October 12, 2010: change the system, not the climate!

I guess the name speaks for its self.

Re: October 12, 2010: change the system, not the climate!

Postby Ercesuzan on Tue Oct 12, 2010 9:06 pm

Andrea wrote:we've just done something pretty radical for 10:10:10


Maybe its all about choice. Andrea and family chose to spend their cash on the woodland and if anyone decides to volunteer to help restore it then it is their choice to spend their time doing the work.
All for now, take care
Ercesuzan
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 6:44 pm

Re: October 12, 2010: change the system, not the climate!

Postby Neill on Tue Oct 12, 2010 9:50 pm

you were slave labour


Definitely not. I took so much with me from the experiences.
I learned about team work, doing things because they were worth while, motivating people, getting through the hard times, ...

Scouting was the basis for everything I have done until now.
30 years after officially "leaving" I still consider myself a scout.
And I am still proud of what I did back then.

Neill
Neill Hogarth
Life is not a practice [www.hogarth.de]
T307-10
Neill
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:20 pm
Location: Nesselwang, Germany

Re: October 12, 2010: change the system, not the climate!

Postby Teiana on Wed Oct 13, 2010 9:13 am

so slavery is ok as long as they all get little badges?


ok.. we've had the scout debate before and i think we all agreed it was a good thing. The value of the land will go up as a result of the improvements... so the landowner gets a return on their investment...why should they profit from the actions of volunteers? Surely the scouts/volunteers ought to be working on things where the gain from their actions goes towards public benefit? Are you saying i can just nip out, buy some woods, regardless of whether i can look after them, and then say ah well it doesn't matter if i let them all get completely overgrown because sooner or later some troupe of conservationists will come along and beg me to let them tidy it up, and i will then get it managed for free? Because that is what it sounds like to me.
H.R.H. 8-)
Teiana
 
Posts: 2800
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 8:46 pm
Location: planet earth

Re: October 12, 2010: change the system, not the climate!

Postby Dave H on Wed Oct 13, 2010 5:29 pm

I am slightly surprised at the way this thread is developing and I think we ae missing the big picture or we have fallen into a thinking trap. However I feel the Neill might be thinking along the correct lines.

Volunteers consider they gain some benefit from their activity and it is these gains which motivate them to carry out the task. Thus both the land owner and the volunteers benefit but in different ways. Unfortunately a case could be made that slaves carry out work for the benefit of aviding punishment though I do not think this applies in this example.

I just wonder if this is a form of Cooperation Theory which looks at the role of individuals in groups.

I also wonder what is the difference between a voluunteer doing BTCV work and somebody producing entries for Wikipedia. What are the benefits and who gains from the benefits.
Dave H
 
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 9:27 am

Re: October 12, 2010: change the system, not the climate!

Postby Neill on Wed Oct 13, 2010 5:46 pm

Volunteers consider they gain some benefit from their activity and it is these gains which motivate them to carry out the task.

Good suggestion.

So a few examples from my life to test the theory:
Chairman of sports club: I get satisfaction knowing that hundreds of kids are able to do sport and am "recognized" in the community.
Run and pay for systems-place.org: interesting conversations. Thought provoking discussions. "Some one" had to do it.
Mentor for internees: enjoy watching young people develop. Can ring them in later life when I need something from an expert.
Mountain bike guide: really enjoy watching people improve and go from "scared stiff" to "this is fun.

So yes I benefit. But so do all those others above. So maybe it is an example of cooperation as suggested rather than one giving and others taking.

Have fun
Neill
Neill Hogarth
Life is not a practice [www.hogarth.de]
T307-10
Neill
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:20 pm
Location: Nesselwang, Germany

Re: October 12, 2010: change the system, not the climate!

Postby Teiana on Wed Oct 13, 2010 7:05 pm

um, the issue wasn't about whether or not people should volunteer but about whether private landowners should profit by it - the point is, wouldn't the volunteers energy and time be better spent on Public things not private ones. There's only so many volunteers to go around.. shouldn't their gift be to the general public and not to private landowners? Why don't the volunteers go help on a public park or beach or something..or the national trust?
H.R.H. 8-)
Teiana
 
Posts: 2800
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 8:46 pm
Location: planet earth

Re: October 12, 2010: change the system, not the climate!

Postby Ercesuzan on Wed Oct 13, 2010 8:24 pm

Teiana wrote:shouldn't their gift be to the general public and not to private landowners?


I suppose the ideal answer to your question is yes but then we are back to my point which is the volunteers have a choice. Neill lists his choices and I guess some people would list Andrea's woodland as one of their choices!
All for now, take care
Ercesuzan
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 6:44 pm

Re: October 12, 2010: change the system, not the climate!

Postby Andrea on Thu Oct 14, 2010 11:51 am

Teiana wrote:um, the issue wasn't about whether or not people should volunteer but about whether private landowners should profit by it


I think this is where you're constantly missing the point, Teiana. I really don't see how enhancing the biodiversity of woodland would profit the landowner? What the developers were desperately trying to do is to significantly reduce the biodiversity of the woodland (for example, a significant number of trees were felled and dumped as woodchip, the stream was dredged to improve drainage thus destroying some beautiful boggy areas, and few attempts were made to control the spread of highly destructive invasive species). In that way, the developers could potentially get away with putting some built infrastructure on the site. To give you a stark example, the woodland is right next to a village. Putting a row of houses on the woodland side of the road would net at least £2 million. If I wanted to profit from my investment, the last thing I would do would be to enhance its biodiversity which would totally preclude any development. In fact, our aim is to eventually have the site designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), which would probably significantly reduce the land value (as the pricetag reflects development speculation).

The key question here is how does one change a system that is totally geared for individuals making short-term profits by destroying the ecological life-support base? If more people were involved in giving up their time and money to sustain natural resources for the benefit of future generations, then surely that's a good thing?

In this case, I am willingly reducing my family's current economic capital in order to enhance natural capital for future generations. Potential volunteers will be giving up their time and energy to do the same. And you're saying that there's something wrong with this?
esse sequitur operari
Andrea
 
Posts: 1104
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 9:31 am

Re: October 12, 2010: change the system, not the climate!

Postby Teiana on Thu Oct 14, 2010 12:44 pm

And you're saying that there's something wrong with this?


i think i asked a fair question. Earlier this week i was pulling up weeds on my driveway, and wishing i had a squad of small boy scout types to take over the task. Of course after i wished it, i realised that scouts etc probably all go waterskiing or kayaking instead of odd jobbing these days. I imagined myself paying them a penny a weed, or some such trivial thing. When this thread came up about the woodland it got me thinking again about the volunteers vs paid help thing.
The first thing that went through my head when the wood purchase was mentioned? I thought 'cool idea! i'll help! i could do that.. and mentally was already pulling my wellies on and driving over. However the truth comes down to - i haven't the time to get my own garden in shape right now, never mind start on anyone elses. Hence wishing i had boyscouts for the driveway weeds. I knew if i mentioned that i had thought about helping i would be met with the challenge to back the idea up - after all it's easy for people to say things are a good idea and much harder to actually do anything about it. But i have enough work here for the foreseeable, i even can't take any OU courses over winter to just make myself time to sort the house out.. i have a gap between nov and feb which is already filling... there's furniture to build and curtains to make.. and all the garden to sort out.
But why should i not get free volunteer help to sort it out? Why on earth should i have to pay a gardener if other people can get help for free? Perhaps all people who own land should refuse point blank to pay to look after it, so that volunteers HAVE To come and sort it out. I'd have nothing to lose....

However back to the volunteers thing. Of course volunteers can't be paid - that wouldn't make sense. And of course, in theory, they should choose how they volunteer. But they are, overall, a limited resource. Volunteers are able to volunteer because somehow, they are being supported to do so. Looking at the entire system of land and people looking after it, how does it make sense for public money to be spent looking after public areas, but for private places to get free workers? If the privately owned work was all paid for (creating jobs), the volunteers would be free to work on public areas ( saving public money). The other way around doesn't make sense to me.
This land you have 'saved' from the developers. At the cost of them developing elsewhere... so instead of that overgrown bit of land which wasn't doing anything, they'll now go and bulldoze some old ladies garden (creating horribly high population density) or else dig up some nice useful field somewhere that could have been growing carrots or something..

it sounds all very nice to say you're helping future generations but you've only moved the developers slightly further around the corner, you haven't stopped it happening, and the effects of them going elsewhere could be much worse.

i'm coming out sounding like a complete misery about this but i'm just trying to be practical, and look at the whole thing. We can't designate every last bit of land an 'area of scientific interest'. If we want to stop the country being carved up by developers we have to stop them developing...by means other than just going around sticking 'not here please' labels on everything.

And why should private landowners get free worker when the public areas have to pay for them... ? it doesn't make sense... and if some private landowners get free help, why shouldn't they all?

i know in This Case that 'the best of intentions' are behind the purchase and plans ... but i don't think that supports the general argument that private landowners shouldn't have to pay for the upkeep of their land.

digressing a bit..
i know of somewhere near me where i have seen adverts for land for sale where people can buy a tiny patch in the middle of a huge area... a bit of land say even a foot square, far too small to be useable, but when sold off in lots in areas where the land is wanted by developers, provides an investment opportunity for people wanting to make money. This is insane and drives me crazy. Land should be owned by people who put their heart and soul into looking after it.
H.R.H. 8-)
Teiana
 
Posts: 2800
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 8:46 pm
Location: planet earth

Re: October 12, 2010: change the system, not the climate!

Postby Ercesuzan on Thu Oct 14, 2010 8:26 pm

Dave H wrote:I also wonder what is the difference between a voluunteer doing BTCV work and somebody producing entries for Wikipedia. What are the benefits and who gains from the benefits.


Maybe volunteering to do physical labour at an unfamiliar venue is the difference. Tweaking a wiki entry from the comfort of your own computer chair whilst having a coffee break is volunteering of a kind but involves a different set of skills.
All for now, take care
Ercesuzan
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 6:44 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Systems in the news

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron