{"id":2271,"date":"2013-05-05T17:00:52","date_gmt":"2013-05-05T21:00:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.synapse9.com\/signals\/?p=2271"},"modified":"2013-09-11T09:45:55","modified_gmt":"2013-09-11T14:45:55","slug":"whole-culture-led-not-tech-driven","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/synapse9.com\/signals\/whole-culture-led-not-tech-driven\/","title":{"rendered":"Whole Culture Led not Technology Driven – getting SDG’s to really work"},"content":{"rendered":"

The UN’s idea of <\/em>Sustainable Development G<\/em>oals (SDG’s), as\u00a0a “unified policy framework”, <\/em><\/em>and seemingly everyone else’s too, <\/em>turn out to be “missing something”, <\/em><\/p>\n

Missing the glue that fits and holds the many parts together, high aspirations lacking a real method for connecting the parts<\/h3>\n

In the UN’s “Vision of a Future Worth Choosing<\/a><\/span>“<\/p>\n

\n

“The High-level Panel on Global Sustainability argues that by making transparent both the cost of action and the cost of inaction, political processes can summon both the arguments and the political will necessary to act for a sustainable future.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Human cultures have NEVER changed according to plan, is the problem. \u00a0That’s now how societal change works. \u00a0 How people are discussing the\u00a0implementation\u00a0of the SDG’s, called a “unified policy framework”, is almost entirely as just a list of ideals, almost like “complaints” about how economic development didn’t\u00a0fulfill\u00a0our best intentions over the past century… \u00a0No, it certainly didn’t.<\/p>\n

What isn’t mentioned, though, is how to change that. \u00a0How would the economy’s normal steering mechanism might be changed, if it didn’t go where we’d want in the first place? \u00a0 How would a new steering mechanism be created that would be more responsive to rational concerns about fairness and our role on earth? \u00a0 Just a list of desires for what didn’t happen is really just wishful thinking, a delaying tactic perhaps, rather than addressing the problem.<\/p>\n

The simple framing of this problem below, what steers the economy, is followed by my brief reports to CAUN<\/a><\/span> on how the “connecting the parts” problem came up in the DESA workshops on implementing SDG’s<\/a><\/span>. \u00a0The Workshop Agendas<\/a><\/span> offered a fairly comprehensive view of the “technology push”\u00a0transfer techniques being contemplated… which helps <\/span>illustrate the basic problem that human cultures don’t learn that way. <\/span><\/p>\n

\"the
A choice between Whole Culture Led and Technology Driven change...<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

A. Technology Driven Change, the “tech solution”<\/strong> – leaves cultures shaped to serve technology values, perhaps with ignorance of culture<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span>B. Culture Motivated Change, “the cultural solution” <\/strong>– leaves technology shaped to serve cultural values, perhaps with ignorance of how things work<\/span><\/p>\n

What thrives in nature is the cultural solution, when…<\/strong><\/span> cultures are able to understand what technologies are physically profitable, linked together to produce more than they consume<\/span>, and…<\/strong><\/span> their choices show long foresight in being responsive to where profit ends…<\/span><\/em>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

A combined solution is needed, to both:<\/h2>\n

*stop multiplying technology for exhausting the earth,\u00a0and
\n*start selecting technology really serving\u00a0mankind.<\/h3>\n

– An Earth Dashboard <\/strong>displaying the problems and benefits of cultural and technological solutions, options offered by technology for well informed\u00a0cultural guidance and choices to select from. One way to do that would use the UN to facilitate getting science, finance and cultural choices ALL on the same page<\/span>,<\/strong> like my “Ideal Model SDG’s<\/a><\/span>” concept proposal.<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

It’s also important to see the main reasons why our use of technology went astray, from excess, to the point modern civilization is no longer thriving and in growing danger of failing on earth, as a result of our economic model for thriving naturally leading to the opposite:<\/p>\n

1. The profits of technology being fed back into multiplying technology, in an unsustainable closed cycle of growing exploitation of people and the earth, that breaks the circle of\u00a0returning the profits to its earners<\/span> for use in making informed cultural choices, <\/span><\/p>\n

2. Cultures being misled by the cycle of investment to maximize growing investment, to\u00a0prefer being exploited by\u00a0addictions<\/span> because that’s what investors (most of us, really) measure as profitable for themselves, making choices that ignore how unprofitable that become\u00a0for thriving on earth.<\/span><\/p>\n

_____________<\/p>\n

Two Short Reports on: the important DESA Workshops 1 and 2 on
\nDevelopment, transfer and dissemination of clean and environmentally sound technologies<\/h3>\n

Notes on Workshop 2. \u00a0for CAUN <\/strong><\/p>\n

1 May 13 <\/strong>The second day of this week\u2019s DESA meetings on SDG technology was quite remarkable for a few reasons!\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The sessions were very poorly attended, though, evidently because the quality and breadth of the review of the UN\u2019s work on techniques for implementing SDG\u2019s wasn\u2019t advertised as such.\u00a0\u00a0 The titles given the four sessions didn\u2019t really convey the content.<\/p>\n

As usual I can only give a few highlights.\u00a0 The tension of most interest to me, and I hope to us all, was between technology led and civil society led economic transformation.\u00a0 \u00a0When you think of technology as a tool for reshaping economies (an engineering approach), the question of whether it integrates with the ways of thinking and working of the people whose ways of life you\u2019d be changing is somewhat of a \u201cproblem at the end\u201d of the thought process, an afterthought, an \u201cexternality\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0 Natural technology change is the opposite, the externality of culture driven aspirations.<\/p>\n

The first day of presentations were 100% of the engineering kind, with all the words referring to people in inanimate terms, actually.\u00a0 I mentioned it briefly to David O\u2019Connor, the DESA organizer, citing the scientific studies he turned out to be familiar with, that show that technology change naturally works as a culture change (see prior report below).\u00a0\u00a0 On day II he mentioned the issue as panel moderator, as did a few of the other presenters, that technology needing to work with nature including the nature of societies, as critical to its success and difficult to accomplish.<\/p>\n

Toward the end of the 2nd<\/sup> day the discussion turned to how to connect all the different parts of the broad scope intervention in the world economy being planned.\u00a0 Discussion turned to the many evident \u201cgaps\u201d between parts that weren\u2019t really connected.\u00a0 None of the gaps were given special attention, really, but just noticed as part of the message coming at the end of a comprehensive view of the whole assumed strategy.\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0That was really very exciting!\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 That \u201cthe plan\u201d at present is generally not seen as culturally led but as technology led, but would need to work culturally, was just one of them.<\/p>\n

So, that actually fits in perfectly with our own discussions of how to have the transformation culturally led, through civil society networks. \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0It also exposes the importance of finding how civil society networks can lead a technological change process, making complex technology investment decisions.\u00a0\u00a0 That brings up the one part of the \u201cIdeal Model of SDG\u2019s<\/a>\u201d designed expressly for that, to create information commons to steer SD investment choices.\u00a0\u00a0 So, I\u2019d like us to include some version of that \u201cprocess piece\u201d in our group SDG drafts and discussions, to address the \u201chow to\u201d problem unavoidably tied to the \u201cwhat works\u201d discussions, as a way to serve and inform our \u201chigher aspirations\u201d.<\/p>\n

So, that\u2019s a good to stop,\u2026 \u00a0except to mention Elenita Dano (email<\/a>) with ETCgroup.org<\/a>, an NGO rep invited to be on the last panel.\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0She spoke of implementing just the kind of purpose driven commons network that CAN<\/a> seems designed for.\u00a0\u00a0 I\u2019ve been very impressed with that approach since going to a 2009 NAS conference<\/a> on it, leading to the resources for it on my multi-stakeholder partnerships<\/a> page.\u00a0 \u00a0Hers was a network of farmers working to collect and maintain crop seed diversity for the future.<\/p>\n

I told her of CAN and gave her the web link.\u00a0 I think that kind of \u201cpurpose driven commons\u201d, a kind of \u201cenvironmental commons action group\u201d will have major influence, and as we work on CAN we might give more attention to.\u00a0 It\u2019s kind of \u201chybrid\u201d for us, not a co-op nor a successful ecology, while still working by creative internal cooperation and external negation in an environment with others.<\/p>\n

Most best all\u2026\u00a0\u00a0 :-) \u00a0Jessie<\/span><\/p>\n

Notes on Workshop 1.\u00a0\u00a0for CAUN <\/strong><\/p>\n

30 Apr 13 – <\/strong><\/p>\n

All, \u00a0Yesterday\u2019s meeting at the UN was really impressive, and productive.\u00a0 The morning and afternoon started with very excellent DESA organized panels making technical reports on the UN\u2019s preparations for what is being called \u201ctechnology transfer\u201d, but really means \u201ctechnology transformation\u201d if you consider the scale of change contemplated.\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0It also got into the daunting challenge of working in each cultural context, replacing technologies to drive climate change mitigation and adaptation, along with SDG\u2019s, potentially different ways in each country.<\/p>\n

I made three very good contacts, though.\u00a0 \u00a0One was the representative of Nigeria, who had seen my hand-out on our commons approach proposal last week, and mentioned why a commons approach would matter.\u00a0\u00a0 Its\u2019 because major technology change is always a cultural process, and gets in trouble if it is pushed on cultures that don\u2019t welcome it.\u00a0 The conversation was prompted by his mentioning he can now call his dad by cell phone, who still lives on their family farm which never had electricity. \u00a0\u00a0I asked who paid for it, and of course it was the Nigeria representatives own UN scale salary, as it would cost more than the annual incomes of most of his countrymen to have cell phones of their own.\u00a0\u00a0 I think he\u2019ll get in touch.<\/p>\n

Another was the lead panelist in the first session, Daniele Giovanucci, a leader Sustainability Assessment (COSA<\/a>).\u00a0 His approach sounded as comprehensive as my little outlines in Models of Commons Interests<\/a> suggest are needed, but also being implemented worldwide.\u00a0 Though he didn\u2019t mention the special problem my approach solves during his talk, he was delightfully quick to acknowledge there was a real problem with the way environmental impact measures are defined, and eager to read my SEA<\/a> paper on it.\u00a0 \u00a0For green businesses the usual definition of impacts counts technology consumption, but leaves out the human consumption for the people who run the business and operate the technology.\u00a0\u00a0 That\u2019s an important place the commons approach will eventually get the kind of information needed to guide SDG investment choices.<\/p>\n

I also was able to pass on the name of an expert I know, Ricardo Haussmann<\/a> who studies natural technology change,<\/a> and offered a comment to the DESA organizers of the meetings.\u00a0\u00a0 Natural technology change involves whole cultures of related technologies, that evolve along with the mores of the social cultures adopting them.\u00a0 \u00a0When technology systems are forced on cultures that don\u2019t accept them, like for colonialism, or US attempts at \u201cnation building\u201d that failed, the cultural disruptions can be dramatic and long lasting.\u00a0\u00a0 What made me mention it was noticing the presenters were never used the word \u201cculture\u201d or about \u201cintroducing\u201d technologies, but about \u201ctransfers\u201d.\u00a0 They acknowledged all the difficulties of getting people to change their ways, but as a problem to deal with after the new technology is developed, so happening at the end of the process<\/em> instead of at the beginning, as technology change occurs naturally\u2026<\/p>\n

See Clean & Environmentally Sound Technology<\/a> program<\/p>\n

I also sent out a correction for the letter last week on the UN not following an ecological method for the SDG\u2019s\u2026 which unfortunately appeared to apply to UN staff and organization\u2026 , see attached, fyi. Comment welcome.<\/p>\n

Today\u2019s technology transfer subject is more on the field experiences in less developed countries.\u00a0\u00a0 Glad I approached the whole day yesterday completely relaxed, and with no agenda really\u2026\u00a0\u00a0 ;-) \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0Jessie<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

jlh<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The UN’s idea of Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s), as\u00a0a “unified policy framework”, and seemingly everyone else’s too, turn out to be “missing something”, Missing the glue that fits and holds the many parts together, high aspirations lacking a real method for connecting the parts In the UN’s “Vision of a Future Worth Choosing“ “The High-level … Continue reading Whole Culture Led not Technology Driven – getting SDG’s to really work<\/span> →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_crdt_document":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[3,7,8,9,16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2271","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-among-best-2","category-econn","category-theory","category-policy","category-whattodo"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/synapse9.com\/signals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2271","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/synapse9.com\/signals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/synapse9.com\/signals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/synapse9.com\/signals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/synapse9.com\/signals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2271"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/synapse9.com\/signals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2271\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2410,"href":"https:\/\/synapse9.com\/signals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2271\/revisions\/2410"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/synapse9.com\/signals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2271"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/synapse9.com\/signals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2271"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/synapse9.com\/signals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2271"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}