After years of conferences - attending, helping put them on, and presenting at.... I have yet to be impressed!
Four key downfalls (of env conferences):
1. good information, bad presenting
2. one-way info flow in conference structure
3. professionals representing the stakeholders
4.Conference doesn't walk it's own talk
There is often a myriad of good information, though scattered in focus, but the structure of the conference along with a huge discrepancy in presenting skills enfolds mixed results, often less desirable and quite unfortunate in terms of the amount of energy everyone has put in. Hours and days of planning, researching, honing down on the right slides, and most of it slips away through bad organization and skills.
There should be, as with most things, a certificate for presenting - which you can try out for - in such a way that all presenting skills are honored despite comedic or other styles as long as the information is presented clearly - and if you don't get the certification, classes or workshops are available.
Secondly - the organization of the conference. It baffles me how, with the extent of knowledge in existence, conferences are organized with one-way information flows, which assume there is one positions possible for each person - that of the learner and that of the teacher. This disregards the fact that we can all learn from each other - and that more brains together have more productive results. The structure of the conference does not enable growth, further learning which is fostered by engagement and interaction.
How many people in this world truly learn by being "talked at" ? And how many learn better when there is discussion,..... when there is real-life examples.....
Thirdly - Why do conference have "professionals" who are out of touch with the people they are speaking on behalf of? For example, at the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development.... we have NGOs representing farmers...... I don't remember there being any farmers..... any workers.... any peasants... any teachers.... - the people we are talking about in the abstract - we don't give them a voice themselves - but we use theories and sometimes real life examples, - the professionals speak for them without EXPERIENCE being them.
Fourthly, at all the environmental conferences, with the small exception of some run by students who are truly trying to be aware, the conference within itself is unsustainable!. At the conference on Sustainable production and consumption for example, in Vietnam, it took place at an expensive 5 star hotel.... with meat, dairy, bottled water, excessive use of paper, lack of recycling facilities, constant lighting, and more! It didn't even take into consideration finding a hotel that was interested in sustainable development, and having the conference there - most liekly for free - in exchange for the knoweldge from all of the professionals - a WORKSHOP by all the conference participants creating a SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION PLAN OF ACTION!
why not have a conference of people in countries that are living sustainably? a regional conference... free conference.. They can talk about what they are doing - a community of real representatives not professionals... (We only have cross-shared learning between the rich people).... BOTTOM UP. Do they need us to facilitate ?Should we provide the cost?
Saturday, April 28, 2007
Thursday, April 26, 2007
A walking dollar abroad....
I don't want to buy things, in that I don't need things, i prefer experiences. If certain things can enhance my experience then perhaps I might be inclined to, but as experience is within, that would be quite rare.
In general, overconsumption is one of the largest plagues in modern times - a distraction from ourselves, our connectedness, along with a misuse of our spent energy (often doing something we don't like) - while depleting the earth's resources and often through unequal strategies and practices.
My Chilean friend, whom I met wandering around Vietnam by myself and looking at various intrigues along the streets.... a fellow young traveler, gorgeous, open-minded, and exciting. He said we should spend money here because the people are so poor.
In many senses, I agree - as it is a redistribution of the wealth - they work harder and for less, and we reap the benefits in our world, as the exploitation often returns back to the power source whether through governments or corporations or the IMF. I don't mean we reap the benefits only in that we get to buy some cheap things abroad.
Is it thus my duty and responsibility as a being in this world who's position automatically enables me to so easily reap the energy of those in different positions... born or granted?
Perhaps instead, I can focus my energy dual-fold - giving back, but not through the purchase and consumption of said goods which burden me with "things" but through spending my energy working to decrease the inequalities, and changing in any way possible the root cause - the energy system of the world - of give and take and power.
Perhaps then, I can give them money - however, that in the larger sense promotes laziness and dependency - a reward for doing something positive in their lives - change - or an incentive to make positive changes would make more sense.
The balance is hard to find - how do I properly give energy back that I have been given without a cost? Do I give them my time... my smiles... my positivity.... my listening... will they value that?
In general, overconsumption is one of the largest plagues in modern times - a distraction from ourselves, our connectedness, along with a misuse of our spent energy (often doing something we don't like) - while depleting the earth's resources and often through unequal strategies and practices.
My Chilean friend, whom I met wandering around Vietnam by myself and looking at various intrigues along the streets.... a fellow young traveler, gorgeous, open-minded, and exciting. He said we should spend money here because the people are so poor.
In many senses, I agree - as it is a redistribution of the wealth - they work harder and for less, and we reap the benefits in our world, as the exploitation often returns back to the power source whether through governments or corporations or the IMF. I don't mean we reap the benefits only in that we get to buy some cheap things abroad.
Is it thus my duty and responsibility as a being in this world who's position automatically enables me to so easily reap the energy of those in different positions... born or granted?
Perhaps instead, I can focus my energy dual-fold - giving back, but not through the purchase and consumption of said goods which burden me with "things" but through spending my energy working to decrease the inequalities, and changing in any way possible the root cause - the energy system of the world - of give and take and power.
Perhaps then, I can give them money - however, that in the larger sense promotes laziness and dependency - a reward for doing something positive in their lives - change - or an incentive to make positive changes would make more sense.
The balance is hard to find - how do I properly give energy back that I have been given without a cost? Do I give them my time... my smiles... my positivity.... my listening... will they value that?
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Living in a Reactive Society
As opposed to Proactive Society. We're constantly on the defensive.. reacting to products - governments - policies - developments. We're so busy reacting that we don't take or spend the time to be proactive with creative innovative solutions to create what we want. We're bombarded with information, pressures, products, advertisments, and misinformation!
An example if community development - we are reacting to the fact that Wal-Mart wants to come to Worcester, Massachusetts.
But if we had a mechanism in place for proactivity - we would have council of representations continuously work on a 5 or 10 or other year plan - where we want to go. Then the community is involved in deciding how the community will progress and can ask for bids from companies to come and fulfill the needs they decided they have - not an outside organization deciding for you.
There's soemthing fundamentaly unsustainable about the mechanisms we have in place for faciitating development whether it's the top-down approach or the problem of spending millions of dollars on an environmental impact assessment of a project that will happen anyways and is oftentimes inherently unsustainable due to it's resource use.
An example if community development - we are reacting to the fact that Wal-Mart wants to come to Worcester, Massachusetts.
But if we had a mechanism in place for proactivity - we would have council of representations continuously work on a 5 or 10 or other year plan - where we want to go. Then the community is involved in deciding how the community will progress and can ask for bids from companies to come and fulfill the needs they decided they have - not an outside organization deciding for you.
There's soemthing fundamentaly unsustainable about the mechanisms we have in place for faciitating development whether it's the top-down approach or the problem of spending millions of dollars on an environmental impact assessment of a project that will happen anyways and is oftentimes inherently unsustainable due to it's resource use.
Saturday, April 21, 2007
Blogging Chapter 1
I have never blogged before - nor had any interest in it - but here I am as a result of my fingers itching to get these thoughts down! I've recently been reinvigorated and overwhelmed with thoughts and musings on multiple topics - mainly how to create positive impact and progress in this globalizing world. So here I commence my thought bubbles!
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
What is Selling Out?
selling out.... what does it mean?
I realized a couple of months ago that part of my definition of "selling out" was making money - and my immediate reaction was how silly that was. Then it spurred me to wonder what i want my definition to be.
I think a better definition would be:
Spending energy/time on an activity that inherently goes against your values - only with the object of money.
For example, I struggle with the knowledge that doing any promotional jobs (handing out free product samples) for $25/hour, is essentially selling out under that definition because I am spending energy perpetuating the consumer culture.
Or am I educating consumers and giving them options?
Perhaps I am enabling them to try out a product so they have experience not just advertisements to go on?
Doesn't everyone like free products?
So perhaps it depends on the angle. Tricky.
Perhaps then it's all about the benefits and costs and must be applied on a case-by-case basis.
Am i supporting Coca Cola, a horrible company, by having them pay me $20/hour to promote Fuze - their natural vitamin drink?
I realized a couple of months ago that part of my definition of "selling out" was making money - and my immediate reaction was how silly that was. Then it spurred me to wonder what i want my definition to be.
I think a better definition would be:
Spending energy/time on an activity that inherently goes against your values - only with the object of money.
For example, I struggle with the knowledge that doing any promotional jobs (handing out free product samples) for $25/hour, is essentially selling out under that definition because I am spending energy perpetuating the consumer culture.
Or am I educating consumers and giving them options?
Perhaps I am enabling them to try out a product so they have experience not just advertisements to go on?
Doesn't everyone like free products?
So perhaps it depends on the angle. Tricky.
Perhaps then it's all about the benefits and costs and must be applied on a case-by-case basis.
Am i supporting Coca Cola, a horrible company, by having them pay me $20/hour to promote Fuze - their natural vitamin drink?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)