Talk: Community Involvement via Community Action 2020

Use this page to post comments on, suggestions for improvements to, etc, the article, if you don't want to edit the article directly.

Note about conventions: Although on articles it's not usual to sign edits, it is usual to sign entries on a talk page. If you are logged in you can do this with three or four tildes (~'s), or if not you can add a name manually. Philralph 08:28, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Feedback from Community Action 2020 Project board meeting - for discussion[]

The aim of CA2020 is to get more people to live sustainably (a good thing!), thesis is that people already in community groups could be delivering more on sustainable development. (I think most community groups already, naturally operate with SD at their core but barriers such as legislation, planning and insecure funding get in the way). CA2020 won't provide funding but will provide mentors and toolkits to help people delivering SD. Based on idea that there is good will in community groups and potential for community groups to deliver more projects/ initiative or opperate in ways that promote SD. These community groups that are meeting/ coming together already need additional support (tools/ helplines/ enablers) to facilitate and deliver more SD projects. It is not a funding stream. CA2020 is keen to mainstream SD, so not left high and dry like LA21. Need to find ways to re kindle LA21, how? It needs more than an initative from from central government!

Many communtiy groups are already delivering SD but don't call it that. Funders look for single outcomes – that don't reflect diversity of outcomes from community organisations, need funders to recognise multiple outcomes. Local community groups already respond to need, engage local people, want their projects to sustainable, respect their environment, benefit the local economy but don't call themselves SD, does that matter?

Feedback from a colleague in Devon:

“The issue of funding was critical to the discussions/ consultation about the strategy in the first place and Ministers were told how core funding for this type of work is seldom available. I think they are in denial or have never tried to deliver SD in real life. I don't see how mentors etc will help unless monies are freed up to support the action. There is little available from local authority budgets and, to date, nothing in Neighbourhood Renewal Fund etc. So how do they think we are going to persuade people ? Are they going to open up existing funds and insist that SD is supported through them?”

I agree, funding is a key issue and in my experience people working in voluntary organisations are an imaginative bunch and will try and use all avalible funding sources where possible. Most community organisations and projects I know naturally have SD at their core, but they may not call it SD. Community orgs are usually based on local need, be it transport for excluded people in rural areas, new roof on the village hall so the youth group/ yoga group can meet. They have a long term vision and are trying to get a better deal for people, the environment and often the local economy; local food projects etc. Barriers to these initatives being sustainable are usually funding, planning permission etc. Toolkits and mentors have their place in supporting people to achieve more but it's hard to get behind CA2020 without being really convinced about how it will help communities to help themselves.

Let's use this wiki to discuss the issues, I am happy to take comments and feedback to the next CA2020 project board meeting (6th July and 16th August 2005).

Polly Goodwin, Westden (working with rural communities in Devon), 13 June 2005.

Please say somewhere what the Community Action 2020 project Board is. If there's an initiative from grassroots networks it probably needs to be on the article page. Tim Gray 10:52, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

As I understand it the Project Board is the core group responsible for taking this forward. Polly is one of the the very few / the only? community sustainability people on it. It does include a colleague of mine from CDF, Gabriel Chanan.

There is also an Advisory Board (bigger body, less work!) which I am on as a representative of London 21. This has not yet met.

Chris Church

I tend to agree with the comments that the government seems to be in denial about the need for (at least some) funding and this would seem to undermine serious discussion of, and faith in the programme. I wonder if it's useful to distinguish between a potential discussion with officials (presumably the Project board is mostly officials?) and lobbying politicians? Or would officials like to see also any arguments about the necessity of funding?

As I understand it the government is saying it sees CA2020 as a subset of, or at least related to a Home Office programme, Together We Can (?) Philralph 07:01, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There seem to be three key things missing from the government plans so far

1. anything that looks genuinely like "helping communties help themselves" - very little, if anything to suggest it isn't stuck instead on helping bureaucratic intermediaries through yet more top down processes. For example where is the explicit commitment to let the whole rich network of local and community activists and practitioners influence the design of this programme? - see Update October 26 2005

2. explicit recognition that action on sustainability must also be about the joined-up. In a presentation to the recent Grassroots innovations for sustainable development conference, Chris Church said "Networks, etc can play a valuable role in transmitting ideas and practice upwards (to government), downwards (to the grass roots) and sideways (between organisations). Clearer recognition of this role and support is overdue. It would be highly desirable if every major local government area (e.g. county, city, borough) had a visible and effective network to promote and support grass roots activity.

Improved community - local government co-operation: Where it worked well Local Agenda 21 played an important role, and also helped build links between environmental work and wider social concerns. Every area needs some form of local forum to ensure exchange as above but also to provide a clear support framework and a structure in which local practice can inform and feed in to policy-making." (my choice of emphasis)

3. an approach to funding information which fully utilizes modern technology - with the suspicion that this conveniently hides the fact that there is no real funding for real joined up community action on sustainability. A disparate bunch of short term single issue projects does equate to anything genuinely sustainable. Philralph 11:28, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)

One might also say that there is little interest from groups and networks working at community level in discussing and cooperating with each other. The lack of participation in this wiki is a case in point. I surmise that people are just tired, from the long hard slog on Local Agenda 21 which achieved very limited change, and do not wish to spare energies from their local work. Basically, everyone would be very happy if someone else did something. Tim Gray 19:16, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Update on CA2020 August 5th[]

Just to update those who are checking this page and to comment on previous posts.

CA2020 is still working hard on development. A recent event brought together 18 chief execs / chairs etc. from both environmental NGOs (RSPB, FoE, BEN, BTCV, groundwork et al) and Voluntary and Community sector bodies (CAF, ACRE, NACVS, Communtiy Links, NFWI) (enough acronyms!).

This showed there to be quite a lot of interest and enthusiasm along with concerns. Further work is being done: this ranges from work to develop training standards for community workers to incldue work on CD through asessment of existing SD tool-kits, considering mentoring processes, and further work on developing links between CA2020 in Defra and the wider V&C sector.

I'm not quite as sceptical as Tim G (above) about the exhaustion factor. While there are certainly some people and organisations who have been soldiering on since the beginning of LA21, there's a lot of new faces and energy around as well.

I am happy to respond to direct queries about more on this as a member of the Advisory Board, although I am also doing some work on this with CDF and can onyl discuss what is already in circulation.

Chris Church

Thanks for the update, Chris. What channels are there for information and involvement for those of us not on the official list of the great and good? Perhaps there's a website? If not, there should be. Something public that says, "Actually, these prominent organisations are having serious discussions about this, here's what we can tell you now, here's a timetable for future stuff, here's how you can hook up", would make a huge difference to the picture of SD work.

The feeling I get from the localsustuk email list is that lots of people feel that there should be some coordinated network at national level to continue SD, but nobody can actually point to one, and nobody really has the energy to be outraged or take action. I'd be delighted to be shown otherwise. Tim Gray 08:52, 7 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Comment, October 2005[]

See How can Community Strategies be turned into Sustainable Community Strategies?

Update October 26 2005[]

The programme is to be launched next year (2006). The Community Development Foundation are running five workshops this autumn (2005):

for key staff in sustainability networks (City Farms, Sustrans, CRN, Food groups etc. )
for local sustainability practitioners (London)
Workshop with an urban focus (organised with BASSAC and Urban Forum)
Workshop with a rural focus (organised with ACRE and NALC)
Workshop with CVSs (organised with NACVS)

between Nov 18 and Dec 2 (2005) Further information via the UK Local Sustainability email list (localsustuk)

Latest, November 20 2005, see Community Action 2020 development workshop, November 24 2005