In my last post, I challenged you to start sharing your dreams and visions of the future. Today, I want to start sharing some of mine. It’s a big task that would fill a fat book because there are so many interwoven issues. I have chosen to start with a vision of restructuring human settlements, and rebuilding local communities. Please post discussion on the Pod "On the Wisdom Trail"

The Ecovillage Movement

I have chosen to live in an ecovillage at Findhorn in Scotland, part of the vibrant Global Ecovillage Network (GEN). Ecovillages are relatively small communities that seek to create a way of life that is sustainable ecologically, economically, socially, culturally and spiritually. They are very diverse. At one end of the spectrum are traditional villages in the majority world such as the Sarvodaya movement in Sri Lanka and Eco Yoff in Senegal. In rich western countries, many are small rural communities with just a few families and enough land to grow most of their own food. But others, such as Eco-village Los Angeles, are transforming inner city areas.

A decade ago, GEN was small and almost invisible. Today, with growing concerns about climate change and sustainability, the world is starting to take notice of what ecovillages have to offer. For example, the Findhorn Community, where I live, is an NGO accredited at the UN, and host to one of 12 CIFAL training centres set up by the UN Institute for Training and Research. Each CIFAL Centre is “a hub for capacity building and knowledge sharing between local authorities, national governments, international organizations, the private sector and civil society.” Findhorn also offers trainings in all aspects and levels of ecovillage design. The month-long Ecovillage Design Education is a training for trainers developed by GEN and an official contribution to the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development. By contrast, the Ecovillage Training, which also lasts a month, is more of an introduction based on Findhorn’s experience.

The energy of the ecovillage movement is focused on creating model small-scale sustainable settlements. However, valuable as these are, the vision needs to expand beyond individual ecovillages if this approach is to make a significant contribution to the future of an over-populated and increasingly urban world. My vision of the future is of a sustainable society and economy with a high quality of life and advanced culture based on networks of ecovillages which capture the economies of scale and diversity of large populations without losing the advantages of a smaller ecological footprint, local autonomy, neighbourly and cooperative relationships, slower rhythms of life, and vibrant community arts, crafts and entertainment. Following is a brief sketch, little more than a verbal cartoon, of what this might look.

A glimpse of the future?

When they think about sustainable futures, many people focus on technologies for energy and water supply, building construction, transport, food production and so on. These are hugely important, because without appropriate technologies a sustainable community is impossible. But the experience of aspiring ecovillages reveals that technology is the easy part. There are lots of brilliant technologies and creative ideas already available, and more are being developed all the time. In the long term, people are far trickier. It has proved very challenging to create settlements and social structures that work economically, socially and culturally. These challenges include:
•    Generating a sustainable, if modest, income;
•    Building community relationships;
•    Creating decision-making and conflict management systems that work;
•    Finding time and energy for socialising, celebrations, art and creativity.

The answers developed by ecovillages are as diverse as the technologies they use, and detailed discussion is beyond the scope of this article. What I want to do here is focus primarily on the role of settlement design in facilitating the emergence of sustainable communities. The way we lay out our villages and towns, or restructure urban areas over time, has a big impact on the kinds of social relationships that emerge. For instance, it is almost impossible to provide efficient public transport in suburbia, locking such areas into high-energy, high-cost private transport. They discourage neighbourliness and community, and encourage isolation of nuclear families. And there is no alternative to commuting to work for most bread-winners. So how might things be different?

Imagine in place of your city, a network of autonomous, inter-connected small towns, separated by land set aside for nature conservation, recreation, water supply, food production and similar purposes. The actual size, shape, distribution and spacing of these towns varies, both to provide diverse living environments and to fit harmoniously into the landscape. However, some idea of how such settlements might work can be gained from an idealised model.

Each town has a population of a few thousand people, living around a central area containing schools, shops, offices, service industries, the public transport terminus, and civic, entertainment, sporting and recreation facilities. This core occupies an area of no more than 80ha – corresponding to a circle 1 km in diameter. Most buildings here are underground to save energy, and to leave the surface free for parks and sports grounds.  However, there is ducted natural light inside, including ‘windows’ through which the outside world can be seen, including the night sky. 

Residential areas are located in a ring around the core, no more than 0.75 km wide, with open space beyond. Dwellings are arranged in clusters of 5 to 50, with a range of shared facilities such as common dining and recreation rooms, child play spaces, workshops, laundry, and shared guest facilities, all of which cut the need for private space and encourage development of a cooperative community. In this way the ecological footprint and cost of dwellings is reduced. Workshops, storage and parking facilities are often located below the dwellings to save land. Buildings are low-rise, no more than 3 or 4 stories high, and of mixed size and density to suit different lifestyles and stages of life. Private gardens are small, and most land is owned and managed in common. Dwelling clusters are very energy efficient and use advanced technologies that make them generally self-sufficient in energy, water and wastewater services.

The dwelling clusters are connected with each other and the central core by a network of paths for cyclists, pedestrians and electric buggies that run through linear parks, and are segregated from the narrow roads used by delivery vehicles, taxis and the few private cars. Due to the layout, no-one lives more than 1.25 km from the town centre, or more than 2.5 km from any other house - easy walking or cycling distance for most, and accessible by electric buggy for others. Similarly, no-one is more than 0.75 km from the open space surrounding the town.

Ideally, in densely settled areas such towns are spaced at about 5 km intervals, although the actual spacing and layout varies greatly. Thus, typically there are 2.5 km of open space between the edges of adjacent towns, and the built-over area occupies less than 25% of the landscape. The open space supports a mixture of conservation reserves, natural parks, urban forests, quarries, intensive organic agriculture and aquaculture, and ‘allotments’ used for growing food by residents without private gardens. As much of the town’s food as possible is produced in this area, thus minimising transport and maximising freshness, although the actual percentage depends on the landform, soils and climate. Other farm products include raw materials for plastics and biofuels as well as timber and paper pulp. The open area is interlaced with walking and cycle paths as well as narrow service roads that are used for leisure, access to neighbouring towns, and transport of produce. The open space also is crossed by transport corridors which connect the towns by high-speed rail and road for both goods and passenger transport.

In its pure form this vision is applicable only to ‘green fields’ developments, or regeneration of extensive derelict industrial areas. But over time whole cities could be restructured into more self-sufficient communities. Natural models for this exist in many older cities such as London which long ago engulfed neighbouring villages which have somehow retained their identity over intervening centuries. On a smaller scale, there are already examples of suburban streets that have been converted to cluster housing by removing land boundaries, and apartment blocks and disused warehouses that have been turned into urban communities. Such evolution requires vision, imaginative planning and appropriate incentives rather than wholesale demolition and reconstruction.

Each cluster of dwellings becomes the basis for a cohousing or ecovillage community that is responsible for its own internal management. The town and its surrounding area is governed by an elected council responsible for all functions which cannot be adequately managed at the community level. This includes some aspects of energy, food and water supply, waste recycling, local environmental management, transport, education, welfare, health, cultural and recreational facilities, and development control. A relatively novel, but key, function is employment of trained facilitators whose job it is to help the residents of housing clusters to build community and overcome relationship difficulties. Towns coordinate and standardise their activities where necessary through regional and State assemblies with representation from each town. State agencies and utility companies act as consultants and contractors, facilitating coordination and establishment of uniform technical standards where necessary, and providing expert planning, design, installation, maintenance and management services. However, their role as regulators and central service providers is much reduced.

As each town is responsible for its own development within an agreed coordinating structure, a high degree of diversity evolves in social and economic systems, settlement patterns, architectural styles and so on. The emphasis is on economic self-reliance, with most people working within their own town in order to reduce unnecessary transport. Thus each town needs a diversity of skills ranging from food production and processing, through maintenance of buildings, equipment and open space, to office, education and health services, and leisure and cultural pursuits.

This economic structure, with most people working and living in the one town, fosters a sense of community beyond the dwelling cluster, so that most people choose to use town recreational and cultural facilities for much of their leisure. Local theatre, music, sports and other cultural activities flourish. People also choose to have retired relatives and children living in the same town where possible. As community identity grows, it naturally comes to take responsibility for those who are unemployed, aged or disabled. Each town tends to have a mixture of ages, abilities and incomes, and develops an appropriate mix of housing. In this way, the new economic structure and settlement pattern reduce the problem of inequality.

Beyond common economic needs, each town tends to specialise in a particular type of economic activity. Some produce manufactured goods such as tools, appliances or vehicles. Others focus on higher education, research, or specialist medical and hospital services. A third group is based on arts and crafts such as furniture making, textiles, pottery or painting. Yet others concentrate on specialist retail facilities, while some become home to professional cultural groups such as orchestras or theatre, ballet and opera companies, or to museums and art galleries.

These towns are not closed societies, although the populations are relatively stable, and their growth is constrained by the availability of land and resources, and the lifestyle adopted. Thus, people can only move into an area when others move out or die. Stagnation and parochialism are minimised by the transport and communications links to other towns, and the world as a whole. People are able to visit other villages easily, and indeed need to do so to buy certain goods, to get certain services, to participate in some sporting competitions, or to visit a museum or professional theatre. People have access to information and entertainment in libraries and databases around the world from their home computers, and have videophone links to other towns.

In some areas, recreational access to natural areas has to be limited to avoid degradation from the relatively high local population. Each town works out appropriate ways of controlling use. These range from encouraging leisure activities away from natural areas towards the landscaped central parks, to tradeable permits for a number of days a year for each person, to ‘on’ and ‘off’ days, or pay for use. Similar mechanisms are used for regional facilities such as beaches, fisheries and national parks, based on access rights by each town as a whole. Overall, however, the impact of such constraints is not severe because the vibrant and rewarding community life reduces the need to ‘get away from it all’.

Concluding comments

In many respects, this scenario is similar to utopian anarchism - a return to an idealised past when simple folk lived a non-industrialised rural idyll. However, there are critical differences. This is not a vision of a society that has turned its back on science and technology, or which has magically got rid of most of the human population. This is a vision of a society which makes maximum use of advanced knowledge to create a world in which large numbers can have a high quality of life without destroying the natural resources on which they depend; a society of human scale, which values each individual, and in which people can achieve their potentials as human beings.

There are few if any technical barriers to this future. The challenges lie in the reluctance of ordinary men and women, the reluctance of ourselves above all, to contemplate radically changing our lifestyles and values to embrace a more community-focused way of life; in our reluctance to devote time and energy to developing community relationships. But we may soon be forced by climate change and other limits to choose between radical change with the hope of a better long term future, or hanging onto our current way of life as its quality declines.

In my last post, I described my vision of decentralised, sustainable settlements, and suggested some ways in which existing urban areas could evolve in this direction. And in an earlier entry on “How we beat climate change”, I described how local community action will be vital to our future. Today, I want to introduce a practical initiative called ‘Transition Towns’ that is inspiring many communities in the UK. The idea is relatively new, and hence concrete results are still scarce, but more and more communities are signing up. The information here is summarised from the website, and a downloadable 48p. “Transition Initiatives Primer.” If you feel inspired after reading this, how about starting a project where you live?

In response to the twin pressures of Peak Oil and Climate Change, some pioneering communities in the UK, Ireland and beyond are taking an integrated and inclusive approach to reducing their carbon footprint and increasing their ability to withstand the fundamental shifts that will occur as we pass Peak Oil. They are unleashing their collective creativity and adaptability through coordinated projects that lead to a planned reduction in energy use in all areas of life. Their aim is not only survival but creation of “a way of living that’s significantly more connected, more vibrant and more in touch with our environment than the oil-addicted treadmill we are on today.”

As we near the end of the era of cheap oil, and face the necessity of drastically curbing our emissions of greenhouse gases, “it’s difficult to overstate what this means to our lives in the developed countries.” In the words of Andrew McNamara, Minister for Sustainability, Climate Change and Innovation in the Australian State of Queensland:

There's no question whatsoever that community driven local solutions will be essential. That's where government will certainly have a role to play in assisting and encouraging local networks, who can assist with local supplies of food and fuel and water and jobs and the things we need from shops. It was one of my contentions in the first speech I made on this issue in February of 2005... that we will see a relocalisation of the way in which we live that will remind us of not last century, but the one before that. And that's not a bad thing. Undoubtedly one of the cheaper responses that will be very effective is promoting local consumption, local production, local distribution. And there are positive spin offs to that in terms of getting to know our communities better. There are human and community benefits from local networks that I look forward to seeing grow.

Many of us are inclined to wait for governments or new technologies to bail us out. But governments are powerless without broad electoral support, and new technologies take too long to develop and implement. It’s time that we took the lead in our local communities. We have to act NOW, before it is too late. It is imperative that those of us who are aware of the dangers set an example of what is possible by instigating local action NOW.

Do you feel daunted? Do you feel that one individual, one local community can make no difference to such a huge global problem? If you do, remember these points:
•    Your action and those of your community will be an example and an inspiration to others. It will be like starting a snowball rolling down hill.
•    Every significant advance in modern civilization has been the result of persistence and perseverance by one, or a few, individuals: abolition of slavery, prison reform, universal education, women’s suffrage, human rights, etc etc.
YOU and your community have the power to change the world.

The key strategy is ‘relocalisation’ – horrible word, but descriptive. This means a process of building local sustainability and resilience by producing as many as possible of the essential goods and services within the community and the immediate surrounding area. This not only minimises vulnerability to energy price rises and shortages, but also minimizes carbon dioxide emissions from transport. Several cities in the USA and well over 100 communities worldwide have begun to relocalize. Portland, Oregon, for example, in its Peak Oil consultation report proposes a reduction in oil and gas consumption by 2.6% per year, or 25% by 2020. And in the UK several communities are looking at similar (or more ambitious) ‘energy descent’ targets.

According to the Transitions Initiatives Primer, the Transition Model is based on the following realizations:
•    Climate Change and Peak Oil require urgent action
•    Life with less energy is inevitable and it is better to plan for it than be taken by surprise
•    Industrial society has lost the resilience to be able to cope with energy shocks
•    We have to act together and we have to act now
•    Continued growth of the world economy and consumption is not possible on a finite planet
•    We demonstrated phenomenal levels of ingenuity and intelligence as we raced up the energy growth curve over the last 150 years, and there's no reason why we can't use those qualities, and more, as we negotiate our way down from the peak of the energy mountain.
•    If we plan and act early enough, and use our creativity and cooperation to unleash the genius within our local communities, then we can build a future that could be far more fulfilling and enriching, more connected and more gentle on the earth than the lifestyles we have today.

When faced with very challenging situations, we humans tend to construct emotional and psychological barriers to change. We act like ostriches burying our heads in the sand. The Transitions Initiative names and dismantles the commonest barriers in the guise of “7 Buts”. It then works with 12 key steps to transition. These are not a prescriptive ‘must do’ list, but are guidelines based on experience that can be adapted as necessary to suit the local needs.

In summary, the ‘7 Buts’ are:
•    But we’ve got no funding ...
•    But they won’t let us ...
•    But there are already green groups in this town ...
•    But no-one in this town cares about the environment anyway ...
•    But surely it’s too late to do anything ...?
•    But I don’t have the right qualifications ...
•    But I don’t have the energy for doing that ...

If any of these feel like your reaction, I suggest you look at the Transitions Initiative Primer, available on the website (link above).

Again in summary, the 12 steps of Transition are:
•    Set up a Steering Group and design its demise from the outset.
•    Raise awareness
•    Network with existing groups and activists to make sure the project is inclusive
•    Organise a public event to bring the project into the community at large and build momentum
•    Form working groups covering all aspects of life
•    Use ‘Open Space’ meetings – no agenda, timetable, coordinator or minute-taker
•    Develop visible practical manifestations of the project
•    Organise training in key skills such as repair, cookery, cycle maintenance, house insulation, gardening, etc etc.
•    Build bridges to local government
•    Honour the wisdom of elders who remember the days before plentiful energy
•    Let the process go where it will
•    Create an energy descent plan

Again, if you want more detail, download that Primer!

I hope that’s enough to whet your appetite for local action! There’s lots of experience and advice out there on the web to help you get going. And we can start our own self-help group in “On the Wisdom Trail”.

In my last entry on Transition Towns I talked about the blocks to change, and listed the ‘7 Buts’ addressed by the Transition Initiative. Since then, I’ve been reflecting on blocks to action – surely the most critical issue in tackling climate change. What are these blocks? Where do they come from? and How can we overcome them?

What stops us acting? Well, of course, there are our fears and traumas, emotional and psychological blocks, our busyness and other commitments to family and job and ... They’re all very real. And yet they can be transformed by seeing Reality differently; by changing our worldview. This is the key starting place – a conclusion I reached many years ago before I began writing “The Science of Oneness: A worldview for the twenty-first century.” To become a revolutionary, change your mind!

So what’s wrong with our worldview? Well ... lots of things actually. But here’s a simple image. To make a stool that will stand firmly on an uneven surface, you must give it three legs. With two or one leg, it will fall over as soon as you let go. With 4 or more legs it will wobble. Just so, a stable worldview must be based on three aspects of Reality – what we might call Physicality, Mentality and Spirituality. Today, we have fragmented our view of Reality as if we’ve made a stool with hinged legs and now wonder why it keeps collapsing.

This fragmentation began in the European so-called Enlightenment which led to the scientific revolution. Philosophers and scientists of the day rightly rejected the authoritarian dogmatism of the Church. But in throwing out the bathwater of religion, they also threw out the baby of Spirituality. So existence became reduced to nothing but mind and matter. And today, we’re so besotted with materialism that we regard mind as nothing but an epiphenomenon of matter. It’s like we’ve removed half the second leg, or put a hinge between the two. We are thus left desperately trying to prop up this tottering one-and-a-half-legged stool with Physicality, but this can’t take the load. The consequences of this fragmentation run deep in our psyches and lives.

Let’s start by taking a closer look at Mentality. Some of us try to build a rational worldview on the basis of science, philosophy and logic, and to lead lives consistent with our conclusions. In some cases, this leads to commitment and service to the material world, but in others, without the support of Spirituality, it results in disengagement and self-service. Many others (particularly in the USA) seek to replace the broken Spirituality leg with fundamentalist religion, but destabilise the stool again by rejecting the critical mind.

What of the majority? Most of us in the developed world, I think, are simply asleep a lot of the time, inhabiting dreamlike virtual worlds. We live, if it can be called living, inside our heads, disconnected not only from Spirituality but also from Physicality. We live in a pretend world of TV, films, books, magazines, avatars, the web ... including Zaadz! Even at work, we mostly inhabit a digital domain removed as far as possible from contact with real people and the real world.

Whenever we leave our mental bunkers and venture into the material world, we don our blinkers, pacify our minds, and enter a strange Physicality of addiction. Addiction to drugs: legal or illegal, recreational or pharmaceutical. Addiction to foods: sugar, coffee, chocolate ... Addiction to the acquisition, operation, care and protection of possessions: houses, cars, electronic playthings ... Addiction to habits and routines that give us an impression of control, stability and security. Addiction to sports and leisure pursuits. Addiction to sex and dysfunctional relationships. Addiction to any and all distractions from the painful, meaningless, scary, lonely, insecure, unpleasant experience of here and now as it really is. Addiction to anything that will blank out the fear when the ice gets too thin over the turbulent cold waters below. Like Charlie Brown in the Peanuts cartoon, we hang on for dear life to our security blanket of materialism and virtual reality.

Unfortunately, the global crisis is not a computer game; climate change, war and poverty exist outside Second Life. If we’re to survive, not only as a civilization but also as a species, we must wake up and leave the security of our virtual worlds and our addictions. We must move boldly into the here and now and dwell there. Just think what we could do for planet Earth by releasing all the creative time and energy!

It takes courage to wake. I’m as reluctant as the next person when my inner fears and traumas rise. I head for the coffee and sugar, if not for stronger things. I take refuge in my routines – like writing blogs! I’m as addicted to stability and security as the next person, but I can see that it’s a mirage enticing me to destruction. Life could throw a big spanner in the works at any moment: sickness, accident, death, ... Or fantasy world on which I depend may collapse as the credit crunch, energy prices, ‘natural’ disasters and terrorism bite. My best hope is to face my fears and take action. But boy, am I resistant!

It’s fear that locks us into our virtual world and our addictions. It’s fear that blocks action. Fear born of trauma. Until we face our fears, heal our traumas and move through them and beyond them, we will remain stuck on the road to destruction. But when we do face them, we will discover great treasures. This is the universal myth of the hero’s journey. The hero (male or female) sets forth into the unknown, facing their terrors, encountering hardships and dangers along the way, and ultimately returning home transformed and with a great gift for their community.

Real security can only be found within. Not in the world of virtual reality, but in the confidence that we can cope no matter what, that we have a valuable part to play in the journey of humanity, that we can trust the process of life and learn from it. Only those with the deepest spiritual lives can stand alone in this way. But we don’t need to. We can stand together as family, friends and community in mutual support. We can replace electronic relationships with good, old-fashioned, local, flesh and blood ones! 

If we’re to survive and transform ourselves and the planet, we must learn to stand in the real world on the three-legged stool of true Physicality, Mentality and Spirituality. A Physicality based on our intimate relationship with the Earth and Cosmos. A Mentality grounded in scientific knowledge and spiritual wisdom. And a Spirituality rooted in the Spirit of Life, the Source that enlivens and unifies all that is. A Spirituality stripped of the trappings of religious dogmas, doctrines, rituals, practices, scriptures, priesthoods ..., and open to the power of love, compassion, truth and wisdom.

Merry Christmas and a transformative New Year!