The Change Agency by Alberto- Thursday, 26 July 2012, 09:51 PM

As I shall outline in class tomorrow, part of your assessment relates to forum discussions. You will be required to contribute regularly to the forum. To kick off, here's my first question. What do you think of the pedagogical principles and practices of the Change Agency (www.thechangeagency.org)?

I could be missing some profound value here, but my response to this is..."Is this training model for real"?
This is like the 21st century's answer to Fordism with all the new 'globally correct' buzz words..
The 'Lean NOW' process sounds like the romantic version of the industrialism that Engels wrote about in Manchester in the 1800's...
It appears to be all about economic growth, which doesnt seem like much of a 'Change' at all.
And..What is muda!?

Empowered learning by reflection, trust, openness, honesty, self-critique etc. ... I must agree with Jen, arent they just a buzz words? Ive been the witness and participant of the several manifastations that took place in Barcelona in 2011, Spain, called 15-M (see the links below). Each day we were sitting at the main square: Plaza Catalunya, discussing our thoughts, ideas for social changes ...it was absolutely great initiative, but what was the final effect? riots, response of police, injured people ... some conclusions, but no effects within the group. I agree with Paulo Freire that education by itself do not change the world, education changes the people who want to change the world, but at the same time, I have a strong concern if this people are active enought, or they are rather lectured, filled with words, thoeries etc. ... http://www.flickr.com/photos/asias/5772449703/in/photostream http://www.democraciarealya.es/manifiesto-comun/manifesto-english/

In regards to pedagogical policy I wouldn't say it's all that bad. The key principle of 'We avoid the ‘talking head’ approach to adult education, the facilitator as expert; and treating participants as empty vessels' as well as;
- experiential and empowered learning
- listening and reflection
- mentorship
- questioning, not telling
- exercises linked to real and contemporary change work
- building a ‘container’ or learning environment characterised
- by trust, openness, honesty, self-critique, mutual respect and support

Sounds like something I could participate in. Some of the ideas actually remind me of the style Alberto intends for this subject, especially the 'empty vessels'-part

When it comes to their practices I have less to say. If they're true to the title of 'activist education' and in fact educate activists, I'd say it sounds like a vision in line with a lot of 'alternative development thinking'. That the change will not be sustainable, nor sufficient if it does not happen in both North and South. Hence, the goal has to be enlightening, engaging and educating people from North.[/list]

I have to agree with Emil, my first reaction was that their pedagogical principles sound quite positive. Messages such as "education that directly confronts and challenges the current system of injustice (including how people are taught)" do resonate. Facilated training in running workshops and connecting activists with other organisations. Sounds like the workshops are something I might get onbaord with also, as a general training tool.

However the notion of streamlining a process for 'social change education' sits less comfortably, even if it is constantly evolving based on research and activist knowledge. I would think that every effective social movement should develop their own agenda and training model which is owned and managed internally, reflecting the participants, through the process of direct democracy. I've read that the Zapatista movement sought external support and guidance from various indigenous leaders throughout Latin America and the knoweldge they obtained was very specific to their own experience. For communities seeking external support and education, it is important that they have access to resouces, knowledge, training and connection to other organisations but that this should be a colloborative process, initiated from within, which could very well happen at 'the change agency'. Yet I'm not convinced this model could effectively help to strategise and plan every form of social action. Surely this should be initiated internally, so it is specific to the requirements of the people involved.

...On a slightly different social change note here is a link to a Ted Talk by Chris Jordan, a photographer who's work I've found inspiring.

http://www.ted.com/talks/chris_jordan_pictures_some_shocking_stats.html

Be great to hear your thoughts??

This is indeed a great start to the discussion. Thanks Jen, Joanna, Emil and Rebecca.

Some great points by everyone.

Based on principles such as sharing, engaging, supporting and networking I find the Change Agency’s approach quite appealing.

Their website is a great tool for anyone wanting to create change. Particularly the smaller community/grassroot organisations who don’t have the resources or the skills sets internally would find the resources available through the Change Agency very useful. The website itself is user friendly, the messages are clear and succinct, the content is easy to understand.

I’m looking forward to going through the research and case studies they have on the site, might be useful for our essays??

While admitting the pedagogical principles of the Change Agency, I would like to highlight their description to their own work, ‘activist education’ inspired by the work of Paulo Freire. If you need to change thinking terms of a society, the best thing is to change the mindset of the leaders of that society first, not merely the so called society as a whole.

One good example is the three decades long lasted LTTE terrorism Sri Lanka. Demand for a sovereign state from a separatist group started in late 1980s and it became a serious political issue later on due to some short-sighted political decisions at the very beginning. In mid 1990s international community intervened into the problem seeking a solution and among them Norway played a bigger role.

Since 1997, Norway dealt with establishing peace in Sri Lanka by way of negotiations between the two parties involved, LTTE and the Sri Lankan Government. But, they failed after 12 years of continuous peace building efforts. There were several NGOs facilitating the same approach but they also failed. Peace through negotiations never worked.

They all failed because none of the mediators undertook the role of an “Activist Educator” as seen by Paulo Freire and The Change Agency. They did make an immense effort to initiate peace negotiations but they could not properly convince the main activists trying to make an end. They did not properly consult the stakeholders. The evaluation report on the peace mediation in Sri Lanka prepared by the Norwegian government clearly identifies the drawbacks of their process, as they put it “peace efforts were constrained by the structural features of the Sri Lankan state and politics”. They could not consult the proper activists because they had not identified the “structural features” of the society. Therefore, the notion “Activist Education” is more important rather than “Societal Education”

(Norwegian Government evaluation report can be accessed on: http://www.oecd.org/countries/srilanka/49035074.pdf. Another report on the failure of peace process from International Crisis Group can be accessed on: http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/asia/south-asia/sri-lanka/124_sri_lanka___the_failure_of_the_peace_process.pdf)

I believe you are right Ajantha, however, in order for the 'mindsets' of the leaders to be changed, politicians has to be aware of the issues. Activism is one of the most used means to engage politicians, and the interventions you refer to are good examples, I believe the two are interlinked rather than separated. The 'beauty' of a democracy is supposed to be that the majority’s opinion sets the guidelines for policies, and the minorities are heard. Nonetheless, there is need to engage a vast number of people in the global North so politicians will set different areas of ‘international development’ on the agenda.

Thanks for the insight and the links Ajantha!

...and here also comes to my mind Tolstoy's famous quote:

"Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself"

Asia

I think that activists already know what their concerns/problems are. They know that there is something that is not working and needs to be changed, what they need (sometimes) is the tools that enable them to generate that change. Once that activists’ have that tools, they will be able to use them to achieve their goal. Generally the leaders of the activists groups, know that something is wrong and they feel the need to change it; but they don’t know haw. For example aborigines groups in Argentina know that land was taken away from them, but they don’t have the tools to fight for those lands through the current democratic institutions. Therefore, there are organisations that give them the judiciary elements that enable them to do this. That is why I believe that what the “Change Agency” proposes is a good idea. However, we would have to evaluate how well it is implemented in practice. I think one of the main problems is that wonderful ideas can by poorly implemented.

I agree with Giovanna, in that activists of all persuasions need an avenue such as 'the change agency' to help in developing the tools needed to implement change in deep and lasting ways. I think that it is also interesting that the plurality of social and environmental movements in the present age have some where they can learn similar techniques and strategies aimed at making 'social change', even though their objectives maybe slightly different in orientation. The adversity and difficulties that many fledgling social movements go through to get off the ground and be heard (especially when they are standing in opposition to the state and its economic and national interests) makes alternative activist training and knowledge almost essential for their success. The other day at lunch, I speaking to Celeste about the 'occupy' movement that occurred in Melbourne and around the world. I made the point that it seemed to me that this movement was more 'against' the economic status-quo than actually having a clear and independent agenda or alternative economic paradym to put forward of its own. Celeste reminded me that it never had a chance to really be heard and fully develop - as after the first week, the police and horses moved in to arrest and beat up protesters and crush the movement. I hadn't thought of it that way but I think she was right- planning and having enough time to properly develop is important in gaining coherence, support and overcoming later difficulties. Ideally, I think these types of movements need to have their knowledge base and strategies developed before they come up against such powerful opposition, but this could be difficult to plan for and have in advance when such movements are sometimes relatively spontaneous. It seems to me that the change agency provides this type of early and necessary support and I look forward to exploring the website in greater detail

I have been following this discussion and increasingly thinking I'm on another planet with what I saw the change agency to be, so I had another look. Instead of .org, I googled .com and please for those who can be bothered have a look at the site I first encountered. www.thechangeagency.com, it's logo is a triangle. This is what my original comment was based on.. Now that I AM on the same page, I agree that it is a positive thing to have a platform where issues can be put forward for public attention and support. I have actually signed a few petitions that have originated from change.org. I do agree with Giovanna and James though, in that these movements need to be organised and directed to ensure they achieve their desired outcomes. Get up is a good example of a public supported organisation who is having an impact on policy and awareness of social issues across Australia at the moment. As James mentioned of the discussion at lunch last week related to the occupy movement. The occupy movement was an example of good intention and agendas, and great support, however unclear strategies on how to tackle the heavies who don't want to give up their hold and monopoly over wealth and power. It also highlights the fact that we are so policed and controlled by even the threat of hierarchical powers, even invisible as Foucault and Agamben show. This social psychology perpetuates and supports capitalist interests and money being in the hands of few rather than many. It's this issue and fact that I have trouble seeing a way past, and out of. I am always lamenting the fact that we have lost our community spirit in the formation of States, and the indigenous and egalitarian way of being has eroded our sense of place in the cycles of nature and life. I have spent many years of life denying adherence to social norms to combat this, to my own detriment at times. I see the value and beauty of these diminished ways of living, but wonder how we bring these values back against the State now, who has so much power under militant forces. As soon as large groups of social actors rise up the batons and guns come out. Added to this is a social structure that has created positions of value and power over others, which are institutionally supported. In the ingigenous village there are no public toilets to clean, or mass piles of rubbish to collect, or human waste to redirect. How do we insist that all are equal? Could we convince a politician that their job is no more important than a toilet cleaners, and we all as a society share our wage equally to achieve the highest state of humanity? Would I give my degree away to sweep floors and dig holes? Am I just part of this hierarchy. I want to solve these problems because I now understand that I understand what is wrong with the world, yet I'm sure I won't be taking any menial positions to solve these problems with a huge hex debt and mortgage to pay. Am I therefore part of the problem with my own self interests.? I hope for this world to be a fairer and better place, but get befuddled when I try to imagine how we will achieve this and really address and abolish structural inequality, and mass psychology that the past 300 years has hard wired us to. I'm all for socialism but not sure I can think of a case where it has been completely successful and a nation state has been able to alleviate and abolish poverty.

True thing, the closest thing to abolishing 'poverty' is my home region, the Scandinavian countries, and perhaps Norway the most. However, even there inequalities exist within the borders. And what is poverty anyways? Access to money? Personally I'd say the spiritual aspect of poverty as increasingly important, but this may be due to my origin country’s welfare. For instance, I'd say my friends in Nepal had less poverty in love by family and neighbors than an average Joe in Norway.

Nonetheless, I too believe activists may need guidance when uniting to front an issue. ‘Activist education’ sounds like just that though, and the Change Agency provides something important. It may not be only about having good intentions and agendas, but also having adequate means to reach the goal. I imagine that use of social media and advocacy could be important tools in activism. Also, there is clearly a need to have some guidelines when it comes to violence, and perhaps an exit-strategy would be beneficial in case of unwanted riots.

When I was around 10, a house where they created fur-coats and such was set on fire. I think Greenpeace was the organisation that took on responsibility for the arson. I imagine they could’ve reached the same outcome with less means if they had a better strategy and perhaps guidance.

This forum is being filled up with energetic comments and interesting points of view, I really enjoy reading it! Its actually helping me to distract from reading Facebook, lol

Just wanted to make a short note regarding James perception of movement that took place in Melbourne. James, I cant say much about the one that occured here, but all the concept of movements that demand a radical either social or polital change really interest me. I think what happened in Spain increased my and many others people's awareness how we can make the social changes happen. The manifestation had a good start, as it was absolutely pacific manifastation with people sharing food between them, exchanging ideas, spreading away such a positive wibe...at the beginning the protests had a strong economic status, but soon it turned into a mix of powerful ideas how to make this world better place for everyone, discussing topics, as: global warming, human rights, security food, protection, etc.

What Im trying to say is that the manifastation was a kind of lesson for everyone, increasing an awarenes and advocacy of everyone about the need of social change. There were families with kids, young, old people, from all social classes and professions, "meditating" in a peaceful way about the change ... that showed me that we are a huge community of the ones who look for this change, but I do agree that we need to develop tools, strategy a kind of fundamentals that can guide us properly, becouse as far as now, all the protests didnt have had any "echo" in the social changes (at least in Spain).

Peace
Asia

I agree with Giovanna and others about identifyinf strategies and tools for the aborginals groups to fight for their rights interms of land and so forth.. however i have a scenerior in my country Papua New Guinea where about 90% of the land is owned by the local tribes and almost everyone there is connected to the land and their resources whereby the local Government has to negotiate with landowners buid infrastructures such as schools, roads, health posts etc...My question is how does this situation fit into the Change Agency agenda?

This forum has definately gathered momentum to actually bring social change but firstly it has to be our selves then to the societies we live in then the world as a whole... i personally agree to some extend with what Emil and Ajatha has alluded too... the important stakeholders that should be engaged initialy in any activitist movement has to be the local Government.. . No society will can be isolated from its local government rather the involvement of local government in addressing an issue affecting a society is important because of several reasons such as the issues of sustainability and ownership. Once the government is aware of this issue then it can try to address this through its government policies and strategies.

Finally, the agenda of social change is a personal commitement one has to make and to be a change agent we all have to live it rather then talking.

Cheers,

I think the whole idea is quite good and original. I mean, social change is difficult to achieve and I would respect any attempt to achieve that. I really see the website as a great encouragement of positive political activism. I especially adore the educative part.

There are several shortcomings however. The nature of the program is very grassroots, therefore there is little leverage in high end politics, or parliamentary politics (i.e. direct political lobby, political encouragement through parliamentary hearings, etc). Some very good examples are Friends of the Earth (with their anti-nanotechnology campaign that attracts great media attention, or Beyond Zero Emissions with their stationary report that is presentable to both senates and parliment members). Another thing, the nature of the program is in such a broad scope of political actions, so I fear of low impact on community awareness (this might be the reason why none of us knows of this website until albert introduced it).

In all fairness, I still see this as a great idea, it's one of a kind and it teaches activism in a very interesting way, I'll give them thumbs up just on that basis.

Jen, how funny...you're onto it now! It is frustrating and I sometimes wonder too, if the years of social engineering have caused us to get stuck, to not be able to envision a way to change, especially when it comes to changing ourselves. I'm also conscious of contributing to the current system, in ways that we don't even realise...the unconscious behaviours and accredited forms of power (say from doing this course!) that you mention and Foccault wrote about. But then reconsider and realise that just by expanding our minds and having this conversation we are changing and that's a start. I went to listen to Vandana Shiva speak recently and she said something along the lines of - 'we'll never be able to change things by using the language of the dominators, we have to change the conversation'. I think it's a great point.

With regards to Occupy here in Melbourne, in NY and around the world I've heard it described as not quite movement yet...It's a howl against inequality, a space that has been created to allow people to find each other. The slogan 'we are the 99%' is deliberately inclusive, so that everyone can find their place. The process of voting by consensus is terrific but painfully slow. And that is important in a system where people feel like they've lost their ability to participate, for their say/vote to really matter. There are activists, teachers, students, cooks, cleaners, people of all walks of life involved and they are all about activist education! Occupy have deliberately avoided coming up with a specific list of demands as it puts them in a box and has the potential to exclude people. I think this way of evolving a movement organically while frustratingly slow at times is very important, especially when dealing with people from varying backgrounds and who are coming along with different grievances and agendas, even if they fall under a common objective - to fight global structural injustices. None of us know how to do that yet. I did at first feel what some of you are saying, that it was such an amazing turn out at the first few Occupy Melbourne demonstrations and it would have been great to be able to keep this momentum going, but I don't think a movement like this can be built overnight, even with the right kind of training. I still think that the 'the change agency' could offer a wealth of experience and knowledge in helping define future goals and strategies and impacting on policies but it's true it's the way this is implemented and built in a collaborative way that really counts.

Our own behaviour: the answer to change?

In reply to Becca’s link to Chris Jordan’s talk, WOW! Way to prove that an image says a thousand words! I found his photographs and their meaning and purpose to be incredibly effective- they silenced the crowd, and definitely hit home for me. I loved his very gentle approach to the subject of our culture’s flaws. It was much easier to “swallow” through simple soft-spoken examples and self-reflecting questions, as opposed to an aggressive approach, like being disciplined, yelled at, or protested against. His approach gave the audience the time to self-reflect about “What am I doing wrong and how can I change it?–Regardless of what the rest of society is doing.”

He spoke of future generations, the “billions of people who will inherit the results of our decisions,” and it made me reflect on the examples I would want to set for my future children and/or future generations. I remember a speech from the Co-Founder of Free the Children, a huge child-education-school-building NGO based out of Toronto: He said that as a young boy, he remembers his mother frequently approaching beggars on the street, engaging in conversation with them, asking them for their name and other questions. He realizes now that it was more for the benefit of educating her two boys, than it was to help the homeless; she wanted to give a human face to poverty- And did they ever learn the lesson! (Craig and Mark Kielberger founded Free the Children as teenagers: here's the link if you want to learn more: http://www.freethechildren.com/aboutus/history/).

In my case, my mother always invited newly arrived immigrants in Canada to celebrate Christmas Day with us, throughout my childhood. There was rarely a Christmas where we didn’t have a guest from Africa. This gesture without a doubt shaped my early perspectives on the world, cultural difference, and the human experience.

I think Chris Jordan gets right to the point when he concludes, “How do we each individually take responsibility for the one piece of the solution that we are in charge of, and that is our own behaviour?”

I think that in this light, perhaps we should launch a challenge to the class this semester: Let’s eradicate, in our own behaviour, a certain form of consumerism/superficiality/waste that we do not like and no longer want in our society. Could we fight it collectively by no longer participating?

I feel like that too Jen. It all starts with ourselves but what sacrifices am I willing to make?

In response to the Occupy movement and what it is achieving, I came across this online resource earlier in the week - www.thirdworldtraveler.com- while doing research for my IR Globalisation & Governance essay.

The book ‘Globalisation from Below: The power of solidarity` discusses how such movements can in fact set the agenda:

"Those affected by globalization from above have begun to converge... This emerging movement - this network of networks - is the iceberg of which the street demonstrations form the most visible tip. (It is) ..the larger forces that share its interests, not the threat of a few thousand demonstrators, that troubles the sleep of finance ministers and international bureaucrats.”

For more see: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Globalization/Globalization_Below.html Or better yet, read the book

Maybe it is just me - but when I read this (the change agency - not the forums posts) for some reason I cannot help but think of the old joke - the meek shall inherit the earth....if that is alright with the rest of you....

I look around my own neighborhood at the moment and there are signs on all the houses to stop a local development project, a large inappropriate apartment development is planned for my residential tidy and very low profile block.... The council rejected the plans but now there is another port of appeal, and then????

It seems that there is always a way to get what you want, and that someone at the other end of things is not going to necessarily be happy about it all. I wonder how much money it takes to get what you want, in the most cynical view of the world and for those who bring less finance to the table, but more moral, more benificence and non-maleficence..... do good, but also do no harm.

I would encourage us all take a trip to the global rich list website and have a look at where we are in relation to the 99%. I was surprised how little it took to be in the 1%.

However, until - in my opinion - 100% of the total percentage accept some responsibility in things - then as the one world wombat says - we are 'doomed' - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHyH3MPgZDo

Wow that reads very negatively, but I still keep my glass half full....

It is really interesting reading all the posts on the forum. Like Jennifer I find it hard to think of the answer to: how do we change? Watching the TED link was very thought provoking on how you can reflect on your own behaviour and start the change from an individual level, like the quote from Gandhi "Be the change you want to see in the world". However I think action is needed from society as a whole. I think the Change Agency is a good thing as by increasing the tools of activists(strategy, organisation, reflection) hopefully more people will be exposed to the idea of a different way of doing things and be inspired to change. But how long and what will it take for governments to change their policies? And am I really living my life in a way that will help bring about change?

It is true that to change the world, it is necessary to achieve the most difficult change, and it is the one that comes from an individual level, because sometimes the people tend to criticize every action of the government, agencies, NGOS or even of people, without doing nothing about it. For that reason is essential to transform those words or critics into actions. To achieve that is vital for each person in the society to have a goal or a incentive that makes them to act and realize that if they change, in the future it is going to worth it. Likewise, it is important that the people look at the opportunity to make a change, that means that the agencies or government establish the rules of the game, which they could act without any negative effects or suppressions. Because, for example, in Colombia happen two things. 1 one is that sometimes, people that have tried to make changes or fight against the system have been killed, or 2. simply, they see culturally normal all the problems and they simply decide to not take action, because it is going to be useless, and there is where the agencies could make the difference.