INVEST IN PLANET EARTH
FOREWORD
In 21st C Tasmania, and indeed Australia wide, how a ‘Community Cultural Enterprise’ (CCE) might be imagined and understood is challenging in so many ways. ’a CCE is not just a 'business'. Quite simply it is an enterprise with community benefits front of mind. As it turns out, a 'cooperative' is an irrevocable condition imbedded in our ‘cultural consciousness’ that needs to be fostered albeit that 'cooperatives' have often taken over by the corporate world.
The imperatives that until recently informed 'cooperatives as business entities' where there without too much ambiguity or controversy. Given that in 'the Australia' they existed within, and the communities they operated in where status quo oriented, the 'services' they deliver are devised within 'their Community of Ownership and Interest'.
Nonetheless, increasingly people seem to have looked to other ways of seeing themselves and realising their aspirations – economic, environmental, social – and the more 'corporatised' they become, the more disconnected from their 'placedness' they may become.
A cooperative might well turn out to be the kind of 'investment' a community might make, or is more likely prone to make, in order to fulfil an aspiration for sustainable living. While it is our 'right' to have a secure and safe sustainable lives, it is of supreme importance that we actually do. “The only thing that will redeem mankind is cooperation.” – Bertrand Russell
Also, what a CCE might, or perhaps more importantly 'could' look like, to a diversity of people in contemporary CULTURALlandscapes are changing apropos all manner of things. It is something that far too little attention is being paid to in 21st C context.
Along with the need create business and corporate enityies there is a need to look beyond the status quo in order to create more 'sustainablre entities' that are 'fit for purpose' – culturally, environentally and socially.
In floating the concept of 21st C not-for-profit; entity that is a self-sustaining enterprise, its worthwhileness on one hand seems obvious. However, on the other hand the fact such a thing is not already in place that is also something worthy of serious consideration. Whatever, there is a job to be done, and that is to get on with creating more resilient, more sustainable and responsive enterprises – and that more so than more businesses.
Of particular interest here is that in the Nordic countries there is a wide range of housing policies and the prominence of 'housing cooperatives', which assist both renters and those wanting to own a secure, high-quality home. With these ‘policies’ and the resulting ‘enterprises’ the processes via which they come to be can be problematic as might be those that sustain them. Nonetheless, clearly what is important is the socio-political imperatives that provide for them and that sustain them.
Interestingly, Sweden’s cooperative sector amounts to 22% of total housing stock. Norway’s represent 15% nationwide, and 40% in the capital, Oslo. In Denmark, more than 20% of the population lives in cooperative housing.
By comparison, cooperative housing in Australia comprises less than 1% of the Australian housing sector, with about 200 housing cooperatives mostly focused on providing affordable rental housing. In all this we can see that while cooperatives have much to offer the revitalisation of the 'model' is somehing to be considered.
Establishing a body to manage funds contributed to a cooperative of the kind flagged here is non-trivial. Tasmania/Launceston like communities everywhere have organisations, with the wherewithal and the administrative infrastructure, and arguably the expertise as well, to:
• Muster resources in ‘the community’;
• Undertake the publicity such as that which can be reliably found in communities worldwide; and
• Hold the credibility important to have in order to develop crowd funding initiatives.
There can be little doubt that within ‘the community’ many, if not most, of these organisations, operations, whatever, would see themselves as being up to the task of actually floating a cooperative if it was seen to be part of their raison d'etre.
Nonetheless, the question hanging, if such an initiative is seen as ‘worthy’, why up to now haven’t any of these ‘operations’ been ’up for it’. Why might that be the case? A sense of comfort with the status quo might well be a factor.
Whoever it is, or whatever body it might be that comes about, or is enlisted to, manage funds invested in a social community enterprise such as a ‘bamboo growers' cooperative’ would have administrative overheads that would need to be factored into such a cooperative cum enterprise’s strategic planning.
Given that a ‘short term profit motive’ couldn’t realistically be a driving force, this ‘recurrent administrative funding/support’ might well be provided to some extent by ‘government at all levels’ on the basis of delivery on competitive key performance indicators – environmental and social dividends in lieu of fiscal dividends especially.
With a ‘trustworthy administration’ projects such as the management of say a proof of concept (POC) plantation planting; erecting innovative POC structures, designing POC housing that fits 21st C imperatives – socially, culturally and economically – mustering the necessary workforces and resources would, largely, be beyond the capacity of volunteers.
However, as beneficiaries of the ‘enterprise’ there are roles for them. Arguably, it also is an endeavour that is well beyond the imaginative, or cooperative capacities of ‘governance’ – Federal State, Local – any closer than at ‘arm’s length’ and with them:
• Providing appropriate planning approvals;
• Dedicating access to land within planning schemes;
• Servicing the outcomes; and
• Marketing the opportunities to people seeking to establish a POC ‘planting’; and establish plantation investors cum contributors to 'a fund' to come together.
The 'coming together' here would/might be in endevours to fund a council to plan appropriate placescaping as canopy streetscaping, environment remediation, and/or cultural landscaping on land provided by ‘governance’ – councils etc.
A fundamental problem – most likely the most important factor – in Australia is that ‘bamboo’, albeit undeservedly so, is seen as a potential 'weed cum invasive plant', and misplaced in a temperate climate, Arguably that is a 20th C sensibility that is under all kinds of pressure in a 21st C context – and especially so when it comes to LANDliteracy and environmental management. The fact is that, and there is significant evidence to support the notion, 'bamboo' – along with hemp, bananas and coconuts – is a MIRACLEplant that may well turn out to be a key contributor to actually 'decarbonising' humanity's footprint on planet earth in an ongoing and meaningful way.
Arguably right now humanity needs to be ever vigilant in the search for strategies to repair the damage done to planet earth's ecosystems. Affordable and appropriate strategies need to be found and acted upon, and proactively, given that anything near being effective thus far has won too little acknowledgement.
This proposal should be put forward within a much more accommodating community mindset and given that such an enterprise doesn't already exist it is not ‘surplus to requirement’.
COMMUNITY ENTERPRISE IDENTITY
NOTE: An ahoc 'Steering Committee' assembled and the entity name 'FOUNDATION X' seems fit for purpose in maintaining a focus upon 'IT' in comparison to other 'names' supporters might want to compare or contrast this proposal with/to. To that end FOUNDATION X' has been nominated in order to reflect 'purposefulness'.
PURPOSE To enable the development of Not-For-Profit Community Fund/Trust that will support viable community initiatives when and where governments and/or the corprate sector is unable or unwilling to lend support.
OBJECTIVES
1 ... Initially, put in place a Proof-Of - Concept project dedicated to developing better and more expansive understandings of bamboo and the plant's utility from the vantage points Tasmania offers the world.
2 ... Build a network of networked community enterprise – not-for-profit, etc. – that is a 21st C entity – say a cooperative – that enables growers and makers use the plant's utility in sustainable ways for the long term.
3 ... Build a network of members – individuals, groups, organisations and businesses – who can offer product, skills and services and likewise be the beneficiaries of the 'operation' via their memberships and affiliations – via social, cultural and/or fiscal 'dividends'.
4 ... Initiate 'proof of concept projects' one project at a time, projects that fit the needs and aspirations of members and affiliates in ways appropriate to their circumstance – social, cultural, economic – in a mindset focused on secure sustainable PLACEmaking.
5 ... Draw upon the resources, skills and experience of people within the 'enterprise' and its networks to offer training and information for members to enable people to expand their knowledge and skills relative to bamboo's utilisation and PLACEmaking while building and creating sustainable ecological systems.
5 ... Build a fiscal resource that members can draw upon and contribute to towards enabling them to realise their aspirations in building a sustainable future relative to bamboo.
6 ... Establish a Collaborative Research Entity to enable collaborative research relative to bamboo in the context of 21st C circumstances and thus providing income and/or research opportunities for researchers in the field.
STRATEGIES
1 ...Initially establish a 'formal steering committee' under the auspices of an incorporated body charged with facilitating the initiation of a 'purposeful corporate entity' – say FOUNDATION X – with a clearly articulated purpose supported by a foundation set of objectives – short term, medium term and long term. Upon achieving this, appoint a Board of Directors to operate within the constraints of the entity's constitution and rules.
2 ... Put in place a suite of interfacing communication networks – SOCIALmedia, NEWSsite, WEBsites books, etc. – dedicated reaching and servicing a diverse audience at a 'grass roots' level. That is a standalone network that offers ‘rhizomatic linkages’ to information typically and ordinarily unavailable via 'the press'.
3 ... Initiate interrelated but standalone 'proof of concept projects' that build upon the outcomes of each other and provide modelling for future projects of various scales, in variable contexts and various levels of complexity – grow via a diversity that is reflective of the TASWEGIAN BAMBOO NETWORK'S constituency.
4 ... From within the 'entity/enterprise' establish project teams/units with the resources, skills and experience to undertake projects that are initiated within the entity/enterprise, by groups, individuals and/or affiliated organisations – community groups, service clubs, men's sheds, etc. The overarching imperative being the creation of 'proof of concept projects'.
5 ... Establish a professionally managed TRUST FUND that brings together funding from multiple sources:
- Membership contributions; and
- Social investors – governance et al;
- The outcomes of CROWDfunding initiatives;
- Bequests and donations from supporters;
- Project grants from the 'public purse';
- Interest/income earned on managed funds; and
- The sale of services when and where appropriate;
- with the funds being ‘totally dedicated’ to enabling people to initiate 'proof of concept projects' that fit ‘their needs’ in accord with their aspirations.
6 ... Initiate research and development residencies that attracts artists, designers, makers, architects, writers, bamboo growers and others to enable appointees to initiate and undertake projects in Tasmania.
No comments:
Post a Comment