This commit is contained in:
Jeremy Kidwell 2018-06-05 08:24:20 +01:00
parent 07a7948534
commit 6f1939d21c
2 changed files with 57 additions and 35 deletions

Binary file not shown.

After

Width:  |  Height:  |  Size: 679 KiB

View file

@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
font-size: small;
}
.red { color: #fa0000; }
.blue { color: #487bb6;}
/* Two-column layout */
.left-column {
width: 50%;
@ -56,12 +57,11 @@ Presentation engineered with remark: https://github.com/gnab/remark/wiki
---
4 key questions:
# 4 key questions for today:
- What are community groups in Scotland?
- How do they contribute to climate action?
- What should we know about them?
- How can we improve engagement between national networks like SCCS and community groups?
1. What are community groups in Scotland?
2. What should we know about them?
3. How can we improve engagement between national networks like SCCS and community groups?
---
@ -135,7 +135,7 @@ So what role do these groups play?
---
# 1. Niche & Experimentation
## 1. Niche & Experimentation
.right-column[Specific policy interventions can be helped by a "proof of concept"
@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ Smaller community groups can help to form a "niche" which can serve as laborator
---
# 2. Up-scaling
## 2. Up-scaling
Community groups often form ad-hoc regional/national networks.
@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ On the level of these "leaner" networks, information can be disseminated more ef
---
# 3. Formation of community "values"
## 3. Formation of community "values"
Environmental values are often cultivated and deployed through practices on a local level.
@ -165,17 +165,17 @@ Similarly, community groups can often form the context where environmental trans
---
# 4. Consolidating opinion
## 4. Consolidating opinion
More than serving as the sum of the individuals who are involved, community groups can provide a safe supportive space where convictions can be transformed into action.
---
**Question 2**: What do we need to know about community environmental groups?
# **Question 2**: What do we need to know about community environmental groups?
---
# 1. Groups Overlap!
## 1. Groups Overlap!
In some cases, a group will connect with a range of different networks, setting up a Development Trust for the sake of a funding application and a transition group for another project.
@ -183,7 +183,7 @@ Similarly, individual members of these groups may participate in a whole range o
---
# 2. Issues are not the driver
## 2. Issues are not the driver
Whereas for national networks and campaigning organisations, "action" and "issues" can often serve as the main driver.
@ -195,25 +195,25 @@ Groups are driven by community formation and support, and issues come afterwards
---
# 3. Local groups aren't always "local"
## 3. Local groups aren't always "local"
In workshops we've conducted, we have found that these groups can often contain a wide mix: including people who have resided for multiple generations in a community to foreign nationals who have been resident in Britain for only a few years.
---
# 4. Local groups are often "lean"
## 4. Local groups are often "lean"
Resourcing is extremely scarce. Though some groups are successful at securing lottery funding or a climate challenge fund grant, far more often groups work with minimal resourcing. This means there isn't any formal staff, and their activities are outside working hours, and activities will rely on volunteered expertise.
---
# 5. Local groups work hard
## 5. Local groups work hard
Many of the volunteers involved in these groups are tremendously hard working people, putting in hundreds of pro bon hours each year. Small successes and public attention can provide a major boost. Similarly, setbacks can often dampen work for long durations.
---
Quick review:
## Quick review:
- Community groups provide a "niche" for experimentation
- Their work can often provide the basis for up-scaling larger sustainability transitions
@ -222,56 +222,78 @@ Quick review:
---
Quick review (part 2):
## Quick review (part 2):
- Group memberships overlap, participants often have multiple "environmental identities"
- Groups can tend to be focussed on community building over "issues"
- Local groups aren't always comprised of "locals"
- Local groups usually have no budget or resources, relying on volunteers.
- They work really hard but their work can be precarious. Small resources / encouragement can provide an outside effect. Similarly, for setbacks.
- They work really hard but their work can be precarious. Small resources, encouragement, and setbacks can provide an outsize effect.
---
**Question 3**: How can we work more effectively with community groups?
# **Question 3**: How can we work more effectively with community groups?
---
# Idea 1: Use social media
Talk about usage patterns.
Engage on the level of local values; the need for user engagement is not satiated by "messaging", especially with religious groups.
## Idea 1: Use social media
---
# Idea 2: Targetted communications make a difference
We conducted a study of five Scottish community group networks (633 total). Based on this research, these groups use the following social media platforms:
Consider sub-setting groups.
- Groups which have a .blue[website]: **87%**
- Groups with a .blue[facebook page/group]: **70%**
- Groups with a .blue[twitter feed]: **26%** (ranging from 16% to 35%)
- Groups with .blue[no social media] (including website): **9%** (ranging from 3% to 18%)
Fuller analysis of social media engagement and social networks forthcoming...
---
# Idea 3: Build in reciprocity
## Idea 2: Targetted communications make a difference
Community groups can have tremendous impact within a small space and have access to social networks which are unknown to major NGOs.
Each network has a range of different forms of work: food growing, infrastructure. Similarly, groups have different approaches to policy engagement - some are direct others are indirect.
.left-column[
I'm working with several of these networks to survey their membership to identify these patterns and enable more bespoke outreach, e.g. identifying "high stakes" groups near licensed fracking wells and "politically active" groups with identified experience hosting hustings and local MPs.]
.right-column[<img style="width:65%;margin-top:-1em;" src="derivedData/high_stakes_map_sample.png">]
---
## Idea 3: Build in reciprocity
Community groups can have tremendous impact within their local area (and elected political leaders by extension).
They also have access to social networks which are unknown / inaccessible to major NGOs.
We're often used to the "direct" appraoch to the public, but can we find ways to treat community groups as intermediaries?
There is tremendous potential for policy co-creation and co-research?
**The potential impact of policy co-creation and co-research could be very significant, especially given the uneven distribution of population across representative democracy.**
---
# Idea 4: Consider enabling projects outside the central belt
## Idea 4: Consider spinning off SCCS "communities"
- Support community anchors as "beacon" projects; invest in established projects to leverage as support agents for new projects
Stop Climate Chaos is very effective at advocacy and engagement on .red[high-level policy] and .red[direct outreach] to the concerned public.
## Calibrate expectations of community-level groups to match SME investment expectations
Our community engagement policy is a periodically successful accident of the above two.
- Expect failure (Startup failure rate > 90%). Can we fund blue-sky ambitious projects?
- Compare time to ROI for SMB; adjust funding horizons for project maturation and delivery
- Deliverable should be customer focussed ("climate justice" local services, etc.) not investor focussed ("carbon metrics")
Might we consider setting up a working group tasked with engagement at the intermediate level?
I'm happy to advise, as always.
---
## Recap
- Use social media
- Targetted communications / network subsetting
- Build in reciprocity
- Consider spinning off SCCS "communities"
</textarea>
<script src="https://remarkjs.com/downloads/remark-latest.min.js">
</script>