Asian Alliance for Solidarity Economy

by

BETSAN PATRICIA MARTIN, New Zealand

(This paper was presented at the 2007 Asian Forum for Solidarity Economy in Manila, Philippines)

I bring greeting from the Charter for Responsibility Committee in NZ and include in that warm greetings from the people of the land, Maori and Pacific communities with whom we work as an intercultural team.

We acknowledge those who have gone before us, those who inform our thinking and actions towards human responsibility, and those who give leadership and guidance for governance that supports the interdependence of people with the earth.

Philosophy for Aotearoa-NZ Charter for Responsibility

Relational ethics

The main philosophical orientation of our committee is to work with relational ethics, through practices of partnership, shared-decision-making, and working with an earth-centered approach in our projects. One of our group, Charles Royal who is a Maori philosopher refers to a ‘woven universe’ (2003) to describe the inter-relatedness of all things.

The relational world view that we work with comes from indigenous knowledge sources, as well as to western philosophers of ethics. Indigenous thought  such as Charles Royal’s concept of a woven universe, and the Pacific oceanic traditions  reflected in the two hulled waka come from traditions of  governance which have regard for safeguarding resources across generations.

Western thought which guides our thinking include Emmanual Levinas and Luce Irigaray, whose work comes from critique of western patriarchal individualism, and restores relational and spiritual values such as responsiveness as neighbours, and the capacity to relate across differences of sex, culture, age, belief that is identified as being attuned with women’s values.

Within this relational approach can be found a move from human centred ethics to the interdependence of life with earth, air, fire and water. The challenge of this work to western women for whom freedom and equality have become realities, is to work with such ethics when we are in so many ways compelled by the dominance of competitive, economic values.

Partnership

Another metaphor for a relational approach, from our location in the Pacific is the two-hulled waka – a vessel for the great journeys across the Pacific that were undertaken traditionally.  Much can be derived from this image, but the main aspects which inspire us are the two hulls and the joining platform.

The model may seem restricted to partnership between ‘two’, but it can represent many forms of shared endeavour, One interpretation we hear is that women are at the front, giving birth to the future, and men at the back safeguarding experience for traditional wisdom.

The hulls can be seen as corresponding to Mãori and Pakeha, the two main groups of people in NZ who entered into a Treaty in 1840. The Treaty was an agreement for shared governance, but this has never been agreed to by Parliament since is represented the majority British immigrant population from the 1860’s.

The joining platform is a key part of the structure, where representatives of the hulls meet to exchange knowledge and views and for decision-making. You might say that direction for the vessel is set from the space in the middle.

Partnership expresses our relational approach which is at the heart of responsibility – responsibility is responsiveness, and attunement with those we relate to closely, as well as  more distantly, and with the living world.

Responsibility for the Health of Water Ecosystems: a NZ –Pacific regional initiative.

NZ Team

Earlier this year a small groups of us  came together for a special 3 day meeting  to discuss responsibility and the project we have initiated on  governance for the health water ecosystems. We chose to work with water because our Pacific identity as a liquid continent, where the  ocean, Te Moana Nui a Kiwa, makes us neighbours.

Reference points for Responsibility for Water

Water is the focus of intense interest for governance in NZ with tension between the market interests in commodifying water and establishing property and ownership rights, and indigenous tribes having to straddle customary traditions of guardianship and care for water, yet make claims for their interests in water through property rights conventions.

Access to water and water quality are the focus of local  conflicts across the globe as water becomes locked up  in private property regimes.  The rising sea levels in Climate Change is already impacting on the Pacific with the prospect of environmental refugees raising particular responsibilities as neighbours for the larger countries of NZ and Australia.

Another reference point for  water comes from understanding water as the foundation of all of life. As stated by Callum Coats, a  water researcher and advocate with whom we are working stated:

“Good water – good life, Bad water – bad life, No water – no life.”

The natural state of water is to be in continuous motion and transformation, absorbing essential elements as  it flows through the atmosphere and earth to take on the qualities needed to support life. The continuance of life is not just a matter of water supply, rather it is the quality of water that determines the level of functioning of human life and other species that consume water.  Coats has identified the mutual importance of the health of water and of life. The question before us is not one of humanity versus the rest of creation, but one of a humanity inextricably embedded in a mutually supportive environment in which the myriads of lesser organisms have an equally vital role to play. Ultimately their needs and their continuing health are as important as ours, and we neglect them at our peril (Coats 2001:2)

Unfortunately I can only bring you a sip of knowledge of  the amazing attributes of water which we are partaking in through a series of seminars with Callum Coats, who opens up the world of  vortical energy systems as part of the complex properties of water.

In this time of a Climate for Change we are taking notice of global environmental deterioration and our intimate connection with this loss.  Part of the remedy for the general increasing disconnection with the natural world is to restore our ability to relate to living, breathing energy systems, to hear the intelligence of earth and rivers and oceans.

In a small and humble way we seek to respond forms of governance and management that is attuned to the life supporting capacity of earth’s ecosystems.

Integrated governance

In the NZ and Pacific context, indigenous systems based on the interdependence of people with earth, provide some guidance for engaging with environmental responsibility through whole of systems governance and safeguarding long term environmental  and human interests.

We have identified ‘integrated governance’ as a term our Charter for Responsibility working group is using for the initiative on ‘Responsibility for the Health of Water ecosystems. We are inaugurating the project with a meeting in Samoa in January, with participants anticipating being involved in case studies of integrated governance of various water ecosystems projects in NZ, Australia and Pacific Islands.

Principles which we are working with for integrated governance are linked with the sharing of knowledge across disciplinary boundaries and with the interwoven dimensions of social, economic and environmental dimensions for ‘strong sustainability’. These, along with decision-making for the Long term correspond with principles of the Charter for Human Responsibility.

Principles for integrated governance include:

• Partnership and collaboration
• Working with cultural difference and support for indigenous aspirations regarding land and governance
• Decision-making involving whole systems approaches
• An interdisciplinary approach, involving science, social science, philosophy, economics,  with sharing of knowledge.
• Holding the Long view to ensure resources to support future generations
• Earth related with an ecosystem focus
• Keeping a place for the environment ‘to speak’ at the governance table

Recently I was discussing a  proposal for a housing development, of a style that can be seen all over NZ  for subdividing land into small lifestyle properties or for intense inner city apartment construction. In this case it was a rural area which I had been involved in opposing through provisions of the RMA – in my role as a board member. When I spoke about this to a Maori elder from the area, he said ‘ there’s no problem with development, all that matters is that the quality of water in the stream is protected.

NZ and Pacific as parties to International Conventions:

NZ and many Pacific Island states have become parties to numerous environmental conventions, as well as to UN Covenants for the elimination of racism, and other covenants to safeguard Human Rights.⁴

While noting these environmental covenants, and before identifying them, it seems timely to refer a moment to the recently passed UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Key Articles

Simple principles of partnership  include provision for indigenous people to chose their own representatives at forums (and not have these selected ). They also include compensation for the taking of land and other forms of loss.

Articles include:

• Indigenous Peoples have the right to self-determination, and to determine their political status.
• The right to distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions, while retaining the right to participate in the life of the State.
• Right to establish educational systems and provide education in their own languages
• The Right to practice and teach spiritual traditions, to protect privacy of cultural sites and control ceremonial objects, and rights to repatriation of human remains.
• Shall not be forcibly removed from their lands or territories.
• the Right to development and to determine priorities for their lands, territories or other resources
• the Right to determine the responsibilities of individuals to their communities

There has been an outcry because of NZ opposed the Declaration , despite years of advocacy and lobbying from Maori for the NZ government to support this indigenous initiative. The Declaration was passed by 143 votes to 4  (with some abstentions) with opposition from New Zealand, Canada, US and Australia. The Declaration was supported by the Philippines, Chile, Brazil, France, Greece, India, Zimbabwe, Netherlands.

A key area identified by one speaker at a local meeting was that opposition by the four states was to protect  Free Trade, with the argument that  Indigenous Nations Treaty rights might constitute an obstacle to the free trade regime because international free trade agreements rest on  non-disputable national sovereignty  – so states ensure there is no diminishment of  territorial sovereignty.

These proclaimed rights have symbolic force which will be realized with duties, or responsibilities to implement them. You will see the difference between our state refusal to support these rights and the Charter for Responsibility Across Oceania project to work with, and support these kinds of principles.

Environmental Conventions

The Pacific Islands and NZ are two of the 25 ‘hot-spots’ in the world, marked as being in environmental crisis. The need for locally-based ecological initiatives integrated with regional and global information was identified in our Responsibility team discussions with  scientists at the Pacific Regional Environmental Programme (SPREP).

In our project we will therefore bring knowledge of global ecosystems to inform local and regional programmes for protecting biodversity. Protection of fish and birds needs to account for migratory habits -  birds migrate from Alaska to Samoa, Godwits migrate from Siberia to New Zealand and then return to reproduce.   Similarly, long finned eels live in NZ rivers for 80 years then migrate to Tongan waters to spawn and continue ther lifecycle in this habitat for a further 20 years.  Fish migrations mean that local environmental and ecological initiatives have to be matched with corresponding responsibilities in far regions.

Some of the conventions which NZ and Pacific states are party to include:

• UN Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 1982, covers  territorial sea, EEZ and continental shelf. Refers to sustainable fisheries and marine protection
• UN Convention of Biological Diversity
• UN Fish Stocks Agreement – management of migratory species beyond EEZ
• Convention on Conservation of Migratory species – NZ involvement in managing biodiversity beyond territorial limits
• Protection of Antarctica – Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade

The UN convention of the Law of the Sea  provides a legal framework for management of oceans. As a signatory New Zealand gained rights and responsibilities for over 4 million sq. kilometers (430 million hectares) of sea, the area of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).

The UN Convention on Biological Diversity (1993) arose from the 1992 convention on biological diversity held in Rio de Janiero. The UN convention, which has been ratified by NZ, provides for the setting of national priorities, which are then translated into regional plans and local management regimes. A series of conventions include codes for responsible fishing, provisions for management of migratory fish, and mechanisms for NZ involvement in managing biodiversity beyond territorial limits. New Zealand is part of the UN Convention on Environment of the South Pacific Region, as well as being party to treaties on Antarctica,

In the visions and objectives of the UN Conventions, and the ways in which they have been translated into policy in New Zealand, there are general principles which can be identified as:

• The conservation of biological diversity;
• The sustainable use of  resources;
• An ecosystems approach to research, governance and management;
• Fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of  utilisating genetic resources.
• Marine Protected Areas as a tool for managing the marine environment
• Community-based natural resource management and conservation initiatives
• Management to ensure freshwater quality and supply
• Sustainable coastal fisheries
• Waste management and pollution prevention
• Learning for best practice in integrated governance and management of coastal watersheds

Current water, oceans, and fishing policies are oriented towards species and resource use, whereas these principles move us towards taking account of the inter-relationships between species, of habitat protection and of the effects of waste disposal in  water and oceans. At present NZ has not proceeded with a comprehensive Oceans Policy as originally promoted, which is attributed to the government’s betrayal of Maori customary interests in the Foreshore and Seabed. Legislation in 2003 foreclosed on customary rights, with an assertion of Crown sovereignty which is parallel to the assertion of territorial sovereignty for trading purposes that we saw with the Declaration of Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

We are working with another approach to globalization, different from that of corporatized economic growth: which is shared responsibility for the complex inter-connected eco-system of the biosphere, from which emerges the need for protocols that support local, and indigenous approaches to ecological responsibility with international protocols for safeguarding all forms of life.

Concluding  notes

Linking social and environmental responsibility

Our projects on water encompass building a NZ network on responsibility for water, Te Wai Puna Ariki, and a regional project Across Oceania Te Au o Te Moana.  Working with science and social science has led us to bring together social and environmental concerns, and this will be one area we bring to a symposium / assembly in Samoa in January 2008.

One of the big questions of sustainability is how to relate care for the environmental  with responsibility to alleviate poverty.  Development is seen as the pathway to achieve  the freedoms that come with sufficient income to bring access to education, to enhance health and bring the human benefits of enhancing human capacity for social participation and access to technology and knowledge.

Knowledge about climate change and environmental responsibility comes out of science and is access to information. People who are poor in terms of education and access to information are less likely to be informed of the environmental crisis and even less likely to be able to be involved in movements for responsibility or to influence decisions. This may not  be necessarily true of indigenous peoples who may be income poor, but who are resourced with traditional knowledge and unextinguishable responsibilities to the land. Nevertheless, it can be claimed that people’s whose basic needs are not being met cannot give priority to protection of  earth, water and air (Sinner, Baines et al, 2004).

To this end we hold up Amartya Sen’s thesis (Sen 1999) that freedom requires relief from poverty and deprivation and is the basis for the opportunity to realize and express human potential and engage in responsible citizenship.

Callum Coats has asserted that a long-term view is now imperative, taking appropriate steps to respond to an earth in crisis and safeguard the long-term future of life. For this a far more profound knowledge of Nature is necessary, so that whatever is implemented by way of remedial measures, will be in harmonious accordance with Nature’s laws.

References:

Coats, C. (2001) ‘Water the Unifier of Life’ Presentation Paper at the Alliance Workshop ‘Interbeing’ ,Bangalore, South India – 19^th – 23^rd June 2001

Royal, C.  (ed) (2003) The Woven Universe. Selected Writings of Rev. Maori Marsden. The Estate of the Rev. Maori Marsden.

Sen, A. (1999) Development as Freedom. New York: Anchor Books

Sinner, J.; Baines, J.; Crengel, H.; Salmon, G.; Fenemor, A.; Tipa, G. (2004) ‘Sustainable Development: A summary of Key Concepts’. Ecologic Research Report No. 2.

Asian Forum for Solidarity Economy
Tokyo, November 7 2009

Yvon Poirier, Martine Theveniaut

Workshop 7 Task Force – Atelier 7 – Results and Continuation.

Martine Theveniaut

Sociologist

Coordinator of Pactes Locaux since 1998

Pactes Locaux is a member of the European Steering Committee -RIPESS since 2007

Practitioner member of BASE Sud Audois (Bureau pour l’Action Solidaire dans l’Espace Sud Audois) South of France since 2000.

Yvon Poirier

Chair International Committee of the Canadian Community Economic Development Network (CCEDNET)

RIPESS North America

Involved in working with Martine since 2001 on local development

Co-Editor with Martine in publishing a monthly Newsletter since November 2003

International Newsletter on Sustainable Local Development

1- Preparation and results: Martine Theveniaut

Pactes Locaux (Local agreements)

Pactes Locaux was created in 1998, supported by the Foundation for the Progress of Humankind. This French network of people and organisations involved in local development, has adopted a solidarity and cooperative approach in addressing socio-economic concerns through sustainable initiatives.

Pactes Locaux assumed the mandate for preparing a Workshop for the 4th Meeting of Globalisation of Solidarity, held from the 22nd-25th April 2009 in Luxemburg.

A majority French working group, thinking globally, and led by Pactes Locaux, prepared this meeting.

Common learning methodology: The experience takes shape.

In the current context of deep crisis of democracy and the growth model, Pactes Locaux, devised a mobile, learner-centered capitalization process, which involved a broad working platform at the European level.

December 2007 the group preparing for Workshop 7 “Democratic participation and territorial anchoring” agreed to hold 5 regional meetings.

A lot of material, many questions, valuable ideas and proposals were collected through this sharing process .The five meetings concluded in January 2009 and the results can be seen on the website. www.pactes-locaux.org

What lessons have we learnt that will help the future?

To put the economy back on its feet, we need

• to start from concrete reality, needs, aspirations and human inventiveness rather than at institutional level, with its power-based logic and fragmented, biased vision.
• to affirm that the new economy is one of shared responsibility: What is my responsibility within the economy, society, culture and nature? And how can I create links between these fields and my own life?

The lessons were enriched and enlarged at international level (February / April 2009).

Using presentations prepared by the speakers and other guest contributors from around the world who were members of workshop 7: Europe, Georgia, Senegal, Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Mali, Madagascar, Quebec, Chile, Malaysia and the Philippines.

A learning journey in Aude (South of France)

Hosting an international delegation in the Aude before the Lux09 meeting, from April 16 – 21: Yvon Poirier and Jacques Fiset (Quebec), Denison Jayasooria (Malaysia) and Ben Quiñones (the Philippines), President of the CSRSME Asia (Coalition of Socially Responsible SMEs).

April 20, Terménès (France)

The conclusion of Workshop 7 is that the idea of territorial anchoring is of central importance.

The gravity of the current crisis provides an opportunity to revise fundamental aspects of the economy by connecting them to the other dimensions at the most relevant level.

This means at local territorial level. It implies that people are the central starting point for both analyses and action. At this level it is possible to adopt a holistic vision.

Territorial anchoring makes it possible to adopt a transversal, across-the-board approach, and achieve joined-up thinking (environment, social, culture, finance, governance etc.).

It also allows for the involvement of all social groups, especially the excluded.

This approach is a pillar of the solidarity economy and will be placed at the heart of the 5th meeting of RIPESS

A provisional steering committee to carry out this process (June 2009) based on exchange between practitioners or catalysts, is formed of:

• Ben Quiñones (Asian Alliance for Solidarity Economy).
• Denison Jayasooria (Asian Alliance for Solidarity Economy)
• Yvon Poirier (International Newsletter on Sustainable Local Development)
• Martine Theveniaut (Pactes Locaux).

At the end of July 2009 the internet Forum opened an initiative of:

• the Asian Alliance for Solidarity Economy, the principal partner of the 5th meeting of the Globalization of Solidarity in Asia in 2013
• and Pactes Locaux who accepts the responsibility to implement the consensus of the Workshop

The forum is hosted on site by ALOE (the Alliance for another economy) to benefit from their experience in facilitating intercultural dialogue at a distance.

Thinking «locally» is becoming a major force in the organization of solidarity.

As this way of thinking is not usual, the approach is one of proof, we must: illustrate, discuss, compare how to make proposals on the basis of a diagnosis.

It is a must to convince that solidarity economy has the capacity to become a sustainable and responsible alternative in the context of globalization process

It is a must … to engage together in strategies for change.

This Forum was in three languages: English, Spanish and French.

We agreed that : « In this Forum, we assume that we are all, to varying degrees, practitioners of an economy with more solidarity, all rooted in a particular territorial context, but living and sharing many issues and values that we agree upon”.

Participation: about 150 people; 30 contributions – illustrative and theoretical.

The contributions served to produce a synthesis and are the basis of reflection for the future work program on “territorial anchoring” in 2013.

2 Territory in a global approach: Conclusions and proposals for the Future.

Yvon Poirier

Many contributions linked «territory» and «sustainable development»

A-Access to land and the production of food for local territories

Examples

- A land Trust in France «Terre de liens» for buying farmlands to settle young farmers An Association of 25 villages in Ivory Coast (West Africa) working in a long term perspective so strengthen the villages though farming

- Seikatsu Club Co-operative Union in Japan (300 000 members). Linking directly famers and consumers in cities

B- New forms of organisations and social innovation

In most contributions, people share initiatives they have built over the last 20-30 years

Examples

• Employers groups in Europe to create full time jobs in regions with seasonal or part-time jobs
• Networking in Agriculture Supported by the Community (ASC) with an international network called URGENCI
• Transition Towns to adapt to a world of sustainable communities (less use of energy)

GLOBAL PERPECTIVES

Two papers presented a global perspective

Pierre Calame (FPH) proposes the idea that the «territory will become the key actor of the 21st century» He suggests that territories are better place to face the «Four major challenges of our time: the integration of human activity in the biosphere, the search of a new equilibrium, social management, reducing energy consumption and the economy of knowledge»

Michael Lewis from the Canadian Center for Community Renewal and Pat Conaty from the New Economics Foundation (NEF) in the UK say in their paper: “The Great Transition: Navigating social, economic, ecological in turbulent times.” The global challenges we face demand a radical transition from a globalised growth economy driven by escalating levels of debt to a federation of decentralised, social, and ecological economies. This paper is not merely a theoretical discussion, however. The thesis proposed for SEE (Social, Ecological, and Economic) Change builds upon historic and contemporary efforts by co-operative organisations to end usury, advance local land reform, reconstruct local food systems, and forge energy solutions that can decrease our dependence on fossil fuels. The dynamic and complementary innovations introduced in this paper explicate strategic pathways that need to be interconnected to shape the social and ecological system. »

The analysis and perspectives of these authors help us link the territorial approach with the global picture; especially since papers both place the territory in a central position.

MAIN CONCLUSIONS (from the synthesis paper)

1 – The global vision of solidarity economy contributes to the “great transition” with other currents of thought and action, including those of sustainable development. They have a common purpose is: “put the economy in the right direction and its rightful place: a means to serve the purposes of living together on the same premises in a liveable world for all – a world of finite resources, shared fairly, and deliberately democratic. “

2 – The territorial approach opens the possibility to balance the excesses of thematic and sectoral inputs towards a comprehensive approach.

“When the focus is placed on the sector (fair trade, social currency, finance, social, ethical consumerism, food sovereignty, etc…) Solidarity Economy, as an approach, treats the constraints of territory as one parameter among others.»

A NEW DEFINITION OF TERRITORY

As we concluded this first initial step (Luxemburg to Tokyo), we came to realise that we had a more precise knowledge of different aspects of the concept of territory.

In the conclusion of the Synthesis, we said:

· We must continue discussions on this territorial approach: what is a territory? What is territorial anchorage? what are the meanings of these words (vocabulary) in different languages?

· We received many comments after sending the synthesis.

· We are now ready to suggest a revised definition. These proposed changes come from friends in France. We acknowledge that we will need to continue to improve the definition to take into account other languages and cultural contexts.

What do we mean by «territory»?

This term has different meanings dependent on languages and cultures.

For us, a territory is an action system geographically based, where are organized social, cultural and economic relations:

· between inhabitants that share a common heritage, a past and a future in a same area, that they inherited and gas a destiny (whether native born, of adoption, migrants or visitors);

· between organizations with multiple features (enterprises, local authorities, state, networks, mutual aid, sectors of production, etc,)

· between these individuals and the organizations with a specific bio-geographical environment;

· between all these components and larger ones (macro) of smaller ones (micro).

These systems of territorial relations are necessarily open and connected to the outside. For in today’s world, interdependence has increased. Solving concrete problems as housing, food, development, infrastructure, services, employment, use of natural resources, the allocation of resources, etc., must take into account:

Constraints and opportunities of production and distribution of globalized goods and services;

Shortcomings of current international governance in the organization of a fair, just and appropriate territorial management of natural and cultural resources «the global common goods and shared values» and the flow of all kinds that are appropriate to the diversity of different situations (ecosystems, overcrowded metropolitan areas, vulnerable territories, etc.);

Territorial governance must also create new types and forms of organization (institutional, economic, social but also cross-cutting, financial, fiscal, technical, etc…)

NEXT STEPS

Continue our learning journey:

• listen to the practitioners
• links with researchers,
• knowledge exchange with others pursuing alternative approaches
• overcome the challenge of intercultural and language barriers

ANOTHER WORLD IS POSSIBLE…. AND NECESSARY|

A final thought:

Gandhi once said « the world has enough for everyone’s needs but not their greed».

(Published in Third World Resurgence No. 230, October 2009)

An Indian organic farmer recounts how his bitter experience with expensive and impoverishing Green Revolution techniques led him on the road to natural, organic farming.

by Subhash Sharma

SOIL, water and seeds are in fact the strength of farmers. I could understand this agro-economics only when I connected myself with this ground reality.

I have been in the farming profession since 1975 and during these years I have seen two faces of science in agriculture.

Destructive face of science

I started farming like others, applying plenty of chemical fertilisers and poisons and using hybrid seeds. During the initial years, there were indeed bumper crops but that could not be sustained for any length of time. Production from my farm started declining and the cost of cultivation started rising. Such a situation continued till 1994. This was the year when I adopted natural farming. Nature became my guru and started revealing the causes of reduced production on my farm during the previous nine years (1986-1994).

In the process of farming with chemicals I had destroyed almost the entire micro-organism population in the soil, trees, birds, seeds, water, soil and personal energy and that was what caused the reduction in the yields. Nobody should ignore or underestimate the importance of the aforesaid factors in farming.  What unfolded on my farm was also happening with all the farmers like me in India. In the pursuit of increased production, the science of agriculture based on chemicals was adopted but it resulted in continuous lowering of production and damaged agro-economics. I question now: how can this science help the country achieve a higher rate of growth?

The greater consequence was the destruction of the agricultural environment. Increased mechanisation, which made human labour redundant, led to large-scale migration of rural people towards urban areas. The kind of urban living turned out to be worse than hell and gave rise to enhanced urban crime. Those who could not migrate turned into Naxalites and terrorists. Tackling them now is costing enormous amounts of public money. This is what happened to our human resource.

The loss of soils and water is another severe problem because that will lead to managing food grains and water from outside. This in turn will weaken us (India). One needs to remember that money is not the answer to all problems.

We have already lost our seeds and are being forced to depend now on genetically modified (GM) seeds which are harmful to human health as well as the environment. Such seeds are to be considered as ‘terminator’ seeds as they hardly germinate during the following season. Wherever farmers have adopted GM seeds the soils have deteriorated and many new diseases have started affecting the crops. Also, the rising atmospheric temperature has had its own damaging effect on production patterns. In the year 2008-09 my farm production declined by 25% but my profit doubled because of market forces (less availability led to increased prices).  But this is not a good sign.

We certainly do not want an economic situation that results in farm produce going beyond the purchasing capacity of people.  That is why change in agriculture is essential.

We need to change in order to protect and preserve our soils, water, seeds, environment and labour-power and to strengthen our economics. This is only possible if we can reduce our costs and yet enhance production.

Constructive science

When I first started natural farming, I did not really know much about it. But slowly nature became my teacher and taught me the science and economics of agriculture. I came to understand that this is the only constructive science under which all the constituents of nature are conserved and at the same time show gradual growth. In chemical-intensive agriculture the growth was the result of killing all others – a violent tendency – but this constructive science ended my violent growth and made me totally non-violent. In this non-violent regime I could visualise a strong economics which is in the interest of farmers as well as the entire human race. This reminded me of Mahatma Gandhi whose ideas could give pleasure only when brought into practice. Times will change but this theory of agriculture will remain intact.

This constructive science also made me fully self-reliant. This self-reliance made me strong by returning to me my power of the soil, water, seeds, environment and labour. Nature made me strong by giving me five avenues of success: 1) self-reliance of soils; 2) self-reliance in water; 3) self-reliance in seeds; 4) cropping cycle, and 5) understanding of labour.

Self-reliance of soils

This has strengthened my agro-economics. With my strong economy I have realised the potential strength of the agricultural economy of the entire nation. This self-reliance taught me love and now I do not need any kind of insecticide or chemical fertiliser input to my soil. Both these are managed by nature itself. The four constituents of nature which help this process are: a) the cow; b) trees; c) birds and d) vegetation.

a) The cow

In the year 1994, based on personal observation I developed a process of utilising fresh cow-dung, cow-urine, and jaggery (a local sugar). In Indian villages, fresh cow-dung diluted with water is traditionally sprayed on the open space about our houses (except in the rainy season). As the rains come the earthworms start coming out in plenty. This gave me the idea that if fresh cow-dung is sprayed in the fields, the number of earthworms will increase and thereby other micro-organisms as well. If we use cow-urine along with dung, the fungus of the soil can be controlled.

Following this, I placed one 200-litre drum for each acre, filled it with 60 kg of fresh cow-dung, 5 litres of cow-urine and 250 grams jaggery, and used this mixture (diluted with water) extensively on the fields. I named it Go-Sanjeevak, the application of which gave me better yields in the very first year itself. In four years the micro-organism population increased. In each square foot, 6 to 10 earthworms could be found. The increase in bacteria and earthworms demanded more feed, which was met by constituent no. 4, i.e., vegetation.  The increases in earthworm and bacterial numbers resulted in less input cost along with better yields. This helped me to develop a new agricultural economics.

b) Trees

In the years 1990-92 I had realised that the temperature increase because of industrial pollution would certainly kill millions of plant species and living organisms within the next 40-45 years. For me, a farmer, this was a serious warning. To check the rise in temperature, I decided to plant trees. In one hectare I planted 2,000 wild trees to create a forest around me and in the remaining 11 hectares I planted bird-loving trees. These 150 trees included  jamun, goolar,  aam (mango), peepal, bargad, neem, imli, arjun, etc., and I brought them up as children. As these trees grew, my farm output increased and I could understand how the trees helped in agricultural production.

The trees control the rise in temperature. This is a great help for the growth of bacteria and friendly insects. The big tree-leaves which fall on the earth are converted into manure. As the trees increase, birds multiply and a new economics of agriculture is revealed.

c) Birds

The growth of trees within the farm increased the micro-organism population and the supply of good manure. Birds started multiplying. On observation I found each bird eats at least 50 destructive insects and contributes its excreta to the soil as manure. Where there is good vegetation this process goes on the whole year round.  Within 8-10 years the number of birds increased to  the thousands. You can imagine how many insects are being managed every day and how much manure is added to the soil. This also helped me to write a new economics of agriculture.

d) Vegetation

In 1994 I started using crop residues and the grasses of the farm back on the farm itself. Each hectare of my farm started getting around 25 metric tons of this wet biomass. This enhanced the micro-organism population within our farm, which in turn converted this biomass into manure and simultaneously controlled the fungus on the soils. Growth of microorganisms, earthworms, etc., made our soil porous, which helped plant roots to get oxygen and rain water. Millions of such micro-organisms in their lifetime help the soils and after their demise, they become top-quality natural manure.

In this way these constituents of soil self-reliance provided me with free manure, insect control and water, making my farming less costly and more productive. A new agro-economics was thus revealed.

A study of the large number of living organisms and creatures doing the work of soil self-reliance gave me the understanding that every living being on the earth plays an important role in the well-being of the human race. Soil self-reliance will solve problems related to temperature rise and scarcity of water.

Self-reliance in water

India has been blessed by nature with abundant water but a crisis is now developing. The change in agriculture technology in the 1960s resulted in immense use of water in farming along with chemical fertilisers as well as poisonous compounds. These destroyed and killed large numbers of insects and small creatures which used to make the soil porous and capable of absorbing water and thus recharging the groundwater table. Chemical-based farming caused rapid lowering of groundwater levels while the rainwater on the surface was allowed to flow through drains and rivers.  Along with the rapid flow of rain water, useful soil also started getting washed away, affecting soil productivity enormously. The  washed-off soil silts dams and irrigation  reservoirs  and  gives  rise to  more  and  more  water  shortages and crises.

A large number of irrigation projects were built for developing agriculture but the growing urban population and industries forced the diversion of this enormous quantity of water away from farmers and agriculture. Water, on the other hand, is also being polluted by chemical-intensive agriculture as well as by the discharge of poisonous effluents from industries. Management of such harmful and unhealthy water is no easy task.

Planning should, in fact, have been done with a view to providing good potable and purified water to all citizens, helpful for healthy farming as well as human health.

Instead, as production of hydro-electricity increased, more and more groundwater was exploited for irrigation as well as for drinking purposes. The result was that in several states groundwater has declined to dangerous levels, thereby affecting ground temperatures as well. This situation is alarming because it directly affects crop productivity as well as human health.

Thus the destructive science promoted after 1960 polluted water and exacerbated the water crisis in a big way.

Ray of hope

I  am sure if we change our agricultural policies even now we can get rid of the water crisis for ever. This I say because of my personal experience of adopting natural farming in place of the destructive science earlier pursued, which has provided a ray of hope and a path of comprehensive development in addition to solving the water problem.

Since I turned to natural farming, I have realised the importance of water. Now when I hold 100% water which falls on my farm and divert it underground, the soil is automatically saved from erosion. This tends to enhance productivity of the soil. Thus when I was able to hold 100% water on my farm, I realised that I had achieved self-reliance in water. In order to verify this I undertook a scientific study of my 12 hectares in the year 2003-04. This was as follows:

1. When one hectare of farm receives 1 cm rain, the total precipitation is 100,000 litres.

2. If rainfall during a particular year in that area is 100 cm, the total precipitation per hectare is 10,000,000 litres.

3.  Thus a 12-hectare farm, like mine, receives a total of 120,000,000 litres of rain water.

4.  On average 30% water evaporates from the surface, which means nearly 36,000,000 litres of water is evaporated.

5. The remaining 84,000,000 litres of water are diverted below ground, i.e., groundwater is recharged.

6. If we draw more water than this for irrigation, this means we are not self-reliant in water.

On my farm I have two bore-wells, each fitted with a 5-hp pump which draws about 36,000 litres of water per hour. Normally my pumps run for 800 hours per year. That means each motor draws 28,800,000 litres of water per annum. The two motors thus draw out 57,600,000 litres of water. Since I have recharged 84,000,000 litres of water in that year I have a net gain of 26,400,000 litres of water. This shows that I am fully self-reliant in water resource. In spite of drawing groundwater I am contributing 26,400,000 litres to the groundwater reserve.

In addition to the above, water was conserved by appropriate methods of cultivation following  the contour system, sowing across the slope, natural absorption because of porosity of the soil, and digging 20ft x 10ft pits/ditches in each hectare to store rain or excess  water. With this water I harvest 450 tons of vegetables and food grains while during the years 1975-86 the maximum production that I got was only 400 tons. My production from 1986 onwards started coming down and during 1990-94 it turned out to be only 50 tons.  The cost of production continued increasing in those days till I was forced to abandon that system.

I adopted natural farming methods in 1994. Slowly, after realising the importance of Go-Sanjeevak, trees, birds, biomass and water and properly utilising them in my production, I was once again able to push the output upwards from 50 tons to 450 tons by the year 2000.

A new record was again set.

Output increases

My farming experience clearly belies scientists’ claims that chemical fertilisers, poisons and hybrid seeds are the main factors behind higher production.

The increase in production seen from the introduction of chemical farming was essentially because of enhanced availability of water and energy. Prior to 1960 we lacked water as well as energy (electric power), natural farming was not properly developed while the increase in population continued. After 1960 water resources were created and availability of energy too went up. From 1975 onwards chemical-intensive farming was taken up on a large scale. In the beginning that showed higher production but by 2002 the production stabilised and thereafter started declining. In spite of our enhanced water capacity due to dams like Sardar Sarovar, the production kept on dwindling. Why that was happening was clear to me because of nature’s teachings.

During the years 1986-94 why did my production come down? Cotton output was reduced from 30 quintals to 10 quintals, jowar from 50 quintals to 15 quintals, tomatoes from 350 quintals to hardly 5 quintals (because of mosaic infestation). As a result, my production declined from 400 to 50 tons. Despite available power, the same water quantity, and increased use of chemical fertilisers as well as pesticides, the production came down to 50 tons. The cost of running the farm was increasing but gains were dwindling.  In 1994, the first year I turned to natural farming, I received 50 tons only but achieved savings in terms of much lower costs. By 2001, my farm production increased to 450 tons of vegetables as well as food grains. For this higher production, I am using the same power and water as before. Only the chemicals have been ousted.

Once farmers understand the techniques of natural farming, their agro-economics will become strong. Villages will have abundant water, the groundwater level will increase and the nation will become rich in water resources.

Thus I must say that agriculture demands major changes today. The new agro-economics based on natural agriculture can only benefit the farmers, society and the nation.

Subhash Sharma is an organic farmer whose farm is located at Yeovatmal in Maharashtra state on the west coast of India. He regularly addresses training colleges all over the country on organic farming.

By Martine Theveniaut, General Manager of the Pactes Locaux

Octobre 2009

Pactes Locaux started in 1998 as an informal network of people and organisations.

- A way of thinking and being “among peers”: this involves neither evaluation not judgement of others, nor any external posturing, and enables a genuine sharing and reflection on our experience as practitioners

- Critical well-intentioned observation: to mutually help distance ourselves and others from our practice, to improve, compare, become more effective and powerful in our actions, to start afresh…

… all allow us to build a shared framework of reference for action as we go down the road.

In 2005, the Collective became an officially registered NGO.

The objective: “Develop and provide services that help to promote, consolidate, improve and link all forms of co-operation aimed a supporting change in territorial and human environment” (article 2 of the statutes of the NGO).

A pool of human resources.

- Voluntary contribution and participation.

- Different themes based on individual expertise and practical know-how: social cohesion, local development, solidarity economy, social territorial dialogue, tourism and territory, sustainable development, democracy and citizen’s participation, interculturality, evaluation.

- Permanent group dynamics and moderation

- A collaborative empowered group with no headquarters

- Regional branches or resource-people, affiliated NGOs, trusted by the other members, empowered to act.

Different configurations for co-operating:

- Based on territorial anchorage/grounding

- Based on a specific theme related to a territorial approach

⇒ Examples

1st regional preparatory meeting for Lux09: France Joubert:

A complete cycle of territorial innovation, up and running since 1985, aimed at maintaining and creating project-based employment.

- The tools: Employers groups, a “helpful” law in 1985, followed by the Planned Management of Territories and an Employment, Employer’s Group Resource Centre. This was created as a prototype in 1999, and has now been disseminated in 7 regions in France, with an uptake at European level in 2008. Contact: http://www.crge.com

- Promoting a concept: social territorial dialogue opened a 4th level of negotiation and gained official recognition in a report by the Economic Social and Environmental Council (an official French Institution), in July 2009.

- “Crossroads for Social Innovation and Employment”, is a unique regional tool in France: it is an association bringing together both trade union and employers’ representatives for social dialogue before negotiations on key questions like aging work force, seasonal jobs etc. Although officially part of the Regional Governmental and Territorial Plan since 1999, there is still resistance to changing traditional institutional habits…handing over power is a difficult step.

“ The joint development of tools that enable people to work together on the same subjects is a 20-year journey, with markers along the way. Our ideas are clearer today: the pact is a contract and the local is the territory. This is the level where it is possible to regulate employment. When we scale up, we are talking to the same people, but their attitude has changed. The problem of exclusion is too serious. The elected representatives have stepped down from their pedestal. They need other people. Obstacles havebeen removed, and globalisation is the name of the game.”

France Joubert, 1st regional preparatory meeting for Lux09, Poitiers, December 2007

Languedoc-Roussillon (South of France), the BASE Sud-Audois, created as an independent initiative of local civil society in 2000

The Office for Solidarity Action in the South Audois Area contributes to local economic development by a strategy of solidarity and sharing of experience.

- They operate with a mandate conferred by a Public/Private Local Authority-related management structure of the Haute Vallée de l’Aude District.

- A demographic survey: Human Resources and New Residents in the District (2003).

Directory of Solidarity Initiatives (2005).

- A local Forum: exchange of experiences: « Nothing to sell, our currency is exchange

»: brought together 32 self-employed people and collectives who had stands to exchange on their respective learning journeys (June 2007)

- An interactive web site created in 2008, (www.base-sud-audois) informs, invites people to contribute, and encourages people to get together. 350 different visitors per month (2009).

- Regional branch of the Pactes Locaux since 2008.

- Peter Wollny (President) and Martina Wollny (general secretary).

- Contact: pw@base-sud-audois.fr

Lower Normandy: Géraldine Lechevalier: How to maintain the elderly in their home environment and within the framework of their local relationships. Age is not an illness or a commodity.

- President of «Myosotis» an NGO (created in 1997) providing services to people

- Diploma in caring for the sick and elderly (Accreditation of experience…).

- Collaborative research-action on how to change attitudes and professional practice

Regional branch – Contact: geraldine.lechevalier@wanadoo.fr

Midi-Pyrénées: Judith Hitchman, international conference interpreter, committed to “cross-cultural communication in the service of peace”

- Practical knowledge of peasant agriculture and food sovereignty and “language of alternatives” (Social Fora, Via Campesina, URGENCI…)

- Involved in the Collective for the International Solidarity Week in Tarbes

- Resource person – Contact: hitchman@club-internet.fr

2nd regional meeting in Auvergne: responsible tourism, a laboratory for greater solidarity, co-operation and culture in territorial economy. Alain Laurent

This meeting was organised by Alain Laurent of Beira-CFP and the Pactes Locaux. It was hosted by Jean-Claude Mairal, Vice-President of the Regional Government for the Auvergne region. It took place in May 2008.

- It catalysed 20 years of reflection and action.

- It created a space for dialogue and new forms of relationships between stakeholders in the tourist sector, the region as well as international co-operation networks and structures.

- It enabled all the actors the consider the issues of inhabitants and territory (publication of a collective work entitled “Responsible Tourism, the key to sustainable territorial development”, published by Chronique Sociale, 2009)

- In the following months (2009), it contributed to defining a French governmental strategy for co-operation with developing countries (ex-colonies in particular) under the heading “Responsible Tourism and Territories”.

Principles have provided a framework that validates or prepare an across-the-board, interministerial public action.

Constitution of TERritoires_RESponsables in 2009.

One outcome of this meeting, the NGO TER_RES brings together committed experienced individuals, as well as representatives of different families of actors, businesses, consumers, citizens, and organised local inhabitants

- The project is managed and co-ordinated by Alain Laurent, initiator of the approach, supported by the University of Toulouse. The first UNI_TERRES (Open University project on Responsible Territories) is scheduled to be held in autumn 2010.

- It proposes a bespoke and holistic approach to methodological project management.

- There is an international referential that takes the reality and rhythm of each territoryinto account.

- It aims to provide an accreditation for quality and territorial responsibility through a System of Collective Guarantees. (Collective Guarantee System)

- It is based on the choice of a dominant theme: responsible tourism (sustainable, solidarity, eco- cultural…)

- Contact: territoiresresponsables@orange.fr

- There is a particularly strong partnership between TER_RES and the Pactes Locaux

« Ultimately, making a pact…is a declaration of collective ability to do things…it involves organising to find solutions to needs. It is also realising that united we stand in strength when we undertake an action. Finally the Pactes Locaux are the premises of a collective approach to work for today’s and tomorrow’s society ».

Contacts for the Pactes Locaux: France Joubert, President: + 33 (0)6 70 00 14 67

francejoubert@wanadoo.fr

Martine Theveniaut, General Manager Telephone + 33 (0)4 68 69 92 88

martine.theveniaut4@orange.fr

Address: 5 rue de Cadène, F- 11580 Alet-les-Bains

English translation: Judith Hitchman.

By Martine Theveniaut, General Manager of the Pactes Locaux

October 2009

A network of people, open to Europe and the world, committed to a collective process of internationalisation

- Priceless intellectual social capital

o High quality relationships that are often lasting

o A long experience of exchange between peers

o A shared framework of reference

o Active affinities based on the territorial approach

o “Portfolios of alliances”

The opportunity of the “Lux09” Forum transformed the resources first into objectives, then into actions.

- The Fourth International Meeting of the Globalisation of Solidarity was hosted in Europe in the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg, in April 2009.

- The Pactes Locaux were members of the Steering Committee, and proposed a European preparatory Platform for Workshop 7 called “Democratic Participation and territorial anchorage”.

2007-2008 were dedicated to organising and holding “Regional Meetings” (Learning Journeys)

- They were hosted “in situ” by participatory organisations that openly presented their territories, their partners at all levels to an outside delegation from the Pactes Locaux.

- All meetings were organised to meet the same specifications. They took place in different regions and on different themes: employment, tourism and territory, local development/solidarity economy, neighbourhood solidarities, economic solidarity between urban and rural communities.

⇒ Examples of opening up to other regions

The reports on the regional meetings and synthesis are availableon line : www.pactes-locaux.org

Nord Pas de Calais: 9th –10th January 2009, the final regional meeting “Metropolis and their adjacent territories, linking solidarity and economy”

Hosted by the local Development Council of the Saint Omer district:

Refusing to be fatalistic means making the most of available resources and leads to:

- An endogenous economy, linked to sustainable development: tourism, farming, cultural heritage, renewable energies

- A solidarity economy and public/private partnerships that are levers of innovation

- Provision of high quality local services to maintain and attract permanent residents

Refusing fatalism involves promoting the art of

- Learning to work together

- New forms of logic

- Organising a new approach to business: legal tools, tax incentives, risk management, platforms of activities….

Refusing fatalism means organising. The meeting is perceived as an opportunity to:

- Develop dialogue between rural areas (a horizontal approach)

- Consult with local and Regional authorities and other neighbouring areas before taking decisions (a vertical approach)

- Aim at building a mutual agreement on how best to share urban/rural resources in a more balanced way

- Contact: accueilpaysdesaintomer@gmail.com

Grand Duchy of Luxemburg: Objectif Plein Emploi (Objective full employment): This structure is a network of 820 employees whose jobs can not be delocalised, as well as 400 volunteers, all working towards local development, solidarity economy and the European promotion of a 3rd economic space.

It is based on:

- Refusing social exclusion: the NGOs mobilise to help young people enter the job market in a geographic area of post-industrial restructuring, and with national support to fight unemployment. The OGB-L Trade Union is a key actor.

- A two-tier network:

1- Local networking: The local, regional and branch Centres for Initiatives and Management, which all exist on an appropriate scale

2- A general management centre, OPE, that provides resources and management, support and advisory capacity. It is organised in various departments.

- Projects are anchored in the districts. They include the delivery of services, NITC,environmental management etc. The Government supports all this, as it meets clearly defined needs: it creates jobs, and provides greater well-being for local inhabitants.

- Originally a prototype, there has now been a shift to creating a specific legal framework. Together with the European Institute for Solidarity Economy (INEES), OPE has achieved recognition of this third economic space within Luxemburg. The legalframework will include a new specific form of NGO. (Government Declaration 07/2009).

- This partner is associated with the post-Lux’09 initiatives of the Pactes Locaux:

- Contact :Ben Goerens, OPE goerens@ope.lu

Contacts for the Pactes Locaux: France Joubert, President: + 33 (0)6 70 00 14 67

francejoubert@wanadoo.fr

Martine Theveniaut, General Manager Telephone + 33 (0)4 68 69 92 88

martine.theveniaut4@orange.fr

Address: 5 rue de Cadène, F- 11580 Alet-les-Bains

English translation: Judith Hitchman.

By Martine Theveniaut, General Manager of the Pactes Locaux

October 2009

- 5 meetings, the same format: 3 half days: illustrate, discuss and propose

- An analysis and interpretation based on the same questions:

o What kind of economy can the action create?

o How has the action increased empowerment and responsibilities of the various actors through the solutions that have been implemented?

o What co-operation between actors, what links between different levels of governance have proved to be a key factor in achieving successful territorial dynamics?

o What were the factors that enabled certain initiatives to become sustainable and develop a locally sustainable approach?

o What are the lessons learnt that could be applied in the future?

- Regular meetings of the operational team took place; these were open to the key members of the regional meetings as well as to other people who wished to contribute.

- The approach included alternating between “in situ” fieldwork and meetings to develop the approach, reflect on the implications of the fieldwork (practice/theory) as well as to aggregate the results and articulate a recommended strategy for change.

An international delegation was hosted in the Aude (South West France) prior to Lux09.

- A convivial meeting with our foreign guests took place in the South West of France Jacques Fiset, director of CLD of the town of Quebec, Denison Jayasooria (Researcher and lecturer from Malaysia); Yvon Poirier (RCDEC, Quebec); Ben Quiñones (Coalition of Socially Responsible Small & Medium Enterprises in Asia, Philippines), Patricia Tamini (ONTB, Burkina Faso).

The meeting was in English and French.

- A 5-day programme included: meetings with Eric Andrieu (Mayor of Villerouge Terménès and member of regional government for Languedoc-Roussillon), Meeting with members of the county government, A full day’s visit each to the BASE Sud Audois, An innovative book-shop, these were accompanied by Pactes Locaux members: Alain Laurent and Judith Hitchman.

- The exchange helped to clarify mutual understanding and agreement as to the prerequisite conditions that allow territorial anchorage to happen, and enable the promotion of solidarity economy. They involve:

o An initial “grass-roots” level: Concrete commitment to local projects, catalysts (both people and projects), like the BASE Sud Audois, and/or support by local elected representatives who translate the local culture into a concept and winwin concrete objectives.

o A second “intermediary” level: documentation of case studies to bring together collective evidence, a non-academic think tank – because it is essential to understand what has been learnt before jointly carrying proposals forward.

Extracts of the discussion in the Aude (19th Apr il 2009)

Eric Andrieu, Mayor and Regional Councillor, Aude:

The crisis provides a favourable context. The dominant ideology is stuck in a corner, and this gives new meaning to public commitment

Denison Jayasooria, researcher, Malaysia:

Ben and I had a dream. People took their affairs in hand, in other words, their responsibilities, and can change things and teach others, all because theyhaven’t despaired.

Ben Quiñones, Chairman, CSRSME Asia :

The World Bank exports concepts and projects. They have no feeling forhistory; it’s all technology and money! People do not feel concerned at local level. He understood the language, the terminology and the territorial approach. In Asia, we would call this an integrated approach. It’sinspirational. Then, we need to bring these learning journeys together, to show the world that there is an alternative, and bring this to the fore at Lux’09.

Jacques Fiset: Manager of the Local Development Centre for the town of Quebec:

The possibility of sharing this little bit of the road here is pure happiness!

Alain Laurent :coordinaor of TER_RES, member of Pactes Locaux :

How can we shift f rom the small-scale model here to mainstream?

Eric Andrieu :

You can’t create models; but rather inform people of the ingredients. They are available to everyone, and allow empower everyone to control their future, particularly local authorities: the f irst step is to be clear as to why we aredoing things together; the next is to take belief s and cultural reality of peoples’ lives into account, the systems are different throughout the world, as well as the methods, and the length of time… what you need is a good sociology of balance of power if you want to take effective action!

Contacts for the Pactes Locaux: France Joubert, President: + 33 (0)6 70 00 14 67

francejoubert@wanadoo.fr

Martine Theveniaut, General Manager Telephone + 33 (0)4 68 69 92 88

martine.theveniaut4@orange.fr

Address: 5 rue de Cadène, F- 11580 Alet-les-Bains

English translation: Judith Hitchman.