Whoop whoop! Got myself interviewed. Thanks to Claire Janisch and Justin Friedman who suggested me to Justin Nurse – who did the writing (thanks bru!). Two notes here, the informal style is because the only time we managed to meet was early one morning, we were both very sleepy. I like the style. The second note, you get in the papers because of your friends – value them, and take this into account when you read the papers. Don’t believe you’re getting a representative sample of awesomeness, or the full story. And if you want to get in the papers, start talking to lots of people. The original article can be found here, and in hardcopy in the Cape Argus of 17 April 2012 (I think – was in Doha, Qatar at the time). Maybe I’ll superlinkify this copy soon to related posts, don’t hold your breath.

Justin Nurse profiles bioprocess engineer, Bernelle Verster.

In this week’s edition of the Pied Piper Project, Justin Nurse chats to Bernelle Verster, a bioprocess engineer from Benoni, who specializes in the non-genetic modification of biological organisms. Put simply, she is at the vanguard of the water challenges we are facing as a country, playing her part in cleaning up society’s wastewater industry.

What do you do, exactly?

I work on cleaning wastewater, specifically sewage, as it is a huge social issue. But instead of just cleaning it, what I take out of the water – the nutrients – I am trying to turn into a valuable product, so as to improve the financial model that sewage runs on. Sewage runs on municipal funding alone, as no one likes to fund things they cannot see. And no one sees waste. So I’m trying to change this.

Wastewater has so many nutrients. A sewage plant, like the one in Mitchell’s Plain, emits hundreds of tons of carbon, nitrogen and phosphate – that people pay good money for as a raw material – as wasted gas that escapes into the atmosphere. And so I’m like, ‘dudes, it’s free! Let’s use that.’ So turning our wastewater into something that is re-usable and valuable is the work that I do.

I’m now doing my PHD at UCT, developing the technology to clean our water using biological organisms (bugs).

How did you get into this line of work?

At varsity in Pretoria I discovered biochemistry, which is to do with the tiny, tiny cells in your body and what they do. I found that fascinating, but soon realized that we study so much and yet often do so little with it. I remember a lecture by a company that made enzymes that could break the molecular fibre in a pair of jeans and create the ‘washed out’ look, without having to put them into washing machines with a pile of stones – which is what they used to do. The jeans were just as strong, it was cheaper for the manufacturers, and it was better for the environment. This really grabbed me.

My studies led me to try to understand the role of water in our society. In a way, water is a solvent. But humans aren’t very kind to their solvents – we use it once to clean something and then discard it. But if we can keep our water clean, i.e. don’t put in anything that we can’t take out again, we can re-use it again and again. Water, like everything in nature, is a cycle, and we need to help that cycle flow.

What are some of the challenges?

The work that I do is challenging as I work with living organisms at ambient temperatures. If you heat them up to get results, they just die. Then there are things that shouldn’t go into our waste stream, things like heavy metals, which are just killing the bugs that we are trying to grow. So we need to have a good relationship with the industries upstream to prevent them from polluting the water to begin with. Industries downstream also need to be happy, so it becomes a huge industrial ecosystem.

I do a lot of work with TEDx (conferences), facilitating between these big industry players and the environmentalists, so that they all start talking and so that there is no secrecy and conspiracy as to what the other is doing. A lot of these big industries have to pay to get their waste taken away, so as they are starting to see the financial benefits of our work, they are becoming more amenable to discussion. Building these relationships and getting different industries altogether in a safe environment where they can all talk and listen is hard work though.

Then, if people knew what was going on with science in the first place, and it wasn’t such a freaky concept, my job would be easier. We need to get the man on the street inspired by the work that we do. We need to do this because we all have a problem: even though we recycle our water, the quality of it is decreasing, and there is simply just not enough of it. We need better technologies, better understanding, and better awareness.

Opportunities?

Water is a very trendy topic at the moment, so people are throwing money at anyone who might have a solution. But it’s the same thing with climate change and the dotcom bubble – people expect immediate results. But this is a long-term thing, so we need to be honest about the time that it will take. There are going to be mistakes along the way, that’s just science. But the bugs are growing, and they’re creating product. So that is very, very exciting.

Industry Communication

Scientists and engineers don’t talk to each other, so getting an idea to a process and then a product just doesn’t happen that easily. So I try to facilitate that communication. Then, nobody seems to know about business, so that’s the next challenge when it comes to dealing with the actual waste industry. And then there is the public awareness aspect of the environmental issues at stake, which usually just amounts to “Oh my god, there’s a crisis!” And the public can’t do anything with that, other than donating to some or other charity – which is absolute rubbish.

Last year’s World Water Day got a polarized and politicized industry of ministers, scientists and industry talking a bit more, and we got the public engaged too. That led to a TEDx event that I helped organize; TEDx is about cross-disciplinary ideas worth spreading. TED talks are inspirational and easy to relate to. The theme of our TEDx event was ‘Be Water My Friend’, which is a Bruce Lee quote regarding how to address conflict in one’s life. It was so fitting, the event was magical, and a big success.

Personal Growth

People are looking for a quick answer to questions like, ‘Do I flush the toilet, yes or no?’ But that is because we train them to think like that in school, forcing them to become dumbed down people. People are curious though, and willing to learn. They just don’t want it all shoved down their throats either.

So I’ve realized that my biggest role to play is as a researcher, hand in hand with creating awareness of what I’m doing by taking the public with me along on this journey. I’ve helped organize a few TEDx events now – which anyone can do by the way, just by going on their website and filling out a form – and while they are a lot of work to organize, the real work always begins thereafter.

Leader?

Yes. I’m a leader because I take the responsibility to engage and bring people together. A leader is not someone who stands on a podium and asks to be followed. If you have to ask to be followed, then what are you doing? Comparing leadership to that which exists in the animal kingdom, where, say, a herd of wild horses are protected by a masculine leader who’ll protect the herd from prey, and when that leader says ‘run’, the herd follows. That type of leader is needed in that situation, but in the day-to-day running you have the matriarch who says ‘don’t eat that plant’. And that’s where engagement and communication comes in. Conversation is required. Both are very strong, necessary forms of leadership. I’m a bit of both. And the magic of the field that I am involved in is that there is this flat hierarchy that is understood, and the leader is different in every situation. I’m good at knowing when to lead and when to follow.

South Africa?

We’re a semi-arid country that has always had the challenge of dealing with our environment. So we’re well placed to deal with fixing the environmental crises that are befalling us. Socially we overcame apartheid, so we know that it takes a lot of people doing their little bit to effect change. The environment is the same: we all need to take lots of little steps to make things better. There’s not going to be one person that we can fling our money at and hope they’ll make things better.

To find out more about the work that Bernelle does, please visit: www.merahmas.co.za

HOW cool is that.

What is TED and TEDx?

After a conversation around Food security and Water, and a few related things, including a rather thought-provoking conversation around how professionals communicate, I thought about the Action bit around TEDx.

Organising a TEDx event is an intensely personal experience. I got involved with TEDx to actively build awareness in the water sector. What I received in return, most nourishingly, was an entire community. Most of these people, however, are not even vaguely interested in water. This, it turns out, is this community’s greatest strength.

In my personal capacity, my link to TEDx have made me popular because of my networking ability, my leadership, my quirkiness. My water maverick status is an afterthought, or an introduction. It’s a tiny bit of the me that people want.

With regards to water, we hosted a conversation around food security, as part of the UN World Water Day 2012 theme of Water & Food Security. Our aim, originally, was to explore social campaigns and projects that are manageable and involve the public, but is also informed by researchers, to fit into the big picture and ensure wider impact and less conflict between projects.

My original idea was that we were going to come out of it with a well thought-through, action and outcome based Social Campaign: We’re going to plant a helluva lot of food. Everywhere.

This is not what happened. And that’s a great thing. (The complete conversation can be found on Aqua d’UCT’s website)

The value of the inspiration at TEDx is that you can just sit back and let it wash over you. The diversity of TEDx being a cross-disciplinary platform contributes to this value, allowing you to sit back and think how it all fits together, that there is no obligation to get involved and that you don’t just rush in and do something because it grabbed you. This feels, on the face of it, elitist and plan lazy and non-committal. But let’s explore this.

When you watch a TED talk online, I think the diversity gets lost, and leads to the often bizarre comments on the talk’s page. Most TED & TEDx talks makes you sit up and go YES! We need to do this! That is a wonderful, emancipating feeling of empowerment. We can DO something. But as you process the details in the following days and weeks, and immerse yourself in real life again (if you’re the brave part of humanity that chooses to do this) the enthusiasm often wanes. And that is a good thing: TED ideas change mindsets, lives, and in some cases the world, but these changes take time, effort, and a conversation much wider than TED itself. One could even play devils’ advocate and say that by the time it reaches TED, the wheels are in motion already, TED just gives a bit more exposure, and ratchets up the gears a bit.

Having an overemphasis on Ideas into Action, or AFT/AFI (Action Following TED Talks / Action Following Inspiration) is bad for two reasons, in my opinion:

1. It can cause a ‘fools rush in’ feeling, leading to failed projects if these projects are not well thought through. Even successful projects may feel like ‘drops in the ocean’, whereas TED’s strength is that it has the interest of high-leverage individuals of influence.
2. It can chase people away who do not share the interest of the immediate action, and these individuals are valuable exactly because they see things from a different perspective.

As Richard Hsu, TEDxShanghai, commented on the blogpost of a TEDxAsia workshop
 ”TEDx and TED must not give direct pressure for actions, but those of us who feel strongly that the energy, enthusiasm and talents that grow to the end of conferences will be sadly wasted if we do not try to encourage participation, support systems to some good worthy ideas”

From the Water Conversation, the outcome most valued was conversation at a broader scale. Creating a common language between researchers, decisionmakers and the wider public is the most important thing we can do. I received flak for this ‘soft’ non-actions based approach, which made me feel uncomfortable (not to say blatantly bullied –  and I think scientists are bullied when they want to engage with the public, which is a complex issue in itself; neither the scientists or the bullies are blameless), but after thinking about it, I feel strongly that even if this person wanted someone to just DO something - “that is content. that is action. that is what we need” - I think we need to engage with complexity, and not make things simpler and create ‘charitable causes’ because that makes us feel better.

After a brief encounter to use TEDx for action, outcome based social campaigns, my conclusions are:

1. Use TEDx to share ideas, and revel in the diversity and inspiration. Never use TEDx to push a particular project or cause.
2. There ARE ideas that need to be developed that arise from communication at TEDx, are showcased at TEDx or  arise through some other relationship to TEDx. The TEDx community should have a partnership with an initiative that can specifically develop these ideas. These initiatives need to be independent of TEDx, I doubt that they should even have an agreement, or MoU or anything like that with TEDx. The representatives of these initiatives should at most attend the events – be inspired themselves – and be in close communication with the organizers. The initiatives are the connectors, they should have functional systems in place to leverage the best ways to develop these ideas, to give the ideas the best chance of being implemented. TEDx as an initiative, as a movement, does not have this capacity and should not be expected to develop it.

As a note aside, TEDxCapeTown works so well because we have initiatives like Silicon Cape, the support of the University of Cape Town, Aqua d’UCT and others that provide this supportive structure – even if some of these connections are still in their infancy. We are very grateful to them and their members.

Many people have contributed to this (ongoing) discussion. I thank Peter Johnston in particular for insights in this regard.

TEDxCapeTownSalon Food|Water|Cities conversation

29 March 2012

Chemical Engineering Seminar Room, University of Cape Town, South Africa.

http://www.tedxcapetown.org/food-water-cities-conversation

Panel:

Jane Battersby-Lennard http://www.egs.uct.ac.za/staff_files/jane.html

Leonie Joubert http://www.scorched.co.za/books-by-leonie-joubert/

Shannon Royden-Turner http://www.linkedin.com/in/shannoninformalsouth

Tania Katzschner http://www.geomatics.uct.ac.za/index.php/people/academic/tania-katzschner

Peter Johnston http://www.climate.org.za/

Ulrike Rivett http://www.civil.uct.ac.za/staff/academic/rivett/

Aim of the conversation: To explore social campaigns and projects that are manageable and involve the public, but is also informed by researchers, to fit into the big picture and ensure wider impact and less conflict between projects.

Quoting Colin Cremin [2011, 108]: “If the possibilities for victories on different magnitudes are open, it is better sometimes to be involved in those movements than not participating in any struggles at all. Nevertheless, to simply do something rather than doing nothing is no compensation for the horrors capitalism unleashes and for this reason we need local struggles to acquire a universal dimension.”

In the pre-conversation session (16:00 – 17:00) we realized that ‘the public’ is poorly defined. (Peter asked: Who do you want to tell, what do you want to tell them?) Groups included stakeholders, decision makers, ‘who cares’ groups, the media. I decided to focus on the educated sector of stakeholders, who have graduated from a tertiary institution, but all these groups were touched on in the discussion. We decided that focusing on undergraduate students is not a good approach, as these students are very limited for time. (Mainly talked about engineering students at the University of Cape Town (UCT) – as that was where the main expertise of the panel lay). I want to involve these sectors to become more aware of the complex issues, to engage with them, and through these actions become more empowered.

‘Who is government?’ was another question. ‘What is governance’, ‘Who does the daily work in government’, ‘How does government work’, were important questions to tackle when we decide to take action for e.g. food security. In a highly polarised political situation like South Africa, governance and dominant political parties were often confused: this needed education and engagement. This issue is returned to later.

The next question was Education – what are we educating for? It was not to convey information, but to allow for flexibility and openness to what appears to be conflicting issues. An example from Ulrike was that civil engineers are responsible for sanitation, but they are not asked to engage with what it means to have humane sanitation. Hence they do make decisions in a simple way based on formulas and not based on human drivers. The conversation took a sidetrack on how universities engage with the reality that they teach or research, Shannon expressed the wish for universities to keep the complexity, to engage with the reality and not just the book. Doing projects in real situations and not simulated environments, asking for community services for engineers as is done with medical doctors was listed as potential routes, while it was acknowledged that e.g. UCT is continuously revising their curriculum and that it is tough to manage the content load. We did comment that perhaps we should try more to teach graduateness, a way of thinking, how to be a global citizen and not teach things. Breaking down the ‘ghettoisation’ of university departments and faculties is important as we become more comfortable in dealing and analyzing complex issues. On the other hand students still need a core skill set and be grounded in a particular discipline.

We then asked what are the role of academia and the role of civil society in, for example, ensuring food security and water management. It was this overarching question that kept popping up, and also contributed to the conclusion of the conversation at 19:00.

The main session, 17:00 – 18:00 was focused on food security, with water taking a lesser role. The conversation started with Carolyn Steel’s TED talk, and points highlighted from the talk included the following:

• We are living in a place ruled by food
• Food is at the centre of life, we need to take more time for food, think about it, plan for it, make it part of our social life, part of the landscape.
• Humus brings the whole thing together, reconnects us with nature.
• Use food as a way of seeing
• The allegory of good governance (Ambrogio Lorenzetti painting); what would it look like today?

We explored the statement ‘Good Food in Cape Town’.

Good: secure, accessible, nutritious, appealing, uncontaminated (by e.g. metals, pathogens, antibiotics)

Food: nutritious, tasty (also salty, spicy, fried), addiction, culture, habit

The reason vs emotion driver in food consumption was a big talking point – that it really is not about our nutritional needs at all.

Another big point, raised by Peter, was that food is a commodity, now cheaper than ever. Hence it is influenced by profit, and as such any changes need to be influenced by policy at a decision maker level. There is a wider point to be made about urban planning without consideration of food. “If planners are not conscious of food issues, then their impact is negative, not just neutral.” (Pothukuchi 2000) That does not only relate to the space available to grow food, but to accommodate and plan for a food system.

Tania highlighted that food cannot be seen as isolated from healthcare, the environment yet is seldom linked to these issues. After transport, the food system uses more fossil fuel than any other section of the economy. Our industrial food system is bankrupt as we are using ancient sunlight (i.e. fossil fuels) in the way we grow, process and eat our food. We should get back to current sunlight… we are eating fossil fuels and spewing out greenhouse gases.

Cape Town: Cape Town has a policy for food security, but this exclusively deals with production security (Leonie uses the catch phrase – ‘urban gardens’). This is flawed – other factors also have to be considered:

• Geography;
• The time needed to travel to work and hence time not available to spend on cooking or finding food;
• Drivers influencing food choices, for example KFC as an aspirational food store
• The overlap of these factors creating their own influences
• Relevant sanitation (affecting the safety of the food being consumed).

Urbanisation was discussed. A comment from the audience indicated that some people feel that the spatial layout of cities is to blame for a lack of urban gardening, and that there is more space to grow food in the rural setting. Europe was used as an example of ‘garden suburbs’. While it is true that South African city layouts are not based on water access, the bigger issue is that people do not want to grow food once they come to the city – it is not seen as modern, even the choice to boil and not fry your food is frowned upon.

People move from rural areas to the cities looking for work, skills migrate to cities, this is a trend very unlikely to reverse. Once in the city, the individual becomes dependent on others in a different way as the lifestyle transitions from country to city living. There is an element of choice in this transition, but by the same token, the economic and geographic structures interact with personal desires to produce the lived experience.

Shannon notes: Even if individuals would choose to grow their own food, there is often a lack of electricity, processing and storing facilities. In contrast, there is pride in opening up a spaza shop (similar to a corner café), and the informal trade shares many of the same traits as the formal supermarket systems. The food system has two parts to it in the informal context. One is predominantly linked to global food flows where people buy longlife because they don’t have electricity and therefore refrigeration; and low quality highly processed food because it is cheap, from supermarkets. The second is through fresh produce bought at the spaza shops located within the settlement. These are linked more closely to provincial and city flows source from fruit and vegetable markets in the city. These spaza shops are considered to be one of the greatest assets within the community.

Jane pointed out that urban development’s approach to food centres around a pervasive logic: get a supermarket, and get a bank. The supermarket model actually has suitability, and the preference between a ‘supermarket-model’ and a ‘home-farm-model’ is not straightforward. She was hinting at the implicit logic of the formalisation of the food system and food markets in low income areas as a by-product of the economic development apparently brought by the mini-mall. Although the supermarket does bring food that is usually cheaper per unit and may have better diversity and quality, we need to be aware that it is not the panacea and that the informal food trade sector is in many ways more responsive to the economic needs of low income households (ability to ‘buy’ on credit, bulk breaking into more affordable and portable unit sizes, and in the case of fresh fruit and veg – fresher, more local produce).

The discussion moved towards how malnutrition is not the individual’s fault, but caused by normal people forced to make unhealthy choices (point raised by Tania). The responsibility has shifted from the individual to the settlement.

Peter was not so keen to move responsibility away from the individual, and noted that there is an intersection between poverty, education, and food security. There are still choices open to the individual. Jane noted that education is not sufficient to force behaviour change, that we need to recognize how individual agency connects to household decision making structures, cultural norms, household asset bases, food retail geography and the wider lived geography of the city.

From this point, the conversation really started to engage with the complexities around food, when an audience member asked about the impact of water in all of this. The conversation was again focused geographically, as most of the Western Cape’s agricultural activity is in fact not based on food, but on export fruit, wine and flowers – again the profit motive of production. Our wheat is imported. While 70% of water use in the province goes to agriculture, this has to be capped and these practices need to become more efficient. Peter noted that water is a limiting factor, but it is so cheap, and the competing interests here include industry (which has clout because it creates jobs), domestic use, (mining in other provinces), as well as agriculture, so that food security really does not feature in the argument about water management, but commercial and political interests do. The little food-based agriculture is focused on using the patches of fertile soil, and water is not a strong decision point. Peter noted that water is becoming more localized, similar to the energy production centres like coal mining, instead of decentralized and more locally responsive.

Clearly, to influence these macro trends, we need to engage with policy makers. Where researchers are more comfortable analyzing complex situations, policy makers need to make quick decisions, on short time frames, to manage risk. Ulrike stressed that we need to develop a common language to build constructive interaction and productive engagement. We need researchers to be based in a system; we can’t abandon projects when the funding cycle ends. VPUU, Violence Prevention through Urban Upgrade, was highlighted as a success story. Shannon reiterated that we need to integrate research into real projects, to build long-term resilience, scientists/researchers/technocrats need to engage with decision makers and build long term relationships to improve the massive lack of continuity and capacity currently experienced, in South Africa but also on a global scale (Shannon’s Voluntary Association, Informal South, aims to achieve exactly this). This thread carries real weight and we returned to it later.

Aqua d’UCT (pronounced aqueduct) here can play a strategic role. In being formed as a meta-water-research group at UCT, it aims to coordinate research interests and societal needs by firstly understanding and showcasing the UCT-wide water research activities and capacity. Using horizon scanning, research promotion and engagement with the state, researchers, industry and stakeholders, Aqua d’UCT can then begin to explore and promote relevant research needs, ensure that results are disseminated appropriately and streamline water-related research. The primary goal of Aqua d’UCT is to enhance the existing specialties and expertise of water research at UCT. Further goals therefore include increasing interdisciplinary research and collaboration and developing further, novel capacity both in knowledge generation and skills development. This can be understood as the breaking down of research silos and creating a bridge or aqueduct for all water research at UCT (and possibly further in future years).

Getting back to what to we can do to improve food security and the associated water needs, Jane noted that in developing countries 30 – 50% of food goes to waste, mainly as post-harvest loss. There is a lot of potential for innovation here, and Ulrike’s research on using mobile technology to improve municipal water management can be well utilized for these applications too. In developed areas, most of the food goes to waste from supermarket to home. Landfills are filling up, and we need structures to improve this nutrient management cycle. From a purely technology innovation point of view, these are easy pickings. What is required here is for students, universities, innovators to engage with the public, with mayors, and the media to develop these systems based solutions together, and communicate to improve feedback loops. It ties in with the need for communication mentioned earlier.

On a side note, Neil Armitage, a UCT Urban Water Management researcher in the audience, put things in perspective by noting that the real issue is not really food at all, if one seriously considers embedded water, Canada should be growing a lot more of it and South Africa should settle for being one big national wildlife park.

This provocative statement reminded me of a book I am reading by Colin Cremin – Capitalism’s New Clothes. I asked if the whole food crisis is not just part of the COCI – the Culture Of Crisis Industry – a capitalist/consumerist tool to get us to spend more money in an attempt to ‘fix the problem’. (The short, simplistic conclusion I got to was, if’s it needs money to fix it, it’s not a real crisis). The panel agreed that we do have a fair amount of a crisis on our hands; that richer as well as poorer communities are at risk, as the volcanic ash cloud illustrated in Europe recently. They acknowledged though that ideas around security are also influenced by equality and distribution. Peter noted that food production has to happen as a business, and Ulrike noted that it is easier to distribute food in more concentrated areas (this was illustrated by using Middelpos as example, who need to pay more for their frozen chickens than their neighbours in Calvinia, but who are not growing their own food – a complexity in itself which theoretically could be solved by everyone in Middelpos moving to Calvinia).

Leonie countered by arguing that there is a critical mass required, that too concentrated populations and too much dependence on the supply grid is not healthy either. Leonie used the example of RDP (low-income) housing with inadequate service provision, that can actually result in higher rates of diarrhea than in shack/slum areas where there is no service provision at all (Dr Jo Barnes from University of Stellenbosch works on this).

The conclusion from this returned to Carolyn’s points that food needs to be made more visible to influence behaviour change. It came down to communication once again. This concluded the main session, and as most of the audience left, the panel continued to explore how to best communicate research findings with the various groups of ‘the public’.

In the last hour, 18:00-19:00, we worked on a communication strategy to develop technocrat-decision maker relationships. TEDx was widely agreed to be a great platform for this (allowing me a breath of relief!) Requirements for a more resilient communication structure include

• Science journalism becoming more prevalent, and better. The move towards digital magazines can help with this – TEDx talks included;
• Researchers need to be on first name basis with the newsroom. Good relationships take time, so start early,
  • Researchers need to communicate risks better, rather be slightly wrong but talk to the public, than not talk at all and foster ignorance. Even highly contentious arguments are soon forgotten, but contribute to general education (UCT’s admission policies was used as example);
• Develop different messages for different audiences, using different media outlets. Academic writing has its place, but is not suitable for discussions with in-the-trenches government workers;
• Scientists need to be groomed and engaged;
• Developing a common language between researchers, NGO’s, decision makers and the wider public (tongue in cheek Leonie said ‘using words consisting of less than 8 syllables’).

Ulrike challenged this by saying she does not trust journalists as they misquote scientists to push their angle. Leonie, a journalist, countered by saying that municipal officers don’t trust the media, but there are ways to get around this, mainly through building a long-term, first-name basis relationship. A member of the audience noted that University departments should have PR agents to assist researchers with managing their public statements. It was noted that while researchers should be curious about other disciplines, fields, roles and worlds, and that there is a very important role for generalists, researchers are also, first and foremost, researchers. They are not expected to be journalists or PR agents. We as researchers are, however, expected to engage and share our knowledge – that’s the whole point of generating knowledge in the first place.

In conclusion, the aim was to develop Social Campaigns and projects to improve Food Security. Food security is about much more than food production. We need to use the allegory of good governance, step outside of the fixation about production security, and focus more on distribution, especially into slums, improving the nutritional content, and access to food. We need conversation at a broader scale. Food security is not a poverty issue. It affects how the entire city is shaped. We need to make food visible in the city, to understand where the vulnerabilities come in.

Potential projects that were highlighted during this conversation are

• Making engineers do a two year community service after they graduate – contribute to skills and learn how to deal with realities;
• Use TEDx or TED-ED short movies to build engagement around these issues;
• Where we do get involved in urban gardens, use these areas to build awareness and visibility of food, rather than to push the ‘food security’ angle;
• Innovate around the optimal systems that minimize or eliminate post-harvest loss, and supermarket-home losses, using IT, technology and social innovation.

Post script: This Food|Water|Cities Conversation was a joint initiative between Aqua d’UCT and TEDxCapeTown. Lead people are Raymond Siebrits (rsiebrits@yahoo.com) and Bernelle Verster (Bernelle@tedxcapetown.org), both post-graduate students at the University of Cape Town. This conversation was organized and executed voluntarily, organically and maverickally with no budget. We thank the panelists for their precious time and input.

References:

• Cremin C, 2011, Capitalism’s New Clothes: Enterprise, Ethics and Enjoyment in Times of Crisis, Pluto Press.
• Pollan M, 2008, In defense of food : an eater’s manifesto, Penguin Press.
• Pothukuchi K, 2002, What’s cooking in your food system? : a guide to community food assessment, Community Food Security Coalition, Venice CA.
• Steel C, 2009, Hungry city: how food shapes our lives, Vintage.
• Stuart T, 2009, Waste : Uncovering the global food scandal, W. W. Norton & Co, London.
• Joubert L, 2012, The Hungry Season, (in press)
• Jane Battersby articles: African Food Security Urban Network: http://www.afsun.org/
• Violence Prevention through Urban Upgrade: http://www.vpuu.org/
• Wilson E, 1998, Consilience: the unity of knowledge, Random House.

In the spirit of ideas worth spreading, TED has created a program called TEDx. In addition to the spirit of TED and TEDx, TEDxCapeTown distinguishes itself from other events by our aim to become a nucleus of things happening in South Africa and connecting key initiatives within the innovation and change-making ecosystem. We have a core focus on innovation and entrepreneurship, and aim to grow influential, open networks through our TEDx events.

This blogpost is my personal opinion on the type of speaker, the type of ideas I want to showcase at TEDxCapeTown 2012. However, TEDxCapeTown – all TEDx events, are a team effort. This blog per se does not influence the final selection of TEDx speakers.

I want to showcase inspirational ideas, but not just good ideas. I want to showcase ideas that challenge our very assumptions of the system we see ourselves a part of.

I’m not here to showcase how you make it work in this system. We have moved through such big changes – a double dip global recession, a point of no return in climate change, that in my mind, the system that we feel we should be able to function in, or to function in spite of, no longer exists. I’m not here to share inspiring examples of charity. I’m not here to bridge the rich-poor gap. I’m not even here to showcase African innovation. I’m here to change systems.

I love Africa because I see people here who change systems, who make their own reality, and I think Africa is a genius of place that forces this. The previous ‘systems’  - imperialism, colonialism, Apartheid, (capitalism), Aid – didn’t work for us, so we disregard it. It becomes irrelevant to us – the people on the ground (not talking about governments here). There are informal settlements, slums, that, according to the economic models of capitalism, should not exist. The numbers just don’t add up. They should not be alive based on their annual income. And yet they do exist, because they work on a different set of assumptions. A set of assumptions that we should be looking at more closely.

I want to showcase African changemakers, but any changemaker is in the running. I want to showcase people we consider as ‘poor’ who are saying system? What system? This is my life, my way. I want to showcase sustainability, but not environmental sustainability – sustainability that is that way because it fundamentally changes the way the world works. I want to go beyond sustainability, to thrive, with Nature.

The disenfranchised I want to give a voice to, are the ones who we can learn from, who changed the system to make it work for them. I want to showcase ideas that make you feel uncomfortable, because it is so outside your comfort zone. At first, you might not like it, but it sticks in the back of your mind, and months, years after my event, I want you to still think about it. Then, I want you to start recognizing this idea everywhere.

This ‘new system’, is not capitalism, it’s not socialism either. Whatever it is, it’s hard work, and it doesn’t define itself in monetary terms. Money is the beads used to trade with the locals – it has utility, but is so loaded with inequality, and is really, after all, just a bead.  This ‘new system’ is not an equalizer, and it doesn’t care about rights: When there is no water, your constitutional right to clean water is irrelevant. You can either take action to learn how to clean water, to do it as part of a team that will look after each other, or you stay without water. It’s not about the money to pay someone to do it for you.

This ‘new system’ is deep democracy, where you get a vote if you work for it. It’s not a revolution. It’s not fighting the privileged, comfortable capitalized 1%, it’s just quietly making this class division irrelevant. If the deep wisdom of a community can clean their own water, and become resilient, they don’t need to pay someone for it, neither can money buy it from them. This new system does not fight capital, it reduces it’s dependence on it, making economic inequality irrelevant.

If this sounds too good to be true, come to our event and listen to some speakers prove it, with examples. These paragraphs refer to actual, confirmed, speakers.

With this context, you can see why I don’t want to showcase rags to riches stories. I don’t want to showcase ideas on how to help people cope in this system. Our anger and frustration is BECAUSE we see a different way. I want to showcase people who embrace this anger, who delved into their subconscious and found the courage to pursue this different way.

I don’t want to showcase an idea of how to feed Africa, ‘educate’ Africa (to fit into this broken system and make us ‘employable’ and ‘reduce poverty’). I want to showcase how we turn the very idea of philanthropy upside down, to work together, as equals from very different backgrounds and skillsets to change the way the world works – with some education, with some money, but using these as tools, not as desired outcomes.

I support and cherish every single person who wants to speak at a TEDx event. I believe in what you do – you’re DOing rather than TALKing, and it should get out there. I am spending every spare waking minute on TEDxCapeTown because there is something I want to get out there too. And if you’re not saying that thing, then you don’t fit with my idea. This is also why I assist other people in their own TEDx events – because we all have a message, and it all fits the big picture, and it needs to get out there. Don’t feel like I’m disproving your idea because I say your idea is not suitable to me. Am I creating separate cultures, a new ‘apartheid’ by allocating/suggesting different ideas to different TEDx events? If I am, it’s because I am trying to find a platform that gives your idea most impact, while staying true to my inner cause. I am trying to create communities, who interact in a web of different networks.

“You can’t institutionalize a social experience on your own. Nor can you “convince” others to have a particular experience the way you can convince them to adopt a behavior or a belief. You must live it out, together, within community, until it becomes part of how that community encounters the world.” – W.O. Nilsson. (via Jonathan Glencross)

Something I learnt from a TEDxCapeTownED teammate is that we inadvertently select our audience through the way we market, so we should just make this explicit and select our audience more consciously. This year, TEDxCapeTown’s application process will look for prospective changemakers. Just coming to an event because it inspires won’t be the TEDxCapeTown vibe. You need to take these lessons and pursue it after the event. Whatever hits home for you, you need to make that fly.

Will TEDxCapeTown 2012 be gender and race balanced? I have no idea. It’s not in my range of criteria, so I don’t know what will happen. You can be sure that every person on that stage will be there because they have a phenomenal idea. You might disagree, because not every idea appeals to you, or because the time might not be right for you. All I ask is for you to entertain that idea. You don’t have to accept it. And if you hate TEDxCapeTown, or any TEDx event, that’s fine too. Organise your own event or conversation, TEDx or not, make us see your point of view, I’m sure it’s a good one. But if you feel strongly enough about it, make it happen. Discontent can only be eradicated with careful action. It’s your LIFE. Engage. Play with it.

Pinnacle or pyramid?

My session with Ruth two weeks ago touched on ‘the sticky spiderweb around the PhD’. The simple conflict between showing off – achievement –  and being part of a community tangled me up for two weeks.

The conflict was visualized by two pyramids.

The first, a pinnacle. This is where you rise above the rest, you stand out, you get shown off by your friends, your parents, your networks, but they had no part in achieving your success. You are defining yourself to be visible. The awards you reap are an acknowledgement of your achievement. To me, it feels a vulnerable, lonely place, draining me, and so open to criticism, represented by the PhD, the title. It feels that I excel in spite of the people showing me off, not because of them. It feels that I lose my essence by being exposed. Ruth thinks that this pinnacle makes one more robust, that, exposed enough, you are more valued. You can thrive. I think we’re looking at it from different angles.

The other extreme is a flat pyramid. You are a leader, but in a community context, where you are protected, safe, but also relatively hidden. Ruth comments that you will lose your skills and talents if you don’t risk exposing it. This conflict can be described as different ego-states in a personality. According to Ruth, what is needed, is for the two ego-states to have a conversation. Hmm, I don’t think this conflict is only in my personality.

I was still struggling with these concepts when I interviewed a TEDxCapeTown speaker – Louise van Rhyn from Symphonia and her Partners for Possibility program. She mentioned, that during her PhD, she also had this desire to ‘be enough’. She felt that all PhD’s she’s met had this chase to feel ‘enough’, to ‘be enough’. She mentioned that her work in communities taught her to embrace her humanity.

“Communities have this incredible power to reject you. I didn’t want to be rejected. The only way to be invited back into the community is through my humanity, not through my knowledge: being rather than doing. None of your knowledge matters, who you are is enough. You can make a difference simply by who you are.”

Clearly, she made a case for the flat pyramid. Ironically, for her program to spread she had to embrace the pinnacle. To attract more partners for her school principles, she had to market the program, and as people hold on to a personality when hearing a story, she had to learn how to market herself. So the need to entertain both pinnacle and pyramid exists.

I was still trying to reconcile this community – versus – performance conflict when I continued reading “Capitalism’s New Clothes – Enterprise, Ethics and Enjoyment in Times of Crisis” – by Colin Cremin.

Let’s relook that pinnacle. Being valued by whom/what? … and thriving … where?

On p37 Cremin starts explaining the Culture of Employability. (Visualised for me by my parents urging me to get a proper job). We are never employable enough. Everything we do is to improve how we are seen, to be more competitive in the labour market. To stand apart. Volunteering has moved from being something you do in your private time to something that enhances your CV.

“Regardless of how people feel, they have no choice other than to develop a social personality that employers want”.

“The private lives of individuals become signifiers of commensurability with capital”.

Employability becomes the worker’s death drive. We can never be enough. Nothing that we do is to build the sense of community – it’s to increase our competitive edge – building the pinnacle, not the flat pyramid, even as we think we’re doing the opposite.

This hit home, as I saw my friends who have solid day jobs (and aren’t faffing around in an academic environment) subtly change to something I can’t relate to. It hits home when we view the power struggles in social movements. It hit home when I read a scrap of paper I wrote in 2008 – “Don’t lose the ‘common touch’, but lose the ‘common’ touch”. and “I feel that if I go through with this PhD, I will lose a big, important part of myself. The wild creative (unfocused) part. I am in danger of becoming dull and boring and flat.” … and employable.

How to walk these two worlds? Be yourself and survive (financially)? I truly believe that we can’t change things from the inside of the current system: incrementally, with compromise. Use less water. Recycle. But you can’t step out of it either. Where would you go? I don’t want to be a hermit. I don’t want to give up my internet. The best you can do is step alongside it, walking and tugging along. Evaluating. Every. Single. Step. You. Take. While the employed rush ahead to perform even better. You have to be you, not give in to ‘employability’-improvement but at the same time still be a mensch. How do you become a better being without selling out?  … Better in which way? How do you believe companies are true, and not selling you the terms you’ve been led to demand? Do we need companies at all? Who would make our internet? Is entrepreneurship the answer? How do you remain true to yourself – the you hidden in that flat pyramid – unglamorous, uncouth, ungroomed, uncool, disgustingly real? When the you in that pinnacle can demand all it likes, be all it likes, a perfect 10, even ‘changing the world’? If you choose the pinnacle you, will you remember your pyramid you, if by the time you hit that pinnacle your changing might be hollow and corporate? What does changing mean, anyway?

In some ways the private and public have been blurred, the more you employ your private life to influence your employability – feeding black babies boosts your CV – see Cremin p36 through to p50. In other ways you have to really hide those aspects of yourself that doesn’t conform (probably the flat pyramid part, the part that says ‘I am enough’) – creating a massive gulf between the private and the public. So many people comment on my ability to tell it like it is, until now I didn’t appreciate what they find so unusual about it. I sometimes wonder if this is not the root cause of people like the Norway bomber imploding and shooting entire villages or schools.

A closing note, why do we wonder about these things in the first place?
Cremin notes on p54 our desire for excessive surplus-enjoyment, via Lacan described as ‘jouissance’ – crudely related to the fleeting pleasure of orgasm – a brief flash of enjoyment achieved after excessive pursuit. The pleasure lies in the obstacles to fulfillment – but only if that fulfillment eventually arrives, and only if there are obstacles. Athletic activity, a fight won, gardening, hard work, these all create the same feeling. Money, addictively, makes it easier to achieve this feeling without the obstacles, and erodes it at the same time. We feel empty, and we can’t go back, can we? I see it become harder for my friends to give their paycheck up. We’re tame: Tricks on demand, always available, for as long as we like. But it is a hollow pleasure. Now, what little ‘true’ enjoyment we can generate in a non-monetary way, our spare time activities, is corrupted to build our employability. The fulfillment is corrupted: the jouissance is stolen by our employers – we work, and never win; never experience jouissance. If we do, we have to hide it, it’s sin.

So in a roundabout way the community-versus-performance conflict, for me, for now, comes down to capitalism. It reinforces the need to change systems, change everything, for the sake of our humanity. To get our enjoyment back: Tame is not sustainable.

Dinner at Carlyle's on Derry

This week was a rollercoaster of loneliness. But a few things happened that made me realize I’m simply too close to the problem – small successes in teams where we were struggling for some time, and care given in areas that I too often neglect. One big thing happened that can only be ascribed to serendipity, fate or Pacha Mama (that’s Mother Earth). To the uninformed eye, it looked like a dinner. To us, it was the re-iteration that there are always people willing and able to engage in thoughts (Andrew’s words). As Robbie White said “remember the concept that if you get 1 in 100 to do something much more than before, it’s a big step forward. ” Being surrounded by the *other* 1%, more like 1 in a million, and 10 of them, no less, there not because they’re sponsored by some government initiative, or free food, or some buzzword like TEDx or biomimicry, although we discussed it, but because they believed in something, stepped up and said yes, I’m here, was something goose-bump-causing.

I want to write this blog to always come back to when I’m cynical about humans. To read it might come across as a ‘you had to have been there’ event, but to us it was great.

These were the people attending. We had the dinner at Carlyle’s on Derry, highly recommend it – good service, good food, good space.

Candida Leigh Hall (candidaleigh[@]gmail.com). Candida studied Biology and Drama. Her combination of logical science background and heart-inspired performance is sure to stand her in good stead in the future. She was supposed to go back home in the US, but instead met Tyler and missed her flight.

Tyler Maloney (taconfre[@]ncsu.edu). From the US, Tyler did (conventional) environmental engineering, didn’t like the conformity of it and switched to biomimicry and marine science. Tyler is passionate about biomimicry and rural education, and am now looking for projects to get involve in. He has a background in Sales, Non-Profit Development, Wildlife Rehabilitation, Photography and Engineering. He originally came to South Africa with an American social business NPO called ThinkImpact and lived in Mpumalanga in a rural Shangaan village for 2 months.  Tyler’s quote: Good Design Is Beautiful.

Janelle Morris (janelle[@]nexii.com). Janelle works for Nexii. Nexii is an impact investment global social enterprise and advisory firm that is passionate about connecting investors to change and high impact initiatives to capital. She shares a passion for Social Entrepreneurship and wants to find out more about the SE scene in South Africa. Her vision includes to build the first sustainable bank in Africa, and her role as part of Nexii is to build ecosystems of people who want to be in this space.

Robbie White (uhm, find him on Facebook) – Works for SAB IT, likes helping to support start-ups. He couldn’t stay long, but usually have a lot to say, on Facebook.

Lauren Uppink (lauren.uppink[@]gmail.com) – Social entrepreneur in the making, Social commentator, currently working in a Trade Labour Union. Is on the TEDxCapeTown team and organized the TEDxMfuleni event in September 2011.

Jonathan Glencross (jonathan.glencross[@]gmail.com). Originally from Canada, his present goal is to break up the assumptions you have when you’re comfortable and successful and happy. Jon is busy with a project, briefed by the Bertha Centre, to address the following question: “How can you create an experience to strengthen, support and stimulate social movements.” Watch his TEDx talk here. He notes that the mobilizing forces often reinforce the same power struggles they are trying to dethrone. So he wonders, how to make social movements more interactive and collaborative; what are the needs, how do we understand what is leading the movement? While social movements have many different definitions, what they have in common is that they move in arcs, crossing boundaries. He is currently looking for someone to work with in South Africa.

Shannon Royden-Turner (shannon[@]fnbconnect.co.za). Shannon is starting ‘Informal South’, a Voluntary Association focused on Urban Socialisation. Shannon is an architect, currently exploring knowledge sharing, open space communication and group processes, innovative ways of having meetings to get issues on the table in a flatter hierarchy, so that the conversation becomes the agenda; the conversation leads to identifying projects, and the action groups get formed around the interested people. Her recently completed project looked at a systems approach to development, finding the balance. She looked at urban ecology and an asset based framework, working with what is to create a better future. She quotes Edgar Pieterse ‘Reconceptualising the city from the bottom up’. Of informal settlements, she says people are still living the same lives, just at a different level than we’re accustomed to. There’s much to learn from this difference. She’s keen on the Guerillar Gardening movement. Questions she asks include, is informal settlements not guerilla living? Do we even need planning permission if we have community councils? What can we learn from informal settlements, should we try NOT to regulate? Are these settlements not informal for a reason? Shannon challenges conventional ways of thinking, at a time when conventional conversations about sustainability could do with a fresh breath. Shannon’s quote: If everyone was living like the townships, the planet wouldn’t be exploding. That’s for sure.

Andrew Gasnolar (andrew.gasnolar[@]gmail.com). Andrew is a 2012 Community of Mandela Rhodes Scholar, lawyer and currently studying environmental law. His interest in contacting me was around organizing a TEDx event around Conversations for Change – exploring the role of education and entrepreneurship in advancement of social transformation. Like most / all of the dinner mates, he wears many hats, with many exciting projects on the go, one involving Blikkiesdorp. He talks about Trojan Hope Horses.

Bernelle Verster (bernelle[@]merahmas.co.za). (me) Bernelle is called a social entrepreneur by others, even if she is still studying and her company not really being very entrepreneurial. She is also involved in large group experiments like TEDx – she loves bringing people together and then watch with wide eyes what they get up to.

Jasdeep Virdee (jasdeep_virdee[@]yahoo.co.uk) Jasdeep cut her post-degree teeth in a start-up, then used this experience in a journey through London corporate life, before that became too empty. She gave it all up to travel the world for a year or so. she likes seeing the world, how other people live, and to get involved.

According to Ruth, this fight is between my internalized external authority (being a good little girl, a good little Christian, etc etc) and my true, internal authority. The fight between I should, I aught to, and I want to, I need to. If you’ve been a REALLY good little girl your should’s and aught to’s are exactly the same as your wants and needs, and you really need to do some work to find your internal authority, otherwise the guilt will just kill you. If you’ve been a slightly less good little girl you’ll just have issues. I’m somewhere in between.

Case study: I feel like a retard when running. I know I could be really good, and I want to be the best. I aught to be the best… I want to win, but then I don’t even run at all. I feel too embarrassed to start. I used to enjoy running. When I was so pissed off at my parents and the world and I lived in a nice simple adolescent anger where I just couldn’t care less I ran really well. The PhD is like running, but with different motions (Sometimes I feel academics, or highly driven people in general are adolescent in that they are so single mindedly convinced about their cause, often at the exclusion of all else). So are relationships, I guess. To do well you have to be really twisted or really dull. But not doing well at all doesn’t mean you’re sane, either.

As a child I could get away with anything. I remember that no one could punish me. I was too quick for them. Both my brother and I were remarkably resilient to physical abuse, and could keep a straight face at the usual bum-lashings, as we quickly learnt this cool mask infuriated adults. If resilience didn’t work, strategy did the trick. My brother was sentenced to no TV, so I pre-empted by not watching TV in the first place. But children should have boundaries. Not having boundaries means we have to make our own at a very young age. We can’t just trust someone else with the big stuff and get down to just being children. We have to grow up too fast. My fights were probably as much a creed to ask ‘What are the limits?!’ These are the games we play, in strange families where nothing is ever said.

I think I’m still having this boundary problem. Being at the forefront of some sort of innovation means you’re the only person capable of establishing those boundaries. There is no simple way forward. Some days this is just too terrifying. This is why I am so hellbent on good communication, to the point of embarrassment.

I don’t blame my parents. I was headstrong and smart and everything a girl shouldn’t be and they went through their own issues, about their own parents, their own identity. We all went through the end of Apartheid, where our entire reference frame crumbled. They are good people who want the best for me, they tried to force what they thought was the best for me, and as soon as they realized this was not the best way, they backed off to let me be me. That takes courage and I am grateful for that.

Ruth says that even it is not their fault, I don’t have to feel that I have to keep protecting them. I don’t have to be a missionary. I’ve realised I’m really bad at standing up to people who play on my emotions, makes me feel sorry and exploits my guilt. A few things in the last week illustrated this, not least the planning stages of the Water Week / UN Water Day activities, where this conservative, loved industry ask for favours with no intention of providing benefit. This broke me last year; as I struggled to deliver time and time again, and when at last exhausted, and at least expecting a thank you, I got a ‘more please’ I crumbled. I’m determined not to have this happen again this year.

My internalized external authority demands an ever increasing need to understand, to compromise, to give ever more, leading my true, inner authority (perhaps my quiet place: Bella) to get agitated, irritated, fighting. I confuse myself. This is the mad cartoon fight. Me in a Fightclub with myself, baulking at shadows, chasing ghosts.

I wish, at the end of the session last week, I eagerly said, cool, let’s try find my inner self and responding with peace to these forces. Unfortunately, I have one very clear desire: I don’t want to go to the quiet place, I don’t want to understand, to find peace, to communicate. I want to go, I want to be home, away, I don’t want to deal with it. These are the depths of my despair. To know what I need to go through and to wish and demand with every fibre of my body not to. To stand on the edge of that cool clear pool and not want to jump in.

What it is:
A Change of Foundation – change the emphasis of where the power of democracy ultimately rests.
Consentience – believing it makes it true. Holding a vision of an ideal or value and thereby contributing to the unfolding of that value.
Democracy, and even more so D2, is hard work. D2 also takes the option of blaming others away. At large, we need to put more effort into living and less into working. Individually, we need more effort & thinking in approaching our food – growing and other things. We need to put more effort into political engagement and governance – that is, not political parties, but how we interact with power relations around us. The economic system that forces working people to work harder makes this difficult, and the transition more extreme.

Potential book / documentary title: Politics and economy: How the economically excluded are making their own politics, and what we can learn from it.

Core principles of D2:

• Every decision is made by the people who care about it
• No decision is clogged by people who don’t care about it
• If you care a lot you get more clout than if you care a little (caring does NOT equate to most vocal)

You can do anything that people don’t mind you doing.

Any community can be a political unit if it wants to be, and can exercise the powers its residents mandate to it.

Random other points of importance:

• Politics is an operating system, humming quietly in the background, so real people can get on with real life.
• A web of responsibility makes accountability foolproof.

The following are rough notes from Shannon Royden-Turner’s (SRT) MSc thesis:
‘From eradication to intervention: Urban informal ecosystem’

from the abstract (looking at Sweet Home Farm, Cape Town):
“If informal settlements were to be considered as an accepted African urban typology …” -> in a similar way, if we would consider our communities as an accepted way of governance, how would we map a descriptive model, to form a basis for the development of a normative upgrade model? Aka how would we model this as a form of governance?

Three functional categories of a functional African urban typology:

1. to nourish and clean
2. to reside and work
3. transport and communicate

“Cascading and closed loop flows”
“The descriptive model provides rich evidence that informal settlements are an asset within the city that not only provides affordable accommodation to low-income urban dwellers, but also contributes towards the improved environmental sustainability of Cape Town, through the creation of cascading and closed loop material flows, as well as local economic opportunities specifically related to the informal construction sector.”

and in the conclusions:
“This does not suggest that the status quo is acceptable, but rather that we need to find ways to support upgrade processes that are multidimensional, beyond just the provision of physical infrastructure, towards the inclusion of interventions aimed at social, human, natural and financial capital development.”

Here’s my wish:
Shannon helps, through Informal South, her brand new company, to develop a third way of (environmentally) sustainable urban planning – looking to the physical infrastructure IN THIS CONTEXT.
I want to look at the natural interaction, the water flows in particular, that links with nutrients – food and wastes – IN THIS CONTEXT.

What I would like Denis to do is look at the politics of it – the social and human aspects. To report on it, and help with the widespread improved understanding of development issues – that government CAN’T fulfill their own promises. Basically to articulate the context in a non-academic, easily accessible, entertaining way. And then help to find a way forward that learns from all of this: Positive, action orientated, aggressive. No griping, no complaining, but loads of fun, and no backing off, selling out or giving up.

“In order to adequately respond to [the complexity of urban development, specifically within the African urban informal context], it is necessary to move beyond measuring the success of urban development as a quantitative measure of the number of houses delivered, towards one capable of taking this into account, and respecting current practices used by urban dwellers to accumulate financial, social, physical, human and natural capital.”

Diagrammatic representation of social capital - Shannon Royden-Turner MSc thesis (From eradication to intervention: Urban informal ecosystem). Note how formal 'government' structures, like the police, is only used as a last resort. Most issues are internally resolved.

Look at p202 of SRT thesis, diagram 47 – Diagrammatic representation of social capital. for D2 in action.
Also read (at least) the conclusion – p214, on a post welfare state:
“Following years of deepening globalization and the entrenchment of neoliberal policies we are faced with a reality of intensely uneven development, both at the global and local scale. The informal Capetownian settlement of Sweet Home Farm bears testament to the shift towards a post welfare state where government’s reach is limited and the state becomes minimalist, focusing greater support for improved efficiency, competition, and choice. The welfare state of the past, envisaged universal infrastructure coverage irrespective of the economic position of the population, where the minimalist state became increasingly concerned with user pays scenarios, making it increasingly difficult to cross-subsidise infrastructure in underserviced areas. The result is spatial partitioning with grossly unequal access to state resources. The focus on investing in economic infrastructure also implied a drain of resources away from human development.” and further paragraphs: ”… a call to address issues of inequality in a multidimensional fashion, concurrently paying attention to all forms of capital.”

First steps to D2 require a widespread improved understanding of development issues – that government CAN’T fulfill their own promises. (resonates with TH p 36 In the mind of most citizens, government is the only decision maker there is. (important point to remember, but certainly not true).)

‘the twin crises of economy and ecology’ – Capitalism’s new clothes: Enterprise, Ethics and Enjoyment in Times of Crisis, by Colin Cremin. Another author to read: Fritjof Capra. I see Shannon cites a 1996 book. I read a, I think, 2003 book. The gist is to move from ‘predict and control’ systems to ‘sense and respond’ systems – in a way give up centralised control.

This says to me: we think of poor people as helpless, hopeless and powerless. We also talk in our ivory towers of sustainability and the difficulty in achieving it. We lament that humankind’s sense of community is eroded. But we are the poor ones here. We are rich in analysis, assimilating and using vast amounts of information to innovate. We can learn so much from working together. These settlements are an asset. To learn of D2, we have to start here, in informal settlements.

Biomimicry Life's Principles

These are rough notes on the book Themba’s Head (TH) meant for discussion and reflection, mainly for myself and Denis Beckett. It’s a combination of arguments, questions, and a summary of good points from the book (page numbers included as far as possible).

Themba’s democracy (or D2 – democracy version 2 or deep democracy) is a system, and the process I believe underpins it is group transformation, taught to me by Helene Smit and through the book ‘Sitting in the Fire’ by Arnold Mindell. I think the system can work, is already working in places and strata, but without the process of group communication this system will fall down – for reasons explained in Mindell’s book, mostly relating to issues of unconscious rank.

I also see many links with biomimicry, and I think this can prove useful as a language to cross boundaries and tensions, and a design tool, to make the whole process less scary. I indicate which of Life’s Principles I think apply in places.

Lastly, I think this contributes to my #ifiranza plans. My ballot system involves sms and twitter. But this needs more thinking. also see http://uconomy.net

Overall I think TH is not well thought through. It’s angry and all over the place. I feel like I’m being attacked. It needs depth (not the how, but the why and what if’s needs to be fleshed out). I’d like to say that the next step could be another book (Yes, Denis! Another one!): A piece of investigative journalism analyzing the places it is working already (even if in places we need to throw in some imaginary things). Keep it positive, agressive, and action orientated. Places to look at first:

• Abahlali baseMjondolo, the South African version of SDI
• Shackdwellers International (SDI) Movement,
• VPUU (Violence Presention through Urban Upgrade),
• Community Organisation Resource Centre (CORC),
• Abalimi Bezekhaya, an urban agriculture (UA) and environmental action (EA) association, and multiple others at all levels of society. Ke nako. Africa’s time is here.
• also look at Transition Towns – a blogpost on TEDxPrinceAlbert should go up soon, here it is on Helene’s blog so long.

A general problem is the 5m taxpayer and 55m+ serviceable public – disconnect. But the places that are working are doing so in spite of not having any money – a non-economic model?

p2 – A Change of Foundation – change the emphasis of where the power of democracy ultimately rests.

A semitroubled country is the best place for this to happen because we’re part of both worlds – working and not working, governable and ungovernable. ‘West’ and not-west. Institutionally rich and institutionally poor. We can do any kind of experiment.

Some researchers at UCT say that the Cape Flats are already ungovernable. The service delivery promises are widely understood by all parties involved to not be achievable to any extent. All that we ned to move forward is to be honest about it – to acknowledge it formally, legally. Some structures are doing just this – e.g. CORC

p4 – I don’t think we’ll ever get unity. We are all different cultures. We can get community. (Biomimicry – modular and nested components)

Consentience – believing it makes it true. Holding a vision of an ideal or value and thereby contributing to the unfolding of that value.

p6 – polling booths also depend on effective communication. I believe that consentience is not going to come first from privileged communities. I do think, however, that you don’t need this system to be in all at once. Small places can start this process/system effectively.

p6 – ‘calm and sober’ requires trust that someone listens (Mindell’s rank). ‘Polite’ is also a Western Construct. Polling booths may be too… this needs interviews and research from a wide variety of people (interviews on the train between Jhb and CT?)

p13 – Apartheid and xenophobia and the holocaust are not really ideological arguments. They are economic ones (Sven Linqvist – Exterminate the Brutes). It’s important to keep this in mind when considering better ways of running countries. Globalisation is a powerful force.
The global recession – breaking this mould – therefore, plays in our favour.

I don’t think this ‘revolution’ will be televised (and Denis’s agreement is hinted at on p 119)

I noted down that there is no single solution, no silver bullet. E.g. D2 relies on good fair communication and awareness of rank. I also note that we often miss the simple, obvious things, so that D2 seeming ‘simple’ is not a bad thing.

p 21 – simple does not mean easy. Democracy, and even more so D2, is hard work. D2 also takes the option of blaming others away. p 22 – At large, we need to put more effort into living and less into working. Individually, we need more effort & thinking in approaching our food – growing and other things. We need to put more effort into political engagement and governance – that is, not political parties, but how we interact with power relations around us. The economic system that forces working people to work harder & longer makes this hard, and the transition more extreme. Which is another reason I don’t think D2 will happen in privileged (aka having regular jobs) soon.

p 23 – how do we guarantee accountability? I think accountability is the most important thing, and again, in the last pages (p133/4) this is approached better, I think. A Web of responsibility makes accountability more robust. (Biomimicry – tighter feedback loops) ‘diffuse power’ (Biomimicry – nested and modular systems, redundancy builds resilience…)

p24 – ‘you get those things’ You don’t necessarily get benefits in D2 – don’t sell promises. But what you could get is more power and responsibility that comes much closer to you. (Biomimicry – tighter feedback loops). This is very scary to most people, but that is I guess where voting in local leaders comes in.

p 24 – Martha can only talk if Jones listen. Rank consciousness is need – group processing (Mindell). It’s the listening bit that needs to be fostered. People toi-toi, grab land, start revolutions because it’s the only way they can get people to listen.

‘Raw’ democracy is very bad at dealing with rank (Mindell)

p27 -

• Every decision is made by the people who care about it
• No decision is clogged by people who don’t care about it
• If you care a lot you get more clout than if you care a little (caring does NOT equate to most vocal)

You can do anything that people don’t mind you doing.

p28 – decisions are a function of headcount and vehemence (not motive – passion). Agree, but take care to listen to the shy ones…. and yes, voting can decide, but the silent leader can be suppressed before it comes to voting.

p30 – impatience with agony – I agree. Don’t complain to me if you are not willing to take (even small) actions.

p31 – again, be careful about rank and community.
Something that gets me stuck, it’s easy for a rich community to ‘self govern’ with their own taxes. Where does poor people’s ‘taxes to pay for public services’ come from? This is a great thing to investigate, because e.g. Abahlali is managing. (without xenophobia)

p33 – synchromesh, I would call a sense of community, collaboration.

p34 – the ebb and flow of joint wills makes me think of the TEDxCapeTown 2011 theme: ‘Be Water My Friend’

Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find a way round or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. 

Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle and it becomes the bottle. You put it in a teapot it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water my friend. – Bruce Lee

p35 – the things that have so far made South Africa lag may be things that now position it to step ahead. The starting point is the toughening of the ‘fragile flower’ (my blogpost of 22feb12)

p36 – In the mind of most citizens, government is the only decision maker there is. (important point to remember, but certainly not true).
stat: 2006, 10.1m people voted from 29.7m people eligible.
(so we need approx 7m people voting for us. fertile soil. ).

p37 – agree:
If the ballot booth really ruled, so that every elder accounted to the multitude who don’t go to rallies (…) politics might be a different animal
If the ballot booth really ruled, so that every activist manning the trenches will get nowhere without winning votes [aka they themselves are accountable], activism will be a different animal.

What makes D2 (even more) possible now? I think advances in ICT has the potential to level out knowledge asymmetries. The global financial crises make the economic monster more vulnerable. Large scale environmental pressure, environmentalism and a greater comfortable ability to deal and think about complex systems across the board makes it easier to discuss this. It’s almost reached a point of no return.
I think D2 is already happening in places like SDI, CORC, Abahlali – places that have basically passed a vote of no confidence in their service delivery. Entrepreneurship in general and management models as highlighted by the Living Company (Arie de Geus) or Bioteams (Ken Thompson) are further examples.

p41 – Any community can be a political unit if it wants to be, and can exercise the powers its residents mandate to it.

p41 – do we have to convince today-thinkers? If they are inactive, then vis-a-vis D2, it doesn’t matter.

p45 – What amendment(s) to the constitution is necessary to allow D2 to function in this society (aka to also take into account the transition) ? Why rely on parliament at all? Is provincial government necessary?

p45 – 288 municipalities. I’ll include one level lower to ward level, to have communities of 1 000 – 10 000 people
scrap provincial level? (This is an existing argument – there must be a reference somewhere)

p46 ” For villages and suburbs, what changes is that they pack muscle.” … I think this is already happening – ask Shannon Royden-Turner (Informal South).

p51 – To cast a vote when you do not feel a vote will somewhat impair the system.

p52 – Extremist factions – again about Rank (Mindell). Need group process before ballot – HOW do they discover the public is not behind them? They can sweep the public up by passion and fear (current problem in NL), need reasonable debate that takes into account rank.

p58 – ‘Too chaotic’ paragraph – agree. ” …confusion arises when there is a disconnect between the person who is paying the tax and the person who is spending the budget.” (Biomimicry – tighter feedback loops)

p59 – D2 not socialism or parecon – I agree. Those are patronizing and a different form of Aid, in my opinion. I don’t do charity. It may be useful to describe how D2 departs from other forms of governance – aka describe it by what it’s not.

p64 – the problem of the see-saw of government power. This is why I say ‘anarchy’: I don’t think we need/can ask permission to do this. I don’t think government will grant it. Governments are adaptive structures, they respond, they don’t take the lead in change.
I’m not rejecting all authority. I’m rejecting centralized authority. Distant authority. (Biomimicry – tight feedback loops, be locally attuned and responsive)

p81 – You defuse extremist by ‘the gift of power’: by giving them a fair chance to communicate.

p85 – scheduled or as-needed voting? I think we can explore this, and it probably depends a little on the levels – wards and councils as needed, higher powers very often – e.g. monthly. But with sms/mxit [Florian's website: http://uconomy.net/] impromptu meetings / votes can be notified or have quick polls etc. ICT really helps here!

Open influential structures
p85 – Agree. who you know will always be important. The diffuse structure prevents ‘old boys clubs’, creates open influential networks – a big thing of TEDxCapeTown too. Again, ICT – like twitter also reduces this barrier greatly. Take note that to create your own network takes about 2 years. D2 is all about creating community.

p86 – Six first names from the president – this is why privileged structures currently work. It’s already in operation, we can learn and operate from it, but I doubt it’s that needed when you can take action yourself & in your community. It is a confidence builder though. – This is also a good place for some investigative journalism.

p87 – flattest pyramid – agree. (Biomimicry – nested and modular components …

p90 – Constitutions are guides, not rule books. The constitution is an expression of the ideal scenario. They’re always good to have. No one has rights. We have privileges.

p93 “Democracy doesn’t allow people t be racist” – Racism is part of human nature. Current democracy does not allow for that, it drives the human aspects of things underground – hidden, where it eventually leads to revolution. (Mindell). Current democracy is a Western concept. “D2 is not about constitutional systems, it’s about human needs” – p93.
p94 – Sawdust paragraph – agree. Bureaucracy, hierarchies of power is like sawdust in an engine. (Biomimicry: build ecosystems not empires)

p97 – D2 prevents everyone feeling left with a sense of unfinished business (also read Mindell)
p107 - “D2 provides a structural reason for taking an interest”

p113 – Race exists as a social construct. We should be aware of it, but don’t let it beat us. We must be politically aware, politically sensitive, but not politically correct. PC drives human aspects underground to fester. – Communication is NB

p116 – Agree on the points (some paraphrasing).

• Judge people by who is polite (but allow for heated conversation – don’t push Western values down on a diverse culture), honest, punctual, who delivers on promises, by their own characteristics and not by stereotype. Break stereotypes down by open conversation.
• Represent all who have elected you and none who did not. You can’t please everybody, don’t try find a middle way, find a rich diversity and be open about your agenda.
• Tolerate opposition. Engage in heated discussion, put the issues on the table.
• Practice honest politics. Everyone on the web of power is surrounded by elected watchdogs with insider knowledge, access to resources, and more accountability to voters than to party bosses. Accept, and promote greater knowledge symmetry.

SA is one nation-ecosystem with many players inside it – different but all essential. We share a common quest, and play different roles to achieve it.

p118 – When ballots show agreement, people ceases to feel alone. We have started a community and we have expanded freedom, in a way that raw democracy could not do – Individual ownership and accountability in the context of a community.

p119 – Politics is an operating system, humming quietly in the background, so real people can get on with real life.

p121 – Comment: history happened the way it has because of knowledge asymmetry. ICT & more widespread education changes that more and more. The environmental pressures & complex systems problems mean more people have to work together, which makes D2 work now.

p132 – next steps? Now we analyze places that resemble D2 and see what we find, use this to inform people on next steps.

p133 – A web of responsibility makes accountability foolproof.

p140 – to have begun is enough. All you need to show is that it is possible.

the fragile things are often more valued

etiolated |ˈētēəˌlātid|
adjective
(of a plant) pale and drawn out due to a lack of light.
• having lost vigor or substance; feeble : a tone of etiolated nostalgia.

This comes from a personal session with Ruth, but we see a good analogy with South Africa’s current situation – in our collective psyche as well as our politics. So I thought let’s bring it into the public space.

I find it very difficult to find a space of quietness. So I work harder and harder to not have to face myself standing still. The problem with going into the lab and do experiments, is that in the lab there is nothing else. Just you and the vast open space that you have to be quiet and meticulous in to generate data to answer your questions with. You need to also be quiet to get to the damn questions in the first place.

I am positively running away from the quietness. I’m addicted to the excitement, which is also disturbing, because then I don’t have to deal with whatever pops up in the space created by quietness (I don’t know what this is, seeing that I don’t allow it to pop up yet … it’s a process).

I need to learn to BE without DOing. I need to learn to trust myself. Now here is where the analogy with South Africa starts.

I had to fight to be me, in the face of multitudes of conforming forces, people who wanted me to be a good little Afrikaner, a good little girl, a good little NG kerk Christian-who-hates-black-people, a whatever. The struggle generation had to fight for freedom, to show that apartheid was wrong in a very conservative society. And we all still fight. For a better world environmentally, socially, economically …

We’re terrified that we will lose who we are if we stop fighting. That we will lose our creativity, our uniqueness. We don’t trust ourselves to be strong enough to still be so special  -the best place in the world! if we aren’t involved in some crisis / war anymore. We don’t want to give that fight up, because we are so afraid that we’ll lose what we’ve fought for. I guess the whole world maybe works like this a little.

I don’t trust that I can still be my creative, eccentric self, if I stop fighting. But I’m tired of fighting. I think South Africa is tired of fighting. The problem is that there is no clear easy, black and white way to go about things now. What will we revolutionise against? Who’s the enemy? Who will we BE if we’re not fighting? We can’t follow anyone else’s example – the global world is not working well either! The new ‘fight’ is not a fight, it’s learning how to be special quietly.

Ruth taught me a new word today: etiolated
etiolated |ˈētēəˌlātid|
adjective
(of a plant) pale and drawn out due to a lack of light.
• having lost vigor or substance; feeble : a tone of etiolated nostalgia.

It came up because this quiet, creative part of me is stuck underneath all these layers of fighting. The layers are the protective covers that stand up to the pressures to conform, but they also hide the really great parts, and prevents the hidden inner part to get nourishment. The layers make you seem like a violent destructive thing, dangerous (even if only to yourself). But this hidden inner part, is actually more acceptable, and more valued, if it could only get out and be robust.

This inner part is a perfect little thing, but it is now fragile because of all this fighting. South Africa needs to find and nurture this inner beautiful thing, just like I do. My job right now is to find a quiet space to give this little thing, let’s call her Bella, a place to get strong.

One way in which the outside world can help with this is a process called ‘mirroring‘. A parent needs to build her child’s sense of self esteem by mirroring his experience. For example, when he touches a block of ice, his mom says, oh, wow, look how cold that felt! And he becomes robust through learning. South Africa’s challenge is that that mirroring role is lost, as we find a third way forward – not ‘african suffering’, not ‘capitalist destruction’. What we as caring people for this wonderful nation can do, for ourselves as inhabitants tired of fighting, and as nurturers of this miracle continent, is to mirror good things and affirm good practice. And not to tolerate the layers that cause etiolation.

well, that’s what I think right now.