Expressions of interest

Would love to help but not a lot of time. I am a full time working mum already volunteering some of my time. I am particularly interested to help with this venture as it is dear to my own values. I think I would make time! Let me know if you are keen to talk further.
Cheers, Amanda

Hi Natalie,

I believe you are right that TT could benefit from a heightened national profile/leadership.

Not sure what I can contribute at this stage, but interested to talk more about it.

cheers

Andy

Hi Everyone,
I think this is a really important discussion to have, whatever way the outcome goes. First up, just to note that I have had no active involvement in TT. I have read the forums since this time last year, I started a blog a couple of months ago, but I do so in relative isolation, not being part of a local TT group. So, take my comments from this place of a lack of inside knowledge, so to speak. I may get some points wrong in terms of history and existing capacities. So, from this space my view of TT in NZ is that it hit it off with a roar (going on the TT Handbook) but has since quietened off in many (most?) places. Some are well and strong, such as Scott’s example (sounds like fantastic work you and your crew are doing in Dunedin). I also see from events postings, more than forum postings, that there is high activity in AK in parts, BOP etc. From my experience, the TT handbook has a section on New Plymouth and mentions the group talking to a council that is very open to ideas. Living here in New Plymouth 4 years later I see zero activity, though there are related activities in local environmental and political groups, environmental centres etc.

I run a social network site for 400 distance education students. It has had a similar experience – initial activity and energy, students meeting up local to discuss their courses, get peer support etc. followed by a drop off a year later. For the last year there has been a very low baseline of activity online. Experience (and student survey results) here shows that while some students are now actively engaging via other media (Facebook, email etc.), the vast majority say they are just too busy to get involved, even though they would like to more. My guess is that a lot of people interested in TT are in a similar boat. Natalie, from this viewpoint, I would agree with your Maslow reference – we are often so busy in our lives just meeting basic needs that time and/or energy/motivation to get involved in TT activity is limited. I am in this place at present. 2012 for me is all about getting onto an acre of land, moving a house there and expanding my previous suburban food growing capacity. I’m trying to meet my family’s personal needs, as you say, and become more food resilient. I then plan to look more outwards. However I would jump at a way to be able to contribute to TT initiatives now, while I am busy with other things. I do wonder how many others out there would be in a similar boat…

Scott, I agree with your idea that some regions might have strong groups, and yours is obviously very robust. However I think the fact that research would be required (a great idea to do) to find out needs and what is happening nationally points to the fact that there is likely a need of some sort to co-ordinate nationally. If we knew enough of what was going on everywhere because we were actively sharing learning and experiences about successes or otherwise in projects, the concept of the need for research would not be there. Or at least that is how I see it. However, I admit I don’t know what existing structures there are behind this TT site for instance. How was it set up? What group maintains it? How would these people, or this group link with any new structure/organisation? There is already a trust set up yes? These are areas I don’t know much about, obviously, but it would seam to be part of the research required.

I also agree this should not be entered lightly. Representing such a diverse range of decentralised (by nature) groups would be a big challenge, as would the thus allocated responsibility for that person to be the voice piece of TT NZ. Would it be an elected role? Who/how would this occur? Or, would a governance board advertise the position? etc etc. Lots to think about, and I would love to hear some input by people more experienced in the network.

I would say that a national paid person to help draw strings the energies together does not need to seen in the light of ‘leadership’ in the sense of normal business ideas of leadership (even while Natalie used this word). Leaders can help show the way rather than being a power holder. Scott, I like your phrase ‘enabling structures’. From my workplace experience with social networks, I am doubtful that the lack of action on the TT website shows maturity. I think in many regions of NZ it is most likely a sign that not much is happening, even while a few are strong and maturing. To my mind, enabling the learning and knowledge created by these few to be used by others would be a great thing. While local governance seems to be a key element in the TT model, I think there also needs to be a focal point that allows outside groups, media etc. to come to that point for info on what TT is, what it offers, how to get started etc – sometimes a book (the TT book) is just not enough, and personal experience can lead to more action. In the UK, while Rob Hopkins expounds this local governance model and decentralisation, he is by default this focal point nationally by doing what he has. Aspiring groups, media etc. come to him for his experience and advice. He helps get things started. Is there value in creating a structure in NZ that is this enabling focal point, and which is fed into by the regions? I would say yes.

Coming back to my earlier point that I am one of the ‘I am feeling like I am too busy and don’t have the energy but like the idea people’. In the name of diversity and resilience, I would suggest that should anything move forward along the lines of a National Coordinator (yes, jumping the gun a bit I know) that the focus of base wage funding should be from within the network, rather than external sources. Many small internal contributors give more diversity and resilience than a few, or just one, external funder. I would be happy to offer a monthly donation to aid this. It gives me a way to enable the movement now and feel like I am contributing, while I am focused on other things. I think many others would be in a similar boat and feeling like they are not taking part in positive change as a result. $25 a month is $300 a year. Get 150 people within the network to offer the same and your funding is on its way.

Right, feel free to chew my ideas and rebut any that do not make sense. Like I said at the start, I have little active knowledge of this movement and may get a few things wrong as a result. Still, I hope this adds positively to the discussion. Thanks for starting it Natalie. I appreciate your sense of urgency :)

Smiles, Laine

Hello Natalie

Interesting discussion so far on the governance idea. We are in the process of establishing a TT group "Sustainable Bays" in the east coast bays of the North Shore Auckland, we are meeting on Monday so I will take you proposal to the group.

I am keen to be involved, however like others, life work, kids and other TT commitments make time an issue.

There are few groups now well established so it would be worth investigating their thoughts on the issue. I agree some national coordination and support for NZ communities wanting to establish groups is a must. I believe that as we move to the future the solution will lie within our communities and the easier it is for groups to get going when the time comes the more likely we are to thrive with the challenges the future will inevitably bring.

I look forward to seeing where this goes, we are indeed living in interesting times!

Thanks
Lynsey

Hi Natalie

To be honest I don’t visit this site much anymore so I have only just noticed this thread.

I have to say it is a bit deja vu-ish. The need for a structure/leadership team/co-ordination seems to be a recurring theme for some in the TT movement. But I personally think this is what TT needed from the start, so I am more than happy to be involved.

In the past I have developed a few ideas around strategy and structure to move TT forward by providing leadership and support but still retaining the self- directed independence at the local level that is key to making TT work.

I would be happy to talk further with you about these ideas if you wish but I'm not real keen to be engaging in endless keyboard discussion. I think social networking sites like this are great for connecting like minded people but personally I think they actually hamper functional communication. The nuance of what is said is too often lost to the interpretation of the reader.

So if you would like to discuss feel free to call me. You can find my phone number on my website www.powerpedals.co.nz

Cheers
Richard

Like Richard I always thought TT NZ needed the structure so it could support the locals - I always thought it was a movement interrupted an did voice that as you know. Possibly it needs a bit of re-branding to encompass the wider local resilience efforts. good on you Natalie for carrying forward with it. Will support however i can

Hi Natalie,

Transition Town Bay of Islands recently participated in a strategy session called by the Far North District Council to discuss a "Sustainable Growth" strategy. After pointing out that "sustainable growth" on a finite planet is a contradiction in terms, we did get on to some useful dialog and so long as it continues to be useful I think we will continue to participate.

I'd be happy to share any points of interest coming from these sessions (two more are planned for next year).

But I'm not sure that the TT Network needs a national body to survive, and I'm always leery of giving up any measure of control to people outside of our community, but within those constraints I'd be happy to volunteer some time for this as information sharing is almost always a good thing.

- Deck

Hi Natalie et al

I also don't refer to this site very much any more... been far too busy in my community..... but this discussion is good and important. I've now stepped sideways in TT to allow something else to emerge. I think we also need to be still and silent to listen to/for what is needed. Impossible to do in our busyness.

I don't hear you asking for traditional leadership, control or power Natalie. We are looking to create something quite new - this is the new structure we are looking for. And conversation is the perfect way to begin to nut out what it is we need and want.

There is a very good speech by Gar Alperovitz in Seattle on 3 Oct this year on new structures and where and how they are coming about in the poorest parts of USA - well worth a watch and listen. Hope this link works.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1wNkVBI1NA&feature=youtu.be

I also think times are changing and more people, and local governments, are beginning to be aware that a major shift is upon us so a good time to reignite the passion for transition.... The working together more fund is a definite option - The people working in Tindall Foundation are onto it.

I'm in Natalie to help .... with some reservation about how much time I have to commit as I am trying to give myself a little time for life as well.

I look forward to following the conversation.

Can't help myself sometimes....so here's my 10 cents

I think TT did need a national body and if it wants to stay relevant still does. If only to at least maintain a profile and awareness in the wider community.But more so to support local groups and initiatives to gain momentum.

The fear that a national body would somehow override the autonomy of local groups has always been the stumbling block around this but I would argue and have in the past, that does not need to be the case at all.

The way I see it Structure is a fundamental pattern of nature. Three of Holmgrens permaculture design principles come to mind here;
Design from Patterns to Details
Use and value Diversity
Integrate rather than Segregate

But given the archetypal nature of David's principles, each one of them has relevance. I think once you have structure other principles can be applied such as
Catch and Store Energy (Instead I think TT let much of its energy dissipate in the past because of the lack of structure)
Apply self regulation and accept feedback (See also Peter Senge's Learning Organisation Theory) and finally
Obtain a Yield.

As Chair of PiNZ we used Holmgren's "Permaculture Flower" design and these principles to develop a flattened structure for the organisation that was designed to effectively allow the "committee" to keep the flame burning as the central point but encourage and support autonomous groups to integrate with that hub and other groups. Can't find the design but its in a PiNZ Newsletter from a couple of years back if anyone wants to dig it up.

Finally I think its also worth remembering that Hopkins is a permaculture designer/educator and did set up TT in the UK with structure in place. I still scratch my head as to why TTNZ did not just replicate that successful structure at the very beginning.

Hi,

good to see this conversation continuing.

I have been somewhat focused on our local group recently and we are discussing structure there, too. Thought I'd share the link to where we are at with that here: http://www.transitiontowns.org.nz/node/3748. I could see a similar idea working at the national level, with bubbles being local groups and the 'core group' being a large forum of local representatives which meets annually. I would still add a coordinating team to the mix, which could be selected on an annual basis by the forum of local representatives. - Or something like that, I'm making this up as I go along here. Starter for 10.

More thoughts?