben and think a split could work, given that: "All Transition initiatives within a city would have to negotiate between themselves some way of coordinating, and it would be the coordination body who would have most of the contact with the Transition Network. There would probably be little difference in practice between a city initiative that successfully managed to grow without breaks and one that first broke up, then managed to renegotiate some kind of agreement, except history." It seems clear to me that you are right - that this kind of arrangement would indeed resolve many of the issues Ben was talking about. It also seems that if all parties can agree to work together under a coordinating body then it is rather academic whether or not this is termed a "split". As you say, in this scenario it's little different from the different working groups within any Transition initiative. If you think this is a feasible option for TBH then I'd say go for it! Doly on "Questions on the evolution of Transition initiatives" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/questions-on-the-evolution-of-transition-initiatives#post-2824 Thu, 18 Feb 2010 08:35:00 +0000 Doly 2824@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Another reply that was sent by email from the coordinator of the Energy Group: I stand for an open and democratic Transition Brighton & Hove. I recognise the world isn't perfect, and that there is sometimes a pretty poisonous 'politics' in organisations - and it has happened, sadly, in TBH. But that doesn't mean we split. And even if we did, it doesn't mean we go round Transition saying we are 'genuine' and the other lot are 'bogus'. If we have problems, it has to be sorted out here, in an open and democratic way. We can be upfront about it, that is part of the 'openness' side. Dolores says that you couldn't get an organisation of 1,000 people in TBH. Well, I think you can point out organisations of 1,000 people in the voluntary sector, and it can be done, but that clearly is more than about the 100 core activists in TBH at the moment, so to grow I think we need a different structure. I do think we need to think about growing. As an aside, we get many advantages from being part of a semi-large organisation. The website and the web forum for TBH are one example. It makes a very deep sense to me that this is part of 'one' TBH umbrella. Another is the Forum, which still works as an open and democratic body. The structure of TBH is highly devolved - this came about through much debate and a little history, and is, I think highly satisfactory in this aspect. The problem, as I see it, is the 'Enabling Group' - an elected body so wracked with disputes that its numbers are severely depleted - which sees itself as an Executive for the Forum. In another incarnation as the 'Hub' it was disbanded for being a 'clique' - so this has clearly happened again. I am on this Enabling Group. We are faced with immovable agendas and an inability to progress business. This wouldn't be the case if we were in a cooperative frame of mind. On the other hand some groups - I am the coordinator of the Energy Group - have extensive activities, and this keeps them growing. So we are building a wind turbine, and still have plans for the second Eco Energy Fair this year. The EDAP (we call it the EDRAP), after much learning covering two years about how NOT to do it, now looks highly feasible - entirely as an Energy Plan. The Buildings Group is resuscitated, and is now very active. There are potentialities for growth everywhere. I have commented elsewhere (our web forum, under 'Vision & Process' and the 'Enabling Group' sections) that different personality profiles of people adopt different 'protocols', and we have a split between 'technical people' - like me, and 'social networkers' - like the 'other' faction in the Enabling Group. I do think it might be productive if we could think of ways of getting out of each other's hair. Then we could all get on with what we are interested in without loosing our cool. I also think of myself as a 'systems builder' - so I think we can devise a structure for TBH that is acceptable to all, and gets us growing and developing. My comment: I haven't ever said that TB&H should split, or that if it splits a certain group is genuine and the other one is bogus. I have asked what happens if it splits? And is Ben Brangwyn and anybody who says there should only be one Transition initiative in one location that automatically one of the groups is genuine and the other is bogus? Doly on "Questions on the evolution of Transition initiatives" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/questions-on-the-evolution-of-transition-initiatives#post-2814 Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:47:38 +0000 Doly 2814@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Ben Brangwyn came for the AGM of TB&H last October and he said there that applying the idea of a "local transition hub" isn't as straightforward in a city as it is in an area with a number of small towns. Cities have neighbourhoods, but it appears that most people in a city don't feel they belong to a community defined by their neighbourhood, but to communities defined by shared activities: hobbies, religion, work, etc. He seemed to be happy for Transition city initiatives to develop along interest lines, rather than neighbourhood lines, if that seemed to work for that Transition initiative. On the issue of the EDAP, I have found that it isn't as simple as I initially supposed it would be. The fact is, most people aren't interested in collaborating in writing an action plan, and it looks like that is the experience in most Transition initiatives. People talking to their neighbours about climate change and peak oil doesn't create a plan all by itself. My last thoughts on how the EDAP could be approached were that there would be three parts to it: 1) "The bones" - Facts and figures. A technical report, about 100 pages long, describing a) The current situation in the city in all the areas relevant to sustainability b) The trends c) The technical solutions to different issues, and their impact This report would be written mostly by the local universities and any organizations with the relevant knowledge. 2) "The flesh" - Key decisions. A report for the main decision-makers and educators, possibly in the form of a series of articles, describing a) The most important points of the report above b) The key decisions to be made, and the kind of scenarios that those decisions may create This report would be written mostly by the local environmental organizations, local government, local business and media, and using the input from workshops open to the general public. 3) "The dress" - Look and feel. Educational material, in different forms (leaflets, multimedia presentations, etc.), containing a) The basics, key points of the two reports above b) A clear vision with images of what the different scenarios could be like c) A clear explanation of how individuals can participate d) A feedback mechanism for local people to have their say on their preferred solutions and to ask any questions or make any proposals about "the bones" or "the flesh". This material would be created mostly by local schools. In my mind, the EDAP would never be finished, it would be constantly evolving with new information and the input from some parts feeding into the others continuosly. Anyway, all of this is a bit academic, because it isn't being done. DaveDann on "Questions on the evolution of Transition initiatives" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/questions-on-the-evolution-of-transition-initiatives#post-2812 Mon, 15 Feb 2010 17:38:05 +0000 DaveDann 2812@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Here's what the Transition Initiatives Primer say on this topic: (just some extracts) ...through transition, the first place for you to start is in your local community. It may be that eventually the number of transitioning communities in your area warrant some central group to help provide local support, but this will emerge over time, rather than be imposed. This point is in response to the several instances of people rushing off to transition their entire county/region rather than their local community. In exceptional situations where a coordinating hub or initiating hub needs to be set up (currently Bristol, Forest of Dean, Brighton&Hove) that hub is responsible for making sure these criteria are applied to all the initiatives that start within their area. and.. the "Local Transition Initiative" - embedded in its own locale where the steering group inspires and organises the local community. This is the real heart of "Transition". 2. the "Local Transition Hub" - based within a large congruent/contiguous area with its own identity (eg a city). Helps establish and support "local transition initiatives". and.. More about the "Local Transition Initiative" This is the most frequent and simple initiative, typically with communities of up to 15,000 people. Examples of this include Totnes, Lewes, Wrington, Portobello in Edinburgh. This is where real change happens - at the local level, driven by the people living there. Without active local initiatives, there is no Transition Network. and.. The Local Transition Hub is also responsible for carrying out the "transition network" role in the Locale of making sure that each initiative works on the baseline Transition criteria right from the outset. As individual initiatives within the Locale mature, the Hub will encourage them to apply to the Transition Network for consideration as an official transition initiative. Over time, we expect the task of “registering” communities to official status will be taken up by the Local Transition Hub. and.. We're planning to set up a "Local Transition Hub" community to discuss the complexities of this approach - and there are many. We think this Local Transition Hub model is crucial for the cities, and larger scale rural initiatives, but the early adopters are going to have to carefully feel their way into this role. It's virgin territory and by no means a trivial undertaking... proceed with caution. (end of extracts) So B&H is just a 'hub' and co-ordinates the local groups where the real change is? It doesn't sound as if you are working like that. What would be the real worth of a 'plan' devised by even up to 100 activists in a city of half a million? Is the idea now to get these 'hub' groups to devise the plan and then get its adoption by a local authority? If this is the case then I think there has been a major shift away from 'community' as the driver of change and into 'government' as the driver of change. Note also that the Primer suggests that Transition B&H is responsible for making its own decisions on these subjects. Has the 'Local Transition Hub' community been set up? For my own part, I pretty much agree with the ideas stated in the Primer, word for word, and I'm grateful for the authors for changing my life (somewhat) by printing these ideas. Unfortunately these big city Transition groups now seem just like a Friends of the Earth group in the 1970s - with almost exactly the same activities, but with an 'EDAP'. I stick by this quote "Without active local initiatives, there is no Transition Network." For me that makes 'talking to my neighbours' a top priority, a plan has to have the support of the community. Good luck! Dave Doly on "Questions on the evolution of Transition initiatives" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/questions-on-the-evolution-of-transition-initiatives#post-2809 Mon, 15 Feb 2010 07:46:05 +0000 Doly 2809@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ I got a reply directly to me that makes a good contribution to the discussion: From Transition Lancaster: We had awful problems in our transition group 3 years ago - in fact, it was the most horrible group I have ever been in. Some of the people in it came along every time but opposed every aspect of the TCL method. Why come if you do? Eventually we had to dissolve the group completely. A year passed and a new group was formed with new people (I was the only continuous link). It is now going well. The trouble makers from the first time still turn up at public events and spout their bile about transition towns as a reformist, managerial control freak organisation. It is a pain but we pretty much ignore it now, we have lots more to do. The shame is, we were all on the the same side but you cannot deal with fundamentalists, even eco-anarchist ones. Now, my own comments: I can see the point that appealing to outside authorities may not be the best solution, but the advantage of outside opinions is that they can be trusted to be neutral. We can get outside opinions local to Brighton, but it's much harder to get locally outside opinions that are very familiar with the Transition concepts and have not been involved with the existing initiative. I love what Paul Baker has to say. I think a big part of the problem in Brighton is the attitude of some key people is that conflict is a terrible thing that should be buried as soon as possible. When I wrote this post, I couldn't help thinking that some people in Brighton are going to hate my guts for bringing these questions in the open for all other Transition initiatives to see. I remember we had a permaculture workshop and I made a comment there to the effect that conflict could be a good thing, citing the example of Europe and China. Jared Diamond thinks that one of the reasons Europe became the dominant civilization of the world, rather than China, is because there was more conflict in Europe, and that meant that if one country thought (for example) that the idea of exploring the world and funding Columbus was ridiculous, another one would accept. Because there was conflict and division between countries, it was almost guaranteed that somebody, somewhere, would make the right choices. The trainer of the workshop and most of the participants treated me like I had said the most inappropriate thing, and cited to me Einstein's quote: "You can't resolve problems with the same mindset that created them." I didn't reply, but I felt like saying that I had probably heard that quote at a younger age than anybody else, and hadn't they ever thought that it could also apply to their own mindset? paulhbaker on "Questions on the evolution of Transition initiatives" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/questions-on-the-evolution-of-transition-initiatives#post-2800 Sat, 13 Feb 2010 19:48:07 +0000 paulhbaker 2800@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Dear Dolores, I am so relieved that you are writing this and bringing the issue out into the open. This type of conflict is entirely inevitable, in fact it is not possible that it won't happen. The timing of your email's arrival is extraordinary as I was addressing aspects of this issue last night on the training course in "Process Work (Deep Democracy / World Work)" I have been attending for the last 4 weeks with Arny Mindell and his colleagues. (The previous issue in the session was about the progress that is being made in creating dialogue between Israel and Palestine and the problems (and solutions) in the extraordinary work that is being done there) In PW (Process Work) jargon, you and Brighton are being "Dreamed up", you are representing / giving form to what is happening not only all over the place in Transition Groups but as much (more even) in the world outside of Transition. We are living in a world "polluted" by conflict and almost no one knows how to deal with conflict in the Permaculture spirit of working with what is happening rather than fighting against it (that is why PW seems to really offer something fundamentally different and important and why I am here spending money I haven't got to learn about it). We urgently need to take on the Permaculture attitude that there is no pollution, just a valuable resource in the wrong quantities, in the wrong place at the wrong time and if we understand how the system works, that "polluting" doesn't need to happen. Conflict is not inherently violent and does not need end in polarised positions that are somewhere on the continuum of ignoring each other unable to work together or competing violently and trying to destroy each other. That violence to "divorce" continuum is simply a symptom of mismanaged conflict that is stuck mid cycle. Conflict is an amazing resource that arises out of the diversity that Transition claims to value so highly. It is the inevitable result of different perspectives and points of view. It is the doorway to enhanced and deeper relationships with greater understanding and appreciation of ourselves and others - but only if we take the time to go through the whole cycle (and any resolution is only temporary as life is an ongoing process, not a fixed state). Conflict is our most overlooked and abundant resource. It can be produced at any moment with minimal effort, using (initially) no resources or energy in any situation. Don't you think we need to start using it creatively instead of being disrupted by it? I would really like to offer you (singular and plural) help and support in the area of understanding and working with conflict. I will do whatever I can to help you. Kind regards Paul Baker (I have been involved on the Steering group of Transition Bristol from near its beginning. Some people see me as a bit of an "Eyore", but that is because I need us to be realistic as well as optimistic, I need the whole story to be represented, not just the positive parts. In my experience understanding how conflict works is fascinating and enormously life-enhancing and energising. PS I need time to think about your questions and Ben's answers and will share my thoughts in due course. It might be easier to share our contributions on a wiki site so that we don't just have long strings of emails we can't keep track of either as emails or on this. <a href="http://transitionconflict.pbworks.com/FrontPage" rel="nofollow">http://transitionconflict.pbworks.com/FrontPage</a> If you send me an email, I will enable your access <a href="mailto:paul@paulbakerandcompany.co.uk">paul@paulbakerandcompany.co.uk</a> Cliff on "Questions on the evolution of Transition initiatives" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/questions-on-the-evolution-of-transition-initiatives#post-2799 Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:23:46 +0000 Cliff 2799@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Sounds painful, but hopefully growth-pains, even if it isn't apparent yet. For starters, 'splitting' need not be damaging and hurtful - it can be healthy and a sign of growth. Look at amoeba. Accept that between us we have different understandings, different priorities, different thresholds for stimulation, and over-stimulation, and very different styles of communication and working - accommodating all this is a tall order! (One we have to meet somehow.) That said, I'd guess TB&H is experiencing unresolved tensions that aren't going to be addressed well by appealing to outside 'authorities' (eg TN recognising one group as 'official' but not another.) Is there a leadership within TB&H attending to group process? Have friendly outside facilitators/consultants been asked to help? (Have the 'feelers' agreed to write a report each, to a deadline; have the 'technicians' agreed to weep and scream for a whole meeting? - just joking about stereotypes and resistance to seeing others' perspective) World is too big, challenges too many, to let stuff like this impede anyone from their creative collective eforts. Then again, remember step 11. Good luck! Doly on "Questions on the evolution of Transition initiatives" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/questions-on-the-evolution-of-transition-initiatives#post-2796 Sat, 13 Feb 2010 13:01:21 +0000 Doly 2796@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ I was until recently the coordinator of the Energy Descent Action Plan for Transition Brighton & Hove. I have recently quit TB&H because I couldn't stand any more the kind of internal politics I could see going on. A number of people have suggested that the way forward could be to split the organization. I agree with the general principle that people should try their hardest to resolve their problems before considering a split, but there has been a long history of conflict already. It's got to the point where some people are thinking of hard choices and wondering what would be the consequences of those choices. In short, I would like to have the input of my peers in other Transition cities on the general questions raised by this, specifically: 1. Is it acceptable to have more than one Transition initiative in one location? (I'm not talking about neighbourhood groups here, the neighbourhood groups aren't clearly developed in TB&H) 2. For those who think it isn't acceptable to have more than one Transition initiative in one location, how would you decide which of the groups is the "real" Transition in case of a split? 3. How would you decide if a Transition initiative has drifted far enough from the original purpose that it isn't a Transition initiative any longer? (This could help in answering question 2, if it was established that one or both the groups are no longer a Transition initiative) I have asked Ben Brangwyn these questions and so far he has only answered the first one. To elaborate a bit more on the questions: 1. Is it acceptable to have more than one Transition initiative in one location? Ben's response has been the following: I'm against two Transition Initiatives operating in the same geographical locale. There are plenty of reasons for this: 1. pretty much any official body - local authority, funder, potential partners - will be confounded by the notion of their being two such groups. Funding will dry up for each group. Each group will have difficulty coordinating with the local authority. Partners will steer clear of both. I say this with some authority, having experienced in a prior role trying to coordinate with two competing groups that should have been working together. It was a nightmare. 2. the public will be confused and will attribute very reduced levels of credibility to each group. 3. thinking about initiatives beyond Brighton & Hove, their credibility could be undermined by anyone who wants to stick the boot into Transition by citing the squabbling internal politics of one of the potential flagship initiatives. 4. re all the "things" Transition Network (for no financial gain) provides for the "official" initiatives: webspace (new system coming on line very soon), partnering on funding bids, preferential public liability insurance scheme, speaker support, high visibility and connectivity via our new platform. There's no way we can provide it for the thousands of other groups out there - and that would include your breakaway group - so we have to reserve it to the manageable quantity of Transition Initiatives. My reply to this would be: On the first three points, I think any split is a symptom of some serious underlying problems, and those underlying problems are likely to cause all these three issues - confusion in official bodies, the public, and credibility problems - before any split is made "official". I know in TB&H it's already happened. Luckily, it appears that official bodies have been quite happy to deal with three grant applications filled in with completely different details for the Food Group, the Energy Group and core TB&H, without complaining about the discrepancies. Complaints from members of the public that initially wanted to join and then found it all too confusing have been constant. And the same can be said for credibility. On the last point, I think the Transition Network has that problem already! The answer is, obviously, a tree structure and subsidiarity. Transition initiatives already are grouping themselves by regions. All Transition initiatives within a city would have to negotiate between themselves some way of coordinating, and it would be the coordination body who would have most of the contact with the Transition Network. There would probably be little difference in practice between a city initiative that successfully managed to grow without breaks and one that first broke up, then managed to renegotiate some kind of agreement, except history. Finally, I don't hold a lot of hope for Transition ever becoming a significant movement in cities if the accepted point of view is that there can be only one. The Transition training material works fine for groups of up to 100 people, but there is no clue on how you can grow your membership to say 1,000 active people (not just people in a mailing list, but actively working for Transition). And you would need at least that to say you had an impact on 1% of the population of a city. I actually have a few ideas on the subject because I have researched quite a bit. I have good reasons to say that Transition in cities needs a rather decentralized structure, and if the Transition city initiative refuses to be decentralized to a great degree, it will suffocate and never grow to a size that can make a real impact in a city. I've always defended that Transition is a movement, not an organization. One of the things I never liked very much about TB&H is that some of the most influential people were determined to see it as a separate entity that would have dealings with other environmental organizations in the city, a small, tight, well defined group. While I'd prefer to see it as a loosely knit bunch of people that would promote a certain way of seeing things across everyone in the city, pretty much like feminism or Buddhism, and there is nothing stopping anyone from seeing themselves as part of the Transition while they were still doing whatever they were doing already in whatever green group they were in. And if a Transition initiative in a city isn't going that way and key people inside it refuse to go that way, what can be done except starting another Transition initiative in the same city? 2. For those who think it isn't acceptable to have more than one Transition initiative in one location, how would you decide which of the groups is the "real" Transition in case of a split? The difficulty of answering that question is another reason I'm in favour of allowing more than one Transition initiative in one location. The case of Transition Brighton & Hove is clearly very difficult, because the split is along these lines: Talking of separation - Energy Group, Buildings & Construction Group, all the people actively working on the EDAP, and a good number of people that have already abandoned TB&H because they saw it as ineffective but would be happy to re-join if there is positive action Hanging on - Food Group, Livelihoods Group, the current chair of TB&H, the people that have been most involved in Transition training and networking with other initiatives, a number of people not clearly affiliated to any group Different criteria give different answers. The group talking of separating can argue that they are the "real" Transition because they have been working on an EDAP, they have kept a clear focus on climate change and peak oil, and all their actions have been clearly related to this. The group hanging on can argue that they are not the ones talking of separation, that they are the largest group (but this is difficult to measure because there is no clearly defined membership, and a lot of people have been coming and going), and that they have been involved in a lot of training and networking in the name of Transition. 3. How would you decide if a Transition initiative has drifted far enough from the original purpose that it isn't a Transition initiative any longer? I imagine that the same criteria that are used to decide if a group that approaches for the first time the Transition Network can be a Transition initiative, should be used to decide if a group is no longer a Transition initiative. I understand that the Transition Network has been quite generous in agreeing to give the Transition initiative status to different groups, so I don't expect that the criteria for new Transition initiatives would be much help to decide in the case of a split. Your thoughts? Jane on "Building a positve future for Bristol after Peak Oil" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/building-a-positve-future-for-bristol-after-peak-oil#post-2773 Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:23:24 +0000 Jane 2773@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ A few months ago, Transition Bristol was involved in contributing to this very significant report. Produced by Bristol's Peak Oil Task Force, it now appears on the Bristol Partnership website. As well as being very important for Bristol, this report is certain to provide a useful reference point for all those working at Transition in cities. Covering utilities, healthcare, food, transport, social cohesion, emergency planning, public services and the local economy, this report highlights Bristol's vulnerabilities to the effects of peak oil in all these areas. The report can be viewed here: <ul> <a href="http://www.bristolgreencapital.org/sites/default/files/Peak%20Oil%20Report_0.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.bristolgreencapital.org/sites/default/files/Peak%20Oil%20Report_0.pdf</a> </ul> HarrietSJ on "Hints for City Hubs and Hubs in general" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/hints-for-city-hubs-and-hubs-in-general#post-2388 Sun, 22 Nov 2009 11:48:29 +0000 HarrietSJ 2388@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ And similar situation (to Sydney) in the BH postcode area on south coast of England (large conurbation pop. 350,000 including Bournemouth, Poole, Christchurch, Wimborne). Although we are called Transition BH Hub I'm not that keen on the word "Hub" - we're not a central, controlling group, we exist to raise awareness of Transition in the area and to support and encourage the formation of local groups. The four local groups that have formed so far are completely autonomous but can rely on the BH group for help with publicity, communications and shared resources. I agree with Ruth, don't worry about structures - give people the opportunity to get together and the groupings will form - with time. The Hub has been in existence for a year and we have only just now formalised a steering group and constitution (because we needed a bank account). Harriet RuthWallsgrove on "Hints for City Hubs and Hubs in general" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/hints-for-city-hubs-and-hubs-in-general#post-2386 Sun, 22 Nov 2009 08:24:56 +0000 RuthWallsgrove 2386@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Antonio, Just wanted to say we started a hub-y-thingy here in Sydney because those of us who first got together came from different parts of the city. Transition Sydney sees itself as supporting local initiatives before, during and after formation - being a contact point, holding events, offering T4T training, website with resources, back office help such as 'auspicing' grant applications and holding public liability insurance, as well as starting and being involved ourselves in local groups. I believe we should work from where we are - and who else wants to work with us; in fact I don't really think any of us can do anything else. Through offering to go and speak to any organisation that wants to discuss Transition, TS made contact with people in my own area.. who then wanted to start a local Transition initiative, which I couldn't be happier about. But I didn't know them before. A small group of people getting together and asking what they can most usefully do for Transition sounds exactly what most of us do. Go for it, Barcelona - and keep in touch. (Transition Houston is also a good bunch of people we're in communication with.) warm wishes Ruth Juan del rio on "Hints for City Hubs and Hubs in general" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/hints-for-city-hubs-and-hubs-in-general#post-2219 Thu, 08 Oct 2009 13:42:10 +0000 Juan del rio 2219@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Hi to everybody, i'm juan from barcelona, i've just made a post explaining about the final disertation of the 2 years sustanaibilitu master i've just finished. the title is "the la idea a laaccion; aprendiendo sobre el movimiento transition towns". it's about transition movement and it tries to be a good divulgative study about the subject in spanish and research how transition model could be adapted to another contexts like the mediterranean for example in barcelona. hopefully can be useful. here is the link: <a href="http://movimientotransicion.pbworks.com/f/De+la+idea+a+la+acci%C3%B3n%3B+Aprendiendo+del+Movimiento+Transition+Towns+-+Juan+Del+R%C3%ADo.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://movimientotransicion.pbworks.com/f/De+la+idea+a+la+acci%C3%B3n%3B+Aprendiendo+del+Movimiento+Transition+Towns+-+Juan+Del+R%C3%ADo.pdf</a> let's keep in touch. sincerely Juan del rio jbriggs51 on "How can cities transition?" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/how-can-cities-transition#post-2172 Mon, 28 Sep 2009 13:37:34 +0000 jbriggs51 2172@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Hello everyone, thought I’d drop my two pence worth into the debate or at least start one! I know most of you aren’t going to agree with what I’m about to say but please just give it a chance. Sorry to say it but I think it’s incredibly naive to think the future isn’t going to descended into some form of violence. All though the transition model provides a good framework for co-operative sharing it still leave’s many people out. It’s a case of hindsight after the fact. Just check the local papers in new transition areas for evidence of “another bunch of doom mongers “ attitude in the general populace. When the global supply chain collapses for whatever reason people will fight to keep what they have and fight to get more. Think of the violence at fuel stations in the southern states after Katrina, when Rita started to move northwest. Humans are animals and will behave with the same-programmed responses to a perceived threat. Although most animal packs co-operate it’s because it gives the individual greater chance of survival and reproduction. And they usually group together behind a recognized leader, the alpha male/female. And a quick thought to our American cousins. There may be thousands of legal and illegal guns floating about but just how do you get hold of the ammo if there are no trucks or ships any more? If people are short of food, water etc.etc. They will move on mass to where they think is even if it is just a rumour and if they are hungry enough or thirsty enough or cold enough they aren’t going to negotiate. The main problem is the transition models success. It does provide a model for community’s to survive in an energy starved world but what happens on a national level? So far all I see is a good blueprint for a feudal society. I admit I haven’t managed to get to any of the agm’s but has anyone discussed a post peak political structure, what about the role of the police and law and order in general? Or transport systems? Has anyone thought of setting up a skills academy to keep skills alive? Or are we to expect these things to carry on, like some great clockwork mechanism? Anyway getting back on topic, my proposal is to discuss the creation of a national transition peacekeeping taskforce based on the transition model. Largely self sufficient, its role would be to mediate disputes supervise the safe movement of people and defend people under direct threat. They would operate on an invite basis only. What I’m aiming for here is a group similar to the Jedi , anla’shok or knights of the round table. Trained to a high standard, acting independently but recognizing each transition group’s independence. Oh and by the way if any one wants to see how quickly things can degenerate I would recommend the T.V. series Jericho. Especially how relations with New Bern change over time. So is this ok? I’m not suggesting militarising the movement or even creating our own military service. What I am interested in is how people feel about the existence of such a group, and is it something they want to see, something they could be comfortable seeing or something they need (the three things are completely different). I would love to go into details about what i would like to create but that’s something I’ll have to post a link to later. neckie on "Hints for City Hubs and Hubs in general" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/hints-for-city-hubs-and-hubs-in-general#post-2147 Fri, 18 Sep 2009 12:40:31 +0000 neckie 2147@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Hi Antonio try this link <a href="http://forum.transitionnottingham.org.uk/index.php/topic,164.new/boardseen.html#new" rel="nofollow">http://forum.transitionnottingham.org.uk/index.php/topic,164.new/boardseen.html#new</a> neckie ps Is it possible to p.m on this forum? sinergyinaction on "Hints for City Hubs and Hubs in general" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/hints-for-city-hubs-and-hubs-in-general#post-2142 Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:24:59 +0000 sinergyinaction 2142@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Yeah Cliff, I agree, still we need to start somehow (or find something else). Nobody's got all the answers here for good or bad that this can be, and who knows, something like TT might even reveal to be of total irrelevance for the local culture here in Barcelona or even Spain....given that most of the people trying to foster it are expats, not certainly locals.. which is somewhat worrying or it's just that those that might be interested are not confident enough with their english to want to read/know more. By the way how many official transtion hubs are there (UK and beyond)? How many local initiating hubs? Cheers Antonio Cliff on "Hints for City Hubs and Hubs in general" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/hints-for-city-hubs-and-hubs-in-general#post-2141 Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:25:09 +0000 Cliff 2141@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Whatever texts or 'trainers' say, there is a tension within the Transition movement: how to be genuinely grounded in a place, and a community, whilst interacting with organisations and issues that apply beyond the boundaries of that community. One on hand, there is a commitment to 'localism' and grassroots empowerment, and on the other the seductive appeal of attention and status in the eyes of the mainstream. Which can appear to offer funds and 'effectiveness' and influence. Whilst grassroots activity appears often to offer repetition, demoralisation and sharing of disempowerment. How to reconcile that tension is a living issue I don't see 'unpacked' or discussed much. Where would be the place to see that conversation? Incidentally, can't 'action' be very stimulating of a rise in awareness? And doesn't the word 'awareness' beg lots of questions... like politics, the negotiation of discordant perceptions, when to accommodate or confront exploitation, etc etc. Those of us seen to be 'aware'- is it also seen that we don't always agree, and some of us welcome the surfacing of conflict for the release and the lessons it offers? The Transition Movement has not yet matured enough to say 'this works' (and 'that does not work'). Even in Totnes. sinergyinaction on "Hints for City Hubs and Hubs in general" http://transitiontowns.org/forum/topic/hints-for-city-hubs-and-hubs-in-general#post-2140 Thu, 17 Sep 2009 10:19:01 +0000 sinergyinaction 2140@http://transitiontowns.org/forum/ Hi one reason why one might want to have an organization to outreach in different districts of a large metropolitan area, especially in a country where english is not the local language, so 99,99% of people are not even aware that a movement like TT exists, is that you need some sort of visibility. But not only to people that can spontaneously find themselves simpathetic with it. We (as TT) are not aiming just to green minded people, we're aiming at the population at large. We don't want to remain in the green/hippie ghetto that other environmental organizations have got stuck into. TT is aiming to go mainstream (and it has) and it takes much more than a telephone tree in order to do that, believe me. Also, small informal organizations like the ones you mention, already have some kind of bigger organization in common, be it the school or the football club or the stadium, which are already very highly visible and very organized. Without them they would not be there in the first place. This is one of the main reason why I also think some kind of initiating group needs to "pave the way" so to speak, for other initiatives (the real ones) to start forming. On the other hand, the Transition Primer specifically states that: "In exceptional situations where a coordinating hub or initiating hub needs to be set up (currently Bristol, Forest of Dean, Brighton&Hove) that hub is responsible for making sure these criteria are applied to all the initiatives that start within their area. Further responsibilities for ongoing support and possibly training are emerging as we see this role develop." And: "[...]the "Local Transition Hub" - based within a large congruent/contiguous area with its own identity (eg a city). Helps establish and support "local transition initiatives" [...]" So, it appears that the initial TT spirit had already considered this possibiliy from the beginning, I wonder why DaveDan considers it was otherwise back then? But I agree that the hub should be the tool and not the master. I have actually never considered that the hub should be organizing anyone, just stimulate and inspire (or even train) others to set up their own local groups Neckie: in the Nottingham forum I could not find the job list you mentioned, there was no document attached in the post. All the best Antonio