Category Archives: international

SFU Seeks Nominations for Int’l Dialogue Award

Posted on by
Reply

We want to highlight the recent call from Simon Fraser University’s Centre for Dialogue – an NCDD member organization – for nominations for the Jack P. Blaney Award for Dialogue which recognizes dialogue practitioners of international excellence. We encourage our members to consider nominating people you think are doing especially impactful work in our field before the Dec. 16 deadline. You can learn more in the Centre’s announcement below or find the original here.

Simon Fraser University’s Centre for Dialogue is now accepting nominations for the 2017-18 Jack P. Blaney Award for Dialogue

The Jack P. Blaney Award for Dialogue is presented every second year to an individual who has demonstrated international excellence in the use of dialogue to increase mutual understanding and advance complex public issues. Nominations are encouraged from around the world in the fields of international diplomacy & conflict resolution, climate solutions, intercultural dialogue, civic engagement, and urban sustainability.

Criteria used to select the recipient include:

  • The candidate’s demonstrated international excellence in the use of dialogue to increase mutual understanding;
  • The global significance of his or her work in addressing complex and profound public issues; and
  • Related programming opportunities.

Far more than a simple ceremony, the Blaney Award includes a short programming residency in Vancouver, Canada that builds upon the recipient’s work to achieve tangible outcomes, reflecting the mandate of Simon Fraser University to be Canada’s most community-engaged research university. Recent Blaney Award programs have engaged thousands of participants through the hosting of international announcements, book launches, capacity building workshops, and participatory research. The award endowment includes funds to cover recipient transportation and associated programming costs, as well as a $10,000 cash award.

Nomination Form (Word)
Nomination Form (PDF)

Nomination deadline: December 16, 2016

Inquiries: Robin Prest, Program Director, rjprest[at]sfu[dot]ca

You can find the original version of this SFU announcement at www.sfu.ca/dialogue/jack-p-blaney/call-for-nominations.html.

John Thackara’s Intimate Tour of the Emerging New Economy

Posted on by
Reply

In the burgeoning genre of books focused on building a new and benign world order – a challenge variously known as the “new economy,” “Great Transition,” and the “Great Turning” among other terms) – John Thackara’s new book stands out.  How to Thrive in the Next Economy: Designing Tomorrow’s World Today is low-key and sensible, practically minded and solidly researched.  Written in an amiable, personal voice, the book is persuasive and inspirational.  I can only say:  Chase it down and read it! 

It’s a shame that so many brave books that imagine a post-capitalist world surrender to grandiose theorizing and moral exhortation.  It’s an occupational hazard in a field that is understandably wants to identify the metaphysical and historical roots of our pathological modern times.  But critique is one thing; the creative construction of a new world is another.

That’s why I found Thackara’s book so refreshing.  This British design expert, a resident of southwest France, wants to see what the design and operation of an ecologically sustainable future really looks like, close-up.  He is also thoughtful enough to provide some depth perspective, following his own motto, “To do things differently, we need to see things differently.”

How to Thrive in the Next Economy seeks to answer the question, “Is there no escape from an economy that devours nature in the name of endless growth?”  The short answer is Yes!  There is an escape.  As Thackara shows us, there are scores of brilliant working examples around the world that demonstrate how to meet our needs in more responsible, fair and enlivening ways.

He takes us by the hand to survey a wide variety of exemplary models-in-progress.  We are introduced to scientists and farmers who are discovering how to heal the soil by treating it as a living system.  We meet urbanists who are re-thinking the hydrology of cities, moving away from high-entropy engineered solutions like reservoirs and sewers, to smaller, localized solutions like wetlands, rain gardens, ponds and worm colonies.  Other bioregionalists are attempting to de-pave cities and bring permaculture, gardens, “pollinator pathways” and informal food systems into cities.

read more

A Surge of New Work on the City as a Commons

Posted on by
Reply

There has been a surge of new interest in the city as a commons in recent months – new books, public events and on-the-ground projects.  Each effort takes a somewhat different inflection, but they all seek to redefine the priorities and logic of urban governance towards the principles of commoning.

I am especially impressed by a new scholarly essay in theYale Law and Policy Review, “The City as a Commons, by Fordham Law School professor Sheila R. Foster and Italian legal scholar Christian Iaione. The piece is a landmark synthesis of this burgeoning field of inquiry and activism. The 68-page article lays out the major philosophical and political challenges in conceptualizing the city as a commons, providing copious documentation in 271 footnotes.

Foster and Iaione are frankly interested in “the potential for the commons [as] a framework and set of tools to open up the possibility of more inclusive and equitable forms of ‘city-making’.  The commons has the potential to highlight the question of how cities govern or manage resources to which city inhabitants can lay claim to as common goods, without privatizing them or exercising monopolistic public regulatory control over them.”

They proceed to explore the history and current status of commons resources in the city and the rise of alternative modes of governance such as park conservancies, community land trusts, and limited equity cooperative housing.  While Foster and Iaione write about the “tragedy of the urban commons” (more accurately, the over-exploitation of finite resources because a commons is not simply a resource), they break new ground in talking about “the production of the commons” in urban settings. They understand that the core issue is not just ownership of property, but how to foster active cooperation and relationships among people. 

read more

Re-imagining the Polity for a Networked Humanity

Posted on by
Reply

This is the third and final installment from my essay, "Transnational Republics of Commoning: Reinventing Governance through Emergent Networks," published by Friends of the Earth UK. The full essay can be downloaded as a pdf file here.

III.  Re-imagining the Polity for a Networked Humanity

However promising the new forms of open source governance outlined above, they do not of themselves constitute a polity.  The new regimes of collaboration constitute mini- and meso-systems of self-organization.  They do not comprise a superstructure of law, policy, infrastructure and macro-support, which is also needed.  So what might such a superstructure look like, and how might it be created?  Can we envision some sort of transnational polity that could leapfrog over the poorly functioning state systems that prevail today?

A first observation on this question is that the very idea of a polity must evolve.  So long as we remain tethered to the premises of the Westphalian nation-state system, with its strict notions of absolute sovereignty over geographic territory and people and its mechanical worldview enforced by bureaucracies and law, the larger needs of the Earth as a living ecosystem will suffer.  So, too, will the basic creaturely needs of human beings, which are universal prepolitical ethical needs beyond national identity.

It may simply be premature to declare what a post-Westphalian polity ought to look like – but we certainly must orient ourselves in that direction.  For the reasons cited above, we should find ways to encourage the growth of a Commons Sector, in both digital and non-virtual contexts, and in ways that traverse existing territorial political boundaries.  Ecosystems are not confined by political borders, after all, and increasingly, neither are capital and commerce.  Culture, too, is increasingly transnational.  Any serious social or ecological reconstruction must be supported by making nation-state barriers more open to transnational collaboration if durable, effective solutions are to be developed. 

While states are usually quite jealous in protecting their authority, transnational commons should be seen as helping the beleaguered nation-state system by compensating for its deficiencies.  By empowering ordinary people to take responsibility and reap entitlements as commoners, nation-states could foster an explosion of open-source problem-solving and diminish dependencies on volatile, often-predatory global markets, while bolstering their credibility and legitimacy as systems of power.    

But how might we begin to build a commons-friendly polity?  After all, the most politically attractive approaches have no ambitions to change the system, while any grand proposals for transforming neoliberal capitalism are seen as political non-starters.  I suggest three “entry points” that can serve as long-term strategies for transformation: 

1) begin to reconceptualize cities as commons;

2) reframe the “right to common” (access to basic resources for survival and dignity) as a human right; and

3) build new collaborations among system-critical social movements so that a critical mass of resistance and creative alternatives can emerge. 

These three general strategies are not separate approaches, of course, but highly complementary and synergistic.

read more

New Forms of Network-based Governance

Posted on by
Reply

The text below is a second installment from my essay, "Transnational Republics of Commoning:  Reinventing Governance through Emergent Networking," published by Friends of the Earth UK.  The third and final part of the essay will appear next.

Digital Commons as a New Species of Production and Governance

 To return to our original question:  How can we develop new ways to preserve and extend the democratic capacities of ordinary people and rein in unaccountable market/state power?  There is enormous practical potential in developing a Commons Sector as a quasi-independent source of production and governance.  Simply by withdrawing from the dominant market system and establishing stable, productive alternatives – in the style of Linux, local food systems and the blogosphere – the regnant system can be jolted.

While many digital commons may initially seem marginal, they can often “out-cooperate” conventional capital and markets with their innovative approaches, trustworthiness and moral authority.  The output of digital commons is mostly for use value, not exchange value.  It is considered inalienable and inappropriable, and must be shared and copied in common, not reflexively privatized and sold.  By enacting a very different, post-capitalist logic and ethos, many “digital republics” are decisively breaking with the logic of the dominant market system; they are not simply replicating it in new forms (as, for example, the “sharing economy” often is).

Let us conspicuously note that not all open source systems are transformative.  We see how existing capitalist enterprises have successfully embraced and partially coopted the transformative potential of open source software.  That said, there are new governance innovations that hold lessons for moving beyond strict market and state control.  For example, the foundations associated with various open source software development communities,[17] and the wide variety of “Government 2.0” models that are using networked participation to improve government decision-making and services (e.g., the Intellipedia wiki used by US intelligence agencies; Peer to Patent crowdsourcing of “prior art” for patent applications).

Any serious transformational change must therefore empower ordinary people and help build new sorts of collaborative structures. Ultimately, this means we must recognize the practical limits of external coercion and try to develop new systems that can enable greater democratic participation, personal agency, and open spaces for local self-determination and bottom-up innovation.[18] The examples described below are embryonic precursors of a different, better future.

read more

New Initiative Experiments with Collective Healing Processes

Posted on by
Reply

In the lead up to our NCDD 2016 conference, we continue to lift up stories of people who are Bridging Our Divides. So we wanted to share the piece below written by NCDD member Beth Tener of New Directions Collaborative about a great collective healing initiative she’s involved in that seeks to experiment with processes that will help large groups heal from old wounds that maintain separation. We encourage you to read her piece below or find the original here.

Collective Healing: Shifting Historical Patterns that Divide Us

We live in times of extreme partisanship, increasing divisions between the rich and poor, the working class and upper class, experiences of people of color vs. whites, and disconnects of people from nature. As the US Presidential election and the Brexit vote in the UK illustrate, our current political process tends to amplify divisions and generate more discord rather than greater understanding, stronger connections, and wise solutions balancing multiple needs.

When people are divided and disconnected, it is not surprising that there is a lack of empathy, curiosity, and care for the experiences and well being of people different than us. It can be easy to label people and disdain their views versus seeing them as individuals whose stories and struggles I understand and have talked to them about.

Finding new ways

It is time to find ways we can work together that overcome these patterns of division and separation. This is already happening in many places, perhaps at the edges and not that visible yet, but real nonetheless. Global communities of practice are inventing and evolving these processes (e.g., circle process, participatory processes, participatory budgeting, networks for system change.) While these experiments may seem at the edges when all the attention is focused on the mainstream political debate, they can hold seeds of a better way.

Over the last two years, I have been part of a rich dialogue with people who are exploring ways to bring people together that can help heal these long-standing harmful patterns. This group includes facilitators and others working with the Art of Hosting from Europe and the US. A gathering called Collective Healing will take place in Florida in August to experiment with bringing together various methods in a prototype, which we will learn and share more widely. We have focused on several key themes of what is needed:

  • Engaging across difference and connecting to “we” not just “me” – Getting beyond our narrow self interest to see ourselves as an inherent part of a larger group, community, society, and earth – and acting from that awareness – is not emphasized or easy to do. How can we facilitate groups in ways that generate a sense of belonging? How can we create group experiences that help us see those who are different not through the lens of a label but as full human beings with many stories, with complex emotions, and unique gifts and aspirations?
  • Reweaving the fragments of community with positive collective experiences – The pressures and pace of work these days means many are chronically rushed, super-busy, addicted, and distracted. Fulfilling human experiences of connection, belonging, friendship, creativity, meaningful work, and the opportunity to work with others on a bigger cause are sorely lacking. Changing these patterns starts with creating spaces for meaningful conversation about things that matter. Conversation is the “connective tissue” that can reconnect the fragmented parts.
  • Trauma: the overlooked pattern affecting everything – Yet, even with these promising ways to gather people and generate ideas of how we can make things better, this is not enough. Any initiative to look forward and make positive change takes place in a community or system that has a long history, which we often overlook. The fragmented relationships, broken bonds of community, and lack of trust did not arise out of nowhere. There is a story there. Events of the past created harms and burdens that are often unacknowledged. These unhealed traumas can still be affecting the situation and the people involved… and blocking the potential to shift to a healthier pattern/outcome. Promising processes are emerging to help communities or societies explore and work with history in ways that can enable healing, for example systemic constellation, restorative justice, and truth and reconciliation commissions.
  • Community and connection: healing together – One of the key ways to heal trauma is the experience of being truly heard and seen. When trauma is pushed under the rug, mental and emotional turmoil arises. Bessel van der Kolk writes “Denial of the consequences of trauma can wreak havoc with the social fabric of society.” What can we do to create a strong fabric of community while coming together and acknowledging the traumas? How can we generate a shared understanding and commitment to change so we do not repeat these harmful patterns?
  • Accessing overlooked human capacities – In much of the work world, there are unwritten rules of being professional and successful: use your intellect and leave your emotions at the door. We can access a broader range of human capacities, such as empathy and compassion, to understand the experiences and motivations of all those within a community and society. We are only beginning to explore how mindfulness and presence can help us understand past and present dynamics and make decisions. And there is more potential to explore weaving in arts, music, movement, and creative expression, which also tend to be left at the door. What could be possible in our collective work if we did not expect people to split off their emotional, intuitive, and creative sides to “be professional?” How might we make decisions if we access the power of “collective presence?”

There is a hunger for this…

In my work with non-profits, communities, businesses, governments, and foundations in social and environmental change, I have seen that: These practices work. There is a hunger for real conversation, for connecting to our larger community to achieve greater results together, and for contributing to making the world a better place.

It starts with an invitation…

We graciously invite you to join us for this first gathering in Florida, focused on how we can create spaces for collective healing: www.collectivehealing.net.

We anticipate this is just the beginning, with intention to host other gatherings in Europe and other parts of the US. At bottom of this page is place to sign onto mailing list for future events: www.collectivehealing.net/about.

And we welcome your financial support for this new initiative, in any amount, through our crowdfunding web site: www.indiegogo.com/projects/creating-collective-healing-spaces.

You can find the original version of this New Directions Collaborative blog post at www.ndcollaborative.com/collective-healing.

NCDD Members Host 4-day Transpartisan Tele-Summit

Posted on by
Reply

As you may have seen on the NCDD Discussion Listerv recently, several NCDD members are hosting a “virtual roundtable” focused on transcending partisan divides this Aug. 1-4. The American Citizens Summit event will be co-hosted by NCDD members Amanda Roman and John Steiner and will feature many more members and D&D leaders as speakers. We encourage our members to learn more in Amanda’s announcement below or visit www.americancitizenssummit.com.

Join The American Citizens Summit for 3 Days of Political Cross-Training

As you may know, the first decade of my career was dedicated to the center-right political coalition. While my values and philosophical leanings remain. I have spent the second decade getting to know and working to support amazing organizations and innovative individuals that are focused on moving beyond typical political boundaries and getting results.

Just after the RNC and DNC conventions, I will be co-hosting a tele-summit that will recognize and spotlight this transpartisan dynamic. We are anticipating 50,000+ registrants and I would love to have you join us for three days (and an extra evening) of energetic political cross-training!

Are you concerned by our nation’s current political climate? Discouraged that infighting and bitter partisanship is affecting our ability to move forward? Do you feel discouraged and without a place in the political process? Wondering if your vote really counts?

You’re not alone.

Like many Americans, you may feel like a bystander, powerless to make a difference. And while media would have us believe that bitter polarization and gridlock is the norm, that’s only one overplayed perspective of the story.

There are MANY passionate and dedicated Americans engaged in and working to reform our democratic system – citizens just like YOU! – developing bold solutions that transcend partisan politics and creating platforms where everyone’s voice CAN be heard and everyone’s vote DOES count.

You’re invited to take your place among them during the American Citizens Summit, August 1-4!

I’m honored to have served as the lead designer for this event and to be co-hosting conversations with over 45 respected political leaders, grassroots visionaries, business pioneers, change agents and advocates – including Gavin Newsom, Marianne Williamson, Grover Norquist, Jackie Salit, Eric Liu, Joan Blades, John Robbins (and so many more!) – who are committed to putting democratic principles before politics-as-usual to help reclaim the full power of our democracy.

During this unprecedented 4-day event you’ll discover opportunities to bring about the change you believe is possible, ways to navigate political conversations without polarization, and alternatives that build momentum toward a brighter future for us all.

We’ll chart the course toward more positive politics. We’ll build bridges across divides and learn about effective solutions for our communities and our country.

I hope you’ll participate in this special online gathering presented by The Shift Network.

RSVP here for The American Citizens Summit — at no charge!

The American Citizens Summitwill serve as a “virtual roundtable” where diverse thought leaders representing the full spectrum of political ideologies – each with valuable insights and contributions, and united in their desire to bring greater wisdom and compassion to our country through this process – will come together to model a respectful dialogue in an effort to shift our political paradigm.

Join us for 4 days of energetic political cross training on how to get results, respect differences and strengthen our democracy. You’ll discover:

  • Ways to navigate political conversations without polarization
  • Bold solutions that transcend partisan politics
  • How to help reclaim the full power of our democracy
  • Innovative & inspired actions you can take immediately
  • A larger community with resources & connections for you to tap into
  • Pathways to channel your energy, passion & interests
  • Ways to make your voice heard & your vote count
  • Your contribution in peacefully fulfilling our highest promise as a nation
  • Network with like-minded people who share your desire to move forward in UNITY
  • Effective solutions that are working for our communities & our country
  • Processes that allow us to see opposing sides & possibilities for common ground

RSVP here for The American Citizens Summit – at no charge!

Yours truly,

Amanda Kathryn Roman

Transforming Historical Harms

Posted on by
Reply

The 96-page manual, Transforming Historical Harms by David Anderson Hooker and Amy Potter Czajkowski, was uploaded October 2013 on Coming to the Table‘s site. The manual gives a holistic framework to address historical injustices, in a way that engages all participants, and identifies the aftermath and legacies of [generational] trauma. This manual was developed by Coming to the Table and has been a collective effort of Eastern Mennonite University’s (EMU) Center for Justice & Peacebuilding (CJP) and their Strategies for Trauma Awareness and Resilience (STAR) program. From the STAR program, came the group Coming to the Table, which itself was launched in 2006 when a group of EMU participants gathered to address the historical trauma between descendants of enslaved African-Americans and enslaver European-Americans.

The framework is given through the lens of trauma and provides a holistic approach to transform traumas from historical injustices for healing to occur. In order to be possible, all participants affected must be included and address all the following aspects: “Facing History; Making Connections; Healing Wounds; and Taking Action”.

The manual provides five sections and an appendix:
Section I: Overview, context and using the manual
Section II: The THH Framework
Section III: Practices of the THH Approach
Section IV: Analysis and Process Design
Section V: Tools and Resources for Practicing the THH Approach

Below is an excerpt from the manual, you can find the it in full on Coming to the Table’s site here.

From the manual…

The THH Framework
The Transforming Historical Harms (THH) manual articulates a Framework for addressing the historical harms mentioned above as well as the many others present in societies around the world. The framework looks at historical injustices and their present manifestations through the lens of trauma and identifies the mechanisms for the transmission of historical trauma: legacies and aftermaths. These are the beliefs and structures responsible for transmitting trauma responses and traumagenic circumstances between generations. The framework then offers a comprehensive approach to transforming historical harms through Facing History; Making Connections; Healing Wounds; and Taking Action. Transforming historical harms must occur through the practice of all these dimensions. The order in which they are engaged can be different, but none can be omitted. This approach will be the primary focus of the manual. Finally, the framework includes the levels at which healing needs to occur, which range from the individual to the international level. For the sake of simplicity, we will refer to analysis and interventions at the individual and group levels.

The framework we offer in this manual is unique in several ways. The four part THH Approach is holistic because each dimension is interconnected with the others and the approach only works when all the dimensions are present. The framework introduces specific understandings of the concepts of legacy and aftermath, and transformation is considered incomplete unless both beliefs and structures have been addressed that have been responsible for perpetuating historical trauma and harms. The THH framework includes all groups that have participated in and have been touched by the historical trauma and harms rather than focusing exclusively on the group or groups that have been named the “victims.” There is clear and ample evidence that in the context of massive and historical trauma, those who were victimized, those who perpetrated, those who were bystanders AND the descendants of each group are all effected. It is our assumption that participation and healing is required at some point for all groups in order for the approach to be effective. Not only is it requisite for all groups to participate, but for consideration to be made for the unique manifestations of trauma across generations for each group and for healing interventions to occur at the individual and group levels.

How to use this manual:
The intention of this manual is to provide value to those trying to address the personal, familial, communal and/or societal remnants of traumagenic historical experiences that continue to hurt or limit the lives of individuals, groups, societies and nations. The pain or limitation could result from overt violence such as enslavement, war, colonialism or genocide, or more subtle forms of violence like discrimination, poverty and personal or societal exclusion.

Objectives: Those using this manual will:
1. Learn how historical harms, which are current challenges in our lives and communities, are rooted in large-scale historical traumas.
2. Identify how Legacy and Aftermath describe the transmission of historical trauma and harms.
3. Apply the Transforming Historical Harms Approach that includes:
a. Exploring approaches to facing history that help identify ways to move forward;
b. Learning how making connections — building relationships across historical divisions — can create partnerships capable of working towards effective change;
c. Identifying the importance of creating spaces and methods that welcome and support healing wounds (mind, body and spirit) from truama both individually and collectively; and
d. Taking action to address beliefs, behaviors and structures responsible for ongoing harms.
4. Explore historical trauma and harms in specific contexts, and learn about strategies for using the THH approach in these situations.

Above is an excerpt of the manual. We recommend looking at the manual in full, which can be found here.

About Coming to the Table
Coming to the Table provides leadership, resources, and a supportive environment for all who wish to acknowledge and heal wounds from racism that is rooted in the United States’ history of slavery. Our vision for the United States is of a just and truthful society that acknowledges and seeks to heal from the racial wounds of the past—from slavery and the many forms of racism it spawned.

Follow on Twitter: @ComingToTable

About EMU’s Center for Justice and Peacebuilding
The Center for Justice & Peacebuilding educates a global community of peacebuilders through the integration of practice, theory and research. Our combined vision is to prepare, transform, and sustain leaders to create a just and peaceful world.

Follow on Twitter: @CJP_EMU

Resource Link: http://comingtothetable.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/01-Transforming_Historical_Harms.pdf

First Comprehensive Analysis of PB in N. America Released

Posted on by
Reply

We want to draw our NCDD members’ attention to some of the work done by the team at Public Agenda – one of our NCDD member organizations. PA recently completed the first-ever comprehensive analysis of participatory budgeting processes in N. America, and the report they released is a fabulous tool for understanding and promoting PB. It’s full of insightful findings and poses important questions for going forward. We encourage you to read their summary below or find more from PA’s website here.

Public Spending, By the People

PublicAgenda-logoFrom 2014 to 2015, more than 70,000 residents across the United States and Canada directly decided how their cities and districts should spend nearly $50 million in public funds through a process known as participatory budgeting (PB). PB is among the fastest growing forms of public engagement in local governance, having expanded to 46 communities in the U.S. and Canada in just 6 years.

PB is a young practice in the U.S. and Canada. Until now, there’s been no way for people to get a general understanding of how communities across the U.S. implement PB, who participates, and what sorts of projects get funded. Our report, “Public Spending, By the People” offers the first-ever comprehensive analysis of PB in the U.S. and Canada.

Here’s a summary of what we found:

Overall, communities using PB have invested substantially in the process and have seen diverse participation. But cities and districts vary widely in how they implemented their processes, who participated and what projects voters decided to fund. Officials vary in how much money they allocate to PB and some communities lag far behind in their representation of lower-income and less educated residents.

The data in this report came from 46 different PB processes across the U.S. and Canada. The report is a collaboration with local PB evaluators and practitioners. The work was funded by the Democracy Fund and the Rita Allen Foundation, and completed through a research partnership with the Kettering Foundation.

You can read the findings in brief below, download a PDF of the executive summary,download the full report or scroll through charts and graphics from the report. This report is also part of an ongoing Public Agenda project on participatory budgeting – you can read about the project here.

 

Summary of Findings

Part 1: What Happened? Facts and Figures About How PB Was Implemented

How exactly did communities implement PB? How did communities differ from one another in their adaptation of PB to local needs and resources? And how successful were different council districts and cities in getting the word out and encouraging residents to take part?

Key findings:

  • More than half of the 2014–15 PB communities were undertaking PB for the first time.
  • Officials allocated on average $1 million to a PB process (nearly always capital funds only), ranging from $61,000 to over $3 million.
  • In all PB communities, residents under 18 years old were eligible to vote. The minimum voting age was most commonly 14 or 16.
  • More than 8,000 residents brainstormed community needs in more than 240 neighborhood idea collection assemblies. In communities that held more neighborhood idea collection assemblies, total participation across assemblies was higher.
  • Over 1,000 resident volunteers turned ideas into viable proposals as budget delegates. Some communities did not offer residents opportunities to become budget delegates, and one reported as many as 75 such volunteers.
  • Nearly all communities used online and digital tools to tell residents about PB. Far fewer did targeted person-to-person outreach. Person-to-person outreach was associated with greater participation of traditionally marginalized communities.
  • 140 partnerships between community-based organizations (CBOs) and government formed to increase participation in PB. CBO outreach was associated with higher representation of traditionally marginalized communities at the vote.
  • More than 70,000 residents cast ballots across nearly 400 voting sites and more than 300 voting days. Some communities brought out fewer than 200 voters, others more than 3,000.
  • A total of 360 projects won PB funding.

Part 2: Who Participated? The Demographic Profile of Voter Survey Respondents

What do we know about the demographics of PB voters? How representative were PB voters of their local communities? How successful were communities in engaging groups that are often marginalized from the political process?

Key findings:

  • AGE: Residents under 18 years old and seniors were overrepresented among survey respondents in many communities, while residents between 18 and 44 years of age were underrepresented. Overall, 11 percent of respondents were under 18 years of age. Click to view charts.
  • RACE/ETHNICITY: In nearly all communities, black residents were overrepresented or represented proportionally to the local census among voter survey respondents. Hispanics were underrepresented among survey respondents in most PB sites. Overall, blacks made up 21 percent of respondents and Hispanics made up 21 percent of respondents.Click to view charts.
  • INCOME: In most communities, residents from lower-income households were overrepresented or represented proportionally to the local census among voter survey respondents. Overall, 27 percent of respondents reported annual household incomes of less than $25,000 and 19 percent reported annual household incomes between $25,000 and $49,000. Click to view charts.
  • EDUCATION: Residents with less formal education were underrepresented among voter survey respondents in most communities. Just 39 percent of respondents overall reported not having a college degree. Click to view charts.
  • GENDER: Women were overrepresented among voter survey respondents in nearly all PB communities. Overall, 62 percent of respondents were women. Click to view charts.

Part 3: What Got Funded? Ballots and Winning Projects

What kinds of projects made it on the ballot? What types of projects received the largest amount of PB allocations? And what kinds of projects were most and least likely to win residents’ votes?

Key findings:

  • Parks and recreation projects were the most common ballot items overall, followed by school projects. But ballots varied substantially—some included no parks and recreation or no school projects.
  • Overall, schools received the largest share (33 percent) of PB-allocated funds.
  • Public safety projects were rare on ballots but had a high chance of winning.
  • Public housing projects were rare on ballots and had a low chance of winning.

Questions for National and Local Stakeholders

We hope this publication will stimulate national and local discussion about PB and its potential to positively impact individuals, communities and governments across the U.S. and Canada. The report therefore concludes with some important questions for national and local stakeholders who are debating PB’s current state and potential impacts, are working on refining its implementation or are conducting further research and evaluations. Following are these questions in brief.

Questions about PB’s potential to spread and scale:

  • With an average of $1 million allocated in each PB community, what can be achieved?
  • How do communities support and finance the implementation of PB, and how sustainable are these strategies?
  • What community conditions facilitate or hinder successful implementation of PB?

Questions about implementation:

  • What are the various goals local communities have for PB, and how are they communicated?
  • What is the quality of deliberation—when and how do residents consider the trade-offs of various community needs and projects?
  • How do online and digital tools for outreach and engagement affect who participates and what gets funded?
  • As communities vary in voting rules and ballot design, how does that impact voting patterns?

Questions about participation:

  • Why are some communities better than others at engaging traditionally marginalized populations?
  • What are the characteristics and motivations of residents who submit project ideas and volunteer as budget delegates?
  • How do PB participation rates and participant demographics compare with those in other types of local civic and political engagement?

Questions about ballot items and winning projects:

  • What do we know about the processes by which projects make it on the ballot?
  • How do money allocations in PB differ from those that are happening without PB?

Questions about long-term impacts:

  • What exactly may be PB’s key long-term impacts on the health of U.S. and Canadian communities?
  • Are there long-term impacts on the civic skills, attitudes and behaviors of participants?
  • Does PB lead to more equitable distribution of resources?
  • How does PB affect government decision making outside of the PB process?

Methodology in Brief

Findings in this report are based on data collected and shared with Public Agenda by local PB evaluation teams across the U.S. and Canada. Public Agenda has been collaborating with local evaluators since early 2015 to facilitate shared learning across communities and to collectively tell the story of PB across the U.S. and Canada.

Our data compilation was guided by a framework of 15 key metrics that Public Agenda developed based on the experiences of local evaluators and the advice of the North American PB Research Board—a group of local evaluators, public engagement practitioners and U.S.- and Canada-based academic researchers who have researched the effects of PB in other countries—along with input from the nonprofit organization the Participatory Budgeting Project.

These 15 key metrics specify data points about PB implementation, participation and winning projects that are important for a better understanding of the current state of PB, the tracking of its immediate outputs and the clarification of its potential long-term impacts. Click here to read more about the 15 key metrics for evaluating participatory budgeting.

You can find the original version of this Public Agenda summary and more about their report at www.publicagenda.org/pages/public-spending-by-the-people.

Beyond Development: The Commons as a New/Old Paradigm of Human Flourishing

Posted on by
Reply

On June 21, I gave a presentation to a number of staffers and others at the Agence Française de Développement in Paris outlining my vision of the commons as an alternative vision of "development."  The talk was entitled "Beyond Development:  The Commons as a New/Old Paradigm of Human Flourishing."  Here are my prepared remarks:

I am grateful to be back in your lovely city, and I am grateful for your invitation to speak today about the commons as a new vision of “development.”  As the planet reels from the slow-motion catastrophe of climate change, we are seeing the distinct limits of the prevailing paradigms of economic thought, governance, law and politics.  While collapse and catastrophe have their own lurid attraction to many, the human species – and our governments – have a duty to seriously entertain the questions:  What new structures and logics will serve us better?  How can we better meet basic human needs – not just materially, but socially and spiritually?  And can we move beyond rhetoric and general abstractions to practical, concrete actions?

After studying the commons for nearly twenty years as an independent scholar and activist, I have come to the conclusion that the commons hold great promise in answering these questions.  But it is not a ready-made “solution” so much as a general paradigm and organizing perspective – embodied, fortunately, in thousands of instructive examples.  The commons is a lens that helps us understand what it means to be a human being in meaningful relation to other people and to the Earth.  This then becomes the standard by which we try to design our social institutions.

Talking about the commons forces us to grapple with the checkered history of “development” policy and what it reveals about global capitalism and poorer, marginalized countries.  We have long known that development objectives tend to reflect the political priorities of rich, industrialized western nations, particularly their interests in economic growth and private capital accumulation. 

read more