Note: there is no final exam (transformation is hard to test for)

The title of this blog is what Bill wrote on the Weekly Lesson Plan for our last week of class, and it sort of struck me. It’s true: how does one measure for personal change? Well, I suppose you reflect.

Experientially, I’m glad I was able to participate in the group project for Bloomington South. I learned so much about the dynamics of school politics, and had the opportunity to communicate with a variety of stakeholders, including everyone from energetic teenagers to skeptical cafeteria staff to responsive (but budget-focused) district administrators. And the recycling project drew me out of my comfort zone, going door to door for surveys.

Blogger and Twitter were totally new/alien ways for me to express my ideas. I honestly never thought I would use either of these, and was extremely skeptical in the beginning. I’ve definitely warmed up to Blogger; it’s a great way to incorporate a variety of media to get your point across in an interactive way. But Twitter is just entirely too hard with its character limit. I’m a long-winded graduate student, give me a break! :)

Do these things represent transformation? Maybe not entirely. Do I feel different? Actually, yes. I had the chance to not just read, research and regurgitate sustainable development concepts, but read, research, experience, expand upon, disagree with, question, persuade, and create within the realm of sustainable development. There are so many levels on which sustainability can be implemented (local, regional, national, global), but I very often overlook the personal/introspective level.

One of the “sci-fi” readings in Wheeler spoke of a “continuous relearning” of an environmental ethic. Although it might be argued that such an ethic is in some ways instinctual (biophilia for one), it is of no real use if it is not made into mindful, deliberate, day-to-day operations. This is especially critical now in this industrialized, high-tech world where it is so easy (and sometimes encouraged) to be completely removed from natural things.

Richard Bach (American Author): Learning is finding out what you already know. Doing is demonstrating that you know it. Teaching is reminding others that they know just as well as you.

So I continue to (re)learn, to (re)absorb, to (re)discover as much as I can along the way. But it’s important to remember: thoughts lead to words, words lead to actions. It’s easy to get stuck in the thoughts and words, and not follow through. Maybe that’s what transformation is: action.

Personal Project: Final Update

Goal: To get recycling at my apartment complex.

Process: Give out surveys to assess tenants’ interests. Speak with landlord to request recycling. Get estimates from City and Hoosier Disposal. Research financial incentives.

Results: Hoosier Disposal never called me back with the estimate. They had mentioned that they might not be able to tell me since I wasn’t the owner. The City doesn’t give out bins for apartments with more than 4 units. There aren’t a lot of financial incentives for landlords to do recycling, besides using it as a marketing tool. There is the SuPar GrantProgram, but if I couldn’t even get the landlord to respond to my calls I didn’t see him filling out an application for funding. I spoke to him that one time on the phone, and that was it.

A total of 11 out of 13 tenants filled out and returned the surveys (I got three more after taping surveys to their doors). The survey was perhaps the most encouraging portion of the project. Everyone showed interest. One of the people that live above me is actually on the Bloomington Environmental Commission! Small world. Another tenant had been collecting his recycling dutifully, bagging it, and then throwing it in the dumpster! Bless his heart, he’s an international student and I don’t think he understood the system. The updated (and final) survey results are below.

The good news is we have recycling! I put out bins for the first time on Friday for glass, cans, cardboard/paper, and plastics. Lots of signage; you could see it from the other side of the lawn! I sent out a mass email to the tenants to let them know on Thursday morning, so not a lot of notice. BUT I was surprised to find the paper/cardboard bin full to overflowing, ½ full bin for plastics, and 2 cans. :) I’ll be collecting again this Friday and then weekly (every Friday) starting on January 13^th.

While the library lets you check out cameras for free, you have to buy a disk to save the pictures. So no visuals on the setup, sorry guys. The best I can do is satellite. Both buildings are part of the complex. In red are the dumpster and my apartment, so you can see that it’s right along the way to throwing out your trash. 

Reflections: It’s really empowering to do something good and productive. And to be honest, I was completely surprised at the positive response from tenants. Living near the stadium there’s a lot of irresponsible students (I’ll say it, undergrads) that don’t really respect public areas. What you can’t see in the satellite image is the big grassy area east of us that is covered in trash most of the time. And then after a football game, well, you can imagine. But when you get people right where they live, and make them sign something, and show that you care and are willing to put out some extra effort yourself, I think it makes a difference in their behavior and attitudes. So MAYBE I'm a bit less cynical about people as a result of this project.

And who will INVOLVE the community, said the Little Red Hen?

According to Roseland, a collaborative process is a better alternative to the traditional DEAD approach (Decide, Educate, Announce, Defend) because it draws in the community and other potentially-impacted stakeholders early on in the decision making process (190). Collaboration is “…based on the democratic maxim that those affected by a decision should participate directly in the decision-making process” (Roseland 191). It involves actively planning with stakeholders, not for them (Roseland 191).

The advantages to shared decision-making include:

• More intelligent decisions b/c it incorporates best thinking of everyone
• Keeps people from getting into adversarial attitudes
• Increases likelihood of new/better ideas being thought up
• Everyone has a stake in implementing a decision b/c all have participated in its formation
• Lessens possibility that a minority will feel that an unacceptable decision has been imposed on them
• Each participant has an effective veto – levels playing field, creates equal authority in decision (Roseland 191-192).

Canadian Env. Assessment Agency (www.ceaa.gc.ca)

Okay, we’re sold on the concept. How do we do it?

The EPA website has a dizzying array of collaborative problem solving methods, public participation planning guides, and consensus building tools for environmental managers/public officials.

There is also SMARTe, a state/federal/international partnership to develop tools for community involvement in site revitalization (i.e. hazardous waste, toxic cleanup projects). And even IDEM has the CLEAN Community Challenge to help communities create and 

implement sustainable development plans.

Plenty of information exists for citizens too. Just one of the many user-friendly sites is the MyEnvironment website, where a citizen can enter their address and find out information for local air, water, and land quality; health hazards; energy production/savings methods; published reports; and opportunities for community connections. They even have a “Shout Outs” section to post environmental events happening in your area. It also connects the user to the MyEnvironment EPA blog and the official EPA blog, Greenversations.

However, based on citizens’ preferences (NOT managers and officials), is the internet the best venue to inform/communicate with people about environmental issues? I wonder…

I found a great article published by the EPA and Forest Service with results from an 8-year project evaluating the EPA’s Superfund community involvement program. From their many surveys, focus groups, and telephone interviews they gained some pretty telling insights about how people like to receive information:

• A majority of respondents, averaging 74%, prefer site cleanup information to come from the EPA directly. This means people find information from the EPA credible, an important characteristic in the stakeholder communication process.
• Sadly, only 44% of respondents reported actually receiving information from the EPA; the majority (average 78%) got their information from the media, especially newspapers! What a lost opportunity for community building between government agencies and citizens.
• Surprise! The preferred method of communication in ALL survey result categories was a mailing list, and a majority reported that radio, TV, and newspaper sources were NOT preferred.
• Web sites were preferred for less than 10% of respondents (Charnley and Engelbert 172).

What really counts in this study is the following (fairly obvious) finding: “An important pattern that appears…is that respondents who felt informed about the cleanup effort also appeared to have a positive view of EPA's effectiveness in cleaning up a site” (Charnley and Englebert 173). Citizens like to be informed, they like it to come from a credible source, they don’t want it second-hand from the media, and they’re not thrilled with the internet.

As environmental managers/public officials, we have research telling us how people like to get their information; access to all these tools for successful communication with stakeholders; and a few laws that kind of force us to get input from the public. But who is best for facilitating collaboration? They have to (1) be credible, (2) be physically accessible to both inform stakeholders and receive their input, and (3) have some level of authority to carry out any agreements reached via the collaboration process.

My vote is for local government (and no, there wasn’t any consensus on this one). Roseland lays it out pretty nicely. He writes that local governments can be great potential catalysts for sustainable development through the collaboration process because they:

• Are closest to communities
• Build/maintain infrastructure, set standards, regulations, taxes, and fees
• Can influence markets for goods and services (Roseland 193).

BUT as we all know (including Roseland), local governments are generally not rolling in dough. “Policy statements supporting stakeholder participation are inadequate, however, if they are not backed by sufficient resources, staff, and commitment to implement meaningful participation” (Roseland 191). This is where the need for citizen organizations comes in because of limited resources (staff, money, time, political will), and an array of other advantages:

• Provide innovative concepts
• “Furnish whole new paradigms for problem definition”
• Organize information laterally
• Can network across jurisdictions and sectors (public, private, government, corporate, NGOs) (Roseland 194).

Policies, laws, and important resources (i.e. money) often come from the national and regional levels. But when it comes to community/stakeholder involvement it seems like local governments – in coordination with citizen organizations – might be the best option in terms of individualized service.

But I could be wrong! In the study done by Charnley and Engelbert, respondents said they like to get information from the EPA directly, but didn’t specify which level (national, regional, representative state agencies). Maybe the local government doesn’t have the same measure of perceived expertise. Or perhaps people would be concerned with local politics getting in the way of candid discussions. Regardless of who facilitates collaboration, it is imperative to accept and include the public as a legitimate partner, listen to their concerns, and be honest and open throughout the entire process. Or you could just blow it off altogether...

Individual Project Update

I've been able to survey 8 out of 13 residents, which was no easy task. Keep in mind I've been trying at various days of week/times of day since mid-October (like landlord like tenants?). Out of the remaining five: three are never home except REALLY late and two do not answer their doors even when I know they are in fact home (the walls are thin and I live right below them). I will continue to haunt these five, and will tape the surveys to their doors if all else fails, although I don't know how fruitful that will be in getting a response. The trick is to get their email address to let them know my apartment number, and to emphasize the importance of rinsing and sorting!

Here's the survey:

 

And here's the data:

The good: 100% participation on signing the petition and willingness to drop off at my apartment. 0% on "Not at all concerned" and wouldn't recycle even if offered at the apartment.

Not so good: None willing to pay more than $15 extra a month for recycling services. Can't blame them!  Also, I was surprised to see that some people would only be willing to recycle one or two types of things, even though I'm doing all the work.

According to the city and Hoosier Disposal, you can't get bins for a complex with more than 4 units; they just don't do it. So the other alternative is to pay to get a recycling "dumpster" right next to the trash dumpster. I'm waiting on a call back for the estimate from Hoosier to relay the info to the landlord...but I'm not holding my breath. No further word from the landlord since that one fateful call.

When I'm home on break I'll get a few plastic bins for sorting, and a camera to take a few pics to give you guys an idea of what the setup will look like. 

Happy Thanksgiving!