Conflict Resolution Network/Central America - Hosted by ACRIS
Networking Conflict Resolution resources within Central America
The Association for Conflict Resolution's International Section (ACRIS) established Regional Networks to support our members and colleagues around the world, and to promote conflict resolution capacity building. We encourage ACR members and non-members alike to join together to expand our field worldwide. The goal of the Regional Networks is to provide pract ...learn more
GROUP DETAILS
Created: Jul 05, 2008
Updated: Apr 17, 2009
Membership: Open To Apply
Semi-Private
Comments (61 - 79 of 79)
|
|
I like "across the global social/ environmental justice community", thanks JT
|
|
That is a good way to describe it Camilla... I think ... so is that vision analogous to the relationship Groups have with the main Wiser network/ forum currently...?
Peggy I would reword it to say "across the global social/ environmental justice community" maybe...
Jon Ramer wrote:
"Why not let anyone be able to add a profile and comment on any kind of organization? Does it dilute the WE model if we require a different process for adding these other types of organizations?"
I think that is a great question... in the real world I have worked for guiding companies that have stellar reputations... but all it takes is a couple figurative (and literal) rainy days / mishaps to create a body of clients whom are motivated to jump on yahoo or other feeback sites and bombard you with negative reviews... lots of times the people who have a good time never say anything but thanks; are less vocal.
I think if you invite businesses on here, we definitly run the risk of creating a different environment... a more critical one; less music more noise. Users here are very respectful currently, which is refreshing.
(Like Jon mentioned there do not seem to be a lot of users who are making it their life-mission to offer criticism of non profits, or working to get specific non profits kicked off (I think? maybe I am just not aware...).)
So I think -- (like Melinda mentioned in the implementation link Peggy Provided below) -- that building in some sort of rating system (comment section) for businesses (like yahoo has etc.) could be both a positive/ and negative, a figurative double edged sword... because you want people to be honest in something like that right?
But honest brutal constructive-criticism doesn't really seem to mesh with Wiserearth's current tone... and I think the unspoken respectful tone is something that WiserEarth wants to keep... even great businesses that belong 100% with Wiser will end up with some 'noise criticism', rather than 'music feedback'... I guess the wiserworld will just have to be careful to moderate that kind of thing.
Seems like users are pretty good at policying themselves on wiserearth.org right now though... the unspoken tone might just sustain itself through the inclusion of for-profit entities...
just some thoughts.
|
|
Here's a recent comment from Justin (justintilson) in the origional discussion thread:
I've just finished modifying the WiserPlatform for an MBA school project at Bainbridge Graduate Institute. Our team was asked to asset map the Bainbridge Island community in the pacific northwest of the US. We wanted to urge our "client", Sustainable Bainbridge to use wiserearth.org site but couldn't because the lack of ability to include government and business entities.
I understand the necessity to not dilute the integrity of WiserEarth but I think business and government could be included in a way as not to. Pushing them off to a different site dilutes the user base and marketing dollars, complexifies technology & maintenance, limits cross-pollination and mashup possibilities. I'll all for their inclusion as long as the guideliness for joining are explicit and their account is reviewed before activation. |
|
As an example, there is a similar website to WiserEarth in France called 'Who's Who ONG' - www.wwo.fr (who incidently may help to bring a WISER France into fruition). They have a directory of nonprofits and another directory of 'for-profits'. On this site, both entities are separate but joined at the hip (so to speak) with information on how the 'for-profits' are supporting the nonprofits that are listed (i.e. how they are 'connected').
I like the idea of having 2 separate entities who would at the same time be connected. From a metaphorical perspective, we could compare it to a village. It would mean that there would be a village square (or commons) which would be fully inclusive and open to all who would like to meet there, but that there would be different families who live in different houses in the village (with different needs (and facilities) but who would have the ability to make the connections with everyone else and help to participate in and build the commons.
So I would vote yes with caveats (to eventual inclusion of socially responsible businesses & government), but only if there is a way to intelligently 'manage' the integration' of all entities and prevent commercialization of the WISER space (which could happen with the inclusion of for-profit entities). |
|
As I mentioned previously, socially responsible business's [ie: Fair Trade, etc.] will be as much a part of transitioning the status quo to one of sustainability as will be the NGO's and other organizations that at times seem to be leading [dragging?] society toward that goal.
As long as there is a way to differentiate for profit and public agencies from the non-profit and non-public agencies, I think it makes sense to invite them in to the community. But there should also be a mechanism by which people who make it part of life to monitor organizations would be able to allert the WiserEarth community about some questionable organizations, since names don't always indicate what an organization is really about
|
|
|
Being inclusive of all sectors should not affect our Principles. We may need to rephrase our section around "collaboration", and use the language from our orginal vision. What do you all think?
Transparency |
|
|
I thought it might be appropriate here to share with you all our original vision around Wiser, something we drafted around 3 years ago when Wiser was only a concept:
"The World Index of Social and Environmental Responsibility (WISER) will serve the gathering of humanity that is forming around the globe to address poverty, climate change, pollution, globalization, resource issues, hunger, in short, the political, economic, and ecological problems that affect us all. The people and organizations confronting these issues are building blocks of a different world. Collectively, this drive for a sustainable and just existence can be called a “movement” even though it does not have a name. It is manifest in three types of institutions: public benefit organizations (NGOs and non-profits) that collectively comprise the largest social movement in human history; socially responsible businesses that are creating practices that are permeating all of commerce; and responsive local, state, and national governments who are embracing sustainability as the key to a better life for their citizens. WISER works to help this unnamed movement become better connected and more effective. We are creating dynamic, open-source, community-based platforms for people and organizations to enable more communication and collaboration. These are the WISER platforms: WiserEarth, WiserBusiness, and WiserGovernment." More details on www.naturalcapital.org
Our vision has always been to ensure that all three sectors connect, and join efforts towards a just and sustainable world. We had envision three different plaftorms but more and more people are simply asking to widden the scope of our existing organization directory. I suggest that we all look at how this feel in terms of implementation, expecially looking at all the various points that Bowo pointed out around the scope, guidelines.
|
|
This is a great discussion, though not as much as wishlist item that I can have authority to implement. :) I've not yet decided on which way I stand on this issue. There is a a great deal of incentive to include for-profits into the directory, esp as many of them do incredible work "toward a just and sustainable" world. But as Michael as pointed out before, the possible dilution of this space is a big consideration. There's a certain trust that the community has with the information on WiserEarth, mainly that anything they come across hasn't been commercially motivated by another party for financial gain. It's a trust I'd ideally like to keep, but it's always difficult to have to turn away for-profit businesses that are doing really great things.
All the same, my comment is that this is still very much a decision that will have to be determined by Paul and Peggy. My own understanding is that there is considerable interest in having it all housed on one site. I'll be sure to report back if I hear of any momentum on this track. |
|
|
I don't see any drawbacks, I think the more perspectives/ voices/ resources on the site the more "wiser"...
The only problem I could see is what if corporation x is the nemisis of grassroots organizations y and z... because of institutional accountability issues; issues regarding percieved social/ environmental justice operational violations. That would seem to be a potential conflict: I wouldn't think it would become a significant problem though.
|
|
|
What are the core functions of WE? For me, they are precisely what they say they are: a community directory and networking forum. Right now our community directory has only ngos. The suggestion is to include for profit companies and government agencies.
What is the problem with including them? Will their presence infect the directory? Of course not, I think the issue is on the discovery side. We have to make it very easy to filter what you are searching for. So you can filter out or mix the different types of organizations.
For the networking forum the good news is that only people compose stuff on WE. So even though a corporation has a profile in the directory, it won't have a voice. It would have to be some person form that corporation who would have a WE account that would be doing the speaking. I think expanding the directory will attract more people to join WE and this is another benefit of being inclusive.
What do you think?
|
|
|
I wonder if the current functionality, specifically wiki pages and comments, could be enough to handle the challenges that come with adding for profits organizations and supportive government agecies.
I wonder, has any NGO been removed from WiserEarth as a result of people speaking up to say that they do not qualify? And if someone wants to remove an organization would being able to edit the profile and add a comment be sufficent to serve as an adequate self-correcting mechanism?
As I see the current situation, most people agree that to reach a just and sustainable world will require government agencies and responsible businesses. The question is what is the most appropriate way to make a space for them in WE.
Why not let anyone be able to add a profile and comment on any kind of organization? Does it dilute the WE model if we require a different process for adding these other types of organizations?
What do you think? Jon
|
|
From my european, french and brazilian point of view :-), if think it would be useful to include selected companies and organizations such as UNDP (i have good contacts at the UNDP headquarters if needed), not only to reinforce the capacity building part of the website, but also to show that every organization's strengh, support, ideas and points of view is needed to fight against poverty, environment destruction, totalitarism... Our role as citizens is to explain why and how companies must be part of the solution to adress those issues in an effective and equilibrate way. Michael's point f view is really interesting, and i agree to say that for profit organization don't need one more "marketing" platform. That why a wiserbusiness website seems to be a good solution. Some clear rules have to be defined in order not to list each and every company that think it deserves it. A multi stake holder veting commitee could help. J |
|
|
@Jon:
Thank you for your thoughtful and informative response here and in the plan for implementation and questions page. I have spent some time since you replied to browse through the website of B Corp, Chaordic Commons (and Chaordic Initiatives), Social Venture Network and your Interra Project. I consider all as excellent and important initiatives.
Among them, B Corp seems like the most robust and up-to-date platform with proper verification and certification tool and a good objective: "we set a benchmark which distinguishes "good companies" from "good marketing". And we make it easier for consumers and investors to support these companies." (I also learned that the B Corp initiative is formed in collaboration with NCI's WiserBusiness project)
This would be something that will provide valuable guidance on screening businesses that should be included in WiserEarth and address a part of Michael Spalding's (michael) reservations for not including for-profits (quoted at the bottom from the community discussion around this topic ).
As I alwas liked the concept of WiserEarth's sister sites: WiserBusiness and WiserGovernment (click here for a PDF overview), and how they will eventually coalesce with WiserEarth into personal, local and regional hubs, I thus support the inclusion of for-profits and gov. agencies here as you suggested. I also acknowledged how many projects to create positive change must be multi-stakeholders by necessity.
Before adding my vote, there are things that I think needs answers/clarifications:
Again, thank you for your thoughtful response Jon. I look forward too to our working together.
@JP
I think I'm in support of adding an indication of organization type, just to make things clearer. Perhaps a small icon somewhere in the organization's page? (which will also show up in "Organizations" listing within groups).
This is Michael's response to Duane on why he thought WiserEarth is not ready to include for-profits.
Hey Duane,
The following is Paul Hawken's (paul) comment:
The original idea is that there would be three (at least) separate
sites, only because the needs and functions of civil society, business,
and government are different. However, the idea was that there would be
personal, local, and regional hubs in which all three entities would
merge and be seen in an integrated way, because the challenges we face
need all three working in consort. It has not been done yet for a
couple reasons: |
|
|
As long as there is a way to differentiate for profit and public agencies from the non-profit and non-public agencies, I think it makes sense to invite them in to the community.
Perhaps another Directory, or sub-directory could be created to list these organizations, as well as some very obvious indication on their home page as to their status.
There should also be a mechanism by which people who make it part of life to monitor organizations would be able to allert the WiserEarth community about some questionable organizations, since names don't always indicate what an organization is really about
|
|
|
Hi Bowo, It is inspiring to be working on an open project with a community of people who genuinely care so much. Since accountability, integrity, and transparency are so key to protecting and preserving our values, I can assure you that I will gladly share what it is that I know.
For me, it has always been just a matter of when and how we include supportive businesses and government agencies. At the same time there must be a clear values alignment amongst the participants whether they are affiliated with public, private, or civil society.
Our experience has been that just and lasting change requires being inclusive and inviting those that have the power, authority and influence to the table to help bring about change. Effective policy changes can go a long way to change the conditions in which NGOs operate. The marketplace and its demand for innovation can help be a driver for social change and the flow of capital.
I am the executive director of the interra project, The work of the interra project is focused on three way partnerships -- the bottom up, the top down, the outside in. This is true for the foodsystem work we've been doing in California and in the Pacific Northwest. We all have groups on WiserEarth but have reached the limit of what we can do to include all the relevant and affected parties.
Of course they can add themselves as individuals. That is appropriate and a necessary first step. But we also want to identify and relate to the organizations that they represent. My recommendation is that we simply extend the type field and the activity field to include organizations that are public and private.
As long as anybody can edit an organizational profile and comment on an organizational profile we can hear from all of us. We can at least start down this path and see what shows up.
What I know from the wiserearth partners meetings and from my conversations with Paul Hawken and Peggy Duvette is that they are open and looking forward to the community as a whole taking greater and greater responsibility for the direction and future of WiserEarth.
WiserEarth can become a critical place for finding and connecting to each other as we journey together toward our new tomorrow. I look forward to our working together. Thanks to everyone for their contributions!
|
|
|
Hi Jon,
May we know more info other than the proposal and the community discussions linked above? Especially the ones in the WiserEarth Partners meeting(s)...
For practicality and eventuality reasons, I see no wrong in integrating WiserBusiness.org and WiserGovernment.org into WiserEarth. Provided that we install appropriate safety measures as probed in the questions page.
Info for readers of this page:
This is a short description of what constitutes WIserEarth Partners --> http://www.naturalcapital.org/wiserpartners.htm
Are there more info out there that the community should know about? Just to conform with WiserEarth's transparency principle which states that "WiserEarth is open to full public scrutiny". |
|
|
Hi Angus, At the WiserEarth Partners meeting it was agreed that WiserEarth is open and the scope can be expanded to include for profit entities and government agencies. |
|
Can someone summarize the state of the debate on this issue in the community? Just as a practical matter many non-profits are registered as for-profit businesses because the legislation / regulation in their countries don't allow otherwise. Also government agencies tend to be very important in terms natural resource management, proverty alleviation, repro health etc.
|
http://www.wiserearth.org/article/Methodology
The guidelines distinguish a subset within civil society that is described as "sustainable civil society". I suggest that there are these subsets within the private sector (i.e. "corporate sustainability)" and public agencies (i.e. "sustainable public agencies") as well.
So in the same way we are not opening the directory to include NGOs that are not pursuing the common goals of social and environmental justice; we are doing the same with businesses and public agencies. We are looking for the sectors within these two additional sectors that are advancing corporate responsibility, and are the public agencies that recognize their civic responsibility to properly manage public goods, resources and sustainable development.
Resource depleting businesses, weak civil societies and failed governments are part of the problem, but responsible companies, engaged governments, vigilant NGOs and knowledge communities are part of the solution. We see opening WE as an integrated approach that encourages cross sector partnering.