Briefings

Amsterdam takes the first bite

April 21, 2020

One of the more welcome byproducts of the lockdown has been its impact on pollution levels - a glimpse perhaps of what life could be like. A few years ago, Kate Raworth published some work on what she called Doughnut Economics which was essentially an attempt to demonstrate how the needs of everyone could be met within the finite resources of the planet. It drew a lot of interest at the time but the challenge was always to demonstrate how the theory might be converted into practice. Looks like Amsterdam is about to take the plunge.

 

Author: Kate Raworth

The Amsterdam City Doughnut

The Doughnut of social and planetary boundaries envisions a world in which people and planet can thrive in balance – in other words, it offers a compass for guiding 21st century prosperity.

The Doughnut’s social foundation, which is derived from the social priorities in the UN Sustainable Development Goals, sets out the minimum standard of living to which every human being has a claim.  No one should be left in the hole in the middle of the Doughnut, falling short on the essentials of life, ranging from food and water to gender equality and having political voice.

The Doughnut’s ecological ceiling comprises nine planetary boundaries, drawn up by Earth-system scientists in order to identify Earth’s critical life-supporting systems and the global limits of pressure that they can endure. Humanity must live within these ecological boundaries if we are to preserve a stable climate, fertile soils, healthy oceans, a protective ozone layer, ample freshwater and abundant biodiversity on Earth.

Between the social foundation and the ecological ceiling lies a doughnut-shaped space in which it is possible to meet the needs of all people within the means of the living planet – an ecologically safe and socially just space in which humanity can thrive.

If humanity’s goal is to get into the Doughnut, the challenge is that we are currently far from doing so, as shown below. Worldwide, billions of people still cannot meet their most essential needs, yet humanity is collectively overshooting at least four planetary boundaries, and is driving towards climate breakdown and ecological collapse. The red wedges below the social foundation show the proportion of people worldwide currently falling short on life’s essentials. The wedges radiating beyond the ecological ceiling show the current overshoot of planetary boundaries

The challenge of our times is that we must move within the Doughnut’s boundaries from both sides simultaneously, in ways that promote the wellbeing of all people and the health of the whole planet. Achieving this globally calls for action on many levels, including in cities, which are proving to be leaders of driving such change. The Thriving City Portrait aims to amplify that potential.

The Amsterdam City Doughnut

Briefings

Seize the moment 

The roll out of Universal Credit has been by common consent an unmitigated disaster causing misery and distress along the way. But so much political capital has been spent in defending its ‘merits’ it’s surely inconceivable the Government would ever back away. And yet now with millions more now being compelled to sign up for it because the entire economy is in a state of hibernation, it seems that there might actually be an opportunity to consider more radical solutions. Our own First Minister has even called it ‘the right thing to do’. Reform Scotland lays out the case.

 

Author: Reform Scotland

Reform Scotland, the independent, non-party think tank, has called on the UK and Scottish governments to introduce a ‘basic income’ scheme to support people through the Coronavirus crisis. There is growing support for the policy: First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has called a basic income “the right thing” to do, while the Spanish Government has announced its intention to introduce the policy.

Although the UK Government has announced a range of financial support measures, many people will be caught between the cracks of the different packages and there will still be a time lag before some are available. As a result Reform Scotland believes a Universal Basic Income should be reconsidered.

The concept of Reform Scotland’s Basic Income Guarantee is that every citizen, regardless of income, gender or employment status, received a set amount of money, free of tax, but in place of personal allowances, tax credits and a number of other benefits.

Reform Scotland suggests it is set at £5,200 per year for adults, and £2,600 per year for children. The financial implications are set out in its new briefing paper One For All: The Case for a Basic Income Guarantee.

Commenting, Reform Scotland Board member Siobhan Mathers said:

“The Coronavirus pandemic is an unprecedented crisis, which is seeing major government interventions to help our country and its citizens make it through to the other side. We believe one of those interventions should now be a basic income. It is a logical and necessary consequence of Coronavirus.

“As a response to the acute consequences of Coronavirus, a basic income would provide some financial certainty to the many people who have been thrown into a sudden and catastrophic loss of employment or reduced hours.

“It would be a bold, but welcome short-term move. However, we suggest it would also create the right long-term environment as we try to rebuild our lives and our economy. Our current social security system is overly complicated, and actively discourages work because the loss of benefits when a person starts work can often leave them losing money.

“Our national economic recovery must begin with a clear signal that work always pays. Our Basic Income Guarantee would do that, because working would not lead to a withdrawal of benefit. It will take political boldness, political will, and the sort of cooperation between the Scottish and UK Governments which has been such a welcome by-product of the Coronavirus crisis so far.

“People are suffering from the pandemic because they are doing the right thing by the government. Now the government must do the right thing by the people.”

To read the full briefing from Reform Scotland

Briefings

The exit strategy must be local

As the Government becomes increasingly anxious to find a way out of lockdown, one can only hope that the route planners will plump for a more enlightened  strategy than simply reaching for reverse gear and backing us all the way to where we were before the virus struck. Not only has this crisis starkly demonstrated what we must do to prepare for the next pandemic, it has also pointed to the crucial role of community focused infrastructure. Simon Jenkins argues, not for the first time, that a Beveridge style blueprint for communities is required.

 

Author: Simon Jenkins, The Guardian

A new Beveridge-style report on the welfare of communities could help our traumatised minds focus on the future

At the height of the blitz in 1941, the labour minister Ernie Bevin so disliked an official called William Beveridge that he got rid of him to write a report on national insurance. As the bombs fell, an angry Beveridge proposed an entire postwar “welfare state”, with financial security “from cradle to grave”. No one seemed to mind the cost. There was a war on. The rest is history.

There is no war today, just politicians who love comparing their roles to those of their blitz counterparts. But every crisis is an opportunity. What might emerge from coronavirus that is on a par with Beveridge?

Beveridge wrote at a time when his beneficiaries also relied on institutional good neighbourliness. Today that has gone.

The welfare state is not equipped for pandemic or economic trauma. Its NHS gigantism and lumbering benefits regime are slow moving and often inhumane. Private citizens are having to use technology to fall back on otherwise eerily medieval forms of support. My street has a WhatsApp group to help the housebound elderly. A Gloucestershire pub is home-delivering its drinks, and food. A Devon farmer offers drive-in produce, with volunteer dance classes, hairdressing and a nursery.

These and a thousand other ventures are struggling to relieve distress, loneliness and, in many cases, financial ruin. But they are handicapped by the disappearance over recent decades of all that is vital in British neighbourhoods: high streets, police stations, banks, libraries, youth clubs, day centres and cottage hospitals. People have been forced back on neighbours, on geography. When systems fail, geography matters. They can’t stop you walking down the street. Not yet.

Beveridge sought a state that provided everyone who needed it with cash and care. But he was writing at a time when his beneficiaries also relied on institutional good neighbourliness. Today that has gone. We need local testing centres, local food supplies, local elderly care, local employment assistance, above all, local leadership. Unlike in continental Europe, the UK has almost no civic mayors, no public administrators who know their clients. These are replaced by distant, form-waving bureaucrats.

Most marked at present is food security. High streets have been shutting at an alarming rate. Goodness knows what will be left when the virus relents. British food retailing relies on private supply chains, and these, as shown in a new book, Feeding Britain by Tim Lang, are highly vulnerable to short-term shocks. Half of the UK’s food now comes from abroad, Lang says, and 90% of fruit and vegetables. First go the toilet rolls, then what?

A new Beveridge should grasp the gaps in social cohesion that are being revealed by coronavirus. The components of a “village” matter – be it rural hamlet, market town or city street – and they are not binary. They are not conditioned by a corporatist state on the one hand and a capitalist free-market on the other. An intermediate tier of “association” has been ripped away, the businesses, the encounters and activities that lubricate community. As Robert Putnam wrote of the US, Britain now “goes bowling alone”.

Happiness theory is supposedly in fashion. But rarely is it related to localism. The local seems trivial. Its appeal crumbles before the target-driven bulldozer of Beveridge’s central state. I am sure the NHS campaign to close cottage hospitals, like the Home Office’s to replace police stations with patrol cars, passed every quantifiable test. No one counted the naked insecurity of the resulting communities. What is unquantifiable in modern government does not register.

Close one pub in a high street and it is one less nuisance. Close the last pub, and the street loses its heart. British pubs are closing at a rate of some 900 a year. Build over one playing field, too bad. But some 700 pitches have closed in the past decade, and obesity rates have soared. Some 5,000 parish churches lie virtually empty. No one has an idea what do with them.

Like a brick removed from a wall, each closure of a local institution may be an economy. Close them all and social association collapses. We lose what de Tocqueville called democracy’s “mother science … the spirit of association”. Its absence turns nations into “atomised” states, vulnerable to autocratic populism.

For the present, the British government is rushing troops to the front. It is waiving taxes and rents, offering grants and loans. It is even moving hesitantly where it once feared to tread, towards cash-in-hand “helicopter” money, or “people’s quantitative easing”. Those of us who suggested this during the 2008 crisis were ridiculed for printing money and “giving it to just anyone”. As it was, QE vanished into the maw of banks. Now even Donald Trump is in favour, offering $1,000 cheques to families.

This is merely short term. I believe a new Beveridge might, as did the old one, take our minds off the traumatised present and look to the future. It would ask what are the essential components of what we mean by community, be they social or private enterprise, retail, therapeutic, leisure or cultural. It would consider what regulatory and financial support they need to help keep communities alive as social entities. As the saying now goes, what are their true foundational values?

The British government is already compiling “public goods” to be expected – and subsidised – from farmers, in place of EU agricultural policy. They are identifying birds, bees, soil, trees, hedgerows, streams, even beauty. But if birds and bees merit such guardianship, why not the environment of human beings? What about the “public goods” that are embraced by towns and cities?

Government seems to value the institutions of nature, but not those of humanity. During the last great crisis, we were delivered a blueprint for a welfare state. Now we need one for welfare communities, and they are not the same thing.

Briefings

Rescue, recover, reform

Before coronavirus changed everything, a set of ideas around community wealth building was beginning to attract a lot of attention. By shifting the focus of economic regeneration away from the national towards the scale of local authorities and by harnessing the spending power of local ‘anchor institutions’ such as hospitals, universities and councils, some compelling evidence was beginning to emerge. Working to the old adage that you should never waste a good crisis, the think tank that’s been driving these ideas has been busy. 

 

This paper has been jointly authored by The Democracy Collaborative (TDC) and the Centre

for Local Economic Strategies (CLES).

Our work, in parallel on both sides of the Atlantic, to develop new strategies to advance

community wealth building has enabled it to become a movement in its own right. In

the Covid-19 crisis, we face a major public and economic event of historical importance,

potentially unprecedented in its magnitude in peacetime. In the face of this, community

wealth building policy and practice must shift to meet the scale of the crisis, rapidly building

a new institutional power base for a new democratic economy. This paper lays out the

economic landscape which community wealth building must now serve and its new contours.

In keeping with our think-do approach to building more just local economies, this paper is

accompanied by a practical guide for local leaders on steps they can take now as they begin

to feel their way towards economic recovery and reform from the Covid-19 crisis. Read it

here.

Part one

The present crisis has revealed the distressed state of our local economies and the brittle condition

of the local public sector, following decades of under-investment and disrespect. At the same time,

this dual public health and economic emergency has underscored the centrality of community to our

everyday lives. As we ready ourselves to rebuild and reconstruct within the shattered post-Covid-19

landscape, we must strive to make the economic recovery the starting point for reform and a new

birth of community in this country.

To do this, we must refashion our vision and practice of community wealth building. We need a plan

to survive the first, emergency phase, in which we are operating something akin to a siege economy.

But we also need to think ahead to the next phases – the recovery and reform of the economy – and

how to build the new resilient economic future to come.

Three potential scenarios can be envisaged for the recovery and reform phase: the good, the bad, and the ugly. This paper details these before setting out three systemic demands that will be necessary to deliver the good, and avoid the bad and ugly. These are:

  1. Buyouts not bailouts: To avoid the mistakes of the global financial crisis, we need to

consider national and local state holding companies modelled on FDR’s Reconstruction

Finance Corporation. These should acquire failing businesses until the point when they are

able to be re-launched as part of the economic recovery.

  1. A new green industrial strategy: We must replace the UK’s discredited industrial strategy

with a Green New Deal, funded by a green stimulus recovery package.

  1. A new social contract and welfare system: There must be a recognition that austerity

was a mistake, and that we need to restore the capacities and capabilities of the national

and local state, as well as expanding real community power.

Part two

In part two, the paper begins to sketch out the contours of a new era of community wealth

building. Replacing the extractive features of our economy with more democratic and

sustainable features must become the new economic common sense. We lay out some

emergent steps to get there in five key areas:

  1. Democratic and plural ownership of the economy: Rethinking business support

and economic development more generally to advance democratic ownership

models of firms. Also, a new era of municipal ownership.

  1. Making financial power work for local places: A new national fiscal and

devolution framework, as well as expanding community finance initiatives.

  1. Progressive procurement of goods and services: Taking advantage of

changing regulation to advance real social value across all of public spending and

commissioning, potentially through a social license to operate.

  1. Fair employment and just labour markets: More forceful interventions in

regional labour markets, especially in foundational economy sectors such as

utilities, food, social and health care.

  1. Socially productive use of land and property: Rolling back the enclosure of public

land through municipal development vehicles, community land ownership and a

democratic revolution in the planning system.

Briefings

Island-hopping online

April 7, 2020

With most shops and small businesses closed down, it seems there are only two options available to most traders. One is to take advantage of whatever help is on offer from the government, batten down the hatches and hope that the virus disappears before cash reserves do. The other is to find alternative ways of trading.  As island-based businesses are particularly vulnerable with so many dependent on tourism, an ingenious portal has been launched that allows the casual shopper to island-hop at will and browse away to their heart's content.

 

Support the Scottish islands during Covid-19 by shopping from the comfort of your sofa!

Use Isle 20

Briefings

Resilience in the face of disasters

Interesting piece of research highlighted by Alastair McIntosh which explores the relationship between disasters - both natural and man-made - and the extent to which communities are able to organise and develop effective responses. This study looked at the impact of the Spanish Flu pandemic and the self-organised responses from communities. The researchers identified a difference in response when the disaster was perceived to be down to chance or nature as opposed to being directly connected to other members of the community. Somewhat oddly, Spanish Flu was attributed to those individuals who initially became infected.

 

Author: Hayagreeva Rao and Henrich Greve

Full academic paper click here

Why are some communities resilient in the face of disasters, and why are others unable to recover? We suggest that two mechanisms matter: the framing of the cause of the disaster, and the community civic capacity to form diverse non-profits. We propose that disasters that are attributed to other community members weaken cooperation and reduce the formation of new cooperatives that serve the community, unlike disasters attributed to chance or to nature, which strengthen cooperation and increase the creation of cooperatives. We analyze the Spanish Flu, a contagious disease that was attributed to infected individuals, and compare it with spring frost, which damaged crops and was attributed to nature. Our measure of resilience is whether the community members could form retail cooperatives—non-profit community organizations. We find that communities hit by the Spanish Flu during the period 1918–1919 were unable to form new retail cooperatives in the short and long run after the epidemic, but this effect was reduced over time and countered by civic capacity. Implications for research on disasters and institutional legacies are outlined.

Briefings

Half-way house

Although significant resources have been allocated to tackle the rural housing crisis, one of the anomalies of the system is that housing need has to be clearly demonstrated before these affordable housing projects can proceed - and for obvious reasons that can cause problems. If people aren’t prepared to live in tents or caravans as a signal that they want to live in a given place it becomes very difficult to establish a clear picture of local housing need. On the island of Colonsay, the community are working on a creative solution to this conundrum with a half-way housing measure.

 

Author: Kathie Griffiths, Oban Times

Resourceful islanders on Colonsay are looking at turning a former Baptist manse into temporary housing.

There are currently 11 families on the housing waiting list. Some without a roof of their own are having to rely on the goodwill of others and living in caravans.

The Baptist Union of Scotland put the manse on the market and agreed to sell it to Colonsay Community Development Company (CCDC) if it got the money.

The first round of funding has come through from the Scottish Land Fund (SLF) and the project is now waiting for the second level.

The idea is the manse could be used as a stop-gap by giving people a three to four month lease.

Plan B, if the funding does not come through, could be to get a mortgage, said CCDC development worker Roz Jewell.

The start of a long-awaited and much-needed new community-led housing and business unit development has also been announced by CCDC after the Scottish Land Fund awarded £395,000 towards buying land.

A substantial award from Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE) also helped towards the total amount needed and industry partner MOWI, which operates a salmon farm off the coast of Colonsay, also made a significant contribution.

HIE and the Highlands Small Communities Housing Trust have supported CCDC for the last two years to help buy land at Scalasaig from Colonsay Estate making way for a phased construction of new, affordable mixed tenure homes and business premises.

A survey showed an immediate requirement for 11 new homes just to meet existing housing demand but more are needed to build a sustainable community.

Land towards the south of the public road that runs between the harbour and the church was identified for the housing as well as extra business space to add to the units near the village hall and shop.

‘We are so excited to have secured SLF stage 2 funding at what is a crucial moment for Colonsay. Having been born and raised on the island, I’ve grown up watching a community of volunteers working so hard to sustain and protect the island for the likes of myself and my brother. Had it not been for a community-led social housing project nearly 20 years ago, it’s unlikely we would have had the opportunity to stay here as kids. We know first hand the difference projects like this make,’ said Caitlin McNeill, CCDC director.

And Alex Howard from Colonsay Estate added: ‘It is vital for the continued economic success of the Colonsay community that there is adequate modern affordable housing available for those seeking to make their lives on the island. The inward investment onto Colonsay will benefit

the wider community. The estate is now able to complete the development of five industrial units which will be available to small businesses on the island. The estate looks forward to continuing to work together with CCDC in the future for the benefit of the Colonsay community.’

One of those hoping to get a new home is fishfarm worker Liam McNeill who has already had to leave the island once because of no accommodation. He is now back on the island living with his dad.

‘Being away from the island was not great. I was working two weeks on and two weeks off at the fishfarm. When I wasn’t here working, I had to live in Stirling because there was nowhere here,’ he said.

Briefings

Spreading the wealth

Whether it has come about from years of hard slog (which, to bring a renewable energy project to financial close, it invariably is) or simply from living nearby a private windfarm development and being in receipt of annual community benefit payments, the fact nonetheless remains - some communities have been enjoying unprecedented levels of unrestricted income. Recognising it’s a bit of a taboo to talk about wealth, particularly the wealth of others, nonetheless at a time of such stark inequality it seems odd not to raise the issue.  The recent actions of Point and Sandwick Trust have to be welcomed.    

 

Author: Point and Sandwick Trust

Point and Sandwick Trust has announced we will use all our free cash for this year to set up a pandemic support fund for the local community.

The former MP for the Western Isles, Calum Macdonald, who is also development manager for Point and Sandwick Trust, said: “The Point and Sandwick Trust Board have decided to devote all the income that isn’t already committed to key local organisations like Bethesda to support the community effort we are going to need to get through the pandemic.

“We are very lucky that there have been no reported infections in the island as yet and we pray that it remains that way. But whatever happens, we will have to pull together to help each other and also to help the fantastic health and care workers we have in these islands to tackle this virus.

“That is why the Board have decided to use all its spare income in 2020, or to the end of the emergency, to set up a Pandemic Community Fund. We will have discussions with local organisations including Comhairle nan Eilean Siar and NHS Western Isles to work out how the fund can best be used. We also hope to have discussions with other funding partners and intend to support work being done locally by Point, Sandwick and Stornoway Community Councils and others.

“The full impact of the pandemic in those countries worst affected has been traumatic. We have to be ready for it coming here, when it will be all hands to the deck.”

Community Council chairs welcomed the announcement of the emergency fund.

Bob Walker, chair of Sandwick Community Council, said: “Never since the end of World War Two has our island and nation seen such potential devastation to our society and we must all come together and support and help one another.”

Chris Tom Mackenzie, chair of Point Community Council, said: “With services already stretched and struggling this will provide a much-needed lifeline to many in our community during this difficult time for our island. I would hope that this will also encourage other organisations to also help their communities where they can.”

Joan Muir, chair of Stornoway Community Council, said: “Although there have been no confirmed cases in our community there are many affected by the current crisis. By working together, supporting each other in a co-ordinated response we can help our community get through this unprecedented situation.”

Briefings

When zero means zero

The slogan zero waste has the advantage of being crystal clear in its ambition but suffers from being so ubiquitous in its use that it risks losing all meaning. Often this laudable aim is pinned to whole countries - for example, Zero Waste Scotland - and therein may lie the problem. Is it a realistic aim for a whole country to achieve? Perhaps the issue is more about scale and if waste was thought of more as a resource, and what’s more, a community resource, then zero waste starts to become more attainable.  That’s the lesson to be taken from Kamikatsu in Japan. 

 

Author: Justin McCurry, The Guardian

For 20 years Kamikatsu has led the way in the world’s second biggest producer of plastic waste.

The residents of a remote village on the Japanese island of Shikoku have spent almost two decades reusing, recycling and reducing, united behind a mission to end their dependence on incinerators and landfill as the world struggles to tackle the climate emergency and the plastic waste crisis.

Household waste in Kamikatsu must be sorted into no fewer than 45 categories

Although Kamikatsu, an hour’s drive from the nearest city, Tokushima, and 370 miles from Tokyo, has not managed to banish waste altogether, its heroic efforts have inspired other communities in Japan and further afield to take up the zero-waste challenge.

Household waste must be separated into no fewer than 45 categories, before being taken to a collection centre where volunteers ensure items go into the correct bin, occasionally issuing polite reminders to anyone who forgets to take the lid and label off a plastic bottle or remove nails from a plank of wood.

Items still in good condition end up at the Kuru Kuru recycling store, where residents can drop off or take home merchandise – mostly clothes, crockery and ornaments – free of charge.

Not even the coronavirus pandemic has hampered the community’s effort to bring waste generation down to nought (there are no orders to self-isolate in that part of Japan) but it was a quest with rather difficult beginnings.

In 2000, the village was forced to change the way it managed its waste when a strict new law on dioxin emissions forced it to shut down its two small incinerators.

The ageing, shrinking community did not have the money to build new incinerators or transport its waste to out-of-town facilities. The only option was to create less rubbish and to recycle as many items as possible.

Three years later, Kamikatsu became the first place in Japan to pass a zero waste declaration – a statement of intent that met with initial opposition but which in the years since has created an unlikely community of ecowarriors.

There were complaints that the regular cycle of sorting, washing and disposing of rubbish would prove too much for the village’s 1,500 residents, who found themselves having to sort rubbish into myriad types, to compost food waste and to wash plastic bags and bottles so they could be recycled.

“You are always going to get people who are uncooperative in any community-level project,” said Akira Sakano, the head of Kamikatsu’s nonprofit Zero Waste Academy, formed in 2005.

Instead, she added, the academy focused its energies on the 80% of residents who supported the venture and who would, in time, persuade sceptics to follow suit.

She said the village had struggled to find a way to recycle certain items that didn’t fit into its waste categories, because manufacturers continued to use non-recyclable materials that inevitably found their way into Kamikatsu households.

“Our goal was to achieve zero waste by 2020, but we have encountered obstacles that involve stakeholders and regulations outside of our scope,” said Sakano . “And certain products are designed for single use, such as sanitary products, which are difficult to segregate because of the nature of the waste product.”

While reducing consumption has proved difficult, most villagers have embraced the recycling regime. As a result, the village has been able to keep the vast majority of its waste out of incinerators and landfill.

Products that contain parts that fit into two or more categories have to be taken apart and their components placed in the correct bin. Milk cartons, cans, and even plastic food wrappers and shopping bags must be washed before being thrown out, and newspapers placed in neat bundles, secured with twine made from recycled milk cartons.

Glass bottles are relieved of their caps and sorted by colour. Plastic bottles that once contained soy sauce or cooking oil are kept in a separate bin space with PET bottles used for drinks.

In fiscal 2016, Kamikatsu recycled 81% of the waste it produced, compared to a national average of just 20%. The small number of items that have proved impossible to recycle, including leather shoes, nappies and other sanitary products, are sent to an incinerator outside the village.

And it began addressing the growing problem of plastic, which makes up the majority of the residents’ waste, well before the rest of the country.

Japan is the world’s second-biggest producer of plastic waste per capita after the US. Its consumers get through about 30bn plastic shopping bags a year, and it once shipped 1.5m tonnes of plastic waste to China every year until Beijing banned the imports in 2017.

As word of its campaign spread, the village has hosted officials and campaigners from overseas and other parts of Japan hoping to emulate the scheme in their own communities.

Not all residents are convinced that the project can be easily replicated elsewhere, however. “It works because we’re only 1,500 people here,” said Naoko Yokoyama, who moved to Kamikatsu from Kyoto about two years ago.

“It would be difficult in a big town with a larger population,” because authorities would struggle to enforce it, Yokoyama told Agence France-Presse as the zero-waste deadline approached last year.

To give the village a fighting chance of reaching its target at a later date, residents are encouraged not to buy or use products that may end up as waste, through a scheme that rewards them with points whenever they refuse single-use plastics. The points can then be used to buy other items. Sakano said the future of the zero-waste project would depend on businesses and local governments collaborating to make it easier for households to recycle, but added that individuals still had a duty to reuse and reduce. “As you can imagine, it’s a lot easier to simply refuse plastic bags than to have to build somewhere to recycle them.”

Briefings

Connecting community heritage 

Over the course of the past year, what you might call a ‘proof of concept’ has been unfolding in far flung venues - from Voe in Shetland to Dumfries in the south and Leverburgh in the Western Isles and a fair amount in between. The concept relates to what is loosely described as community heritage and whether the hundreds of local heritage groups that exist across Scotland recognise their shared interests and indeed whether they see the value in becoming a little more organised on a national level to promote those interests. It seems they do.  

 

Author: Catherine Gillies, Ergadia Museums and Heritage and Karen Brown, St Andrews University

Full report from research, surveys and roadshow of community heritage research workshops

What is community heritage?

The term “community heritage” encompasses a wide range of heritage-based perspectives and activities developed and run by communities themselves. It is a term widely used to describe groups of people working to preserve tangible and intangible aspects of their local culture. Despite having no overarching national policy framework, many people in Scotland are involved with community heritage in some way, independent from core funding through the state heritage system. For many of them, cultural heritage is central to their sense of identity, and they spend many voluntary working hours making it sustainable and accessible. These activities are grown by and embedded in communities rather than to be understood as “engagement” in a project determined by outside entities.

For the purpose of this community heritage project, we deployed the definition of Cultural Heritage from the Council of Europe Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society – Faro, 27.X.2005 [https://rm.coe.int/1680083746]

Community Heritage, however, distinguishes itself from built heritage and environment and archaeology (which are the most dominant concerns nationally), to consider local archives and libraries, historical societies, social/health-facing activities, and the performative arts among other endeavours. These are the elements that constitute a “sense of place” and can bring a community together through their shared interest in and engagement with local heritage for local benefit.

Why does community heritage matter?

Community Heritage is a term increasingly used by policy makers and funders in Scotland to describe the activities of heritage groups seeking to safeguard and celebrate their local place and sense of place. It matters at a local level for a range of reasons, including feelings of identity and belonging, environmental safeguarding, natural and cultural heritage protection, and community cohesion, to name a few. The situation in Scotland is special in many ways owing to the range of national initiatives affecting community heritage that could be described as UK – or even world-leading.

Therefore, as a backdrop to community heritage work are the framework initiatives of: the Development Trust Association Scotland, founded in 2003 to support community-led regeneration; the local government reorganisation in 1996 and localisation agenda of the Scottish government and in the national outcomes since 2007; Community Empowerment Act Scotland 2015 which, together RSE Community Heritage Scotland Research Workshops (2019) with the Scottish Land Fund have enabled a large number of asset acquisitions and transfers; creation of Historic Environment Scotland in 2015 encouraging local community asset management ; Scotland’s archaeology strategy since 2015, and Archaeology Scotland initiatives (for a fuller description of each of these developments, see Community Heritage Scotland Discussion Document, 2018).

All of the above Scottish initiatives aim to empower local communities to better manage their local cultural and natural resources. However, as our workshop research findings will evidence, there exists a greater need for community consultation and networking of ideas for their full potential to be realised for Scotland, and a pathway for bridging communication between the voice of grassroots groups, and national statutory organisations and decision-making bodies. A number of concerns raised consistently by participants in community heritage consultation workshops appear around capacity, skills, funding, and over-reliance on volunteers.

 

In conclusion

The 2019 RSE workshops and conference project exceeded expectations on the part of organisers – and it is probably fair to say – for participants as well. What does not come through on the data, but was a common experience, was appreciation of the fact that this discussion had been taken directly into communities; that opinions were being sought; and a commitment given that voices would be heard. The quality of debate was exceptional in each location – this at least was expected, based on the experience of all who have worked with people involved with heritage in their communities.

There were predictable findings and common problems, particularly around questions of need which focused on the triangular matrix of money, time and skills, but less predictable was that there are regional variations particularly in how community heritage organises itself and interacts in different areas.

The big outcomes were consistent:

  • Yes to “something” – a network or new organisation
  • Keep it driven by the grassroots
  • Ensure it has a regional as well as national approach
  • Ensure it is sustainable – both with people and funding

In addition to this this it was also possible to draw conclusions about the sector as a whole, which came through as distinct, diverse and self-aware. Organisations and individuals came across as practical and resourceful, expressed through discussions around sustainability and social enterprise. The community heritage sector is also articulate and ambitious, and as will have become clear through comments in the speech bubbles above, regards itself as entitled to a place at the top table in the national hierarchy of heritage as its own self-contained sector.

The data is already being considered by the Scottish Community Heritage Alliance, and with expressions of interest in the developments going forward from workshop participants, it is clear that the outcomes of both this project and the 2018 survey and pilot workshops will continue to have currency.