As I think about all these ideas as a whole I cant help but thinking there are so many great examples of the principles of community engagement and there are some really cool communities out there, but the thing I seem to have completely left out is that stuff like this just doesn't seem to happen. A community doesn't just get together and decide to change. What is normally missing is a leader. There has to be that one outspoken person who people listen to, agree with and join that person on getting other people involved.
We as communities need leaders that help us strive for more livable communities. Maybe we dont need more leaders, maybe more people just need to step up.
I, being a relatively quiet person, find the idea of getting involved in the community a pretty intimidating thing. But I want change, and change doesn't happen unless people speak up. So I need to find myself being more apart of community events. And the best thing about it, there really isn't anything to loose. The community gains from my involvement, and I gain social capital which apparently means I may even live longer :)
I think people and society needs to undergo a complete shift in their thinking to our wants and needs, if we want to be sustainable. Once again we will all benefit from this. Leaving the car at home once and a while will not only benefit the air but also our health.
I came from Toronto where I was driving my gas guzzling car 60km a day, I have given up the car and I have been able to get around just find with my bicycle. (mind you this would not be possible in the community I lived in when I was in Ontario) here in Victoria I live within a 15 minute bike ride of everything I can think of! Groceries, drug store, post office, restaurants, coffee shops, movie theatre, many parks, and so much more.
This is obviously something I feel passionately about, but I guess everyone needs to stand up for what they feel strongly about!
Thanks for listening!
Monday, March 9, 2009
Sustainable travel?
So throughout my time here at Royal Roads I have constantly been reminded of the bad things about travel and how the amount of carbon it emits. But I do not think I am quite ready to give up air travel. Of all the things in the world that every is pushing to become more environmentally friendly, I have heard nothing toward more fuel efficient airplanes. I suppose we have to wait for the technology to catch up on this one.
So air travel may be horrible for the environment, but I still feel there is a lot to be learned from travelling that no amount of books, or schooling can teach you. Actually experiencing other cultures and communities can give us a lot of insight into what is going on throughout the world.
Here are just a couple of things I have learned while travelling:
In Italy I saw a bicycle transformed into a take-out delivery vehicle
In Iceland I have seen a very strong sence of social capital. I was at what I thought was a very touristy site (the blue lagoon) on a freezing cold windy day, was full of locals, kind of like a locals meeting spot!
In the Middle East I have seen the effects of water shortages. I was able to survive on one hour of hot water a day.
Just a few little things that I thought kind of related to this cource. Nothing can replace the good things to be learned from travelling.
Cohousing....?
So one group in class did a case study on a cohousing unit. It really made me look into these communities of cohouses. It definately got me really curious about how exactly things work.
This website gave all the information to satisfy my curiousity. This cohousing unit is in Ann Harbour, Michigan. The presentation made me wonder mainly about the operations of the common place. I really had trouble figuring out the purpose of the common kitchens if everyone had their own kitchen in their houses. But the Sunward cohousing unit holds dinners 3-4 times a week. People can sign up to be a head chef and organize a meal, or be an assistant chef or on a cleanup crew. The cost of the meal just gets divided among those eating while signing up for a job gets you a free meal. Being the head chef just once a month allows you to eat for a month.
There are also small monthly fees, similar to Condo fees ranging from ranging from $252 to $344 based on home size. And the actual prices of the homes seems very reasonable, ranging from $145 to $360K.
But I still really do not think these are meant for everyone, even if the idea sounds great, it would be hard to find one that suits each person. However I can imagine the kind of people that live in cohousing units must have great involvement in the community and very high social capital, making themselves and the community benefit as a whole.
Going back in time?
In a trip to England in May 2008 I went to a museum called the Black Country Museum. It is what they have a living museum where you walk around what is like a village and can go in all the different buildings and areas and learn about them. The first one I went in was a very tiny house. It had 3 rooms. Two bedrooms, and a kitchen/living room. It was representative of what a house would have been like in or around the 1800s. It was super tiny and probably would have housed a fairly large family (for todays family size standard).
The lady at the museum said that this was an example of a sustainable family. The size of the house would have required less energy to heat it in the winter, the amount of 'stuff' in the house was very minimal. Small amounts of furnature and clothing. The amount of 'stuff' that we have today results in large amounts of the earth's resources being wasted. The house also had a small vegetable garden which would have been enough to feed the family.
So I am definately not saying that we should all go back to living the way people did hundreds of years ago, but maybe we should learn from our past. We were able to survive with a LOT less than what we have today. Just the sence that everything these people was available within their community with out travelling long distances is a lesson.
Milton, Ontario
So for a class assignment we had to do an assignment we had to do a case study on a sustainable community. So my group chose the town of Milton in Ontario. Milton came up with something called an "eco village". A region of their community consisting of water saving mechanisms, parks, biking lanes and paths, pedestrian friendly roads, houses that are within shopping areas, and many other things. Their plan was of course one great initiative but did everything or even most of the plan actually come into action? We found only bits of information of the success of the project. You need a housing company willing to build these kinds of neighborhoods, and of course you need people who are willing to live within these homes. I think everyone has that whole suburb picture in their head when it comes to getting married and raising a family. Two cars in the garage, hop on the highway to drive 30 minuts to get to work. How do we convince people that for our communities in general to be healthier, we all have to change! If a sustainability isn't what people want, it will not happen.
I previously had it in my head that I would live in that house in the suburbs with the two car garage, but I dont think that is even what I want anymore. Seems to be much more valuable to have different things. Employment close to home, ways of getting around town without a car, and neighbours who feel the same way. This is now what I feel would be better off. If everyone else felt this way, I'm sure there would be more communities like this.
I previously had it in my head that I would live in that house in the suburbs with the two car garage, but I dont think that is even what I want anymore. Seems to be much more valuable to have different things. Employment close to home, ways of getting around town without a car, and neighbours who feel the same way. This is now what I feel would be better off. If everyone else felt this way, I'm sure there would be more communities like this.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Social Capital and Community Engagement
I would consider myself to be a person with a lot of social capital, but maybe not so much community engagement. It was actually at Church a week or so ago where the speaker started off by saying "the key to a healthy community, is by getting all members involved". He was comparing the small community of a local church, but for a second there I felt like I was back at school!
So I feel there is a difference between community engagement and community participation. Community participation is of course very important and probably consists of talking with the neighbors, attending neighborhood events, and maybe showing up at a meeting. True community engagement would be where people are actually ENGAGED. They aren't just participants, but are actually involved in the running of community events, and would be actively putting out their opinion and view.
Althought there is a big difference between these two, not all people have the time, or personality to be envolved in both of these ways, so I think that they are both important.
The following document entitled: Social Capital and the Built Environment
http://geography.ssc.uwo.ca/faculty/baxter/readings/Leyden_AJPH_walkable_social_capital_2003.pdf
Gives the following criteria for social capital how well residents knew their neighbors, their political participation, their trust or faith in other people, and their social engagement. I think this criteria would encorporate all kinds of people.
So I feel there is a difference between community engagement and community participation. Community participation is of course very important and probably consists of talking with the neighbors, attending neighborhood events, and maybe showing up at a meeting. True community engagement would be where people are actually ENGAGED. They aren't just participants, but are actually involved in the running of community events, and would be actively putting out their opinion and view.
Althought there is a big difference between these two, not all people have the time, or personality to be envolved in both of these ways, so I think that they are both important.
The following document entitled: Social Capital and the Built Environment
http://geography.ssc.uwo.ca/faculty/baxter/readings/Leyden_AJPH_walkable_social_capital_2003.pdf
Gives the following criteria for social capital how well residents knew their neighbors, their political participation, their trust or faith in other people, and their social engagement. I think this criteria would encorporate all kinds of people.
Social Capital
I was thinking about the relation between social capital and sustainablity and whether or not the two are related. It has been proven that people who have a lot of social capital, and interaction and involvement within their community are much less likely to die of premature causes. But how does this related to sustainability?
Social capital has also been linked to increased feelings of security, decrease in crime rates, the proper functioning of democracy, as well as enhanced development. Once again how does this related to sustainability? Maybe it doesn't, but it must be in some way related. For example this might be a bit of a stretch but if people are healthy, on a whole the government will be spending less on health care, and can incorporate more money into the environment.
I was looking at a survey that was measuring to see how 'walkable', certain communities are and the following list was used to see whether or not people identified how many of the following as 'walkable'.
1. A local corner shop/newsagent
___2. A church
___3. A park (or pitch)
___4. A local school
___5. A Community Center or
Recreation Center
___6. A crèche (or child care facility)
___7. A Chemist (or pharmacy)
___8. A Pub
___9. The place that I work
___10. None of the above. It is
hard to really go anywhere
without a car.
I took this survey for myself twice. Once as I was living in Toronto, and a second time living here in Victoria. My house in Toronto got a 7 out of 10, and my place in Victoria got a 5 out of 10. The distances in both of these cases I decided that personally more than a 20 minute walk I probably wouldn't actually walk it.
Walking to everyday activities is both sustainable and also increases social capital. Walking by other people allows more time for conversation and interaction.
I think I am finding in my posts that I am a firm believer in living within a close knit community where you can both live, work, and play.
Social capital has also been linked to increased feelings of security, decrease in crime rates, the proper functioning of democracy, as well as enhanced development. Once again how does this related to sustainability? Maybe it doesn't, but it must be in some way related. For example this might be a bit of a stretch but if people are healthy, on a whole the government will be spending less on health care, and can incorporate more money into the environment.
I was looking at a survey that was measuring to see how 'walkable', certain communities are and the following list was used to see whether or not people identified how many of the following as 'walkable'.
1. A local corner shop/newsagent
___2. A church
___3. A park (or pitch)
___4. A local school
___5. A Community Center or
Recreation Center
___6. A crèche (or child care facility)
___7. A Chemist (or pharmacy)
___8. A Pub
___9. The place that I work
___10. None of the above. It is
hard to really go anywhere
without a car.
I took this survey for myself twice. Once as I was living in Toronto, and a second time living here in Victoria. My house in Toronto got a 7 out of 10, and my place in Victoria got a 5 out of 10. The distances in both of these cases I decided that personally more than a 20 minute walk I probably wouldn't actually walk it.
Walking to everyday activities is both sustainable and also increases social capital. Walking by other people allows more time for conversation and interaction.
I think I am finding in my posts that I am a firm believer in living within a close knit community where you can both live, work, and play.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Healthy Communities
Last week in class we had a presentation from two representatives from 'BC Healthy Communities'. They outlined what their organization was all about, describing how it wasn't a specific program but rather an approach, involving community learning, envolvement and asset collaboration.
They also mentioned that other provinces within Canada and even other countries have this Healthy Community organizagion. As a resident of Ontario I looked at the Ontario Healthy Communities Website to look and see what it was all about.
http://www.ohcc-ccso.ca/en
The Ontario Healthy Communities Coalition also has a focus on building a 'food secure Ontario'.
What I found intersting was the plea for people to become involved with these initiatives. While living in Ontario I had never heard of this Healthy Communities thing. But upon looking into it further I can see the importance in such a thing. But...if people do not know about it, how can they become involved.
I think healthy communities are integral with people being very involved in them. When a person has family, friends, and work within their community they will be more supportive of the health of it. When a person lives in one place, commutes are great distance and works in a different place, they become detched from their community. When a person is more involved and spends a lot of time living, working and playing in their community it is a much healthier balance.
This is a difference I can see between Victoria and Toronto. Most people work much closer to where they live in Victoria, they are able to find alternatives to driving to work and thus are more or less working and living in the same community. In Toronto is is common for a person to commute over 50km one way to work, and thus not really be working and living in the same community.
If we are involved in and living in our community, people will be more for the development of a healthy community:)
They also mentioned that other provinces within Canada and even other countries have this Healthy Community organizagion. As a resident of Ontario I looked at the Ontario Healthy Communities Website to look and see what it was all about.
http://www.ohcc-ccso.ca/en
The Ontario Healthy Communities Coalition also has a focus on building a 'food secure Ontario'.
What I found intersting was the plea for people to become involved with these initiatives. While living in Ontario I had never heard of this Healthy Communities thing. But upon looking into it further I can see the importance in such a thing. But...if people do not know about it, how can they become involved.
I think healthy communities are integral with people being very involved in them. When a person has family, friends, and work within their community they will be more supportive of the health of it. When a person lives in one place, commutes are great distance and works in a different place, they become detched from their community. When a person is more involved and spends a lot of time living, working and playing in their community it is a much healthier balance.
This is a difference I can see between Victoria and Toronto. Most people work much closer to where they live in Victoria, they are able to find alternatives to driving to work and thus are more or less working and living in the same community. In Toronto is is common for a person to commute over 50km one way to work, and thus not really be working and living in the same community.
If we are involved in and living in our community, people will be more for the development of a healthy community:)
Monday, January 19, 2009
Canada's 6 Sustainability Indicators
So, Canada uses 6 indicators to measure how we are doing as a country at achieving sustainability. These are the following
Air quality in terms of ground-level ozone.
Freshwater quality in terms of meeting government criteria.
Greenhouse gas emissions.
Forest cover to track the extent of our forests.
Extent of wetlands in Canada.
Human capital measured by education.
http://www.sustreport.org/indicators/nrtee_esdi.html
I was thinking, whether or not these really cover the basis of our Canadian community remaining sustainable. This especially got me thinking since the UK has 68 indicators. Which includes a much more detailed and specifics. While looking at the list of UK incicators (http://www.defra.gov.uk/sustainable/government/progress/national/communities.htm) it became a little more obvious that Canada does need to make some changes. How does measuring ground-level ozone really account for the quality of our air. There are many other air pollutants that harm the environment as well as human health. Forest cover should also include things like the health of the forest (ie how useful is a forest if it is being killed by the pine beetle). Freshwater quality? what about salt water, it should also be important what we are dumping into the oceans surrounding us. What about fish populations, are we overfishing or are the fish populations on the rise? It would also be nice to see some indicators related to human and animal health. Are we really behaving in a sustainable way if our health is on the decline?
I also understand with more indicators it will put more demand on the community tracking them, but, with the use of only six, it seems like it could be possible for us to come out on top, looking like we are sustainable, but in areas not accounted for by indicators, we are failing.
Air quality in terms of ground-level ozone.
Freshwater quality in terms of meeting government criteria.
Greenhouse gas emissions.
Forest cover to track the extent of our forests.
Extent of wetlands in Canada.
Human capital measured by education.
http://www.sustreport.org/indicators/nrtee_esdi.html
I was thinking, whether or not these really cover the basis of our Canadian community remaining sustainable. This especially got me thinking since the UK has 68 indicators. Which includes a much more detailed and specifics. While looking at the list of UK incicators (http://www.defra.gov.uk/sustainable/government/progress/national/communities.htm) it became a little more obvious that Canada does need to make some changes. How does measuring ground-level ozone really account for the quality of our air. There are many other air pollutants that harm the environment as well as human health. Forest cover should also include things like the health of the forest (ie how useful is a forest if it is being killed by the pine beetle). Freshwater quality? what about salt water, it should also be important what we are dumping into the oceans surrounding us. What about fish populations, are we overfishing or are the fish populations on the rise? It would also be nice to see some indicators related to human and animal health. Are we really behaving in a sustainable way if our health is on the decline?
I also understand with more indicators it will put more demand on the community tracking them, but, with the use of only six, it seems like it could be possible for us to come out on top, looking like we are sustainable, but in areas not accounted for by indicators, we are failing.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Plastic Bag Issue
This past holiday season I went home to Toronto to visit my family and friends. My mom, knowing that I have been studying environmental science was sure to let me know that "Toronto can now recycle plastic bags and styrofoam". I first thought, that is great! good for Toronto! Even here in Victoria we dont have regular curbside pickup of these items.
This got me thinking and comparing the two communities. So different, but both are doing different things in their own efforts to help the environment. A few differences I have noticed in plastic bags usage from Toronto and Victoria: In Toronto if you need a bag you buy one, in Victoria, if you don't need a bag you get a few cents subtracted from your bill. In Toronto, whatever you buy, no matter how big or small you are given a bag (with you can now in turn recycle when you are finished with it); while in Victoria many stores ask the consumer whether or not they need a bag. Without even thinking I took many more plastic bags when I was shopping in Toronto compared to what I would have shopping in Victoria.
I am not sure which city has it right. Probably neither, but it is still interesting to see the differences and similarities between two different communities. I think that both Toronto and Victoria can learn from eachother. Toronto should cut back on plastic bag usage, and Victoria should start a recycling program.
Not really that big of a deal I suppose :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)