JavaScript Menu, DHTML Menu Powered By Milonic
The process – raising the “big tent”
In his opening remarks for the day, John Sewell challenged the room to be part of raising a “big tent” – big enough to include people from a broad cross-section of the community in the development of a greenlands vision.
If we believe that community sustainability can only be achieved through an integrated “triple bottom line” approach – paying equal attention to economic, social and environmental well being – then engaging citizens from all sectors of our community in decision making is essential. Only with a broad range of perspectives in the room will all the right questions get asked, creative solutions be found, and outcomes changed for the better.
The terrific participation in workshop is a good indication that this tent is being raised in Centre Wellington.
Ownership, consensus and a broad base of community support have been integral to smart growth efforts elsewhere. Progressive communities are recognizing the importance of citizen engagement in decision making. In fact, many communities would be jealous of the citizen-led initiative to develop a greenlands strategy for Centre Wellington; a unique effort that brings the municipal government to the table as one of many community partners.
The dual challenge for Greenlands Centre Wellington is to continue to expand the tent while countering opponents who will point to those in the community who have not yet come inside – unless they offer a more democratic alternative, or are prepared to be part of expanding the tent, they remain simply apologists for the status quo where decision making rests with the few.
Several participants commented on the intrinsic value of greenlands and that the benefits of protecting greenlands are self-evident. Indeed, the benefits identified by each break out group were very similar regardless of theme. Perhaps the fact that we are compelled to ask questions like “what are the benefits of a park?” is telling us more about the failure of our governments to serve the public interest than anything else.
Intuitively we know the value of green space. However, we often must come to the defense of green space armed with reams of data and scientific evidence.1
Change
The pressures of responding to change were discussed in many of the break out groups. Encouragingly, those discussions often moved from threats to opportunities.
For instance, significant changes are occurring in agriculture as farmers respond to the pressures of global markets and increasing urbanization. However, the discussion also recognized that with increasing urbanization new markets are developing for a wider range of commodities.
The inherent risk in clinging to certain elements of the past, often those that are the most romanticized, is that we risk losing what is really important in our communities.
I grew up in the country and have idyllic memories of running through the woods chasing butterflies and floating twig boats down the creek. However, my son’s experiences growing up have been very different but no less valuable. As we become an increasingly urban population, we will need to find new ways to connect to the natural and rural landscapes so that we continue to understand their value to our quality of life.2
Connections & the Need for Integration
Another element that was common to all the break out groups was the connections between issues. One group even began to develop a web to describe the interconnections. One could imagine doing this with the material from all break out groups and covering a whole wall.
As the connections became clearer, two things happened. Common ground was found as people saw how their issues intersected. And the need for better integration was exposed - whether that was the need to integrate trail systems into the our transportation system, to integrate public health goals with the promotion of active transportation or the importance of green space in building cohesive communities.
Balance
The last theme that predominated in the day’s discussion was that of balance.
When we start talking about finding balance – the balance between regulations versus incentives, public versus private rights, rural versus urban needs – we are engaging in a process of understanding each other. If we have done a good job at drawing the connections and integrating them into our awareness of the issues, then we will be more successful in finding common ground to move forward. The big tent will help us find the balance we are seeking.
Concluding remarks
The Greenlands Centre Wellington initiative is about building a vision for the future. The full impact of the work being done today will be felt in 50 years and beyond.
The founders of our national parks had a vision for the future that we celebrate today. In 50 years, no one will argue that the green belt around Toronto should have been smaller. Likewise, more than 150 years later, we do not hear calls to downsize Central Park in New York City.
Jane Jacobs was once asked why, with all our understanding and knowledge, that we still don’t make the changes necessary to build stronger, healthier communities. She responded that we lack the confidence.
I wish Greenlands Centre Wellington all the confidence in the world as you move forward with your vision to build Centre Wellington’s own “central park” or “green belt.
1. For instance, to advocate for the protection of the tree canopy in Chicago, a study looking at a public housing development found that apartments surrounded by vegetation are safer than buildings in barren landscapes; fewer crimes are committed against people and property and substantially so – 52% fewer total crimes, 48% fewer property crimes and 56% fewer violent crimes. www.herl.uiuc.edu/canopy.htm
2. Urban population has tripled in the last 50 years and is expected to double again in the next few years. Soon more people will live in urban rather than rural environments for the first time in the history of the planet. The children of the 21st century will embody a new and predominantly urban experience and perspective.