What I Learned From "How To Change The World" (A Course Offered by Wesleyan University via Coursera.org)

Poster for Creek Clean Up by author

I thought the course, How To Change The World*, had an audacious ring to it. That was why I took it. I wanted to find out if it was possible for me to make a difference, wherever I happened to be in my life. I’m so glad I took the course, despite some hesitation (and distractions) at the start, because I ended the class with an actual project that will make a difference in my immediate community.

It directed my focus on action

The course was divided into six weeks, with the fourth week serving as “rest” week so students could catch up with the readings (which were voluminous!). These were the topics, in order, that covered the first, second, third, fifth, and sixth weeks:

• social goods and the commons (resources belonging to a whole community, or even the whole world),
• poverty and development,
• climate change and sustainability,
• disease and global health care and,
• women, education and social change.

It was a broad coverage but it pretty much captured the biggest issues we face as human beings. I liked how the whole course started with the premise that we human beings share a commons, whether it is our biology, our planet, or our systems. It was a good springboard and context for tackling everything else. With every topic, the main questions that we were asked as students were:

What do I know?
Why should I care?
What can I do?

The course was not theoretical though it did not lack in theory. We were challenged to read the facts (I confess that I was really not able to finish all the PDFs and papers that were presented in the syllabus) but beyond that, we were challenged to take action. This, I believe, is where knowledge matters most: when it is put into practice. All the knowledge in the world will not be able to make positive changes. After learning new insights, new methods, new approaches, it makes sense to apply it immediately to one’s life. This was the value I saw in taking up the course. It was designed for application. At one point, I realized that I made a mistake in submitting a multimedia presentation for peer review. It meant that I would not get extra credit. I complained on the forum and one TA (teaching assistant) reminded me that doing the work counted more than the grade. What a wake-up call. Because I’m such a nerd, I wanted that “with distinction” certificate. But the certificate won’t matter if my participation won’t create any actual change in my community. I drew the line and, from then on, I focused on the quality of my work, whether or not I got a good grade.

I looked around with new lenses

All the topics were very relevant to me, coming from a developing country that seems to face all of the issues presented in the syllabus. While the course directed me where to look, what became clear to me were immediate opportunities in my own neighborhood. In the first week (when the commons was the topic), I was able to zero in on a polluted creek across the condominium where I live. I started contacting people I never thought to contact before: a foundation that helps rehabilitate rivers and creeks, the kagawad (local officials) in my barangay (smallest local government unit in the Philippines), and the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH).

I was pleasantly surprised by the reaction from my local government. They were very willing to work with me to organize a clean up. This initiative snowballed with the DPWH volunteering a crew, despite the fact that they work on a national and not on a local level, and a small business offering to donate effective microorganism (EM) solution to be applied to the creek. I was amazed at what actually could be done in my own neighborhood. Citizen action didn’t seem like such an overwhelming task anymore. My barangay eventually got in touch with a company that does corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities, Li & Fung Ltd., a multinational supply chain management supplier, and, all of a sudden, we got 20 more volunteers for the creek clean up plus food donations. All in all, the project that will be implemented on August 16, 2014 will have 55 volunteers coming from both government and private sectors.

I appreciated the beauty and necessity of the grassroots and “the small”

In the course of taking up How To Change The World, a friend of mine (who also happens to be one of the volunteers for the creek clean up) introduced me to a book, Small Is Beautiful: Economics As If People Mattered by E.F. Schumacher. I immediately felt an affinity with the book. Schumacher believes that using economics as a measure for development or progress is a mistake. There must be better ways for measuring wellbeing. Also, these measures must take sustainability into account. This book was published in 1973 but I find that it is very relevant today. It pointed me to the answer to “how to change the world.” The answer is: one village/ neighborhood at a time. While sweeping movements do make a difference, touching hearts is very essential in creating lasting change for the better. This can only be done at close quarters. Modern technology favors the “mega,” the “big,” and “scale” but going back to the “small,” the intimate, the community-based is actually what will make the difference in creating a sustainable structure that favors actual people and our environment.

I now see that it’s time to change our measures

It made sense that the last topic that we took up in the course focused on gender equality. Empowering women and girls not only improves the lives of everyone but it gives women the opportunity to contribute from positions of leadership (either in private business or in government). They call attention to things like child care and the environment. From this topic, I discovered the work of Marilyn Waring, New Zealand feminist, politician and author of If Women Counted, a feminist analysis of modern economics. She advocates changing our measures for progress.

In business parlance, there is a saying that “what doesn’t get measured doesn’t get done.” Even in matters of development, I believe the same thing also applies. However, our tools for measurement reflect the kind of societies we want to build. If we measure for economic factors only, we will not take into account such things as wellbeing and sustainability. I believe it’s time for human societies to change their measures. And once again, we do this one community at a time, until it becomes the model that we use for larger structures like countries and regions.  And so, to close, if you ask me: how do you change the world? My answer is: one community, one village at a time. It takes focus, it takes really seeing and observing what will make a difference to people in my immediate neighborhood, and it takes work at the grassroots. It takes you and me doing something about the things that matter to us most. When it comes to changes we want to see in the world, it will not be about GDP (gross domestic product) but about our wellbeing and the wellbeing of our kids, our planet.

Go take the next course and see how *you* can change the world. 

*Note: I took up a course boldly called How To Change The World offered for free by Wesleyan University (via Coursera.org) from June 21 to August 14, 2014.  The course was taught by Michael S. Roth, Wesleyan University President. It tackled major issues facing humanity and it was based on discussions brought up during the 2013 Social Good Summit in New York. There will be a 2015 version of the course based on the upcoming 2014 Social Good Summit.

How To Change The World #3: Personal Narrative (and Action) in Addressing Climate Change

Q: Many have reported on the difficulty of getting people to focus on climate change because it’s such a long-term problem. Describe two techniques you have found useful in getting people to either change the pattern of their own energy consumption or to advocate for public policies that address environmental threats.

A: Recently, I saw four sets of data that really struck me in this report on my country from the World Bank: http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2013/06/20/survey-8-of-10-Filipinos-Personally-Experience-Impacts-of-Climate-Change

1. That 8 out of 10 Filipinos personally experience impacts of climate change
2. 52% have little to almost NO understanding of climate change. 
3. Also, 63% have NOT personally participated in efforts to reduce the risks of reducing the effects of climate change. 
4. And 68% have NOT participated in an effort to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

And as a test of response, I posted the data on my social media page and got what I expected: zero response (no likes, no comments). That’s just the effect of talking about climate change. Prof. Daniel Kammen of UC Berkeley put it very succinctly in the conversation on energy, sustainability and solution science video (video lecture 3.8 of How To Change The World): a) quoting Prof. George Lakoff, cognitive linguist, there’s no verb form (pretty much, no language) for humans being affected by outside forces like climate change and b) there’s no currency for dealing with climate change.

Climate change is the elephant in the room. We all know, especially us Filipinos, that it is happening. But there’s no structure around which to talk about it without getting extremely polarized. I took a consensus among my office mates during a lunch break and they all believe climate change is real. What is hard to put into words and action is what to do about it that will actually make a difference.

The two techniques that I have found that are effective for getting people to care about climate change have to do with something that Prof. Kammen said and what Prof. Alice Haddad, political scientist (video 3.4 Grassroots Politics and Climate Change) said.

1) Prof. Alice Haddad talked about how art is one potent way to engage people. It’s because art creates narrative, something people care about. It is something that moves them and helps them emotionally engage with an issue or a concept.

2) Prof. Kammen talked about connecting a highly abstract thing like climate change to a deeply personal level of experience.

Overall, I’m also inspired by the work of E.F. Schumacher, Small Is Beautiful: A Study of Economics As If People Mattered. Schumacher advocates a return to small, appropriate technologies that empower people without destroying the environment.

For me, the personal story/ narrative, together with action, are far more effective than rhetoric and fear-mongering. My simple story about signing up with a local initiative called Good Food Community http://www.goodfoodcommunity.com/, which helps local smallholder farmers invest in, and continue to practice, organic farming is a small step in the direction towards addressing climate change (ex. organic farming practices and lower carbon footprint by buying local produce). It’s also something that people responded to positively. It’s an action that could easily be taken by a family and it’s connected to my daily life. It’s a very personal choice but it’s not exclusive. Anyone can make this choice. It’s about doing something that anybody could do without being overwhelmed.

Note: I am currently taking up a course boldly called How To Change The World offered by Wesleyan University (offered for free through Coursera.org) and taught by Wesleyan University President, Michael S. Roth. It tackles major issues facing humanity and it is based on discussions brought up during the 2013 Social Good Summit in NY. I am putting up all my assignments on my blog as well.

ModPo 2013 #42 Talk All You Want...But STEER, dammit: On Creeley's "I Know a Man"

Image of steering wheel from iconfinder.com. 

I Know a Man
BY ROBERT CREELEY

As I sd to my  
friend, because I am  
always talking,—John, I

sd, which was not his  
name, the darkness sur-
rounds us, what

can we do against
it, or else, shall we &
why not, buy a goddamn big car,

drive, he sd, for  
christ’s sake, look  
out where yr going.

Robert Creeley, “I Know a Man” as it appears on PoetryFoundation.org, from Selected Poems of Robert Creeley. Copyright © 1991 by the Regents of the University of California. Reprinted with the permission of the University of California Press, www.ucpress.edu.

Source: Selected Poems (1991)
--------------------------------------------

What I took away from the video discussion was primarily two states: the hemorrhage of words and ideas that describes/ depicts the Beats versus the practical life...the life wherein one does, wherein one functions (as in driving a car and looking out for where one is going).  Is this the theoretical versus the effective life? As all things that we consider, this is a false binary. We know that one needs both in life.

I was particularly struck by the robot-like monotony of the way Creeley read this poem. It sounds like the drone of a text-to-speech machine talking. Maybe this was deliberate on his end if he were satirizing the kind of talk that Beats were used to: full of meandering big-idea jargon like "darkness" and "justice" and "capitalism." These are all just words when faced with real life and there is no answer except to continue driving carefully. Otherwise, it's all accident or darkness.

Talk ("because I'm always talking" with a replace-able stand-in like "John") or drive. It seems like there is only one answer, in this case. It's a good distinction, a good emphasis on grounding all this protest and talk in reality. There are no uses for words if there is no life being lived.

An aside: What is up with all this shorthand that starts in the Beat generation? I see it in Kerouac's manifestos and now in Creeley's poem. I'm not surprised. Maybe it is the introduction of a machine that does this. When the text generation started in the Philippines (everyone could now afford cellphones that had the SMS function) during the 1990s, it was common to speak in shorthand--all vowels erased if the word could still be recognized. Very telling. It echoes back to Niedecker's condensery. Can we do without the unnecessary? Yes, we can!

Lastly, I see Creeley's poem as a challenge to the writer (and the reader). Take the goddamn steering wheel of your life. Talk all you want, protest all you want, philosoph-ize all you want...but take on the steering wheel. Direct your life. Take action. Otherwise, this is all pointless.

Sustainability #6: GMOs, IRRI, Responsibility and Action

My Sustainability posts spring from my forum posts in the free Sustainability Course, offered by the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, which I am participating in.

The last video lecture by Jonathan Tomkin for week 6 of the Sustainability course was eye opening. We *are* already living in the age of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms). Ever since the Green Revolution was introduced in the late 60s, we've already benefited from it. Specifically for my country, the Philippines, one particular example of this is the success of the IRRI (International Rice Research Institute), which has helped breed better varieties of rice and improved yield...especially in Asia where rice is a staple food. It is a cutting edge research facility which also applies its findings and helps farmers use more sustainable methods of farming. One great example is the climate-change-ready rice they are developing: rice that is submergence-tolerant, drought-tolerant and heat or cold tolerant. Both Bangladesh and the Philippines are cooperating to produce Golden Rice, a variety that includes Vitamin A.

Yes, there are risks. As stated in WHO's Q&A about GMOs, the following are what people are most concerned about: allergenicity (provoking allergic reactions), gene transfer (transfer of genes from GM food to the body or bacteria) and outcrossing (transfer of GM genes to conventional seeds). Studies have shown the low probability of these. Maybe there are unknowns in the equation the way that CFCs were regarded as harmless during the industrial revolution but were found to cause damage to our ozone layer in the future.

The point is...inaction results in as much damage as action. We are running out of agricultural land and ground water will be hard to replace at the rate that we pump it out. We need to look at this situation as a whole human race, as humanity. The time has come for human beings to take responsibility and to find solutions together.

We can't leave this to the scientists. This is an urgent human question. Will we have enough food to feed our 9 billion in 2040 or 2050? At our current rate, we cannot. We need to improve yields even further (and that's like a miracle because we've already increased our yields by a tenfold since the 70s). We need to do this together: from different fields, different countries. I like the idea of Jonathan Foley's "terraculture." We answer the question as a human race. And while we are at it...we need to see it from total responsibility for the planet. We aren't the only ones who need to eat.

Let's go for responsible GMO, let's go for more efficient use of ground water, let's go for inter-country solutions, let's go for individual actions aligning with global actions: a humanity that eats more grain, fruit and vegetation (the way our bodies were designed) and acts in harmony with the planet.