A number of models of the socio-environmentalism inform our present understanding of social policy. The human welfare ecology model focuses on limits to growth, both physical and social, and validates environmental reforms on the basis of health and the well being of future generations. The eco-feminist model seeks holistic solutions. It particularly states the need for changing the structures of power where current social policy is conceptualized. All models highlight community wholeness meaning participation and the decentralization of service provision, the impact of growth on our natural environment and acknowledge increasing scarcity of natural resources. It is suggested that the most important issues likely to impact on poor people are access to water, food and clean air.
| Needs | water food air sheltor |
| costs | transportation medicine security |
| models of the socio-environmentalism inform our present understanding of social policy | Whew! |
| need for changing the structures of power | To make them more like Indian centers of power perhaps? |
| eco-feminist model | And I was scared of just plain feminists! |
| holistic solutions | Fascinating how fashionable this term has become, and contexts where it shows up. Now if I could lay my hands on these nonholistics ... |
| current social policy is conceptualized | It should be done as per Sir Packard in 50's - nuclear power station decision and Madame secretary drinking coffee in about the same time! |
| decentralization of service provision | so that they become more expensive, unavailable, stupider, etc! |
| impact of growth on our natural environment | Not a problem if properly addressed, what courts ought to be doing |
| increasing scarcity of natural resources | A malthusian objection that precipated evilly a marxian response |
| impact on poor people | rich too, it is a matter of how much care, not economics alone |
| socio-environmental framework | Hollow term without the implied economic realities term |
>These frameworks can and have informed our understanding of social policy by educating us about the need to integrate social welfare policy with environmental policy. The global equality of the world is not possible to achieve at present because developed countries living standards are based on economic growth emphasizing greater materialism and consumerism. While growth is the main focus, welfare provision is unsustainable.
| environment impact | current generation really does not care of costs to later ones. Just remember what Teddy Roosevelt had to do to US congress? |
| Great depression was an inevitable consequence of the 1920's. | |
| development desires | developed countries living standards are based on economic growth emphasizing greater materialism and consumerism - why is that such a bad idea given that every one wants that. It must be about forced sharing of impact costs too! |
| free market realisation of persistent goals | It is all about free market realisation of persistent goals. Reality Drug cos abuse NIH. NIH anuses Dean Ornish. Problem - patents cant cover costs. Terrible ideas - government servants decide, politicians decide. But Market decides badly due to short term goals! Terrible idea - increase length of patents. |
| The only real solution: compulsory licensing and limited profits. Profits are not obscene, obscene-profits are!! USPTO is not obscene, its examiners, lawyers, and rules are. | |
| Simple but profound Patent rule - you get a patent after 3 years, provided (exising rules ...) and no one applied for it in that period. Encourages people to apply for more patents to prevent others from abusing the limited knowledge of examiners. 1 click stupidity cant be patented because others will do it easily. Spreadsheets can be, for Lotus can always invoke compulsory licensing. NO one gets seriously hurt. | |
| The whole idea of setting up rules using WIPO so that they benefit only a certain part of population, and coupling that with strong inheritence rules; you have the making of a disaster. |
> a.. Bottom up participation .
| Bottom up participation . | But strong centralised commuication and planning mechanism, decentralized only for reliability by replication, not willy-nilly splicing of historical pieces |
| Empowerment | which MUST mean the ability to decide to spent however AND the ability of competitors to be able to inform the consumers. The second ability is just as crucial and has serious anti-trust implications. What is true is no ones business, at least three views IS every ones business, regarless of how much money some one spends. |
| Accountability | Must be political and not legal |
| Monitoring | Anti-trust governed monitors with political reporting |
| Evaluation | Anti-trust governed evaluators with political reporting |
| Gender issues | A basic complicated problem of our time regardless of development best left untouched here. |
A community-based approach is a natural outcome of a commitment to decentralization and participatory democracy (Ife, 1999:89). The structures for decision making within a community, need to provide a feeling of belonging and acceptance for effective participation - meaning workers need to facilitate communication and empowerment at the grass roots level - bottom up. Communities are diverse by their very nature and often promote the ideology, 'small is beautiful' and seek to retain their individual identity. This diversity allows for models of change which can address a more 'local needs based' perspective for desired social and ecological policy outcomes. Gemeinschaft or community structures are important in that they enable people to interact with each other in a greater variety of roles, interacting with others as 'whole people' rather than being limited for example by your role definition in the workplace. This process of holeness means that people can readily contribute and share wider range of skills and creative talents for the benefit of the community as a whole. It is important as a worker to define community in the case of community development and socio environmentalism as having a geographical boundary or distinct border. This emphasis the need for communities to be linked to the land. Ife suggests that workers have to adopt a process of dialogue, exchange, consciousness raising, education and action.. consistent with the ecological perspective (1999:94).
| faclitate communication | |
| grass root empowerment | |
| small is beautiful | |
| local needs based | |
| desired social and ecological policy outcomes. | |
| Gemeinschaft | |
| whole people | |
| holeness | |
| share wider range of skills | |
| creative talents | |
| community as a whole | |
| socio environmentalism |
| self reliance | terrible falsely-appealing idea that opposes THE one way humans have advanced - specialization |
| external resources | usually a simple stupid narrow geographical definition. Pensioners as community in adelaide have more in common with those in Miami than non-pensioners in Perth. |
| LETS | Horrible acronym for cutting the choices and choice providers in the name of self reliance! |
| Far better is free market subject to limited profit and also-must rules. First eliminates price-gouging, second eliminates fly-by-night operations. Who decides profit-levels and also-must? current politicians. | |
| co-operatives | Similar problems to self reliance. |
| community banks | Essential economic caution dooms them to tried and true empirical things and prevent them from acting like venture capitalists. |
| Tightened funding | Perhaps the government is being squeezed, perhaps being an adealogue. There is only one way out - some thing like social security, with earmarked funds, taxes, and responsibilities. Then let there be an earmarked democracy on how the earmarked funds are to be spent and split! |
| Community strength | A properly organized community can be enormously powerful - we are talking of a community of consumers and votes. I repeat, let AARP be the model. The politicians, I bet, would soon be terrorized without even one ounce of blood spilt. |