It seems like in almost any suggested solution we provide to sustainability problems we plan for some form of government intervention. But through the very limited amount of work I have done in local government, it's easy to see that this is muuuch easier said than done. Backroom (or backyard) politics, industry agendas, time constraints, resource constraints, differences in values, lack of information, lack of participation, yada yada prevent initiatives from getting off the ground just as much on the local level as on the state and national levels. The one thing I am thrilled to see, however, is the interest residents have here in maintaining their community. In Phoenix there is a disconnect between neighbors, suburbs, businesses, etc. Everyone operates in isolation due in part to the metropolitan landscape of the city (there exist only a few neighborhoods that carry a sense of place and every node is in competition with one another while simultaneously dependent on those nodes - we're very confused). There is no sense of unity around any cause - even the cause of building social capital. Bloomington, however, has a community environment that fosters a sense of community and ownership which leads to an increase in individual responsibility.
The thing that makes local different from senior levels of government is that the community aspect can be capitalized upon and participation among neighbors and businesses is more feasible. As Tom Friedman said, while we might be digital, politics are still analog. And since we can't all be in Washington D.C. with our lobbyist friends, we can be at formal and informal community gatherings addressing this issues (whether that's over a glass of wine with friend or over a podium microphone is up to you).
What I appreciate about the Roseland Chapter on governance is, as usual, the practical guide they give toward implementing local change and beyond. I've been asked before to draft a plan for how to implement an initiative and it is daunting to attempt to formulate a method for political and community penetration without working or volunteering in these sectors. While I'm sure it can't be practically boiled down to only a few components, a general outline provides a guide for one's plans on how to move through political issues without getting bogged down in the details and the Debbie Downers.
On a related note, I would like to acknowledge that Ontario has a guide for dealing with NIMBY's - the thorn in the side of local government (typically not in a good way, considering the current views of the public on the environment and growth). Awesome.
Yes i agree that pretty much everything is "a lot easier said then done," especially dealing with the government. The problem with the government is that decisions are made incredibly slowly. That is why I think that actions and projects using the bottom-up approach are so valuable.
ReplyDelete