Aries - Education For Sustainability Local Gov Handbook

Education for Sustainability
in Local Government:
Handbook
This handbook was developed as part of the Mentoring Local Government in
Education for Sustainability project which was undertaken between March 2006 and
March 2007. The project was funded by the Australian Government Department of
the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) and developed and
implemented by the Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability
(ARIES).
The handbook served as a resource to support the participants in the local

government project. It was intended that, with input from the project participants, it
could be used as a tool by others wishing to implement similar mentoring projects.
The handbook is a resource that outlines the key principles of Education for
Sustainability and provides information on tools for stakeholder engagement.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the
authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Australian Government or the
Minister for the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts.
Copyright: © Commonwealth of Australia 2007

Information contained in this publication may be copied or reproduced for study,
research, information or educational purposes, subject to inclusion of an
acknowledgment of the source.
Citation: Delgado, L (2007) Education for Sustainability in Local Government:

Handbook Canberra: Australian Government Department of the Environment, Water,
Heritage and the Arts, and Australian Research Institute in Education for
Sustainability.
Acknowledgements
The project was conceptualised by Daniella Tilbury, ARIES, Macquarie University,

Sydney and directed by Fil Cerone also of ARIES, Macquarie University.
Thank you to members of the Key Informant Group for their valuable input to the
review process of the document (Dan Garlick, Kathleen Vella, Rose Read, Angela
Shepherd) and to Jenny Tomkins of the Australian Government Department of the
Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts for her valuable feedback.
Introduction 1
The Project Process 11
Sustainability
Education for – What is it?
25
Sustainability
in Local Education for Sustainability (EfS)
– What is it?
35
Government:
Handbook
Local Agenda 21 51
Tools and techniques for EfS and 61

stakeholder engagement
programs
Evaluation of EfS programs 143

Abbreviations
ARIES Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability
DEC NSW Department of Education
DEWHA Australian Government Department of the Environment and Water

Resources
DEST Australian Government Department of Education, Science and

Training
EE Environmental Education
EFS Education for Sustainability
EPA NSW Environment Protection Authority
IIED International Institute for Environment and Development
IISD International Institute for Sustainable Development
KIG Key Informant Group
LA21 Local Agenda 21
LGA Local Government Association
NEEC National Environmental Education Council
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
NSESD National Strategy for Ecological Sustainable Development
PAR Participatory Action Research
PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal
UN United Nations
UNDESD United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development
UNEP United Nations Environment Program
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation
WSSD World Summit on Sustainable Development

Summary
This document formed part of the Mentoring Local Government in Education for
Sustainability project which was undertaken between March 2006 and March 2007.
The project was funded by the Australian Government Department of the
Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) and developed and
implemented by the Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability
(ARIES).
The Mentoring Local Government in Education for Sustainability project sought to

build the capacity of local government within Australia to use Education for
Sustainability (EfS) as a learning-based strategy for change towards sustainability.
The Handbook was developed as a resource to support the local government
employees who participated in the project. It was intended that, after input from the
project participants, it could be used as a tool by others wishing to implement similar
mentoring projects.
Education for Sustainability (EfS) approaches are increasingly seen, at both the
international and national level, as key to equipping people with the skills necessary
to leads and engage during the change process towards sustainability1. EfS
approaches seek to involve and motivate individuals to reflect on how they currently
live and work, what their value systems are and how they can bring about changes in
the way they do things, leading ultimately towards a more sustainable future. It is
also about developing a more politically informed citizenry which can actively
participate in decision-making processes and lend support to enlightened policies
and government initiatives for sustainability2.
1
UNESCO (2005) United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development: Draft
International Implementation Scheme
http://www.aries.mq.edu.au/portal/keydocs/undecade.htm [Accessed 26 July 2006]
2
McKeown, R. The Education for Sustainable Development Toolit- What is ESD?
http://www.esdtoolkit.org/discussion/whatisesd.htm [Accessed 5 July 2006]
Chapter 2: Introduction 
Introduction
Key questions addressed by this section:

What is the purpose of this section?............................................................2
What is this handbook for? ...........................................................................2
What does this handbook contain?..............................................................2
How should this handbook be used?...........................................................2
Who funded the Mentoring Local Government in Education for

Sustainability Project?...................................................................................3
Who faciliated this project? ..........................................................................3
Why was this project funded?.......................................................................3
Who was this project for? .............................................................................4
Who participated in this project?..................................................................5
Who were the key stakeholders in this project? .........................................6
Which were the essential readings for the project?....................................8
References....................................................................................................10
It is not the strongest species that will survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one
most responsive to change.
Charles Darwin
Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain
to miss the future.
John F Kennedy
Education for Sustainability in Local Government: Handbook 1

What is the purpose of this section?
To introduce:
• the handbook and explain its uses
• the stakeholders involved in the project
• the rationale and context of the project.
What is this handbook for?

This handbook serves two main purposes:
• It is a resource handbook developed for the Mentoring Local Government in
Education for Sustainability project. It was intended to support the mentoring
and workshop processes of the project. It includes information on the key
principles of Education for Sustainability and identifies various tools for
stakeholder engagement.
• It was intended that after further development from input from project
participants, the handbook would be used by staff from local government
authorities wishing to replicate the processes undertaken in this project.
What does this handbook contain?

The handbook consists of a number of sections containing:
• information and relevant documentation from the Mentoring Local
Government in Education for Sustainability project
• the concepts of sustainability
• the principles of education and learning-based strategies for change towards
sustainability
• tools to implement the above in policy and practice
• additional information, including suggestions for further reading.
This resource was developed at the initial stages of the Mentoring Local Government
in Education for Sustainability project. It was revised during and after the project
when the stakeholders involved, including participants, project partners and
facilitators had an opportunity to reflect on the project processes, learnings and
outcomes.
How should this handbook be used?

The handbook is intended to be used as a resource to support the mentoring
processes that underpin this project. It is not designed to be read from cover to cover
as a formal report (although you can do this if you wish), but rather to dip into or use
relevant sections as you see fit to meet your needs. The handbook is in separate
sections, in a dip-in, dip-out form that can be further developed. The intention is for
this to be a living, learning document that can grow.

? Throughout the handbook, you will come across the following
information boxes.
? Please feel free to add to this handbook and modify it to suit your
purposes.
At the end of each section you will find a list of further

information/readings on that topic. Where possible, we have tried to
include information relevant to local government.
Who funded the Mentoring Local Government in Education for

Sustainability Project?
This project was funded by the Australian Government Department of the
Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA). DEWHA develops and
implements national policy, programs and legislation to protect and conserve
Australia's natural environment and cultural heritage. The Mentoring Local
Government in Education for Sustainability project was an initiative of the
Sustainability Education Unit at DEWHA.
For more information visit www.deh.gov.au/education.
Who facilitated this project?

The project was conceptualised and facilitated by the Australian Research Institute in
Education for Sustainability (ARIES) based at Macquarie University. Daniella Tilbury,
ARIES Director, conceptualised the initiative and developed the project. Fil Cerone
was Project Director and a mentor. Lynn Delgado was a mentor and author of this
handbook.
For more information about ARIES and its previous projects please visit
www.aries.mq.edu.au.
Why was this project funded?

The need to build capacity within local government in Education for Sustainability
was identified by the National Environmental Education Council (NEEC) at its 16th
meeting in September 2004. Similarly, a national review of community Environmental
Education practice across Australia1 recommended that funding be sought to support
capacity building at this level. This report argued that there is a need to value-add to
current initiatives by introducing mentoring programs for local government so that
they can utilise Education for Sustainability approaches effectively in their work.

The same report also identified the need to research and develop a resource for local
government educators on learning-based strategies for change and stakeholder
engagement processes. That resource is this handbook.
This project draws upon previous initiatives developed by Macquarie University in

NSW2 3 4 . These initiatives have shown the potential of mentoring processes in
achieving change towards sustainability in local government through education,
This project has been developed in the belief that:
• the ideas and concepts of Education for Sustainability offer an effective

way to grapple with the changes necessary for us to move towards a
more sustainable future
• local government staff have a critical role to play in the move towards a
sustainable future
• there is a need to build capacity of local government staff in developing

new ways of thinking and doing in order for change towards
sustainability to occur
• learning is best undertaken in an active, supportive and non-

threatening environment and should be workplace or context specific
• local government needs to integrate sustainability across all facets of

local government. This will require new and innovative ways of thinking
and doing, in particular it requires a more systemic approach
• local government needs to more actively engage stakeholders within

the community in participatory processes for Education for
Sustainability.
Who was this project for?

This Mentoring Local Government in Education for Sustainability project
acknowledges that whilst there are many local government sustainability initiatives
happening throughout Australia, many are hampered by the lack of capacity, training
and workplace support of their staff. This means that many struggle to implement
programs effectively. Specifically, they have limited experience and training in how to
use education and learning-based strategies for change towards sustainability.
Many local government employees are seeking partnerships or creating their own
networks (e.g. sustainability educators5) to overcome this. Local government staff is
the largest stakeholder group seeking formal education in Environmental Education
(EE) and Education for Sustainability (EfS) qualifications across Australia. However,
there are few educational opportunities for local government staff and
representatives to learn for sustainability in a way which is directly relevant to their
workplace or context. This project was therefore conceived as a way of addressing
this need.
See ‘The Project Process’ for more specific information about this project.

Who participated in this project?
A total of 18 local government participants were selected for this project, two
participants coming from each of nine local councils across Australia.
The participating councils were:
Council Project
Auburn Council (NSW) Towards Sustainability
Going Places – Travel Reward

City of Darebin (VIC) Scheme
Sustainable Homes Program
City of South Perth (WA) Sustainability Strategy
Environmental Events Program

City of Whittlesea (VIC) ‘Spring into Composting’
Community Promotion
Coorong District Council

Local Action Plan
(SA)
Best Practice Integration of

Eurobodalla Shire NRM into the planning and
Council (NSW) management of the Eurobodalla
Shire
Moonee Valley City Integrating ESD into all Council

Council (VIC) programs
Noosa Council (QLD) Living Smart Program
Pittwater Council (NSW) Sustainable Pittwater 2030
An Expression of Interest (EOI) was developed for the project and advertised widely
through email forums and each of the state Local Government Association’s
networks. The criteria used for selection of participants included:
Essential Selection Criteria

1. You must clearly identify an existing Council environmental or sustainability
project/s that will be used as the basis for your participation in the mentoring
process. The existing Council project/s must use learning or education as the
basis for achieving outcomes.
2. You must be able to identify two members from Council who can commit to
participating in all aspects of the ARIES mentoring process from start to finish.
The two identified members of Council can be working collaboratively on one
project or on two separate projects as long as both projects use learning and
education as the basis for achieving outcomes. The identified members can

be staff and/or Councillors. If they are staff members, they can be located in
different departments. Councillors similarly should have some practical
involvement in the nominated Council project. Two neighbouring Councils
can put in a collaborative application on a joint project if they wish (i.e. one
person from each Council).
3. You must supply written support from senior management (i.e. GM or CEO)
actively encouraging the Council to participate in the project*.
4. You must be able to demonstrate how you will work collaboratively with the
local government association in your state as well as other networks to ensure
that the learnings and impact of this mentoring process continues once
involvement by ARIES ceases.
Desirable Selection Criteria

1. You should be able to show how your Council has committed itself to
Education for Sustainability (EfS) and/or Agenda 21 initiatives by supplying
some evidence of the incorporation of some or all these principles into its daily
operations (e.g. policies, employment of EfS officers, community engagement
programs, etc).
2. You should be able to demonstrate how you envisage taking the learnings from
this process and extending those learnings across the Council organisation.
Who were the key stakeholders in this project?

As well as the funding agency (DEWHA), the facilitators of this project (ARIES) and
the local government participants, the project identified several project partners. A
partnership approach was considered important to this project because this approach
offers the possibility to6 7:
• create collaboration between the stakeholders to generate longer term
organisational change towards sustainability
• allow partners to combine talents and ideas in:
o a) the development of the project
o b) the dissemination of the project
• generate mutual support to maintain enthusiasm and commitment to the
project
• bring together people with different perspectives
• generate wider networks and hence ensure that the project learnings and
impacts are extended beyond the participants.
This partnership approach was seen as a significant opportunity to work with other
key stakeholders in furthering Education for Sustainability approaches. From a
practical perspective, it was anticipated that project partners would be capable of
taking the learnings further afield and implementing similar mentoring programs in
other local government organisations.
The following people and/or organisations agreed to be project partners:

• The Gould Group (formerly known as the Gould League)
• NSW Government Department of Environment & Conservation (DEC)

• Environs Australia
• ICLEI
• Sustainability Victoria
• Specific Local Government Associations.
The work of the Mentoring Local Government in Education for Sustainability project
was overseen by a Key Informant Group (KIG) which comprised leaders and
experienced practitioners in Education for Sustainability, Environmental Education,
local government and mentoring from across the states and territories in Australia.
The KIG reviewed the handbook to ensure that the resources and project results
were communicated in an accessible and relevant way, as well as ensuring that the
project findings were communicated to a broader audience to promote the concept of
mentoring as an effective tool for sustainability outcomes.
The following people, and/or organisations formed the Key Informant Group:
The Key Informant Group
Executive Officer, Western Port Greenhouse Alliance, Victoria
Team Leader Community & Government, Sustainability Victoria
Assistant Director, Environment Policy, Local Government Association, Canberra
Executive Officer, Youth Mentoring Network
Director, T Issues Consultancy, NSW
Manager Climate Change, Sustainability and Climate Change Division (SCCD) ,

Department of the Premier and Cabinet, South Australia
Director, Sydney Catchment Authority

What were the essential readings for the project?
? Two essential readings were identified for this project. These are
available online.
• Tilbury, D and Wortman, D (2004) Engaging People in

Sustainability Commission on Education and Communication,
IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK
www.aries.mq.edu.au/portal/keydocs/envision.htm
• Tilbury, D and Ross, K (2006) Living Change: Documenting good

practice in Education for Sustainability in NSW Macquarie
University, Sydney and Nature Conservation Council, NSW
Available for download from www.aries.mq.edu.au and
www.nccnsw.org.au.
Also refer to the ARIES portal at www.aries.mq.edu.au/portal

which offers a wealth of information on EfS, including international and
national documents, key processes in EfS (e.g. envisioning,
partnerships) and community education.
A further two important documents are:
• Tilbury, D. and Cooke, K. (2005) A National Review of

Environmental Education and its Contribution to Sustainability in
Australia: Frameworks for Sustainability. Canberra: Australian
Government Department of the Environment and Heritage and
Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability –
Volume 1
Available for download at www.aries.mq.edu.au
• Tilbury, D., Coleman, V., Jones, A. and MacMaster, K. (2005) 'A

National Review of Environmental Education and its
Contributions to Sustainability in Australia: Community
Education' Canberra: Australian Government Department of the
Environment and Heritage and the Australian Research Institute
in Education for Sustainability (ARIES). Volume 3
Available at the ARIES website www.aries.mq/edu/au.
Hard copies of these two publications are available from:

ariescoordinator@gse.mq.edu.au.

From Education for Sustainability (2001)
Eds Huckle J & Sterling S, Earthscan Publications, UK

References
1
Tilbury, D., Coleman, V., Jones, A. and
MacMaster, K. (2005) A National Review
of Environmental Education and its
Contributions to Sustainability in Australia:
Community Education. Canberra:
Australian Government Department of the
Environment and Heritage and the
Australian Research Institute in Education
for Sustainability (ARIES).
2
Tilbury, D. and Bowdler, L. (2003a)
Education for Sustainability in Clarence
Valley Councils: Action Research,
Learning and Mentoring, Sydney:
Macquarie University Available at
www.gse.mq.edu.au/Research/staff/daniell
a_tilbury.shtml [Accessed 19 April 2006]
3
Tilbury, D. and Bowdler, L. (2003b)
Education for Sustainability in Cooks River
Local Councils: Action Learning and
Mentoring in Stormwater Community
Education, Sydney: Macquarie University
4
ILT Team (2004) ‘Mentoring as a tool for
workplace change: outcomes and lessons
learnt from the It’s a Living Thing
Education for Sustainability Professional
Development Program’, Paper presented
by Henderson, Garlick and Calvert to the
Effective Sustainability Education: What
works? Why? Where to next? – Linking
Research and Practice Conference,
th th
University of Sydney, 18 – 20 February
2004
5
Sustainability Educators email discussion
forum
http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/sustaina
bilityeducators/
6
Wilcox D (2002) A short guide to
partnerships Available at
www.partnerships.org.uk
7
Tilbury, D. and Wortman, D. (2004).
Engaging People in Sustainability. p75,
IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. Available for
download from www.aries.mq.edu.au
Chapter 3: The Project Process 

The Project Process
Key questions addressed by this section

What is the purpose of this section?......................................................... 12
What was this project trying to achieve? .................................................. 12
What were the timeframes and stages of this project?............................ 12
What was mentoring in the context of this project? ................................ 13
What was the structure of the mentoring process in this project?......... 15
Why mentoring as a tool for Education for Sustainability?..................... 16
How was this project evaluated? ............................................................... 18
Where is the research in this project?....................................................... 19
What is the journal and what is its purpose?............................................ 20
What was the Learning Contract?.............................................................. 20
Where to after this?..................................................................................... 21
Where can I find out more? ........................................................................ 23
References ................................................................................................... 24
For this project, mentoring was a peer relationship. It was non-expert led.
The mentor acted as a facilitator, whose responsibility was to facilitate the learning
of the mentoree by providing support and encouraging continual critical reflection.

To introduce:
• the aim and objectives of the project
• the timeframes, stages and key dates for the project
• the purpose and value of the mentoring methodology used for the project
• the commitments to the project
• the journal and the learning contract.
What was this project trying to achieve?

The aim of this project was to build local governments' capacity to use Education for
Sustainability and learning-based strategies for change towards sustainability.
In order to achieve this, the Mentoring Local Government in Education for Sustainability
project had a number of objectives:
• to enable local government staff to consider how education and learning can assist in
planning and implementing sustainability policies and programs at the local level
• to use mentoring strategies to build capacity of local government staff in Education
for Sustainability and support its implementation with a focus on achieving practical
sustainability outcomes
• to develop a resource to support the mentoring and facilitation component ofthe
project and which can be used by others who wish to replicate this project
• to use the skills of project partners as well as build upon existing local council
networks to extend the learnings and outcomes of the project beyond the immediate
participants.
What were the timeframes and stages of this project?

Table 1 outlines the proposed timeframe and the associated components of the Mentoring
Local Government in Education for Sustainability project..
After the initial one-day introductory workshop in August the workplace mentoring and
seminars alternated on a monthly basis. On-going email and telephone support was
available from the introductory workshop through until the final mentoring session.

Table 1: Timeframe of Mentoring Local Government in EfS Project
2006/7 Project Component Location
th Powerhouse Museum,
24 August 2006 Introductory Workshop
Sydney
th
Week 11-15 In each of the 9 council
Workplace mentoring 1
September workplaces
th
19 October Seminar 1 Melbourne
th
Week 6 – 10 In each of the 9 council
Workplace mentoring 2
November workplaces
th
7 December Seminar 2 State Library, Sydney
Week 29 Jan –
nd In each of the 9 council
2 February Workplace mentoring 3
workplaces
2007
nd
22 February
Seminar 3 & Formal Evaluation Melbourne
2007
Beginning March Receive stories/write-ups from

-
2007 participants for inclusion in handbook
Draft handbook published &

End March/April
distributed to all participants, KIG and -
2007
project partners
What was mentoring in the context of this project?
… Learning is the fundamental process, purpose and product of mentoring

Dr Lois J Zachary, Principal, Leadership Development Services, Arizona
… help by one person to another in making significant transitions in

knowledge, work or thinking
Clutterbuck, D & Megginson, D, Mentoring Executives and Directors (1999)
page 3

Mentoring is a relationship concerned with learning. The
process of mentoring is not new and can be found in many Mentoring is a Learning
indigenous systems including the elder system of the process, the Mentor is the
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island people1. Facilitator.
There are many different types of mentoring programs but essentially most programs can be
identified as falling into two main areas:
• professional development mentoring within the workplace – generally ‘expert’ led, the
mentor being another employee with greater experience or an externally trained
mentor.
• community development, in particular aimed at ‘at risk’ or disadvantaged groups
such as youth, indigenous peoples, migrants, refugees, women or people with
disabilities. Community mentoring programs are normally either ‘expert’ led, peer led
or often, particularly in the case of youth mentoring, the mentor could be a retired or
older community member.
Some writers have suggested that mentoring programs should not attempt to rigidly specify
the mentoring roles,2 rather they should be fluid and flexible relationships to allow for growth
and change. This project is based upon this premise; however, it is important to have some
clarity of the roles within this project and an understanding of how we see the mentoring
relationship.
Key tenets of this mentoring project
Effective mentoring programs and relationships are premised on the belief that the learner
controls, and is responsible for, his or her own learning; and that meaning is constructed by
the individual learner. Furthermore the learner must possess the motivation to learn and a
capacity to learn. The mentor's role in the mentoring relationship is to establish and nurture
the conditions for this learning.
Effective mentoring practice incorporates principles of self-directed learning:

• Learning is an active process by which individuals make meaning from information and
experience.
• An individual's prior knowledge, beliefs and feelings influence this process.
• Learners continually monitor and evaluate their own thinking and restructure their
prior knowledge.
• Individuals are natural learners and enjoy learning in the absence of feelings of
insecurity.
• Self-esteem and motivation are heightened when individuals are in situations where
they are accepted and valued.
NSW Department of Education and Training A review of the literature and an exploration of
mentoring practices www.schools.nsw.edu.au/edu_leadership/prof_read/mentoring/
For the purposes of this project, mentoring was identified as being a peer relationship,
that is, it was non-expert led. The mentor (in this case ARIES) acted as a facilitator,
whose responsibility was to facilitate the learning of the mentoree (in this case, local
government participants) by encouraging continual critical reflection. This was done by
posing appropriate strategic questions and by offering time and space to reflect.

What was the structure of the mentoring process in this project?
The structure and style of mentoring programs vary greatly. Mentoring can be carried out on
a ‘one to one’ basis, a ‘one to many’ basis or a networking basis. There are advantages and
disadvantages to all three depending on the target group and the aims and objectives of the
program. For example, one to one mentoring is generally very high in resource needs, and
both labour and time intensive, but has the ability to address highly targeted and tailored
information, and to be very flexible to the needs of the particular individuals and their
individual scenarios. In contrast, networking-based mentoring programs have lower
resource, labour and time requirements and offer excellent opportunities for collaborative
learning and the formation of partnerships, but are much less targeted to individual needs.3
An example of a ‘one to many’ mentoring style program is the City of Charles Sturt Business
Energy Partnership Program where a larger business provided mentoring in energy
reduction methods for smaller businesses across different industries4. This program was
highlighted for its innovative partnership approach between local government and private
sector industry.
This Mentoring Local Government in Education for Sustainability project integrates a

combination of the ‘one to one’, ‘one to many’ and networking-based approaches.
One to one
One to one mentoring was undertaken through workplace visits, i.e. individual visits to the
local council offices. This part of the project delivered highly targeted support to each council
and was very flexible to the particular needs of the participants. In this project we used a
mentoree partnership approach, i.e. two people within each council were jointly mentored.
The aim was that the two mentorees within each council could provide support for each
other and together generate greater impact within council for change.
One to many
This was undertaken through the workshop and seminars. The aim was to share knowledge
and learnings between everyone and to jointly reflect on the way forward.
Networking
Again, this was undertaken through the seminars. We offered this time and space as an
opportunity for networking, to jointly discuss and reflect on ways to perpetuate this program
at the end of the project, and to develop ongoing support networks.
? Through the mentoring process, participants were asked to identify a mentoring

focus for their project, and from this, to develop an action plan to implement this
change. This formed the basis for the mentoring process.
Examples of previous mentoring focuses have included:

• the reorientation of a community engagement program to encourage greater
ownership of the process by the stakeholders
• changes to community consultation methods for council development and
planning approvals process
• engagement of stakeholders in developing a shared vision for the development of
a community garden
• the evaluation of an existing community education project using EfS principles to
identify key success factors and lessons learnt for achieving change.
Throughout the mentoring process, with their mentoring partner and the mentor,
participants were asked
Education for to continually
Sustainability act upon
in Local and critically
Government: Handbookreflect on their action 15
plan.
Why mentoring as a tool for Education for Sustainability?
Throughout Australia and internationally, mentoring is increasingly being seen as a useful
tool for community development, and increasingly it is being innovatively used as a tool for
moves towards sustainability. Also within local government here in Australia, mentoring is
already being used as a professional development tool.
Macquarie University has undertaken a number of mentoring projects in collaboration with

various local government and community partners. These projects typically used both ‘one
to one’ and ‘one to many’ mentoring approaches, within the participants’ workplaces and at
focus groups, and they focused on the integration of Education for Sustainability techniques
within existing education or community engagement programs. Evaluation of these
programs highlighted the value-adding nature of mentoring as an effective tool for providing
support for, and building the capacity of, the mentorees in the planning, design,
development and execution of their education and community engagement projects.
Table 2 gives examples of mentoring programs being undertaken specifically in these areas,
as well as examples of workplace-development mentoring that is currently occurring within
local government. Each project is referenced so that you may investigate further if you are
interested.

Table 2: Examples of mentoring programs targeting local government or with specific
Education for Sustainability aims
Mentoring Program Initiated By Program Aims Target Group Type of Mentoring

Local Government Centre for Professional Local government On-line support and
Peer Support Organisational Development matching of mentors
5
Program, Victoria Development and mentorees
(CFOD)
6
EcoSteps, Australia Helping Hands Skills in sustainability Varied As required from one-
on-one to workshops
Community Action UK Government Community action for Community Community mentors

7
2020, UK sustainability
Young Leaders Leadership for Develop young Youth Work placement with
project, international Environment and leaders for projects in developing
8
Development sustainable countries alongside
development tailored mentoring
programs
Future Monash Train and equip University students Series of workshops,
Environmental University university students to residential retreat,
Leaders Program, become effective sustainability projects
9
Victoria leaders for a and one-on-one
sustainable world mentoring by a leader
in the environmental
field
Mentoring Program Local Support, guidance in Local government One-on-one, mentors
for Councillors, Government various areas such as councillors are other elected
10
Tasmania Association governance, planning members of local
Tasmania and finance government
Sustainable Leaders University of Capacity building of Both junior and Mentoring triad
Tri-Mentoring British Columbia university students to senior students between a junior
11
Program, Canada develop future student, a senior
sustainability leaders student and a
professional
Clarence Valley Macquarie Capacity building in Local government One-on-one, on-line
Action Learning and University design, development project leaders and telephone
Mentoring Program, and assessment of support and
12
NSW community education workshops
programs
Cooks River Action Macquarie Capacity building in Local government One-on-one, on-line
Learning and University design, development project leaders and telephone
Mentoring Program, and assessment of support and
13
NSW community education workshops
programs
It’s a Living Thing Macquarie Building the capacity Educators One-on-one, on-line
EfS Professional University & of the person in the and telephone
Development AAEE, NSW workplace/community support and
14
Program, NSW to reorient their workshops
educational programs
towards EFS
processes and
principles
Reducing Energy City of Charles Assisting businesses Local businesses Mentoring by more
use through Sturt, South to reduce their energy experienced
Partnerships, Australia use and greenhouse companies
Cities for Climate gas emissions
Protection Program,
15
South Australia

How was this project evaluated?
The program will be evaluated using both formative and summative evaluation techniques.
Formative and Summative Evaluation
‘When the cook tastes the soup, that’s formative evaluation; when the guest
tastes it, that’s summative evaluation’ (Michael Scriven, Associate Director, The
Evaluation Centre)
In other words, formative evaluation produces information that is fed back

during the course of a program to improve it. Summative evaluation is done
after the program is finished, and provides information about its
effectiveness.
Formative evaluation was carried out throughout the mentoring process. After each
workshop and one-on-one mentoring session participants were asked to provide feedback
both informally and formally. This was both verbal and written and the information was used
to review the project and adjust it accordingly.
? Participants are involved with the design of the project in that they,
as the mentorees, drive the mentoring process. In the case of the
seminars we asked for input into the agenda before each meeting so
that we could ensure that the seminars were targeted to the programs
and areas of need.
Summative evaluation was carried out at the final seminar which was a feedback and
evaluation seminar.
? At the final seminar participants were asked to complete a confidential

questionnaire and to consider the outcomes of the Mentoring Local
Government in Education for Sustainability project (see Section 7 for more
information about evaluation). These questionnaires were collated and
evaluated by an independent evaluation professional. There was also plenty of
opportunity for informal feedback.
The final evaluation findings were then added to the draft handbook. In
addition to this written evaluation, we also asked for stories – short written
summaries with any information at all that they wished to share about their
discovery journey in Education for Sustainability, be it at work, home or
wherever. This could be taken from their journal for example (see the section
below). These summaries formed a critical part of the summative evaluation
process. In addition, we asked for information that could help to document
the changes that occurred during the project.

To summarise, key evaluation data collection points for the project were as follows:
Formative
• feedback after each workshop/seminar
• feedback via email after each mentoring session
• on-going feedback via email/telephone during the project
• participant input to agendas for workshops and mentoring.
Summative
• written questionnaire at start of project
• written questionnaire at project completion
• participant summaries from journals.
Where is the research in this project?

ARIES undertakes research into Education for Sustainability. The research context of this
project posed the following question:
Q. Is the mentoring approach an effective method for:

• developing the understanding and skill of participants in Education for Sustainability
processes
• developing the capacity of participants to reorientate their programs towards an
Education for Sustainability approach
• generating longer term organisational change for sustainability within local
government?
These research questions were addressed through the evaluation of the project.

What is the journal and what is its purpose?
? One of the commitments to this project was the development of a

journal. It was intended that the journal form a collection of thoughts,
comments, questions and critical reflections, which arose throughout:
• the process of understanding and reflecting on Education for
Sustainability during the workshop sessions, the mentoring
sessions, and in the workplace and community
• the development and implementation of Education for Sustainability
programs in the workplace or community
• the integration of Education for Sustainability into existing
programs in the workplace or community.
The journal could include any sources including personal comments and
reflections, cartoons, quotes, newspaper cuttings, photos, print-outs from
websites, whatever material was considered relevant to Education for
Sustainability. It could also take any form (e.g. loose sheets of paper
added to the draft handbook or a separate exercise book).
Participants were asked to develop their journal during, in between and

after the workshops and mentoring sessions.
It was intended that the journal involve them in a process of considering

how Education for Sustainability may confront their own assumptions as
well as their professional knowledge. It was also used to inform the
mentoring sessions.
As mentioned above, a further commitment was that they write a short

summary or story, summarising any changes that had occurred during the
project. This could be a summary from their journal.

What was the Learning Contract?
? As part of this project, participants were required to sign a Learning

Contract with ARIES. It served to form a basis for our mentoring
relationships and identified time commitments and concrete deliverables
for both mentors and mentorees. See below.
Where to after this?

Once the handbook was published, a Dissemination Plan was developed based on what
we learnt from this project, and offering suggestions on ways to disseminate the learnings
and outcomes. The idea was that the plan would discuss ways to widen the reach and
further the learnings of this project by continuing to develop and strengthen networks and
partnerships across Local Government.

THE LEARNING CONTRACT
Welcome to the Mentoring Local Government in Education for Sustainability project. This
project is funded by the Australian Government Department of the Environment, Water,
Heritage and the Arts and delivered by the Australian Research Institute in Education for
Sustainability at Macquarie University.
This learning contract outlines the responsibilities of the project deliverers and participants.
Our Commitments
• Deliver 1 workshop, 3 seminars and 3 workplace visits for each mentoree

• Provide support for your project throughout the process
• Be open and honest at all times
• Be available via email or telephone throughout the project
• Provide a draft handbook to all mentorees and at completion of the project a final
handbook complete with your stories and reflections.
• Provide other resource materials, including 2 key publications.
Your Commitments
• Attend 1 workshop, 3 seminars and 3 workplace visits

• Identify and commit fully to a change action within your project (we can help you
identify this)
• Prepare, update and act on Action Plans developed during the workplace visits
• Work collaboratively with your mentoring partner
• Develop a journal outlining your reflections and thoughts during the project
• Engage with the project enthusiastically and be open and honest at all times
• Provide feedback for evaluation as required
• At the end of the project, provide a journal summary containing anecdotes about your
journey through the project and reflections about Education for Sustainability
• Provide input into the Dissemination Plan and, if interested, become involved in the
continuation of the project.
I (print name) agree to the above conditions of the

Learning Contract.
Signed Date
We, the Team, agree to the above conditions of the Learning Contract
Signed Date

Where can I find out more?
Mentoring
Australian Mentor Centre
www.australianmentorcentre.com.au Tilbury D & Bowdler L (2003a)
Education for Sustainability in
Dusselldorf Skills Forum: Mentoring Clarence Valley Councils: Action
www.dsf.org.au/themes/10.htm Research, Learning and Mentoring
Lots of information on mentoring best Sydney, Macquarie University
practice and benchmarking. This site www.livingthing.net.au/PP_Proj_6.htm
also contains Mentoring Australia,
Australia’s national mentoring Tilbury, D. and Bowdler, L. (2003b)
association. Education for Sustainability in Cooks
River Local Councils: Action Learning
ILT Team (2004) ‘Mentoring as a tool and Mentoring in Stormwater
for workplace change: outcomes and Community Education, Sydney:
lessons learnt from the It’s a Living Macquarie University
Thing Education for Sustainability www.livingthing.net.au/PP_Proj_6.htm
Professional Development Program’,
Paper presented by Henderson,
Garlick and Calvert to the Effective Partnerships
Sustainability Education: What works? (See also 'Where can I find out more?’
Why? Where to next? – Linking in the EfS – What is it? section of this
Research and Practice Conference, handbook.)
University of Sydney, 18th – 20th
February 2004 Tilbury, D. and Wortman, D. (2004).
www.epa.nsw.gov.au/cee/confpoceed.htm Engaging People in Sustainability.
p75, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.
Coaching and Mentoring Network Available for download from
www.coachingnetwork.org.uk/ www.aries.mq.edu.au
National Environmental Education & Wilcox D (2002) A short guide to

Training Foundation The Mentoring partnerships Available at
Handbook: A Guide to Environmental www.partnerships.org.uk
Mentoring for Companies, Non-profits
and Regulators
www.mentor-center.org
The International Mentoring

Association
www.mentoring-association.org/
Includes a section on key questions to
ask to develop an effective mentoring
program.
The Mentor Directory

www.mentors.ca/mentor.html
Good information on mentoring
including mentoring program tips and
stories on mentoring relationships as
well as a large database on mentoring
resources.

References
1
NSW Premier’s Department Public 12
Employment Office (2004) Mentoring Tilbury, D. and Bowdler, L. (2003a)
Made Easy A Practical Guide Education for Sustainability in Clarence
Valley Councils: Action Research,
2
NSW Department of Education and Learning and Mentoring, Sydney:
Training A review of the literature and an Macquarie University Available at
exploration of mentoring practices www.gse.mq.edu.au/Research/staff/daniell
http://www.schools.nsw.edu.au/edu_leade a_tilbury.shtml [Accessed 19 April 2006]
rship/prof_read/mentoring/ [Accessed 3 13
May 2006] Tilbury, D. and Bowdler, L. (2003b)
Education for Sustainability in Cooks River
3
NEETF The Mentoring Handbook p14 Local Councils: Action Learning and
Mentoring in Stormwater Community
4
City of Charles Sturt Business Energy Education, Sydney: Macquarie University
Partnership Program 14
http://www.charlessturt.sa.gov.au/Default. ILT Team (2004) ‘Mentoring as a tool for
aspx?tabid=247 [Accessed 3 May 2006] workplace change: outcomes and lessons
learnt from the It’s a Living Thing
5
Centre for Organisational Development Education for Sustainability Professional
Local Government Peer Support Program, Development Program’, Paper presented
Victoria by Henderson, Garlick and Calvert to the
www.cfod.com.au/jsp/default.jsp?actionid= Effective Sustainability Education: What
local_gov_peer&page=home [Accessed works? Why? Where to next? – Linking
19 April 2006] Research and Practice Conference,
th th
University of Sydney, 18 – 20 February
6
Ecostepsi Helping Hands Coaching and 2004
Mentoring Service 15
ICLEI Cities for Climate Protection City
www.ecosteps.com.au/static/ecs/services/ of Charles Sturt Business Energy
coachingandmentoring.htm [Accessed 19 Partnership Program
April 2006] www.charlessturt.sa.gov.au/Default.aspx?t
abid=247 [Accessed 19 April 2006]
7
UK Department for Environment, Food
and Rural Affairs, (2006) Community
Action 2020 Community Support
Programme Overview document for
inviting Expressions of Interest
8
LEAD International Young Leaders
Project http://youngleaders.lead.org/
[Accessed 19 April 2006]
9
Monash University Future Environmental
Leaders www.fel.monash.edu.au
10
Local Government Association of
Tasmania, Mentoring Programme for
Councillors
www.lgat.tas.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=371
11
University of British Columbia
Sustainable Leaders Tri-Mentoring
Program,
http://students.ubc.ca/leadership/involvem Chapter 4: Sustainability – What is it? 
ent.cfm?page=tri [Accessed 19 April 2006]

Sustainability – What is it?

What is the purpose of this section?..........................................................26
What is sustainability? ................................................................................26
What is sustainability in the Australian context?......................................27
What is sustainability in the local government context?..........................28
Where can I find out more about sustainability?.......................................30
References....................................................................................................34
Note: Much of the text in this section is taken from Volumes 1 and 3 of A National Review of
1
Environmental Education . These were both key texts for this project. See the Essential
Readings list in Section 1 Introduction.
It is curious to note that while we have difficulty envisioning a sustainable world, we

have no difficulty detailing what is unsustainable in our societies. We can rapidly
create a laundry list of problems – inefficient use of energy, lack of water
conservation, pollution, abuses of human rights, overuse of personal transportation,
consumerism, etc. However we should not chide ourselves because we do not have a
clearer definition of sustainability: many truly great concepts of the human world
such as democracy and justice are hard to define and have multiple expressions in
cultures around the world.
Hopkins and McKeown, ESD Toolkit (2002)

To introduce:
• the key terms, concepts and principles underpinning sustainability
• sustainability within Australia
• sustainability as a learning process.
What is sustainability?
Sustainability can be thought of as the goal of ‘sustainable development’, a journey
and destination that is to be negotiated. Sustainability is open to different
interpretations and takes on different meanings not only between different interest
groups within societies but also between different societies. Sustainability seeks an
improved quality of life and embraces equality for all, and for this reason a key aim of
sustainability is to enable multi-stakeholder groups to define their vision of
sustainability and to work towards it.
United Nations documents refer to key Sustainability is about

sustainability concepts as intergenerational
equity, ecological sustainability and fair Quality of Life issues:
distribution of wealth, community • intergenerational equity
participation and access to resources. Many
• ecological sustainability
of these can be associated with quality of
life or well being. Underpinning them is a • fair distribution of wealth
strong premise that both society and • equity and justice
economy are dependent on a healthy • equal access to resources
environment that provides ecosystem
services.
There are also discussions on what 'sustainability', 'sustainable development' or

related terms really mean and whether they are indeed different. Some people,
particularly from economically developed nations, prefer to use the term
'sustainability' rather than 'sustainable development', others opt for 'sustainable
futures', 'sustainable living' or ‘sustainable communities’. Interestingly the focus of
many of these terms is 'quality of life' and the process of achieving sustainability is
widely understood as one of defining and seeking a better quality of life for all.
No country is sustainable or comes close to it. There

is no proven recipe for success. The international Sustainability is …
community has come to recognise that achieving
an ongoing learning
sustainability is essentially an ongoing learning
process that actively involves multiple stakeholders process that actively
in change across every aspect of society. UNESCO involves stakeholders in
released a document at the World Summit for creating their vision,
Sustainable Development entitled From Rio to taking action and
Johannesburg: Lessons Learnt from a Decade of
Commitment2 which acknowledges that achieving reviewing changes.
sustainability is indeed a process of learning which
helps us grow in understanding sustainability, human motivations and visions and
thus how to progress towards sustainability.

The learning approaches such as mentoring, facilitation, participative inquiry, action
learning and action research are ways of exploring the sustainability agenda. These
approaches enable people to reflect on their experiences, learn how to make change
and move forward.
What is sustainability in the Australian context?

The principal and overarching strategy for
Ecologically Sustainable sustainability within Australia is the National
Development (ESD) is … Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable
Development (NSESD)3 which seeks to
'using, conserving and enhancing address sustainable development issues
the community's resources so from a distinctly Australian perspective. The
that ecological processes, on Strategy sets out the broad strategic and
policy framework under which governments
which life depends, are are expected to cooperatively make
maintained, and the total quality decisions and take actions to pursue ESD in
of life, now and in the future, can Australia. It recognises as a core goal
be increased'. 'development that improves the total quality
National Strategy for ESD, of life, both now and in the future, in a way
that maintains the ecological processes on
Australia
which life depends'. It has been argued that
the use of the term ‘ecological’ and the ESD
definition within the strategy has focused the sustainability agenda within Australia
more towards environmental sustainability, putting less emphasis on social
sustainability4.
? A note on jargon: Although ESD in Australia refers to Ecologically

Sustainable Development, within the international community you will
see ESD as meaning Education for Sustainable Development. To avoid
confusion, we use Education for Sustainability (EfS).
Some states have developed their own strategies. The best example is ‘Hope for the
Future; The Western Australia State Sustainability Strategy’5. It defines sustainability
as ‘meeting the needs of current and future generations through integrating
environmental protection, social advancement and economic prosperity’. The
strategy is identified as a work in progress and as part of the journey to sustainability,
not the destination. Several partnerships were established to develop the strategy,
the most significant being the State-Local Government Roundtable which explored
ways for state and local governments to work together to progress sustainability.
In 1995 Victoria also released its Environmental Sustainability Framework6, however

this document appears to focus narrowly on environmental issues and does not
discuss the wider global and social implications surrounding sustainability.

A view of sustainability
Sustainability relates to ways of thinking about the world, and forms of
social and personal practice that lead to:
• ethical, empowered and personally fulfilled individuals
• communities built on collaborative engagement, tolerance and equity
• social systems and institutions that are participatory, transparent and
just
• environmental practices that value and sustain biodiversity and life-
supporting ecological processes.
Hill et al. 2003
What is sustainability in the local government context?

At a local level much work towards sustainability has been done through Local
Agenda 21 programs; however, in recent years the emphasis has shifted more to
reflect the current funding priorities of the national government, especially in natural
resource management and water policy7. In 1992 the Rio Summit published Agenda
21, which in Chapter 288, Local Authorities’ initiatives in support of Agenda 21 ,
highlighted that ‘as the level of governance closest to the people, they (local
government) play a vital role in educating, mobilising and responding to the public to
promote sustainable development’.
See www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/english/agenda21toc.htm for the

full text of Agenda 21.
In the context of local government, sustainability needs to be the key objective of

strategic planning and should be integrated within all decision-making processes.
The NSW Local Government Amendment (Ecologically Sustainable Development)
Act 1997 presents a legal requirement for Councils to adopt ESD within their
strategic planning. Local Agenda 21 can be used as a tool for generating or
reviewing strategic plans using a sustainability focus.
Many councils have opted to use the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) approach to assess
their progress and to publicly report on progress towards sustainability9. The TBL
performance indicators can be used to govern decision-making processes (see the
reading list for more information on TBL, including the Centre for Public Agency
Sustainability Reporting website and the TBL toolkit). Other sustainability initiatives
include community indicator-type projects and innovative eco-accounting projects10.
Many of these approaches, however, do not address the integration of sustainability

at the strategic level. There is still a sense that local government can somehow be
‘doing sustainability’ whilst continuing within their existing structures. There is a
perception that sustainability (or ESD) is an ‘issue’ that can be addressed and that
can be located within a particular department, normally environmental services.11
This fails to address the need for sustainability to be a cross-cutting, strategic
initiative. It appears that many local governments are still not addressing the issues
of organisational change that may be required to make changes towards

sustainability. A shift in institutional thinking is required to create cultures that support
sustainability over the long term.12
Read more about local government’s role in sustainability in the section ‘Local
Agenda 21’ of this Handbook.

Some identified barriers to the integration of sustainability in local council
Communication of ESD • Council’s lack of commitment

• confusion as to what ESD really • lack of a strong push from the
means community
• lack of ownership by Councils of ESD
• communication overload Staff and management issues
• perception of the ‘environment’ as a • high staff turnover
fringe issue • change fatigue
• perception of economics and • lack of skills and ability to promote
environment being diametrically existing ESD initiatives
opposed • loss of corporate knowledge
• perception that ESD integration means • internal politics
re-structuring – and the poor history of • hesitation and resistance by staff to
re-structuring as a change mechanism change
• lack of communication across
Council internal structures and divisions
processes • older management unwilling to deal
• the budgetary bidding process was a with new environmental issues
barrier to more strategic planning of • preconceptions of ESD by Councillors
Council initiatives and staff
• absence of data regarding the • the problem of ‘group think’ ( the
cumulative impacts of operational tendency of subgroups to think in
activities one fixed way)
• problem of different divisions in an • difficulty of maintaining interest in the
organisation competing with one process
another for resources etc rather than • short-term contract employment of
see them as part of greater whole senior managers
• lack of funding for ESD projects and • unwillingness of non-environment staff
larger integration frameworks to embrace ESD issues
• ad hoc approach; lack of strategic • problem of isolation and individualism
framework – need to more actively sell the
• too much focus on restructuring as the benefits and power of the collaborative
solution to ESD process.
• inconsistencies within Council policies
External difficulties
Political and community issues • difficulties of regional collaboration
• political imperatives: pro-development, • Land & Environment Court approval of
jobs at any cost inappropriate developments
• agenda dominated by economic • inadequate and unclear planning
rationalism instruments
• short-term thinking • conflicts in legislation, for example
• Councillors’ reluctance to consult with Integrated Assessments Act
the community inadequate guidelines and information
• lack of support from elected • lack of an air and water catchment
representatives, as they perceive approach to planning and
better public response from short term development
projects
From Institute for Sustainable Futures (1999) Action Research Project: Policy Integration,
Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) and Local Agenda 21 – Councils in NSW
Where can I find out more about sustainability?

Government departments Caring for the Earth: A Strategy for
ACT Office of Sustainability Sustainable Living
www.sustainability.act.gov.au/ http://coombs.anu.edu.au/%7Evern/ca
ring/caring.html
Federal Government Department of
Environment, Water, Heritage and the Environs Australia
Arts on ESD (Ecologically Sustainable www.environs.org.au/
Development) at Environs is a network of members
/www.deh.gov.au/esd/index.html interested in promoting sustainable
development through local action,
Northern Territory Government primarily in the local government
www.nt.gov.au/ sector.
NSW Government Department of Forum for the Future – Directory of

Environment and Conservation (DEC) Sustainability in Practice
www.dec.nsw.gov.au www.forumdirectory.org.uk/index.html
The Forum Directory has been
Queensland Government Environment developed to fulfill the role of a 'first-
Protection Authority (EPA) stop shop' information resource on
www.epa.qld.gov.au/ sustainability projects.
SA Government Department for The Gould Group

Environment and Heritage: Office of www.gould.org.au/
Sustainability Gould Group is an independent non-
www.environment.sa.gov.au/sustainab profit organisation dedicated to
ility/index.html environmental education and training
in sustainability. This includes
Tasmanian Government Department conducting environmental education
of Tourism, Arts and the Environment and sustainability programs and
www.dtae.tas.gov.au/ projects for schools, businesses and
the community.
Victorian Government Department of
Sustainability and Environment (DSE) ICLEI Local Governments for
www.dse.vic.gov.au Sustainability
www.iclei.org/
WA Government Department of the ICLEI—Local Governments for
Environment and Conservation Sustainability is an international
www.dec.wa.gov.au/ association of local governments and
national and regional local government
WA Government Sustainability Policy organisations that have made a
Unit commitment to sustainable
www.sustainability.dpc.wa.gov.au/ development.
Contains the WA Sustainability
Strategy ‘Hope for the Future’ as well Institute for Sustainable Futures,
as progress reports on the strategy, University of Technology, Sydney
agency sustainability action plans and Action Research Project: Policy
case studies that were developed to Integration, Ecologically Sustainable
inform the strategy. Development (ESD) and Local Agenda
21 – Councils in NSW
General www.isf.uts.edu.au/whatwedo/proj_IC
ARIES EfS portal at S.html
www.aries.mq.edu.au/portal/index.htm The ISF at UTS work with industry,
government and the community to
develop sustainable futures through
project based research. The site

contains relevant information
pertaining to local government and Tilbury, D. and Cooke, K. (2005) A
sustainability. National Review of Environmental
Education and its Contribution to
International Institute for Environment Sustainability in Australia: Frameworks
and Development (IIED) for Sustainability. Canberra: Australian
www.iied.org/aboutiied/index.html Government Department of the
An international policy research Environment and Heritage and
institute and non governmental body Australian Research Institute in
working for more sustainable and Education for Sustainability
equitable global development. Available for download at
www.aries.mq.edu.au
International Institute for Sustainable
Development (IISD) United Nations Department of
www.iisd.org Economic and Social Affairs – Division
The International Institute for for Sustainable Development
Sustainable Development contributes www.un.org/esa/sustdev/csd/review.htm
to sustainable development by The Division for Sustainable
advancing policy recommendations on Development provides leadership and
international trade and investment, is an authoritative source of expertise
economic policy, climate change, within the United Nations system on
measurement and assessment, and sustainable development. This website
natural resources management. provides information on key
international sustainable development
Murdoch University, Institute for meetings and milestones.
Sustainability and Technology Policy
www.sustainability.murdoch.edu.au/ UK Government - Department of
Case studies in Sustainability. Environment Food and Rural Affairs –
Sustainable Development
New Economics Foundation www.defra.gov.uk/environment/sustain
www.neweconomics.org/index.htm able/index.htm
NEF is a not-for-profit organisation This website provides information on
based in the UK, which aims to ‘build a the guiding principles of sustainable
just and sustainable economy with development and UK priorities.
ideas and actions that put people and Contains links to the UK’s Sustainable
the environment first’. NEF has Development Strategy, the
completed extensive work on involving Sustainable Development Action Plan
local communities in assessing the and Community Action 2020.
sustainability of their community.
UN HABITAT-The Sustainable Cities
Sustainable Communities Network Program (SCP)
www.sustainable.org www.unchs.org/programmes/sustaina
This web-based network contains links blecities/
to sustainability projects throughout The SCP is focused on building
the USA. capacities in urban environmental
planning and management. The
Sustainable Development – The UK programme is founded on broad-
Governments Approach: Delivering based cross-sectoral and stakeholder
Sustainable Development Together participatory approaches and
www.sustainable- contributes to promoting urban
development.gov.uk/index.htm environmental governance processes,
This website provides information as a basis for achieving sustainable
sustainable development in urban growth and development. The
government and delivering sustainable website includes tools for the SCP and
development at all levels. case studies from the SCP.

Toolkit developed by ICLEI and The
VOX Bandicoot city of Melbourne. It contains tools and
www.voxbandicoot.com.au/home.htm case studies on TBL and includes a
VOX Bandicoot run innovative report on Triple Bottom Line Best
sustainability programs including the Practice in Local Government
renown Sustainability Streets program. prepared for Gosford City Council.
Other work includes Eco Theatre
events and workplace sustainability
training programs.
WWF UK Mainstreaming Sustainability

Resource Pack
www.wwflearning.org.uk/localmatters/
download-centre/ms-resources/
This resource looks at ways of
mainstreaming sustainability including
workshop resources in integration of
sustainability in the community
planning process, route maps for
developing local strategic partnerships
and case studies. Although much of
the jargon refers to UK policy
instruments (e.g. Community
Strategies) there is much of interest
from a strategic perspective.
Ecological footprinting
EPA Victoria
http://www.epa.vic.gov.au/Eco-
footprint/
Lots of information on the ideas
surrounding Ecological Footprinting.
Evaluation/sustainability
reporting
The Centre for Public Agency
Sustainability Reporting
www.publicagencyreporting.org
The Centre was launched in March
2005 and its mission is to improve the
sustainability performance of public
agencies through the practice of
reporting. The Centre is a not-for-profit
entity, which seeks to build capacity in
public agencies to undertake
sustainability reporting and to
facilitate the development of best
practice in sustainability reporting by
public agencies.
Triple bottom line

Triple Bottom Line Toolkit
www6.iclei.org/anz/tbl/

References
www.leadershipvictoria.org/articles/article_
1
Tilbury, D. and Cooke, K. (2005) A malouf2002.htm
National Review of Environmental 10
Education and its Contribution to Keating T The greening of Local
Sustainability in Australia: Frameworks for Government in Australian CPA magazine
Sustainability. Canberra: Australian www.cpaaustralia.com.au/cps/rde/xchg/SI
Government Department of the D-3F57FEDF-
Environment and Heritage and Australian 9037D2DF/cpa/hs.xsl/724_3073_ENA_HT
Research Institute in Education for ML.htm
Sustainability [Accessed 5 July 2006]
11
2
UNESCO (2002) Education for Institute for Sustainable Futures (1999)
Sustainable Development, From Rio to Action Research Project: Policy
Johannesburg: Lessons Learnt from a Integration, Ecologically Sustainable
Decade of Commitment, Paris: UNESCO Development (ESD) and Local Agenda 21
http://portal.unesco.org/en/file_download.p – Councils in NSW
hp/b53b49866e68498f047d88a843cf9aafl www.isf.uts.edu.au/whatwedo/ARP.pdf
essons_learnt.doc [Accessed 2 July 2006] 12
Salan R (2002) Why LA21 professionals
3
Department of the Environment and are a rare and endangered species Paper
Heritage Ecologically Sustainable presented at the “Sustaining our
Development website Communities” International Local Agenda
www.deh.gov.au/esd/index.html 21 Conference 2002
[Accessed 5 May 2006] www.adelaide.sa.gov.au/soc/
4
Neil H, Sansom G, Porter J and Wensing
E (2002) Australian Local Sustainability
Initiative: An Achievement Recognition
Matrix Volume 2 Literature Review p7
Environment Australia
www.deh.gov.au/esd/la21/framework/pubs
/framework-part2.pdf [Accessed 6 July
2006]
5
Government of Western Australia (2003)
Hope for the future: The Western
Australian State Sustainability Strategy,
Department of the Premier and Cabinet,
Perth.
6
Government of Victoria (2005) Our
Environment, Our Future: Victoria’s
Environmental Sustainability Framework.
Melbourne: Department of Sustainability
and Environment
7
Local Environs Newsletter April 2005
8
United Nations Department of Economic
and Social Affairs Division for Sustainable
Development
www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agen
da21/english/agenda21toc.htm [Accessed
5 May 2006]
9
Malouf M 2002 Sustainability in Local
Government
Chapter 5: Education for Sustainability 

Education for Sustainability – What is it?
What are the concepts which underpin Education for Sustainability? ...38
What’s in a label? Different names for Education for Sustainability .......40
What is the UN Decade of Education For Sustainable Development? ....41
What is Education for Sustainability within the local government

context? ........................................................................................................42
What approaches can you use to reorientate your projects? ..................43
Where can I find out more about Education for Sustainability? ..............47
References....................................................................................................51
Note: Much of the text in this section is taken from the ARIES web portal.
See www.aries.mq.edu.au/portal for more information.
Our vision is a world in which there are many opportunities to learn about sustainable
development. A world where a skilled population makes informed decisions in their
home, community and working lives and in their leisure activities. A world where
people understand and take responsibility for the impact they have on the quality of
life of other people, locally and globally.'
Sustainable Development Education Panel, UK (1999)

To introduce:
• the key terms, concepts and themes of Education for Sustainability
• the Education for Sustainability framework used in this project
• the value of an Education for Sustainability approach within local government
• the UN Decade in Education for Sustainable Development.
Some key moments in the development of Education for

Sustainability
• 1992 Rio Summit, Chapter 36 Agenda 21 recognises education as

key to addressing sustainable development
• 1996 Committee on Sustainable Development (CSD) recognises
the value of informal education methods for sustainability
• 1997 discourse on EfS starts to include concepts of capacity
building
• 2002 Jo’burg Summit, Recognition of EfS as a lifelong, society-
wide capacity-building and learning-based strategy for change
• 2005 UN adopts Decade in Education for Sustainable
Development (DESD) 2005- 2014

A brief history of Education for Sustainability,
internationally and in Australia
In 1992 Chapter 36 of 'Agenda 21', the action blueprint from the Rio Earth
Summit, advocated the pivotal role of education in the achievement of
sustainability. It identified education, public awareness and training as
critical for achieving progress towards sustainability and for building the
capacity of the people to address development and environment issues. It
also identified that education is linked to almost all areas of Agenda 21.
In 1996, the UN Commission for Sustainable Development concluded that 'in

order to change unsustainable production and consumption patterns and
lifestyles, it (is) essential to give great emphasis to the role of education
for sustainable development'. The Commission initiated a program of work
on education for sustainable development and in its report entitled
Implementation of the Work Programme on Education, Public Awareness and
Training (2000) acknowledged that education is gradually being understood
as an integral and indispensable part of the solution to the world’s problems
and to the building of a sustainable future. It also highlighted several other
issues, including the need to reach beyond those traditionally concerned with
education, to create a ‘cross-cutting dynamic’.
The Commission urged for the sharing of experience and the development
of new partnership arrangements among educators, scientists, governments,
non-governmental organisations, business and industry, youth, the media and
other major groups; and that training for sustainable development be based
on a broad participatory approach, taking into account local needs and
values.
By the time of Rio plus 5 in 1997, UNESCO reported that education seemed
to be 'the forgotten priority of Rio' since there had been little national
reporting of action or global funding. It was at this time that interpretations
of 'education' began to move beyond awareness raising towards capacity
building. Entering the education discourse were also interpretations of
education as a critical policy instrument for change.
The momentum stimulated by the Rio Earth Summit in 1992 and 'Agenda 21'
was revitalised at the World Summit for Sustainable Development which took
place in Johannesburg in 2002. Discussions at the Summit reflected how
education in the context of sustainability had evolved from former years,
where it was mostly about reorienting formal systems and training, towards
capacity building and learning-based strategies for change. It was no
longer just about becoming sustainability literate or receiving qualifications
in this area. It was also about understanding education as an approach to
making change within our families, communities, organisations and authorities.

What are the concepts that underpin Education for
Sustainability?
Sustainability requires a population that is aware of the goals of a sustainable society
and has the knowledge and skills to contribute to those goals. An informed citizenry,
which lends support to enlightened policies and government initiatives, can help
governments enact sustainable measures. (McKeown R, The ESD Toolkit)
As discussed in the previous section, it

has been increasingly recognised that Education for Sustainability is …
achieving sustainability is essentially an
a process that uses education to
ongoing learning process that actively
involves multiple stakeholders in change equip people with the skills
across every aspect of society. Education necessary to be leaders and
for Sustainability (EfS) is an approach to engagers in the change process
involving stakeholders in this learning towards sustainability.
process. These learning processes need
to encourage active participation and
opportunities for decision making for UNESCO (2005) United Nations
learners, and to build motivation and DESD: Draft International
capacity to take action for sustainability.1 Implementation Scheme
Education for Sustainability (EfS) is an evolving concept, as is sustainability. It

involves incorporating key themes of sustainability – such as poverty alleviation,
human rights, equity, health and environmental protection – into all education
systems – formal, non-formal and informal.2
Education for Sustainability carries with it the inherent idea of implementing programs
that are locally relevant and culturally appropriate. All sustainability programs,
including EfS, must take into consideration the local environmental, economic, and
societal conditions. As a result, EfS can take many forms around the world.3
EfS seeks to involve and motivate

The overall aim of Education for individuals and organisations to reflect on
Sustainabililty is … how they currently live and work, what
their value systems are and how they can
to empower citizens to act for
bring about changes in the way they do
positive change using a process- things, leading ultimately towards a more
oriented, participatory and action- sustainable future. EfS seeks to develop
oriented learning approach. the knowledge, skills, values and
attitudes necessary to bring about the
change required for sustainability. To help
(Kiev Ministerial Declaration 2003)
participants knowledgeably engage in
sustainability, EfS approaches need to be
developed in terms of both the content of the learning and the style of the learning
process.
The content of an EfS approach needs to include such things as futures-thinking

(visioning), participation in democratic processes, development of problem-solving
skills, collaborative action, generation of collective knowledge through dialogue,
consensus-building, critical and systemic thinking and an exploration of the change
process. This type of approach would typically involve participants in addressing the
following types of questions4:

Q. What is our role in a sustainable future?
Q. What can we do to make a difference?
Q. What skills/knowledge do we need?
Q. How do we make a difference?
Q. Who has the power?
Q. How can we influence?
Q. How can we change our involvement?
Q. Can we design something better?
An EfS approach to the process of designing and implementing a program should

seek to engage rather than inform, be a learner-centered approach, create situations
for participants to become involved in decision-making, be collaborative and
participatory throughout, including in the design and development of the program,
offer opportunities for dialogue and generation of shared knowledge, seek to be self-
sustaining, and to develop partnerships and networks.
This type of approach would typically involve the program developers addressing the
following types of questions5:
Q. Is the process future/vision-orientated?

Q. Does the process encourage autonomy/self-direction?
Q. Is the process confidence-building?
Q. Are the aims and outcomes clearly identified?
Q. Are the tools for the process participatory?
Q. Have all the stakeholders been identified and included?
Q. Is there critical reflection built in to the process?
Q. Is there flexibility within the process?
Q. Is there an evaluation of outputs, outcomes and impacts in place?
Q. Is the process sustainable?
Recent research6 7 argues that EfS requires:

• A focus on the future and ability to create a sustainable future – more than
just focusing on trying to problem-solve our way out of our current situation
• Less emphasis on science and technology solutions and more on
participatory and citizen action
• Less emphasis on seeing people as the problem and more on seeing people
as agents of change
• Less emphasis on awareness-raising approaches and more emphasis on
critical reflection and systemic thinking
• A focus on individuals influencing structural change – not just on individual
environmental actions
• More focus on changing mental models that influence decisions and actions
rather than solely changing individual attitudes.

Some core elements of success for engaging communities in EfS
• Community participation in visioning, strategic planning and

resourcing discussions
• Institutional arrangements such as partnerships, consensus-
building, conflict resolution, transparency and accountability
• Cross-cutting elements such as capacity-building and quality
• Research and documentation for influencing policy.
(Asia Pacific Regional Strategy for Education for Sustainable Development,

Bangkok, 2005)
What’s in a label? Different names for Education for

Sustainability
The text of this section has been adapted from Tilbury, D. and Cooke, K. (2005) A
National Review of Environmental Education and its Contribution to Sustainability in
Australia: Frameworks for Sustainability. Canberra: Australian Government
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, and Australian
Research Institute in Education for Sustainability.
Various names have been used by policy-makers and educators to acknowledge the
shift towards sustainability in Environmental Education. ARIES uses the term
Education for Sustainability (EfS), which is an internationally recognised term, as
well as Learning for Sustainability (L f S ) . Education for Sustainable
Development (ESD) is also widely used, especially in view of the Decade in
Education for Sustainable Development.
Some use the term ‘learning’ rather than 'education' to define their work because
education is often associated with schools, whereas the broader concept of learning
refers to it taking place at all levels and in all contexts – outside schools, within
workplaces, in the community.
Many use the term sustainability rather than 'sustainable development'. In Australia,
the term 'sustainability' has gained greater currency as it is seen as more relevant to
a country which has already 'developed'. However, critics are concerned that the
issues relating to planning, consumption and broader quality of life associated with
'development' are overlooked in preference for ecological and resource management
issues.
Many retain the term Environmental Education because they believe that
'Education for Sustainability' is Environmental Education but with a more specific
focus. They perceive it as a new approach to Environmental Education. Others who
choose to use the term 'Education for Sustainability' believe that it is important to
move away from traditional Environmental Education practices which have focused
on creating positive environmental experiences with nature, developing ecological
knowledge and changing values and attitudes of individuals. Rather the focus is more

on lifestyle choices and actions for the systemic, rather than individual, change
needed to move to a sustainable society.
The term sustainable education puts the emphasis on the quality of education and
suggests the need for culture change in education, based around an ecological and
systemic view. This term has mostly been used to refer to formal education. Many
use the term sustainable futures to emphasise the importance of futures-thinking
and looking forward through a process of education.
? Here the term Education for Sustainability is treated synonymously

with the terms learning for sustainability or education for sustainable
development. The important thing to note is that it is what you are
doing not what it is called that is important.
However, the project clearly distinguished between education about

sustainability (developing understanding and awareness) and Education
for Sustainability (the process of engaging people in actions toward
sustainability). Education for Sustainability aims to go beyond individual
'behaviour' change and seeks to engage and empower people to
implement systemic changes.
What is the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable

Development?
In December 2002 the United Nations (UN) adopted the Decade of Education for
Sustainable Development (DESD), which is to be observed from 2005–2014. The
International Implementation Scheme for the Decade8 interprets education as a
strategic process which can challenge unsustainability in our societies.
The Implementation Scheme identifies two key ways in which local organisations,
both community-based and local government, can participate in the DESD:
• by integrating Education for Sustainability into their own regular learning and
program activities. This will include identifying and implementing local relevant
learning strategies in appropriate ways, and for a variety of target groups
• by cooperating in local groupings and networks, set up on a formal basis or in
an ad hoc manner to meet particular needs or respond to special
opportunities. This may involve identifying local challenges in sustainable
development, integrating local knowledge and skills into Education for
Sustainability, and exchanging experiences. The local level is the primary
place at which lessons for better practice in sustainable development can be
learnt, shared and applied.
The Asia Pacific Regional Strategy for Education for Sustainable Development9
reiterates that local governments must have an active role in the Decade. Given their
presence at the community level, local governments play a key role in improving the
quality of people’s daily lives through the delivery of public programs and services.
They are, therefore, well placed to work towards achieving sustainable development

at the grassroots level. It recommends that EfS should be incorporated into all
existing programs and structures at the local and government level.
For more information on the DESD go to http://portal.unesco.org/education/ and then

follow links to the Decade, or www.aries.mq.edu.au/portal/decade/index.htm which
has a full list of Decade documents including Australia’s approach to implementation
of the Decade.
What is Education for Sustainability within the local

government context?
Chapter 28 of Agenda 21 identifies that ‘as
the level of governance closest to the The local level is the primary
people, they (local government) play a vital place at which lessons for
role in educating, mobilising and responding better practice in sustainable
to the public to promote sustainable development can be learnt,
development’. Thus local government is
identified as having a key role to play within shared and applied.
the sustainability agenda and education is UNESCO (2005) United Nations
seen as being an integral part of any local DESD: Draft International
council’s moves towards advancing Implementation Scheme
sustainability.10
As discussed in the section ‘Sustainability – What is it?’ local governments should be

aiming to integrate sustainability across all aspects of their work, at both the strategic
policy level and on a day to day work basis.
There is a need for a holistic and participatory whole of government approach to

sustainability. This involves all of local government working together towards a vision
of how they see a sustainable local government, jointly putting structures in place to
facilitate this vision and then working together to achieve that vision. It should be
seen as an ongoing action and reflection process rather than a ‘project’ to be
undertaken and completed in a fixed time. This process can be facilitated through an
Education for Sustainability approach by involving people in:
• identifying a vision of what a sustainable local government might be and its
role in a sustainable future
• critically reflecting on what the barriers to sustainability are and what
changes need to be made to move towards a more sustainable local
government, e.g. issues of power and politics
• thinking systemically, e.g. how do different issues link within the local
government structure? What connections are there in common throughout
local government?
• participation by all stakeholders in the dialogue about sustainability within
local government
• the formation of networks and partnerships across local government to
generate momentum, enthusiasm, ideas and resources for sustainability.
Within the wider community context, programs in keeping with Education for
Sustainability approaches seek to engage the community in developing the
knowledge and skills necessary to engage with the complexities of sustainable

development. Whilst many community action programs have traditionally focused on
environmental actions, they are increasingly becoming more holistic in their
approach. It is essential that all the information and skills found within local
government are used to raise awareness, educate and ultimately empower the wider
community.11 This may in turn ultimately lead to more popular input into local
decision-making processes – i.e. linking directly to community participation.
Genuine participation develops people's skills and abilities and encourages learners
to take action for change towards sustainability. The local council officer, group
facilitator or educator is not considered the 'expert' but a facilitator dedicated to
helping learners to rethink, take decisions and actions towards sustainability. This
process of participation is more likely to lead to permanent changes as compared to
participation in one-off events.
Participation in and for sustainability is also an important way of recognising the

value and relevance of ‘local’ or ‘context specific’ knowledge. Successful participation
for sustainability involves a wide range of stakeholders and provides opportunities to
build a shared vision, a greater sense of unified purpose and community identity.
Many government agencies are using participation and learning approaches as the
basis for developing national strategies for sustainability and Education for
Sustainability. Participation in strategy development facilitates the development of
stakeholder relationships. This can serve to catalyse partnerships, both within and
often beyond the bounds of the strategy. Adopting this type of approach facilitates
network-building and improves communication across multiple stakeholder groups.
This approach to strategy development is advocated in the development of action
plans for Local Agenda 21 (see Section 5 for more info on Local Agenda 21).
What approaches can you use to reorientate your projects?

The two essential readings for this project, ‘Engaging People in Sustainability’12 and
‘Living Change’13 identify a framework that could be used for reorientation of your
projects. It has as its basis five key themes:
• Imaging a better future: futures thinking or envisioning
• Systemic thinking
• Critical (reflective) thinking
• Participation
• Partnerships for change.

? These five integrated components were key to the project and were the
platform for considering good practice in Education for Sustainability. We
offer this framework as a way to help you grapple with Education for
Sustainability and how it can be incorporated into your projects.
Education for Sustainability calls for a reorientation of education and

learning in terms of both:
• the content of the learning
• the learning process.
Therefore when considering the re-alignment of your projects with these

principles and the selection of your mentoring focus, you will need to
consider making changes in what the project focus is (the project content)
and how the participants are engaged in learning (the project process).
Remember that what you are seeking through the mentoring project is
ultimately change. The framework can be thought of as a lens or a filter
through which you can consider your project. At each stage, from
conception, planning, design, implementation and evaluation, you will
need to apply the framework. You will then need to reflect on whether
your project’s content and process contain these key approaches and if not
consider how they can best be integrated. The aim is to support and assist
you whilst you undertake this change process.
You will also need to reflect on the strategic impact of your project, i.e.
how you can give your project greater impact, how you can spread the
learnings and how it fits with the strategic goals of your council and your
region.
Futures Thinking
‘There’s no use trying,’ said Alice. ‘One can’t believe impossible things.’
‘I daresay you haven’t had much practice,’ said the Queen. ‘When I was your
age I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I believed as many
as six impossible things before breakfast.’
Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass, 1872
If [problem-solving] is successful, you might eliminate the problem. Then

what you have is the absence of the problem you are solving. But what you do
not have is the presence of a result you want to create.
The Path of Least Resistance, Robert Fritz

Where can I find out more about Education for Sustainability?
General Environmental Education for a
Environmental Education and Sustainable Future National Action
Communication for a Sustainable Plan
World: Handbook for International www.deh.gov.au/education/publication
Practitioners s/nap/
www.greencom.org/greencom/books/e
ec_handbook.asp Education for Sustainability: An
Agenda for Action http://ffof.org/pcsd/
Huckle, J. and Sterling, S. (1996) Final report for the National Forum on
Education for Sustainability. London: Partnerships Supporting Education
Earth Scan Publication About the Environment, 1996, USA
IUCN CEC (2000) The ESDebate: Government of Western Australia

International Debate on Education for (2004) Environmental Education
Sustainable Development Strategy and Action Plan. Perth:
http://app.iucn.org/webfiles/doc/CEC/Publi Department of Environment.
c/Electronic/CEC/Books/ESDebate.pdf
New Zealand Parliamentary
Teaching and Learning for a Commissioner for the Environment
Sustainable Future (PCE). 2004. See Change: Learning
www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/ and education for sustainability.
Wellington: PCE
The Education for Sustainable
Development Toolkit NSW Government Learning for
www.esdtoolkit.org/ Sustainability NSW Environmental
An easy-to-use manual for individuals Education Plan 2002-05
and organisations from both the www.environment.nsw.gov.au/cee/lfs.htm
education and community sectors. It
includes tools for managing change, NSW Government Learning for
creating community goals and Sustainability NSW Environmental
introducing the concept of Education Plan 2006-09 Consultation
sustainability as well as case studies. Draft October 2005
www.environment.nsw.gov.au/cee/lfs.htm
Tilbury, D. Stevenson, R.B, Fien, J.,
and Schreuder, D. (eds) (2002): Victorian Government Department of
Education and Sustainability Sustainability and Environment (DSE)
Responding to the Global Challenge, Learning to Live Sustainably: Victoria’s
Gland IUCN, CEC Approach to Learning Based Change
http://app.iucn.org/themes/cec/cfms/pu for Environmental Sustainability (Draft
blications.cfm?tp=CEC&cat=Books September 2005)
www.dse.vic.gov.au/CA256F310024B
UN Division for Sustainable 628/0/2BDA5FDE21AB1A19CA25709
Development Agenda 21 Chapter 36 100119B24/$File/content-v-6.pdf
www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agen
da21/english/agenda21chapter36.htm EfS networks
Australian Association of
EfS strategies and action plans Environmental Education (AAEE)
See also www.aries.mq.edu.au/portal www.aaee.org.au/
for a full list of national and The Australian Association for
international EfS strategies. Environmental Education is the
professional association for
Australian Government Department of environmental educators in Australia,
the Environment and Heritage (2000)

providing networking and information Sheffield, England: Greenleaf
exchange between the environmental Publishing
education community in Australia. It
has a working group for the Decade in The Change Management Toolbook:
Education for Sustainable Systemic Thinking
Development. www.change-management-
toolbook.com/tools/systems.html
Development Education Association This Toolbook offers a broad range of
/www.dea.org.uk/dea/deved.html tools, methods and strategies which
Development education aims to raise can be applied during different stages
awareness and understanding of how of personal, team and organisational
global issues affect the lives of development, in training, facilitation
individuals, communities and societies. and consulting.
IUCN Commission on Education and WWF Scotland Linkingthinking: New

Communication (CEC) perspectives on thinking and
www.iucn.org/themes/cec/ Education for Sustainability
CEC is a global membership network www.wwflearning.org.uk/data/files/linki
of active, voluntary, professional ngthinking-302.pdf
experts in learning, education, Lots of information and activity ideas
communication, capacity building and for developing systemic thinking. It is
change management. school-based but can be easily
adapted.
IUCN World Conservation Learning
Network www.wcln.org/ Futures thinking
WCLN builds professional capacity for Beyond Intractability
environmental sustainability by www2.beyondintractability.org/essay/vi
developing and delivering 'New sioning/
Learning for Sustainable Solutions'. An essay on Envisioning with weblinks
to related sites.
Sustainable Communities Network
www.sustainable.org/ Burchsted, S. and Byrne, J. (2001)
Linking citizens to resources and to Shaping Our Future: Facilitators
one another to create healthy, vital, Guidebook. Foundation and Center for
sustainable communities. a Sustainable Future. www.ffof.org
Victorian Association for Creating Preferred Futures (CPF)

Environmental Education (VAEE) www.cpfonline.org/cpf/index.php
www.vaee.vic.edu.au/ CPF is a web-based learning
The VAEE is a not-for-profit, environment with the objective of
membership driven organisation that empowering young people to be pro-
provides leadership and a voice for the active in creating a more positive
environmental and sustainability future for themselves and their
education sector within Victoria. communities.
Systems thinking New Zealand Futures Trust: Promoting

Capra, F. (1996) The Web of Life Futures Thinking
London: Harper and Collins www.futurestrust.org.nz
The New Zealand Futures Trust is an
Doppelt B (2003) Leading change independent non-profit organisation
towards sustainability: A change whose members aim to identify
management guide for business, developments and changes affecting
government and civil society. the lives and aspirations of New
Zealanders, and to promote debate
about possible futures.

The Futures Foundation www.criticalthinking.org/aboutCT/defini
www.futuresfoundation.org.au ngCT.shtml
The Futures Foundation promotes Contains an explanation of critical
greater interest in, and understanding thinking, its history and relevant
of, the future. Future Studies provides research into critical thinking.
tools and perspectives to assist
individuals and businesses today in Participation and partnerships
preparing a more ideal tomorrow. The Beyond Fences: Seeking Social
Foundation utilises this discipline in Sustainability in Conservation
planning and strategy. www.iucn.org/themes/spg/Files/beyon
d_fences/bf_section1_1.html
UK Government Improvement and Beyond Fences is a process and
Development Agency (I&DeA) reference book for individuals and
Knowledge: Futures Thinking teams of professionals working in
www.idea- conservation. Participatory tools and
knowledge.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?p process on information gathering and
ageId=75037 assessment, communication, planning
Has a good explanation of Futures and conflict as well as evaluation and
Thinking, resources and scenarios for monitoring are provided throughout
undertaking futures thinking exercises. this book. Although conservation
based much of the information and
University of Arizona Anticipating the tools are highly relevant to all
Future Course community participation processes.
http://ag.arizona.edu/futures/
A university of Arizona course on David Wilcox Partnerships and
methods and approaches for studying Participation
the future. www.partnerships.org.uk/part
Contains lots of good information on
Critical thinking partnerships and participation
John Huckle – Educating for including The Guide to Effective
Sustainability Participation and A Short Guide to
http://john.huckle.org.uk/ Partnerships.
I seek to combine critical social
theories of the environment and
education with critical pedagogy. The DEMOS Project Conference 2004
resulting forms of education are Guidelines for Citizen Participation
designed to empower citizens so that Projects
they are more able to realise a global www.demosprojectconference.org
democracy that gives full expression to The Demos Project aims to increase
environmental and ecological citizen participation in local
citizenship. government through innovative pilot
projects and action research across
Kearins, K. and Springett, D. (2003) seven European cities. The Guidelines
Educating for Sustainability: downloadable form this site outlines
Developing critical skills Journal of guidance and lessons learnt for citizen
Management Education 27 (2): 188- participation in local governance as
204 well as participation methods used in
the project. A highly relevant
Saul, D. (2000) Expanding document.
Environmental Education: Thinking
Critically, Thinking Culturally Journal of Effective Engagement: Building
Environmental Education 31(2): 5-7 relationships with community and
other stakeholders
The Critical Thinking Community: Book 1: An Introduction to
Defining Critical Thinking Engagement

Book 2: The Engagement Planning LogoLink is a global network of
Workbook practitioners from civil society
Book 3: The Engagement Toolkit organisations, research institutions
State of Victoria, Department of and governments that aims to deepen
Sustainability and Environment 2005 democracy through greater citizen
Available for download from participation in local governance.
www.dse.vic.gov.au/engage Coordinated by the Participation
Group at the Institute of Development
Eldis Participation Resource Guide Studies, University of Sussex, UK, it
www.eldis.org/participation/index.htm provides tools and training materials,
A massive resource with manuals, LogoLink newsletters (English,
guides and toolkits concerning Spanish), bibliographies, research
participation in all spheres of papers, articles, and related weblinks.
environment and development. Keep
drilling down and you could get lost Ramsar – The Wetland Convention
forever! www.ramsar.org/key_guide_indigenou
s.htm
IIED- Participatory Learning and This website serves the needs of
Action (PLA) Parties to the Convention and includes
www.iied.org/NR/agbioliv/pla_notes/ab guidelines for establishing and
out.html strengthening local communities' and
Participatory Learning and Action indigenous people's participation in the
(PLA) is an umbrella term for a wide management of wetlands.
range of similar approaches and
methodologies all of which require the The World Bank Participation
full participation of people in the Sourcebook
processes of learning about their www.worldbank.org/wbi/sourcebook/s
needs and opportunities, and in the bhome.htm
action required to address them. The World Bank Participation
Sourcebook follows the definition of
Institute of Development Studies participation adopted by the Bank's
Sussex (IDS) – Participation Learning Group on Participatory
www.ids.ac.uk/ids/particip/ Development: Participation is a
Through the work of the Participation process through which stakeholders
Group, the Institute of Development influence and share control over
Studies serves as a global centre for development initiatives and the
research, innovation and learning in decisions and resources which affect
citizen participation and participatory them.
approaches to development.
UN Development Program
International Association for Public Empowering People: A Guide to
Participation (IAP2) Participation
www.iap2.org www.undp.org/cso/resource/toolkits/e
The International Association for mpowering/intro.html
Public Participation, working through it
members, helps organisations and
communities around the world improve
their decisions by involving those
people who are affected by those
decisions.
LOGOLink Learning Initiative on

Citizen Participation and Local
Governance
www.ids.ac.uk/logolink/index.htm

References
d/esd/documents/Final_draft_IIS.pdf
1
Cooke, K. and Tilbury, D. (2004) Audit of [Accessed 24 May 2006]
Public Education Programs Relating to 9
Ecologically Sustainable Development. Working paper : Asia-Pacific Regional
Sydney: Macquarie University Strategy for Education for Sustainable
Development / UN Decade of Education
2
UNESCO (2005) Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014)
for Sustainable Development Draft ... [et al.]. Bangkok: UNESCO Bangkok,
International Implementation Scheme 2005.
www.unescobkk.org/fileadmin/user_uploa www.unescobkk.org/fileadmin/user_uploa
d/esd/documents/Final_draft_IIS.pdf d/esd/documents/esd_publications/workin
[Accessed 24 May 2006] g-paper.pdf
[Accessed 25 May 2006]
3
McKeown, R. The Education for 10
Sustainable Development Toolit- What is Agyeman, J., Morris, J. and Bishop, J
ESD? (1996) ‘Local Government’s Educational
www.esdtoolkit.org/discussion/whatisesd.h Role in LA21’ in Huckle, J. and Sterling, S
tm [Accessed 5 July 2006] (eds) Education for Sustainability. London:
Earthscan Publications
4
Sterling, S (1993) A view from holistic 11
ethics; from Environmental Education: A Agyeman, J., Morris, J. and Bishop, J
Pathway to Sustainability (ed J. Fien) (1996) ‘Local Government’s Educational
Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria Role in LA21’ in Huckle, J. and Sterling, S
(eds) Education for Sustainability. London:
5
Bowdler L (2001) Excerpt from private Earthscan Publications
EfS Journal developed as part of GSE 12
827, Education and Capacity Building for Tilbury, D. and Wortman, D. (2004).
Sustainable Development, Macquarie Engaging People in Sustainability. IUCN,
University. Unpublished Gland, Switzerland. Available for
download from www.aries.mq.edu.au
6
Sterling, S.R. (2001). Sustainable 13
Education: Re-envisioning Learning and Tilbury, D and Ross, K (2006) Living
Change. Schumacher Briefing No. 6, Change: Documenting good practice in
Green Books, Dartington; Fien, J. Tilbury, Education for Sustainability in NSW
D. Stevenson, R. and Schreuder, D. Macquarie University, Sydney and Nature
(2002) Education and Sustainability: Conservation Council, NSW
Responding to the Global Challenge. Available for download from
IUCN, Gland, Switzerland; Van Rensburg, www.aries.mq.edu.au
E.J. and Lotz Sistitka, H. (2000).
Education for Sustainability, DANCED.
UNESCO, Johannesburg; Tilbury, D. and
Wortman, D. (2004). Engaging People in
Sustainability. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.
7
Tilbury, D. and Cooke, K. (2005) A
National Review of Environmental
Sustainability in Australia: Frameworks for
Sustainability. Canberra: Australian
Government Department of the
Environment and Heritage and Australian
Research Institute in Education for
Sustainability
8
UNESCO (2005) Decade of Education
for Sustainable Development Draft
International Implementation Scheme
www.unescobkk.org/fileadmin/user_uploa
Chapter 6: Local Agenda 21 

Local Agenda 21
What is Local Agenda 21?...........................................................................52
What will it mean for Local Agenda 21 to enter a new stage, Local Action
21? .................................................................................................................54
How does Local Agenda 21 link with Education for Sustainability? .......55
How is Local Agenda 21 progressing in Australia? ..................................56
Where can I find out more about Local Agenda 21? .................................59
References....................................................................................................60
Some text taken from Neil H, Sansom G, Porter J and Wensing E (2002) Australian Local
Sustainability Initiative: An Achievement Recognition Matrix Environment Australia
www.deh.gov.au/esd/la21/framework/framework.html [Accessed 18 May 2006] and also from
the ARIES portal www.aries.mq.edu.au.
Local Agenda 21 is a process which facilitates sustainable development at community

level. It is an approach based on participation which respects the social, cultural,
economic and environmental needs of the present and future citizens of a community
in all its diversity and which relates that community and its future to the regional,
national and international community of which it is a part.
Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government's 'Sustainable

Development, A Strategy for Ireland' (1997)

To introduce:
• the key themes of Local Agenda 21
• Local Action 21 as the new motto for Local Agenda 21
• the links between LA21 and Education for Sustainability
• the issues associated with LA21 processes in Australia.
What is Local Agenda 21?

Local Agenda 21 is a policy tool for implementing local sustainable development and
at the same time it is also a learning process for both the community and local
government. It was first described in Agenda 21, the global blueprint for sustainability
that was agreed at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
in 1992 (the Rio Earth Summit). Chapter 28 of Agenda 21 identifies local authorities
as the sphere of governance closest to the people, and calls upon all local authorities
to consult with their communities and develop and implement a local plan for
sustainability - a 'Local Agenda 21'. By 2001 more than 6,400 local governments in
113 countries worldwide were developing and implementing LA21s.
One of the main supporters of the LA21 process is ICLEI – Local Governments for
Sustainability, an international association of local governments and national and
regional local government organisations that have made a commitment to
sustainable development. See their website at www.iclei.org.
Local Agenda 21 (LA21) promotes a participatory, long-term, strategic planning

process that helps municipalities identify local sustainability priorities and implement
long-term action plans.1 Local Agenda 21 processes aim at involving all stakeholders
in the community in decision-making in sustainability planning and management at
the local level. These processes offer great opportunities for participatory learning as
groups debate their future direction based on working in partnership with
government, industry and other community groups. Guides abound, aiming to
support the community to integrate environmental, economic and social development
in a long term strategic action plan that integrates existing policies and programs.
Local Agenda 21 …
promotes a participatory, long-term, strategic planning process that helps
municipalities identify local sustainability priorities and implement long-term
action plans.
Source: ICLEI

Local Agenda 21 as a learning process
The consultation and consensus building should be seen as a two-way learning
process. Firstly, councils 'learn from citizens and from local, civic, community,
business and industrial organisations and acquire the information needed for
formulating the best strategies.' Secondly, it is intended that the process of
consultation 'increase household awareness of sustainable development
issues'.
Source: Chapter 28, Agenda 21
A number of international frameworks for evaluating LA21 provide a useful starting

point for developing an LA21 framework. Key aspects common to all the frameworks
are:
• the integration of social, environmental and economic issues
• the participation of a range of stakeholders from the community, non-
government and government sectors
• a long-term commitment to LA21
• the formation of partnerships for developing, implementing and assessing
progress.
Our Community: Our Future, A Guide to Local Agenda 212 is the latest Australian
guide to LA21 and was published by the Commonwealth Government in 1999. It was
intended to provide practical guidance on how to develop a LA21. The guide
identifies five action areas for developing a LA21 process.

The five Action Areas in an LA21 process
identified in ‘Our Community: Our Future’
Action Area 1: Preparing the ground – identify council structures,

strategies and resources to be used to develop a Local Agenda 21 with the
support of the council, staff (including senior management) and the
community.
Action Area 2: Building partnerships – establish an understanding of the

community and develop ways and means of extending awareness and
involvement in LA21.
Action Area 3: Determining vision, goals, targets and indicators – set out
what the council and the community wish to achieve, ideally broken down into
goals with indicators and targets.
Action Area 4: Creating a local action planning document – prepare a

statement of actions that the council will undertake in order to realise each
target; this includes timeline, budget and responsible officers for each
action.
Action Area 5: Implementing, reporting, monitoring and reviewing –

consider whether the actions are helping to achieve the targets, whether
In 1999, the South Australian Government and the Local Government Association, in
progress is with
consultation beingthe
made towards
South the goals
Australian and whether
Partnership any aspect
for Local Agendaof21,
theproduced
LA21 needs changing. 3
Local Agenda 21 The South Australian Experience . These guidelines also outline a
process for developing an LA21 program and are based around the experiences of
South Australian
Source: Councils
Cotter and involved in LA21. In 2000 a further document The South
Hannan (1999)
Australian Partnership for LA21 – Identifying Future Directions Discussion Paper4 was
published which provides a good overview of the LA21 issues faced in Australia.
What will it mean for Local Agenda 21 to enter a new stage,

Local Action 21?
In August 2002 during the Local Government Session at the World Summit in
Johannesburg, local government leaders from around the world joined ICLEI in
launching Local Action 21 as the next phase of Local Agenda 21 (LA21). Local Action
21 was launched as a motto for the second decade of LA21. It is a mandate to local
authorities worldwide to move from agenda to action and ensure an accelerated
implementation of sustainable development.
ICLEI suggest that moving from Local Agenda 21 to Local Action 21 will mean:
• Pro-actively creating sustainable communities and cities

Through Local Action 21 communities will be assisted to go beyond general
sustainability planning and to address specific factors that prevent a great
number of them from becoming sustainable, such as poverty, injustice and
exclusion, unhealthy environment and vulnerability.

• Protecting global common goods
Local Action 21 will reduce cities' further contribution to the worldwide
depletion of resources and environmental degradation, which have severe
repercussions on cities and their inhabitants.
• Participatory governance and municipal sustainability management

Thirdly, Local Action 21 will ensure unwavering implementation of sustainable
development action plans. ICLEI see the way forward in anchoring principles,
policies and practices, and mechanisms in participatory governance and
municipal sustainability management.
For more information on Local Action 21 see www.localaction21.org/ and www.iclei-

europe.org/.
How does Local Agenda 21 link with Education for

Sustainability?
LA21 can be thought of as a collaborative process of Education for Sustainability.
Much of the process and content of EfS is clearly mirrored in an LA21 process.
In an LA21 program the community and local government work together to develop a
vision for a sustainable local community and then critically reflect on the changes
and actions required to move towards that future. The process is about dialogue and
consensus-building between stakeholders. The process requires systemic
thinking in order to identify the barriers to change for sustainability and linking local
issues to global ones. The cycle of action and reflection is a learning process for both
the community and the local government involved in the process.
LA21 processes seek to build stronger partnerships and networks between local
government and their communities and to engage the community in cooperatively
working towards solutions to sustainability issues. These participation and
partnership approaches form some of the key principles of EfS. Various types of
partnerships can be adopted in the LA21 process. ICLEI supports partnerships that
are voluntary, multi-stakeholder, democratic and mutually beneficial, whilst the
Australian Government recognises three types of partnerships found in LA21
programs across Australia5:
1. Community driven LA21 programs with resources from local government
2. Community as an equal partners with local governments
3. Community involved strategically or on a case by case basis.

Key outcomes common to both LA 21 and EfS processes
• stronger community and local government partnerships

• a more informed and pro-active community with increased skills
for sustainability
• ongoing active community participation in decision making
processes for sustainability
• integrated decision making which takes all foreseeable economic,
social and environmental considerations into account
• participatory development, implementation and periodic review of a
long term, integrated action plan for sustainability
• changes which promote a continual improvement toward
sustainability,
Adapted from: Cotter & Hannan, Our Community Our Future (1999)
How is Local Agenda 21 progressing in Australia?

Throughout Australia it seems that there has been widespread uncertainty about the
meaning, scope and value of the term 'Local Agenda 21'. One of the difficulties
identified with the acronym 'LA21' is that its extrapolation doesn't mean anything
without further explanation. Some councils have chosen, for a variety of reasons, not
to call their initiatives 'LA21'.
In addition LA21 has largely been perceived as an environmental initiative rather than
a cross-cutting strategy for embedding sustainability. If that perception is to be
broadened to clearly embrace economic, social and cultural dimensions, it requires a
better understanding of what sustainability is about and a 'whole of
council/community' focus. In Australia, federal and state government endorsement of
LA21 has been offered primarily through environmental agencies and, with the
exception of South Australia, there has not been a rounded program for its
implementation.
However, this is not to say that LA21 is not happening within Australia. On the
contrary there is Local Agenda 21 activity in every state and territory6 and many
councils are working on projects that have at their core the processes of LA21,
although they may not necessarily be using that terminology. A survey of Australian
councils in 1998 found that around 200 were involved in LA21, local ESD or other
sustainable development initiatives (Cotter 1999). The highest level of commitment
has been in South Australia where 34 councils (50% of the total) are undertaking an
LA21 program.

It is clear that both Local Agenda 21 and Education for Sustainability processes
within local government require a large and specific range of skills including:
• change-agent skills
• conceptual, systemic and strategic thinking
• facilitation and educational expertise
• an understanding of council operations and marketing expertise.
Some of these skills are uncommon in many councils, particularly small rural shires
with limited staff and access to resources and so often these types of processes are
contracted out and any project learnings within local government are therefore
potentially lost or weakened.
In addition to this, the major responsibility for LA21 often lies with an officer whose
primary training is in a discipline such as town planning or environmental
health/science. In many instances those entrusted with this important role are
expected to change corporate culture and mobilise the community7.
Salan suggests that the solution to the skills and experience dilemma is somewhat
reliant on creating a demand for the profession through mandatory requirements. In
the absence of this there is a clear need for capacity building projects within local
government, so that officers have the confidence and ability to design, develop and
implement these LA21 and EfS projects.

By Gary Eastman (from Salan R (2002))8

Where can I find out more about Local Agenda 21?
Cotter B and Hannan K (Environs ICLEI Local Governments for
Australia) (1999) Our Community, Our Sustainability,www.iclei.org
Future: A guide to Local Agenda 21
www.ea.gov.au/esd/la21/manual/index Institute for Sustainable Futures
.html (1999) Action Research Project: Policy
This document contains many links to Integration, Ecologically Sustainable
LA21 initiatives and relevant Development (ESD) and Local Agenda
documents. 21 – Councils in NSW
www.isf.uts.edu.au/whatwedo/ARP.pdf
Environment Australia (2002)
Australian Local Sustainability Joesph Rowntree Foundation What’s
Initiative: An Achievement Recognition in a name? Local Agenda 21,
Matrix community planning and neighbour-
www.deh.gov.au/esd/la21/framework/f hood renewal, www.jrf.org.uk
ramework.html
This project undertook a review of Local Action 21
LA21 across Australia and www.localaction21.org
internationally and recommends the
development of an Achievement Salan R (2002) Why LA21
Recognition Matrix to monitor progress professionals are a rare and
in LA21 and sustainability within endangered species Paper presented
Australia. at the “Sustaining our Communities”
International Local Agenda 21
Environs Australia, the Australian Conference 2002
Local Government environment www.adelaide.sa.gov.au/soc/
network www.environs.org.au
South Australian Government website
Government of South Australia on LA21
Department of Environment and www.environment.sa.gov.au/sustainab
Heritage (1999) Guidelines for Local ility/la21.html
Agenda 21: The South Australian
Experience “Sustaining our Communities”
http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/sust International Local Agenda 21
ainability/pdfs/la21text.pdf Conference 2002
www.adelaide.sa.gov.au/soc/
Government of South Australia
Department of Environment and WWF UK Mainstreaming Sustainability
Heritage (2000) The South Australian Resource Pack
Partnership for Local Agenda 21: www.wwflearning.org.uk/localmatters/
Identifying Future Directions download-centre/ms-resources/
www.environment.sa.gov.au/sustainab This resource looks at ways of
ility/pdfs/la21_future.pdf [Accessed 26 mainstreaming sustainability including
May 2006] workshop resources in integration of
This document contains a very good sustainability in the community
discussion on LA21 issues in planning process, route maps for
Australia. developing local strategic partnerships
and case studies. Although much of
Hornsby Shire Council Local Action 21 the jargon refers to UK policy
www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au/environment instruments (e.g. Community
/index.cfm?NavigationID=955 Strategies) there is much of interest
from a strategic perspective.

References
1
ICLEI Local Governments for
Sustainability
www.iclei.org/index.php?id=798
[Accessed 26 May 2006]
2
Cotter, B. and Hannan, K. (Environs
Australia) (1999) Our Community, Our
Future: A Guide to Local Agenda 21,
Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra
3
Department of Environment and Heritage
(1999) Guidelines for Local Agenda 21:
The South Australian Experience
www.environment.sa.gov.au/sustainability/
pdfs/la21text.pdf [Accessed 6 July 2006]
4
Department of Environment and Heritage
(2000) The South Australian Partnership
for Local Agenda 21: Identifying Future
Directions
www.environment.sa.gov.au/sustainability/
pdfs/la21_future.pdf [Accessed 9 May
2006}
5
Tilbury, D. and Cooke, K. (2005) A
National Review of Environmental
Sustainability in Australia: Frameworks for
Sustainability p51. Canberra: Australian
Government Department of the
Environment and Heritage and Australian
Research Institute in Education for
Sustainability
6
Cotter, B. and Hannan, K. (Environs
Australia) (1999) Our Community, Our
Future: A Guide to Local Agenda 21,
Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra
7
are a rare and endangered species Paper
presented at the “Sustaining our
Communities” International Local Agenda
21 Conference 2002
8
are a rare and endangered species Paper
presented at the “Sustaining our
Communities” International Local Agenda
21 Conference 2002
Chapter 7: Tools and Techniques for EfS

and Stakeholder Engagement programs 

Tools and techniques for EfS and Stakeholder
Engagement programs

How do I use this section? ..........................................................................62
Which are the articles and tools? ...............................................................63

Overview .................................................................................................................................... 63
1. Ways to Make a Community Stronger, Wiser, More Resilient and Engaged..................... 65
2. Open Dialogue (Listening Circles)........................................................................................ 68
3. Visioning ................................................................................................................................ 73
4. Asset-Based Community Development ............................................................................... 82
5. World Café............................................................................................................................. 88
6. Deliberative Democracy Methods – Citizen Deliberative Councils ................................... 101
7. Parish Mapping.................................................................................................................... 108
8. Open Space Technology .................................................................................................... 113
9. Photovoice ........................................................................................................................... 119
10. Participatory Learning and Action Approaches ............................................................... 124
11. Planning for Real* ............................................................................................................. 134
Where can I find more tools for EfS and stakeholder engagement
programs? ..................................................................................................138

To introduce:
• a selection of tools and techniques that can be investigated and adapted for
use in EfS and stakeholder engagement projects by local government
• further resources and toolkits available to local government.
How do I use this section?

This section is split into two parts:
1. A printed set of reading materials.
This part contains a selection of reading material aimed at encouraging

reflection on the different approaches and tools available. It includes:
• some general articles of interest explaining varied approaches for
stakeholder participation
• examples of some tools and techniques for Education for
Sustainability and stakeholder engagement programs that you may
wish to investigate further for your projects.
These are examples only. Where can I find more? includes links to further
information and more tools – see below. Some of the tools or approaches are
tried and tested, others are highly innovative. It is not intended that all of
these tools be directly applied to the local government context, rather they are
included to offer ideas for development of suitable tools. They will need to be
reviewed within the context of your situation and project aims.
2. A reference list of tools.
This part contains a more exhaustive reference list of tools. The General
Toolkits section covers a wide variety of tools for use, particularly when
engaging communities. Which tools are relevant for you will depend on your
particular projects. Some are entire processes, such as the Future Search
conferences, whereas others are techniques that can be used within another
larger process.
Within the toolkits you will find many examples of activities that you can adapt
and use. The art is to reflect on what you are trying to achieve and then select
a tool appropriate to your aim. Some of these toolkits will help you with this
selection process, e.g. Focusing on Citizens: A Guide to approaches and
methods.

Which are the articles and tools?
Overview
1. Ways to make a Community Stronger, Wiser, More Resilient and Engaged by

Tom Atlee – a good overview of several tools for community engagement.
2. Open Dialogue (Listening Circles) – a technique for shared exploration

towards greater understanding, connection or possibility. It can be used at an
issues-based level or at a strategic-questioning level. World Café is an
example of a dialoguing tool. It is a good technique for critical reflective
thinking.
3. Visioning – a process of identifying a preferred future and reflecting on the

steps needed to make that vision reality. It forms one of the key elements in
an Education for Sustainability approach. It encourages futures-thinking,
reflective thinking and values clarification.
4. Asset-Based Community Development – looks at ways of identifying and

activating the positives, or assets, in a community. It moves away from the
traditional needs or issues/problems-based approach and is a good tool for
participation and partnership building as well as systemic thinking.
5. World Café – a dialoguing tool which brings together different people to

address a strategic question or questions. This is a good tool for critical
reflective thinking.
6. Deliberative Democracy/Citizen Deliberative Councils – a group of techniques

that are most often used for involving the community in policy and planning
issues. They can typically be issues-based or futures-based, i.e. strategic
planning. A well known technique is the Citizens Jury. These techniques are
good for encouraging participation in decision-making processes.
7. Parish Mapping – used by communities to identify and map what they value
within their communities. These maps can then be used for planning, action
and mobilising community engagement. This is a good tool for systemic
thinking, as well as values clarification and critical reflective thinking. It could
also be used to encourage participation in decision-making processes and the
development of partnerships.
8. Open Space Technology – a meeting process where participants come

together to create and manage their own agenda of parallel working sessions
around a central theme of strategic importance. Good for dealing with
complex issues and identification of what communities see as issues. It is
very participatory in nature.
9. Photovoice – similar to Parish Mapping. Participants use cameras to identify

what they value in their community then come together to discuss and
critically reflect on their values.
10. Participatory Learning and Action Approaches (PLA) – an umbrella term for a
wide range of similar approaches and methodologies all of which require the

full participation of people in the processes of learning about their needs and
opportunities, and in the action required to address them. Two examples are:
o Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) – a method that emphasises local
knowledge and enables local people to make their own appraisal,
analysis and plans. It is good for encouraging active participation in
such areas as natural resource management.
o Reflect – a new and highly innovative approach to learning and social
change. Key to the Reflect approach is creating a space where people
feel comfortable to meet and discuss issues relevant to them and their
lives. Reflect aims to improve the meaningful participation of people in
decisions that affect their lives, through strengthening their ability to
communicate. It has been mainly used in developing countries to deal
with issues of power and inequality but is increasingly being used in
Europe and North America.
11. Planning for Real – essentially a community development tool, it aims to

involve a wide range of people in a practical process to determine their needs
and priorities. It is a tool for encouraging futures thinking and participation in
the decision-making process.
From Education for Sustainability (2001)

Eds Huckle J & Sterling S, Earthscan Publications, UK

1. Ways to Make a Community Stronger, Wiser, More Resilient and
Engaged
Created by Tom Atlee www.co-intelligence.org/CIPol_CSWM.html.
Our American culture is very good at keeping us apart – involved in our own lives,
houses, subcultures and hooked up to mass media and mass economics – with
precious little time or inclination to reach out: to work, talk and play with people unlike
ourselves, or to really engage with the place where we live. This is great for profits
and bad for communities, humanity, nature and democracy.
Below are 26 ways to make a community stronger, wiser and more resilient,
sustainable and engaged. There are hundreds of other approaches, but these will do
for now.
STRONGER – We can know a lot more about who we are, as a community, and
weave ourselves together into a strong, brightly-coloured fabric.
1) Asset mapping – We can systematically survey and organise the assets and
capacities of individuals, informal networks, organisations and official institutions in
our community. Dozens of communities already have.
2) Listening projects – Neighbours do door-to-door canvassing that doesn't sell,

recruit or educate anyone. They just listen to the ideas and concerns of their
neighbours. This simple act can produce unexpectedly powerful results.
3) Neighborhood help networks – People sign on to help each other during crises or
life changes (moving, serious illness, etc.).
4) Friendship webs – We can self-organise our community using the existing

networks of people who already know and trust each other. Because those networks
overlap, the effort can include virtually everyone, with no central control.
5) Neighborhood email networks and phone trees – People can reach each other
rapidly and systematically to deal with a crisis or sudden opportunity, without
depending on official media.
6) Affinity-group networks – Affinity groups are intimate activist groups who get
trained in action and decision-making. Even as they work on their diverse issues,
affinity groups can prepare with each other as a network for rapid-response
emergency community action, as well.
WISER – We have a lot of smart and wise individuals in this community – but can our
community as a whole exercise its collective intelligence and community wisdom?
Can we use our diversity to deepen and broaden our shared understandings – or
only to divide ourselves from each other?
7) Wisdom council – A group of a dozen randomly-selected, diverse community

members are convened temporarily (like a jury) to craft a consensus statement about
what the community thinks and feels, needs and wants. The process used is an
advanced, highly creative form of facilitated consensus. A new group is convened
once or twice a year. Results are publicised through the media, as well as to citizens
and officials in every way possible, for further dialogue and action.

8) Quality of life indicators – Communities across the country are creating their own
statistics to measure their quality of life, and then setting up the means to track them.
These are far more useful than standard growth statistics (money, jobs, population,
etc.), and can help us see how we are doing, collectively.
9) Future-search conferences – About three dozen diverse community stakeholders

come together to reflect on their shared past, current dynamics, and future directions,
and to form task groups to move the community in positive directions.
10) Open-space conferencing - A simple, powerful way for people who are
passionate about a topic to organise themselves to talk about and do all the things
needed to address it. A good tool for community self-organisation.
11) World Cafe – Lots of people who want to discuss a topic gather 4-6 to a table
and converse in 20-40 minute periods. At the end of each period, they each move to
a different table and the conversation proceeds with different people. At the end they
return to their original groups and share what they learned ‘out in the world’.
12) Handy process tools for meetings – A toolbox of ways to help everyone be heard,
to organise agendas quickly and realistically, to make circle meetings more lively and
open conversations more reflective, including understanding more about the ‘groan
zone’ that groups often encounter during participatory decision-making (see
Dialogue, Consensus Process, and Facilitation).
13) Multiple-viewpoint drama and video – Ways to explore the many diverse human
perspectives in our community or in some important community event or issue, and
reflect them back to the community so we can see who we are, as a community,
more fully and compassionately.
14) Multiple-viewpoint ‘Fishbowl’ process – A big circle surrounds a small circle.

Spokespeople for side A sit in the middle and talk about their perspective. Then they
return to the big circle and spokespeople for Side B go into the middle to talk. Then
Side A again. Then Side B again. Then perhaps some folk who aren't ‘taking sides’
get their chance in the middle, in the fishbowl. This continues until shared
understanding emerges. Can be facilitated or not, depending on the civility level.
MORE RESILIENT – As global forces – whether meteorologic, economic or tectonic

– impact our community, how well are we prepared to survive and bounce back?
15) Community currency and barter systems – The more a community's wealth stays
in the community, the healthier it will be. There are more local ways than federal
dollars for community members to share what they have and can do, and get support
for it.
16) Community gardens – As people grow things in a common plot of land,

community grows there too, and gardening knowledge is shared. This can also be
done in networks of shared private yard gardens.
17) Community supported agriculture – Community families hire a farmer to grow

what they need, and the farmer delivers it. In Tokyo, hundreds of city people go out
to their supported farms each fall to work together on harvest and canning.
18) Bioregional study and practice – There is a natural coherence to ecological and
cultural communities that is often ignored by political boundaries. In a watershed-

based ‘bioregion’, all life forms share certain natural constraints and opportunities,
which we can understand and work with, coming home to here.
19) Nonviolent civilian-based defence (see the nonviolence page) – Harvard historian
Gene Sharp discovered that nonviolent tactics and strategies were more effective
than violent ones, but hardly anyone studied, trained and developed them as
thoroughly as they studied, trained and strategised for war. Sharp developed ways
for communities and societies to defend themselves nonviolently and effectively.
20) Emergency preparedness organising – At best only 10% of a population prepares

for inevitable disasters – earthquakes, floods, etc. The more citizens prepare
themselves and their neighborhoods, the less they have to depend on (and be
controlled by) authorities in an emergency.
MORE ENGAGED – The foundation of a strong, wise, resilient community is people

knowing and actively engaging with each other and their place, simply because it
feels good or meaningful to them. Everything else rests on that.
21) Arts and recreation – Ways people can actively express themselves together:
neighbourhood sports teams; forums for art, music and performance; movie watching
and discussion groups.
22) Dinner exchanges – People join a network of those from all over the community
who invite each other to dinner to meet others unlike themselves. The network helps
smooth the way and helps people reflect on how it's going.
23) Celebrations, parties, potlucks and fairs – A hundred ways to just get together
and have a good time – usually involving food.
24) Cleanups and neighborhood aesthetics – Simple projects in which people can
work together to make an obvious difference in the community.
25) Scavenger hunts and tours – How well do we know our community? An artist
installed dozens of bronze dinosaur tracks for adults and kids alike to try to find;
stores and schools carry a list of twenty trees or buildings to find; people offer a tour
of historic sites or a local herbs tour.
26) Free school and learning exchanges – Everyone in a community knows

something someone else would love to learn. It's just a matter of connecting them up,
perhaps with some space to meet in.

2. Open Dialogue (Listening Circles)
From www.co-intelligence.org/P-dialogue.html
Not all communication is dialogue. Dialogue is shared exploration towards greater

understanding, connection or possibility. Any communication that fits this definition,
the Co-Intelligence Institute considers dialogue. Communication that doesn't fit this
definition, we don't call dialogue.
Dialogue can at times be truly magical, dissolving the boundaries between us and the
world and opening up wellsprings of realisation and resonant power. In those rare,
deeply healing moments of dialogue in its most ideal form, we may experience the
wholeness of who we are (beyond our isolated ego), listening and speaking to the
wholeness of who we are (deep within and beyond the group around us). At those
times it is almost as if wholeness is speaking and listening to itself through us,
individually and collectively. Words become unnecessary; knowing is instantaneous,
and meaning flows like a great river within and among us.
These are moments of grace, whose frequency increases as we practise listening

more deeply and exploring more openly with each other.
Here are some guidelines for dialogue in its most basic form
• We talk about what's really important to us.
• We really listen to each other. We see how thoroughly we can understand
each other's views and experience.
• We say what's true for us without making each other wrong.
• We see what we can learn together by exploring things together.
• We avoid monopolising the conversation. We make sure everyone has a
chance to speak.
Other ways of understanding dialogue

Three types of communication can be identified:
• Type A: Antagonistic communication, meaning conversations that can't seem
to move beyond conflict.
• Type B: Banal communication, meaning conversations which feel oppressive,
boring, or depressing. This might happen because participants are trying to
avoid conflict, intimacy, or surprises, or it might just be habit. (Common
examples are extreme politeness, tightly-controlled meetings, and alienated
marriages.)
• Type C: Creative communication, meaning conversations that engage
people's diversity creatively to generate greater shared understanding.
Consultant John Adams suggested a very simple way to describe dialogue, inspired
by fellow consultant Harrison Owen: Dialogue is people truly listening to people truly
speaking. When we all truly speak and truly listen, we can't help but generate greater
shared understanding.
An unspoken dimension of such guidelines for individual behavior is that they enable
us to engage a deeper, larger intelligence than our own. Some say this is a universal
intelligence of which we are tiny parts. Others say it is a collective intelligence
generated by the synergy among us. I say it may be either or both, depending on the

circumstances. Both are forms of co-intelligence accessible primarily to those who
practice true listening and real dialogue.
Open dialogue
Again, dialogue is shared exploration towards greater understanding, connection or
possibility. When such communication happens without structure or discipline, we
call it ‘open dialogue’. Our cultural conditioning makes it unlikely that most ‘open
conversations’ will actually end up as ‘open dialogue’. The usual outcome is that
some group members end up arguing or ‘head tripping’ while others sit passively by.
What can we do to avoid such outcomes? It is hard to get dialogue rolling in a world
which has little understanding or experience of it. Few people are competent, aware
and wise enough to evoke real dialogue in the midst of a heated argument, for
example. Those who are, are awesome to witness, but hard to emulate.
In the presence of a number of such souls, dialogue can come easily. In groups of
practised dialoguers, a novice will often find herself eagerly and effortlessly
participating in the open, authentic, shared exploration unfolding around her.
But few of us have constant access to true open dialogue. More often we can get
access to real dialogue only through some structured process like a listening circle.
But sometimes people (including ourselves) don't want the constraints of a listening
circle. Or we're in a circumstance where such practices are inappropriate. We need
guidelines and tools we can use to bring the spirit of dialogue to our everyday
conversations and meetings. This section will provide some ideas and methods that
are widely applicable.
Guidelines for open dialogue

The more all participants are aware of the nature of dialogue and committed to
bringing it about, the better the chance it will happen. Towards that end, the following
comparison of dialogue and debate offers one of the most useful summaries of
dialogue that we've seen. (It was adapted by the Study Circle Resource Centre from
a paper prepared by Shelley Berman, which in turn was based on discussions of the
Dialogue Group of the Boston Chapter of Educators for Social Responsibility.)
Even on first reading, it can change one's perspective. The specifics, however, can
be hard to keep in mind. So the more often people read (and discuss) the list, the
more effective it will be. Perhaps someone will put the items on this list into fortune
cookies for group use. Until then, you could write each one on a card and give every
participant in a meeting one card to keep in mind, on behalf of the whole group.
• Dialogue is collaborative: two or more sides work together toward common
understanding. Debate is oppositional: two sides oppose each other and
attempt to prove each other wrong.
• In dialogue, finding common ground is the goal. In debate, winning is the
goal.
• In dialogue, one listens to the other side(s) in order to understand, find
meaning, and find agreement. In debate, one listens to the other side in order
to find flaws and to counter its arguments.
• Dialogue enlarges and possibly changes a participant's point of view. Debate
affirms a participant's own point of view.
• Dialogue reveals assumptions for re-evaluation. Debate defends assumptions
as truth.

• Dialogue causes introspection on one's own position. Debate causes critique
of the other position.
• Dialogue opens the possibility of reaching a better solution than any of the
original solutions. Debate defends one's own positions as the best solution
and excludes other solutions.
• Dialogue creates an open-minded attitude: an openness to being wrong and
an openness to change. Debate creates a closed-minded attitude, a
determination to be right.
• In dialogue, one submits one's best thinking, knowing that other people's
reflections will help improve it rather than destroy it. In debate, one submits
one's best thinking and defends it against challenge to show that it is right.
• Dialogue calls for temporarily suspending one's beliefs. Debate calls for
investing wholeheartedly in one's beliefs.
• In dialogue, one searches for basic agreements. In debate, one searches for
glaring differences.
• In dialogue, one searches for strengths in the other positions. In debate, one
searches for flaws and weaknesses in the other positions.
• Dialogue involves a real concern for the other person and seeks to not
alienate or offend. Debate involves a countering of the other position without
focusing on feelings or relationship and often belittles or deprecates the other
person.
• Dialogue assumes that many people have pieces of the answer and that
together they can put them into a workable solution. Debate assumes that
there is a right answer and that someone has it.
• Dialogue remains open-ended. Debate implies a conclusion.
Tools for Open Dialogue

‘Popcorn’ and other variations of circles
In listening circles, people's turns are decided by the passing of an object around the
circle. The sequence is totally predictable. This is highly structured dialogue.
Sometimes a group wants to use an object to guide their discussion but they don't
want to go around in a circle. They want more spontaneity. So the object is returned
to the centre after each turn and picked up by whoever wishes to speak next. This is
sometimes called ‘popcorn’ because the object pops in and out of the centre. Since it
is a bit less structured, it is considered more ‘open’ than a formal listening circle.
The group can decide that no one speaks two times until everyone has spoken once.
This version of popcorn still feels much like a listening circle. However, if the group
lets the object pass to anyone, regardless of how often they've spoken, there is a
major loss of circle atmosphere. This loose form of popcorn feels like an ordinary
conversation, except that people don't interrupt each other, there's time and space
between speakers, and it's clear who has the floor – major accomplishments
nonetheless.
In some circles the focus is on individual people. These individuals may be sharing
their stories or receiving some kind of help from the whole group. In these
circumstances it can be useful to let other people question the speaker for a while
after he's finished, before the group's attention moves, with the object, to the next
person.

Chime and stone
Two more modifications of open conversation can help it have some of the benefits
of dialogue without the constraints of a formal circle. These modifications are
embodied in a chime (or a gong) and a stone (or other listening circle object) placed
where all participants can easily reach them.
If at any time one of the participants feels the group needs to centre itself or move to
a ‘heart space’, they reach into the middle and strike the chime or gong. All talking
stops immediately until the sound fades. Often the silence extends for a minute or
more. When conversation begins again, it usually has a more centered, reflective
quality.
The purpose of the stone is different. When someone picks it up, they get the next
turn after whoever is currently talking. This enables participation by less dominant,
more reflective people who aren't inclined to compete for turns in fast-moving, often
competitive conversations.
A penny for your thoughts

Another way to deal with this last problem – the difficulty of some participants to get a
word in edgewise – is to give everyone an equal number (for example, four) pennies,
one of which they put into a bowl in the middle whenever they speak. When they run
out of pennies, they can't speak again until everyone else has run out. (In a small
group you don't need pennies; just agree that each person won't speak again until
everyone else has).
An interesting variation on this is to make the pennies represent time – say, one
minute. A hat is passed to a speaker who puts in two pennies, and a timer is set for
two minutes. When it goes off, he has to stop talking or put in another penny. People
who want to hear from someone can give them one or more pennies, to give them
more time. Sometimes a wild market in pennies can get going, with people wheeling
and dealing. One participant at a conference took up a collection from the men to get
a boxful of pennies for the women –- an interesting approach to affirmative action!
If you think people might cheat, you can use poker chips or other unusual objects
instead of pennies.
Facilitation
An open dialogue can be helped by facilitation. An experienced facilitator can be
brought in or the role can be held by one or more – or all – of the participants. The
simplest form of facilitation entails ensuring that all involved have a chance to speak
and that the meeting starts and ends on time.
Some facilitators discuss broad dialogue guidelines with participants and get them to
agree to try applying them. Often guidelines such as the ones at the start of this
article are posted on a wall where they can be referred to during the dialogue.
The facilitator says that he or she will be trying to shepherd the conversation along
the guidelines described. Then the facilitator lets people talk, giving them gentle
reminders as necessary.
Of course, to the extent all participants are brief, mindful, and curious about what
each other has to say, little formal facilitation or gimmicks are necessary to ensure
healthy dialogue.

Maintaining a shared centre
It is as important to maintain a shared centre in an open dialogue as in more formal
listening circles. When just a few people are talking – especially when they are
engaged in a back-and-forth discussion rather than being fully present in the group
space and speaking from their hearts – the shared centre tends to get lost and the
group's attention and energy dissipates. Other group members find themselves
drifting off or withdrawing, becoming spectators instead of participants.
Many groups encourage anyone who notices this dynamic in themselves or in others
to call it to the group's attention. Then the whole group can take a moment to explore
why this is happening or re-orient to its shared centre in some other way. An
individual who speaks in a particularly profound and inclusive way can also bring the
circle back to centre. In any co-intelligent dialogue, maintaining the shared centre is
usually at least as important as whatever subject is being considered.

3. Visioning
Imagination is more important than intelligence.

Intelligence is about the past and the present,
but imagination is about the future.
Albert Einstein.
Visioning (or futures thinking) forms one of the key processes in Education for
Sustainability. Visioning exercises are used to define and help achieve a desirable
future. Visioning exercises are regularly used in urban and strategic planning and
allow participants to create images that can help to guide change in the city. The
outcome of a visioning exercise is a long term plan, generally with a 20 to 30 year
horizon. Visioning exercises also provide a frame for a strategy for the achievement
of the vision.
Alternatively, some visioning tools may be used to promote thought and encourage
discussion of future land use and planning options, without the need to create a
future-orientated document. Games can be developed to do this; for instance, the
Wheel of Coastal Fortune, a game in which participants post cards to decide where
facilities will be sited, is a planning exercise that encourages a holistic approach to
planning and considering the impacts from the whole catchment area on the coastal
zone.
Outcomes of a visioning approach

Visioning develops future scenarios, together with the steps that are needed to
achieve this vision, and a group of participants who have ownership of the vision, and
therefore have a reason to help make this happen.
How vision brings about change

From Community Visions Pack, New Economics Foundation, 1998.
www.neweconomics.org/gen/uploads/doc_18920003301_Howto.doc
We have already looked at some reasons why a community benefits from developing
a shared vision of the future. There are also general reasons why vision helps
whoever has a vision, be they individuals or a group.
A good explanation of how vision works is set out in Peter Senge’s book, The Fifth
Discipline:
Imagine a rubber band, stretched between your vision and current reality. When
stretched, the rubber band creates tension, representing the tension between
vision and current reality. What does tension seek? Resolution or release.
There are only two possible ways for the tension to resolve itself: pull reality
towards the vision or pull the vision towards reality. Which occurs will depend on
whether we hold steady to the vision.

Another way of explaining how vision works is to look at its role in overcoming the
inevitable resistance to any change. Resistance can only be overcome by a
combination of:
Dissatisfaction with where we are now

Visions of where we want to get to
First steps that take us from here to there
The underlined letters give a formula: D * V * F > R (‘>’ means ‘greater than’).
According to the formula, if any element is zero, the three elements multiplied together
will be zero, so the resistance will not be overcome. At present, vision is the element
most likely to be absent.
The following are notes on envisioning from the It’s a Living thing: Education for
Sustainability Professional Development workshops.
Why is a futures perspective important to improving quality of life and

addressing sustainability issues?
• Time – To imagine a better future and seek goals of social change, peace,
justice, participative decision-making and sustainable development.
• Alternatives – Process that leads to identifying possible, probable and
preferred individual and shared futures.
• Holism – Providing a space for a holistic interpretation of sustainability and
linking these elements into one direction.
• Motivation – To provide the necessary motivation and plans for action to
participate in achieving these visions for a sustainable world.
• Choice – See Hicks (1996 Envisioning the Future) which states that Futures
… tries to help people in becoming more active in envisioning a preferred
future. And we do it by giving them a greater range of images, by helping
them to choose the way that want the future to be so they can move in the
right direction.
• The future … is an act of the imagination. Our Aim … is to discern our
intentions towards the future so as to shed light on our present situation and
provide guidelines for changing our actions so as to move towards that
intended future. (Ziegler 1987 in Hicks)
What is the value of envisioning for motivating and managing change towards
sustainable living?
• It provides an ability to engage in ethical reflection on the consequences of
actions.
• To critically reflect on the values underlying decisions, assumptions and
beliefs.
• It illuminates paths and obstacles to action towards desired futures.
• It promotes action: it encourages us to take responsibility for actions and
decisions, to think ahead and to participate in processes of social innovation,
recovery and renewal (Slaughter 1991 Futures concepts and powerful ideas)

How do you plan and facilitate an envisioning process?
• This process should begin as an individual task to imagine a vision for ...
• Allow time to reflect on vision, and beliefs, values and assumptions, which
have influenced or informed this decision.
• Share visions with others and the whole group, discuss obstacles, challenges,
opportunities and pathways to desired future.
• Draw out of participants – critical reflection, values clarification, implications of
their current actions for their vision.
• Futures envisioning must be linked to an exploration of the process of change
and an understanding of how change occurs.
How do you use envisioning as a tool for values clarification, critical thinking
and issues identification?
• Critically reflect on the core values and assumptions underlying decisions and
actions.
• Develop skills in applying a socially critical view of the past and present.
What outcomes can we expect from the process of envisioning?

• The ability to identify what we want for a sustainable future.
• The ability to critically question what we want for a sustainable future.
• To provide an opportunity to consider conflicts, contradictions and similarities
with other people’s visions.
• To help participants see the process of change as a series of steps and help
reflect on factors/choice that bring about different types of change.
What range of methods are available for envisioning?

Envisioning supports active learning and collaborative learning strategies utilising
methods such as:
• Scenario construction – possible, probable and preferred futures
• Trend analysis
• Delphi survey method
• Future wheels
• Timelines
• Alternative futures cartoons
• Change cards
• Steps to change
• A history of the future
• Futures Tree.
Examples of visioning processes

Example 1: Vision to Action Forums
From Antioch New England Institute website
www.anei.org/pages/51_community_forums.cfm
A Vision-to-Action Forum encourages people to sit down and talk about local
issues and opportunities – and then take action. Together, citizens and elected
officials are protecting rural landscapes, revitalising downtown areas,
enhancing recreational and cultural opportunities, and fostering local pride and
communication.
Vision-to-Action Forums work because they're designed to build confidence in

community problem-solving – and emphasise the importance of achieving
tangible results. Forum participants take the initiative and responsibility for
implementing action plans. Vision-to-Action Forums revitalise existing
community efforts, encourage residents to think creatively about establishing
new ventures and solutions to problems, and improve and strengthen
community life.
What is a Community Vision-to-Action Forum?

A one-day gathering which brings together a broad cross-section of residents to
assess key community assets and issues, develop a collective vision, and
identify and launch specific projects to improve the community. Participants
spend much of their time in small group sessions where they can most
effectively share their ideas and concerns. The Forum brings new people into
discussions of local concerns and expands the pool of individuals who are
active in the community. It also provides a means for community members to
work together.
Who organises the Forum?

A citizen Steering Committee that is representative of community members
organises the Community Forum. The Steering Committee is responsible for
inviting residents to the Forum, publicity, and logistical arrangements.
Who should participate in a Forum?

It is essential to have full cross-sectional participation to assure success for
both the Steering Committee and the forum event itself. Without complete
participation and ‘buy-in’ from all sectors of the community, the results of
the event will be open to challenge, weakening their credibility and value.
In order to achieve full participation it is necessary to have adequate time to
create a Steering Committee, to publicise the event, and to generate interest
and communication about the event. Broad publicity, presentations at various
boards, councils, and clubs, personal invitations, and the vital word-of-mouth
factor all take time, but they are critical to allowing public interest to ripen.
What do participants focus on at a Forum?

Participants examine qualities that help a community work well, including:
• Civic Infrastructure – effective community leadership, informed citizen
participation, and diversity within the community
• Community Infrastructure – cultural and artistic aspects of the
community, educational and social needs, and physical infrastructure
services

• Environment – how natural resources are used, including land, water,
energy, and materials, and how a community looks and feels
• Economy – economic vitality and the strength of local businesses.
What happens as a result of the Community Forum?

Community Projects: At the end of the Forum, four to six working groups
assemble to work on priority projects identified during the event. The groups
continue to meet after the Forum to develop a plan of action and implement the
projects. Examples of community projects include:
• establishing a conservation commission
• launching a community newspaper
• building a town trail system
• promoting alternative transportation
• developing additional recreational opportunities.
Community Forum Report: The ideas brought forward during the Forum and
agreed upon action steps are recorded and transcribed in a report that is
distributed to participants, community members, and local officials. The report
serves as a valuable reference document.
Community Forum Connections: one of the most important benefits of the

Forum is that it provides an opportunity for people to meet their neighbours. As
one participant from the Haverill, NH Forum said: The Community Forum did a
great job of bringing different people together that normally would never have
met – and they stayed friends.
Example 2: Future Search

From www.futuresearch.net
What is Future Search?

Future search is a planning meeting that helps people transform their capability
for action very quickly. The meeting is task-focused. It brings together 60 to 80
people in one room or hundreds in parallel rooms.
Future search brings people from all walks of life into the same conversation –
those with resources, expertise, formal authority and need. They meet for 16
hours spread across three days. People tell stories about their past, present
and desired future. Through dialogue they discover their common ground. Only
then do they make concrete action plans.
The meeting design comes from theories and principles tested in many cultures
for the past 50 years. It relies on mutual learning among stakeholders as a
catalyst for voluntary action and follow-up. People devise new forms of
cooperation that continue for months or years.
Future searches have been run in every part of the world and sector of society.
Future Search as a tool for environmental organisations

The effective use of resources and effective mobilisation of constituencies is
critical to environmental organisations.

Future search brings all elements of an organisation or community together in a
collaborative dynamic that can help communities and non-profits grapple
effectively with both internal and external issues. It can help like-minded people
build an effective constituency for change. At the same time, it is powerful for
discovering common ground in situations where real or imagined conflicts have
made dialogue difficult or impossible. Future search builds on shared
perspectives without requiring participants to compromise their beliefs or values
in any way.
Ways Future Search can Help Environmental Organisations:

• engage all voices – staff, board members, donors and volunteers,
community members, agency counterparts, business leaders, even
adversaries – to build a common vision and commitment
• bring large groups of people together in successful dialogue where they
can learn about and appreciate their commonalties, rather than focus on
their differences
• lay the groundwork – based on an honest assessment of realities – for
moving into effective and collective action
• help groups build effective coalitions to address large scale challenges
• establish solid working relationships among varied sectors (government,
NGO's, scientists, citizen groups, commercial interests, and more)
• help groups devise legislative or policy strategies for regional, national,
and international issues
• bring together all voices to design management plans to preserve
habitats, save endangered species, protect watersheds, conserve
undeveloped land, and reclaim urban and commercial sites.
Future Search as a tool for community building

Future Search is a community building process that brings people together to
share histories, understand present realities, build a vision for a common future
and commit to work together to realise shared goals and values. Future search
has helped many communities take control of their futures, overcome conflicts
and cynicism and pull together to realise common dreams and build a
meaningful and lasting life for themselves.
How Future Search can help government

Future Search focuses on commonly shared values to generate vision and
action. Participants build a commitment to action from a shared foundation.
They are encouraged to speak from their own experience, thus acknowledging
everyone's reality, perception and experience. Full participation results in broad
buy-in to the outcomes of the process. This avoids the trap many governments
get into where they are unable to effectively implement the outcomes of
planning efforts because they haven't built a consensus of support.
Future Search could be called democracy in action. Planners, politicians,

community members, government personnel, business people, public safety
agencies, non-profits and others join together in a common, focused
conversation, giving each a chance to fully voice their perspective. People of all
races, ages, demographic cultures and economic means come together to work
collaboratively. Diversity shifts from being a problem, to becoming a

constructive ally. Future search builds the kind of involvement and shared
ownership that drives sustainable, positive and implementable results.
Future Search methodology

(Usually four or five sessions each lasting 1/2 day)
Focus on the Past

People make time lines of key events in the world, their own lives, and in the
history of the future search topic. Small groups tell stories about each time line
and the implications of their stories for the work they have come to do.
Focus on Present, External Trends

The whole group makes a ‘mind map’ of trends affecting them now and
identifies those trends most important for their topic.
Focus on Present, External Trends

Stakeholder groups describe what they are doing now about key trends and
what they want to do in the future.
Focus on Present
Stakeholder groups report what they are proud of and sorry about in the way
they are dealing with the future search topic.
Ideal Future Scenarios

Diverse groups put themselves into the future and describe their preferred
future as if it has already been accomplished.
Identify Common Ground

Diverse Groups post themes they believe are common ground for everyone.
Confirm Common Ground

Whole group dialogues to agree on common ground.
Action Planning
Volunteers sign up to implement action plans.
Case studies of Future Search Conferences
Case study 1:
Community Partners for Urban Mobility, Salt Lake City, Utah
The Utah Transportation Authority had been struggling with the fact that the
public expected them to solve everyone’s transit problems. Agency leaders
knew they couldn't do this alone. They had to get more information about
people’s transit needs, wanted this to happen in a non-adversarial way and
knew they couldn’t go forward without the support and collaboration of local
jurisdictions and interest groups.
They decided to join together with other agencies in the region to organise a
future search. After months of making sure that all voices were included, this
group, Community Partners for Urban Mobility, brought together local officials,
transit riders, special needs riders, community groups, state political leaders
and others for the future search with an invitation to ‘Join the Revolution on
Transit Issues along the Wasatch Front of Eastern Utah.’

The conference resulted in participants developing a deeper understanding of
the complexity of the situation and why there was a need for broad participation
and cooperation. Local elected officials learned how they could fit into the
picture; local interest groups found out they could affect the outcome through
real participation in planning and implementation rather than opposition. One
transit official said at the de-briefing with facilitators: I know my action team’s
work is going to make a difference. This is worth many times the effort we put
into it.
Case study 2:
Future Search in the Upper Mat-Su Valley, Alaska, November, 1999
Talkeetna is a small town in the Upper Mat-Su Valley of Alaska, whose main
street looks up at the slopes of Mount McKinley. In 1999 residents of four
neighboring communities gathered there for three days to discover how to work
collaboratively.
Background
The towns in this part of Alaska are rugged, frontier towns that have grown
slowly, with no official powers enforcing zoning regulations or building permits.
But, as you can imagine, things have changed and over the past decade big
hotels have been built, tourism has surged and during tourist season there are
as many tourists in the towns as local residents. In 1998, a number of residents
of the four towns decided they were going to have to work together to maintain
their way of life in this special region. This was a big step because previous
efforts at joint planning were rocky at best. As one local resident said: Our
meetings would always end up with people standing on tables and screaming at
each other.
Six months prior to the future search, a small group, made up of residents from
each town, met to plan a future search. Their task was to identify all of the
voices they felt needed to be involved. The planning was a struggle. One
person believed that this was a liberal conspiracy and had joined the group to
sabotage the process. They did a lot of work to stay engaged, build
collaboration and be inclusive of all points of view. They were able to get 80
people into the room, an impressive next step. These people were: advocates,
businesspeople, citizens, community groups, community resources,
government representatives, resource users and students.
The meeting
Some folks came with tremendous wariness and skepticism. They wanted to
make sure no tricks were played. By the end of the second day, there were
voluntary outbursts with people saying, ‘We had no idea how much we had in
common.’ By the third day, as environmentalist and business groups had
explored their mutual distrust, they discovered that the one thing they did share
was support for recycling. Action teams were formed on the following issues:
• Improve communication between chambers of commerce and the
borough.
• Create a federation of Upper Su chambers of commerce.
• Explore incorporation of towns in the region and elect new people to the
borough assembly.
• Implement the Talkeetna Comprehensive Plan to look into forming a
new borough for the region.
• Establish a re-cycling program for the region.

Outcomes
Within a few weeks, the recycling project was organised as a monthly gathering
where people brought recyclables to one location. Six months later, the group
held a follow-up meeting and decided to expand the recycle day into a
community potlatch. This event came to be a day that included lively
discussions between people who now knew how to talk with each other and a
place where people sold and traded local products. Collaboration became a
term that was understood in the community and applied in many settings where
people came together.

4. Asset-Based Community Development
Taken from: Mathie A & Cunningham G From Clients to Citizens: Asset-Based

Community Development as a Strategy For Community-Driven Development (2003)
The Coady International Institute, St. Francis Xavier University
http://people.stfx.ca/gcunning/ABCD/Publications/
An overview of ABCD
Based on extensive inquiry into the characteristics of successful community initiatives
in the US, John McKnight and Jody Kretzmann at the Institute for Policy Research
(IPR) at Northwestern University, articulated ABCD as a way of counteracting the
predominant needs-based approach to development in urban America. In the needs-
based approach, well-intentioned efforts of universities, donor agencies and
governments, have generated needs surveys, analysed problems, and identified
solutions to meet those needs. In the process, however, they have inadvertently
presented a one-sided negative view, which has often compromised, rather than
contributed to, community capacity building.
Kretzmann and McKnight point out that if the needs-based approach is the only guide
to poor communities, the consequences can be ‘devastating’. One of the main effects
is leadership that denigrates the community. Leaders find that the best way to attract
institutional resources is to play up the severity of problems. Local leadership is
judged on how many resources are attracted to the community, not on how self-
reliant the community has become. Another consequence Kretzmann and McKnight
point out is that people in the communities start to believe what their leaders are
saying. They begin to see themselves as deficient and incapable of taking charge of
their lives and of the community. Not surprisingly, community members no longer act
like citizens; instead they begin to act like ‘clients’ or consumers of services with no
incentive to be producers.
Yet another consequence of this approach is that local groups begin to deal more
with external institutions than with groups in their own community. This reinforces the
notion that ‘only outside experts can provide real help’ and further weakens
neighbour-to-neighbour links. Funding is made available on the basis of categories of
needs rather than for integrated approaches which leads to ‘the much lamented
fragmentation of efforts to provide solutions … [This] denies the basic community
wisdom which regards problems as tightly intertwined, as symptoms in fact of the
breakdown of the community's own problem solving capacities’. To make matters
worse, the bulk of any funding tends to go to the institutions filling the needs.
Perversely, these institutions begin to develop a vested interest in maintaining this
approach.
In Building Communities from the Inside Out, Kretzmann and McKnight (1993)
describe an alternative approach, one that recognises that it is the capacities of local
people and their associations that build powerful communities. The process of
recognising these capacities begins with the construction of a new lens through
which communities can ‘begin to assemble their strengths into new combinations,
new structures of opportunity, new sources of income and control, and new
possibilities for production.’
Experience in the US shows how several communities have mobilised to take action
for their economic and social development. Sometimes, this ABCD approach has
evolved over a long period of time. For example, in Savannah, Georgia,
neighbourhood redevelopment had been going on for more than 25 years, initially

through municipal agencies responding to problems identified in local
neighbourhoods. Over time, however, municipal agencies decided to ‘lead by
stepping back’; communities shifted from being ‘consumers’ of services to ‘designers’
of community programs, and, finally ‘producers’ of community (Kretzmann and
McKnight, 1999). Lessons learned from experiences such as these spurred the IPR
to lead by stepping back from the outset, and to encourage communities to take
charge with confidence in their own capacities. Communities are helped to build an
inventory of their assets and are encouraged to see value in resources that would
otherwise have been ignored, unrealised, or dismissed.
Such unrealised resources include not only personal attributes and skills, but also the
relationships among people through social, kinship, or associational networks. By
mobilising these informal networks, formal institutional resources can be activated -
such as local government, formal community-based organisations, and private
enterprise. In fact, the key to ABCD is the power of local associations to drive the
community development process and to leverage additional support and
entitlements. These associations are the vehicles through which all the community's
assets can be identified and then connected to one another in ways that multiply their
power and effectiveness.
Based on the experiences documented by McKnight and Kretzmann, and on

initiatives elsewhere that employ a similar approach, we propose that Asset-Based
Community Development can be understood as an approach, as a set of methods for
community mobilisation, and as a strategy for community-based development.
ABCD as an approach
As an approach to community-based development, it rests on the principle that the
recognition of strengths, gifts, talents and assets of individuals and communities is
more likely to inspire positive action for change than an exclusive focus on needs and
problems. Seeing the glass half full as well as half empty is not to deny the real
problems that a community faces, but to focus energy on how each and every
member has contributed, and can continue to contribute, in meaningful ways to
community development. Focusing on uncovering the merits of all members
encourages a spirit of egalitarianism, even in societies that are hierarchical in
structure and differentiated by culture, educational background and gender. At its
core are associations of community members, both formal and informal. As engines
of community action, and as a source of power and leadership, these are considered
assets of the community (Greene, 2000).
ABCD as a set of methods

Accompanying this approach is a set of methods that have been used to inspire a
community to mobilise around a common vision or plan. While rejecting any kind of
blue-print for ABCD, McKnight and Kretzmann (1993, pp 345) propose a number of
steps to facilitate the process, which we have modified slightly to capture the
importance of storytelling in ABCD's early phases:
• collecting stories about community successes and identifying the capacities of
communities that contributed to success
• organising a core group to carry the process forward
• mapping completely the capacities and assets of individuals, associations,
and local institutions
• building relationships among local assets for mutually beneficial problem-
solving within the community

• mobilising the community's assets fully for economic development and
information-sharing purposes
• convening as broadly representative group as possible for the purposes of
building a community vision and plan
• leveraging activities, investments and resources from outside the community
to support asset-based, locally defined development.
ABCD as a strategy
Finally, ABCD is a strategy for sustainable community-driven development. Beyond
the mobilisation of a particular community, ABCD is concerned with how to link
micro-assets to the macro environment. In other words, there is attention paid to the
boundaries of community and how to position the community in relation to local
institutions and the external economic environment on which its continued prosperity
depends.
Elements of ABCD
• ABCD is an asset-based approach that uses methods to draw out strengths
and successes in a community's shared history as its starting point for change
(as in appreciative inquiry).
• Among all the assets that exist in the community, ABCD pays particular
attention to the assets inherent in social relationships, as evident in formal
and informal associations and networks (recognised in the research on social
capital).
• ABCD's community-driven approach is in keeping with the principles and
practice of participatory approaches development where active participation
and empowerment (and the prevention of disempowerment) are the basis of
practice.
• ABCD is a strategy directed towards sustainable economic development that
is community-driven. Reference to community economic development theory
is therefore relevant to the ABCD strategy.
• ABCD, as a strategy for sustainable economic development, relies on
linkages between community level actors and macro-level actors in public and
private sectors. In fostering these linkages, ABCD also fosters active
citizenship engagement to ensure access to public goods and services, and
to ensure the accountability of local government. It therefore contributes to,
and benefits from, strengthened civil society.
ABCD in 3 simple steps

Taken from: Making Headway Building Your Community: How to get Started; An
Asset Based Community Development Toolkit Central Coast Community
Development Working Party 2003
www.communitybuilders.nsw.gov.au/download/Making_Headway_ToolKit.pdf
1. Discovering the strengths in our communities:

o talents, skills and knowledge of people
o strengths, resources and new capacities in our community
associations, institutions and businesses
o more about our environment, e.g. waterways, open space, parks,
bushland.

2. Connecting with each other and our community:
o connections between people
o building relationships
o linking people and their knowledge and skills to community projects
o creating or enhancing relationships between community projects and
activities
o ideas, solutions and opportunities.
3. Coming together to build on our knowledge and skills

o take personal action and find shared interests for action with others
o form strong relationships and partnerships
o solve problems and see new opportunities
o use what we know to bring in more resources
o invite others to join in
o create opportunities for the future.
The assets of a community may be viewed on a number of different levels:

• individuals
• associations, e.g. residents' associations, Chambers of Commerce
• bushcare/Landcare Group, school groups, church groups, youth groups,
sporting
• clubs, service clubs, special interest groups
• institutions, e.g. schools, local businesses, churches, health facilities, library,
neighbourhood centre
• physical characteristics, e.g. land features, water bodies, parks, buildings,
historical
• landmarks, transport and infrastructure
• local businesse
All groups have positive assets and can contribute to the community:
• Young people: assets include time, ideas, creativity, fresh perspectives,
history, knowledge, experience, enthusiasm and energy.
• Older people: assets include tradition and history, knowledge, experience,
skills, ideas, creativity, fresh perspectives, enthusiasm and energy and time.
• What are the skills they can put to work?
• What are the abilities and talents they can share?
• What are the experiences from which they have learned?
• What are the interests they would like to pursue?
Building a stronger community is about bringing these various assets together.

Once collected this information forms a knowledge base about local capacities that
can be mobilised toward community building.
A Community Asset Map or Community Inventory are processes for identifying the
resources and capacities in a community and collecting useful information about
them and their actual and potential linkages.
Tips for putting together a good asset map

Here are six tips for developing a good asset map in your community or group:
• Explain clearly why you are developing the map, what its purpose is and what
will happen with the information you gather for the map.
• Make sure you understand why you are asking specific questions.
• Once the ground rules are established, don't limit what people think of as
assets, i.e. all assets are equally important so someone with handyman skills
is as valuable as someone who owns a million dollar business in the area.
• There is a range of ways to create an asset map, but we've found that making
the map large and visually striking, where people can add their ideas
themselves, works very well.
• Make sure that when you have developed your map, that information is
available and preferably visible to the local community or group.
• An asset map is a work in progress. Providing opportunities for people to add
to it over time is as important as creating the map in the first place.
Practical examples of ABCD

Example 1: The Entrance
The Entrance Neighbourhood Centre is a focal point for the local community.
The Centre
Co-ordinator was keen to involve a broader range of community members and
local groups in identifying local assets and working together towards improving
community life. Following the Community Congress the Co-ordinator and
Wyong Council's Community Development Worker for The Entrance area
decided to work together and to develop an asset based approach rather than a
deficit or needs based approach to encourage increased community
participation.
An initial workshop was held and from this action groups were formed. One of
these groups, the “Bringing People Together Group” has subsequently
developed a plan to hold a “Bringing People Together” day in March to coincide
with the week when Harmony Day is held each year. Some specific activities
the group has undertaken to date which utilise the assets of the participants
are: writing a media release, designing a logo, networking with organisations
and businesses who may be able to assist/provide resources on the day.
Example 2: Konnecting Kincumber

A group of local people in Kincumber came together during 2002 to organise
and put on a planning day for their community, where they could begin to map
and utilise local strengths and assets. The day was attended by over 100

people and a number of project groups emerged to develop specific ideas over
the next 12 months. Projects include a festival for Kincumber, a clean up and
beautification project, a project to include young people more actively in
community life and decision making.

5. World Café

World Café case study
From http://theworldcafe.com/storyconversing.html.
In Conversing Cafés, Citizens Come Out On Top Down Under

Our Australian friends have put their own spin on Café conversations. They
have used a combination of Open Space Technology and a form of The World
Café process which they call the Conversing Café.
When the city of Marion (a suburb of Adelaide with a population of 80,000) was
planning a new Cultural Centre the usual decision-making process might well
have produced an outcome which failed to satisfy even a minority of
stakeholders. However, thanks to host Alan Stewart, Graphic Artist Cate Burke,
and the enthusiastic participation of a diverse group of the citizens of Marion,
the process of the Conversing Café resulted in plans for a Cultural Centre that
truly reflects the diversity of those it is designed to serve: the community of
Marion.
What follows are four different perspectives on the Conversing Cafés. Alan and
Cate share their experiences as host and graphic recorder respectively. Also
included are the reflections of two of the participants – Nigel Hopkins and Lloyd
Fell – as they describe their experiences and the outcomes of the Conversing
Cafés.
Overview
Alan Stewart is a professional conversationalist. Our story begins with Alan
setting the context of how the World Café came to Australia:
World Café processes have taken root and are spreading rapidly throughout
Australia. There is now widespread recognition around our sunburned country
that these processes are a remarkable way of addressing questions that matter.
To understand how we were so successful in Marion we need to quickly recap
a few events from the past four years.
The seeds of The World Café were sown in Australia when Nancy Margulies,
Meg Wheatley and Myron Kellnor-Rogers visited Brisbane in 1997. I first
became aware of the Café work when a friend who had been at their Brisbane
seminar sent me a paper authored by Juanita Brown and Nancy Margulies.
The appearance of their paper in my life coincided with my being engaged in

supporting the first national tour of Australia by the renowned futurist, Robert
Theobald. It was through networking with people on this enterprise in other
states that I was able to spread the word about Café processes throughout the
country.
It was through Robert's visit to Marion in late 1999, that my connection to the
Council was initiated. I was invited to a series of meetings to explore
implications of the spark provided by Robert to rethink what Council could do to
promote vitality-based on social cohesion, ecological integrity and effective
decision making-in its community.
In these meetings people expressed passion to explore new approaches that

could help support these goals and, in so doing, build stronger, healthier
relationships between residents and Council. What evolved was an agreement
to try new ways to engage the people of Marion in a discovery process to
uncover their wishes on key social and environmental issues that underpin the
creation of preferred futures.

Specifically, the decision was taken to explore the use of Open Space
Technology (OST) www.openspaceworld.org and Café processes in finding
what the people of Marion wished to see happen in their proposed new cultural
centre.
I have come to appreciate that a common feature of gatherings based on Café

and OST processes is that people converse. By this I mean that they talk
openly with each other in a spirit of: We will treat each other well and We're in
this together.
We began our discovery in Marion with a round of Open Space to ‘bring forth’
issues that people felt were worthy of their attention with regard to the
functioning of the Cultural Centre. Then later we used what I now call a
Conversing Café to flesh these out. The format of the Conversing Café is very
similar to that described by Nancy Margulies in her description of a Passion
Café.
I invariably invoke the principles of OST at whatever kind of meeting that I

facilitate:
• Whoever comes are the right people.
• Whatever happens is the only thing that could have.
• Whenever it starts is the right time.
• When it’s over it's over.
• And also the Law of Two Feet which indicates that you are free to move
wherever your intuition leads you at any moment.
Participant Perspectives
Nigel Hopkins runs a strategic communications and issues management
company in Adelaide, South Australia:
Discussions about the future of major community facilities and how they should
be used can easily become shouting matches as different interest groups push
and shove their views. In such instances little is achieved other than a sense
that everyone has just wasted their time. There is no agreement or consensus,
no positive ‘next moves’, and consequently no progress.
In seeking to finesse the design of Marion's proposed Cultural Centre, and to

better understand how the community might wish to use it, Marion Council
decided to take a more innovative, non-adversarial approach. Two meetings
were facilitated by Dr Alan Stewart, who describes himself as a professional
conversationalist. Alan says the Café process he adopts creates a space in
which people feel secure in talking openly ‘conversing’ on what they feel
passionately about and in telling their stories.
The result was two public ‘conversations’ held at Marion Council in late
February/early March 2000, which are being followed by a series of Conversing
Café meetings where people can present their views, passionately if they wish,
about the development of the Cultural Centre.
For most of the 60 or so Marion residents who took part in the first two
conversations, the experience was unconventional-but, the consensus proved it
worked. Views that might have been fiercely expressed and just as fiercely

contested in another environment, were here considered calmly in an
atmosphere of mutual respect. Perhaps more importantly, some of the more
significant views expressed have brought about major alterations to the Cultural
Centre's layout.
Far from being too little citizen involvement too late in the process, Marion
Council Member Wolf Bierbaum, who attended the second of the meetings,
says they were ‘quite timely’ and had influenced the decision to include a 160
seat multi-purpose theatre in the centre.
The relaxed, non-aggressive nature of the Café setting encouraged people to

speak from their hearts, about the things they had a passion for. Senior Council
officers, planners and administrators were among the participants-listening and
contributing as equals in the process. The Council members were there
because they wanted to be there. ‘The Council should not be seen as separate
from the community,’ said Acting CEO Terry Bruun, who introduced the
meeting. ‘It must be representative of the community.’
The idea of consulting with the community in a conversational context is aimed

at making people more confident in expressing what they feel strongly about,
more positive, and creating a new ‘collective intelligence’ on which Council can
draw.
‘I really love the collective wisdom that comes out, and the triggers that provoke
even more thought,’ says Wolf Bierbaum. He was reinforced by Marion
Council's cultural planner Don Chapman, who told one of the meetings: ‘The
community is not only smarter than Council employees think, you're smarter
than we can think. It's marvelous how creative you can be. The solutions are all
there.’
Lloyd Fell, PhD, a recently retired research scientist shares his insights with us:
Like most of us, I suppose, I'm more accustomed to sitting in rows, facing the
speaker, and then listening for quite some time to what he or she has to say.
One can reflect or daydream or connect passionately with what is being said,
but it is difficult to sustain a high energy of involvement with such a low level of
participation. If the speaker manages to solicit contributions from the audience,
certain people tend to speak up, but I am rarely one of those people.
Expecting this occasion to be different, I was a little anxious and excited

beforehand, but others I spoke to did not seem to be primed for a new kind of
experience. They were all strangers to me, but a few refreshments and nibbles
created quite a social atmosphere; not a party, but a bit like the foyer of a
theatre before the performance begins.
When we were seated at the small tables, the facilitator, Alan Stewart, engaged
us very effectively with a few words of introduction and posed a rather
enigmatic sort of question for us to consider.
I was amazed at the gusto and energy with which the people at my table
immediately began to speak about the question. Glancing around, I saw that
this tremendous wave of energy existed right across the room. It was as if
something had suddenly been unleashed with this invitation to speak freely in
the more intimate setting of the café table. There was a real buzz, not the usual
posturing and guarded introductions and shuffling of chairs that I associate with

normal meetings at my work. I am never the first to enter into a group
conversation, but I found myself listening with interest and beginning to feel that
I wanted to join in. After a time I did, and the respect with which my words were
treated had a warmth and friendliness about it that I have never experienced at
a meeting.
We had been asked to come together to treat each other well and this was
indeed what happened. The free flow of conversing was testimony to the non-
threatening atmosphere which had been created. We often spoke more
personally, mentioning something from our own experience that helped to
explain what we wanted to say, more conversationally-with pauses, allowing
others the chance to speak-than is normally the case in a work situation. Those
of us who were complete strangers seemed to find this easier in the Café
environment. There were three people at my table who worked together and
they tended to refer more to one another, rather than simply owning their own
statements.
A couple of people jotted and doodled on the paper tablecloth, but others, like
myself, were not drawn to this. I noticed that some other tables were very active
in drawing and writing on the paper. We were still in full swing when Alan had to
bring us to conclusion. There was surprisingly little comment at my table at that
time about whether we had achieved any real outcomes or not. I thought the
main outcome was that we had gotten to know one another as people far better
than at a normal meeting and that this would probably lead to valuable
collaborative work in the future. It reminded me of how chance meetings in the
corridor or chatting in the tearoom had often influenced the course of my
serious work in the past, making me wonder what would have happened if I
hadn't spoken with so-and-so at that time. Only this was not relying on chance
to harvest and make available the fruits of genuine conversing. Instead the
process was designed to build relationships and share knowledge and ideas.
I am now acutely aware of the fact that we don't take the time and trouble to
create the conditions that promote respectful conversing. If we did I think that
many of our pressing problems at work would be solved serendipitously, as it
were. Our entire output as an organisation would be more creative, and
perhaps most importantly, the employees would feel more fulfilled. There must
be times when a set agenda is needed, but there is at least an equal need for
the time and the opportunity to converse.
Cate Burke served as the Graphic Recorder for the Marion Council Conversing
Cafés:
I scribed and illustrated the ideas and questions raised amongst the participants
during the Open Space and Conversing Café sessions. As I visited each group
with my markers and drawing board, I attempted to capture a graphic snap-shot
of the conversations as they flowed.
Before I comment further on the actual process, I need to speak to the single
most exciting shift in attitude that I observed during the initial session. A
considerable number of invited participants arrived with highly charged
emotions about issues and a strong desire to inform the Council organisers of
their disappointment with aspects of the new Centre. The first session began
with a very intense round of: ‘I am here because’ and participants proceeded to
express their concerns very strongly. As the round of concerns continued, the
atmosphere grew thick with doubts and tension.

Then Alan Stewart briefly introduced the Open Space principles, followed by an
invitation for participants to step into the circle, take up pen and paper and offer
to convene a topic. The choices were announced. The groups formed
according to the preferences of the participants and the process began. At that
moment the ambience soared into a cooperative buzz of sharing, as the
participants took ownership of the process. The event then evolved, as the
community members delved into the questions and issues that had brought
them to the Council chambers.
This was the point at which I realised how powerful the conversing process is. I
have been present at both Open Space and Conversing Cafés gatherings over
the past twelve months, and without exception there was an emergent
atmosphere of caring and respect for each member. This has been combined
with the motivation to give their all to uncovering the questions that are at the
heart of their issue.
As a graphic artist, I record a segment of each group's conversation on large

pieces of art paper, using eye-catching colors. These finished art records are
posted on the walls as the sessions proceed, and are also displayed at later
sessions. This provides both a visual memory for the ongoing participants and
an introduction for the newcomers.
When I reflect on the Marion Forums I remember how a sense of true

community spirit began to emerge as the sessions progressed. The bulk of the
attendees returned for subsequent sessions joined by about another dozen or
so newcomers. The regulars listened attentively to the traditional lecture
presentations delivered before the Café commenced.
New attendees, however would seek to raise questions at this time and initiate
a debate, thinking that this would be the only opportunity to voice their opinion.
From their tone of voice and body language it was apparent that they felt
strongly about their ideas and had come to ‘push’ these.
The participants familiar with the Café process would quietly wait until the café
process was underway before beginning to dialogue. They knew they would
have ample opportunity to express their ideas and share them with others.
What set these ‘Café Gatherings’ apart from most other community meetings
were the enthusiasm, respect and warmth imbued in the quality of the
conversations. The calibre and momentum of dialogue continued to flourish
with each successive session.
Coincidentally, I had been to another workshop held at the Council around the
same time on another complex issue which did not use the conversing process.
The session was typical of any number of events that Councils or organisations
may sponsor: it commenced with a lecture style delivery and then moved into a
sharing session with one speaker sharing a comment or question with the
whole group still remaining in rows. Consequently the attention of participants
began to wander because shared eye contact with the speaker was not
possible. I could observe the growing impatience as individuals awaited for their
own interest group to be invited to comment. There were many distant looks
and side conversations breaking out amongst group members. The behavioral
contrast to the Conversing Café process was quite dramatic.

Outcomes
Alan Stewart recaps the outcomes of the Conversing Cafés:
There was general consensus that the Conversing Cafés have had a major
impact on the design of the Cultural Centre. These sessions brought forth
issues that the planners and architects had not addressed. Perhaps the biggest
change to be attributed to the process was the inclusion of a performing arts
component to the Centre. This had been in the original design and had been
eliminated due to financial anxieties. When Council appreciated the strength of
feeling expressed about this by people who attended the Conversing Cafés the
decision was reversed and the component is now integral to the design.
Also of great significance, was the complete redesign of the plaza area outside
of the building. This has now been reshaped to be a drop-in area for young
people, and to function as a place for open air concerts and fairs. Additionally,
the suggested changes to accommodate the environmental impact of the
Centre and to link the activities there with those of a nearby Aboriginal cultural
site have been incorporated.
There has been a general recognition that the Café and Open Space processes
have engaged the Marion Council and its community in a stimulating and
creative process of working together which has generated both good will and
practical solutions to issues of significance to local people.
The Conversing Cafés can be viewed as rousing success from a variety of

perspectives. The Marion Council gained a huge increase in the esteem of its
citizens for providing a venue where people could express their often
passionate desires in an atmosphere of respect and caring. The process
allowed for these passionately held ideas to be reconciled with the pragmatic
reality of city management of a publicly funded project.
Diverse and sometimes seemingly opposed ideas found creative resolution

through ongoing conversation focused on what is possible, instead of the
typical fragmentation which occurs when avenues of dialogue are cut off. The
revised plans for the Cultural Centre which resulted are more reflective of the
needs of the people whom it is designed to serve. Because there was so much
citizen involvement, the support and use the Centre will enjoy is likely to be
much higher than if the Council had simply gone ahead with the original plans.
While at still another level, democracy itself was served through the direct
participation of a group of caring and committed citizens; who thanks to their
positive experience are far more likely to continue their involvement instead of
retreating into a cynical apathy.
This augurs well for a future in which the Council is seen increasingly as
representing the community, rather than being separate from it. As one Council
member mused about the process:
‘Our role as a Council is to create opportunities for people to converse
about important matters. Our staff, elected members, and residents
are learning that this approach to significant issues, no matter how
complex and conflicted, invariably generates surprisingly constructive
outcomes. We could now rely on this for one of our primary functions:
to direct resources equitably to projects that our citizens express
passion and responsibility for. And, incidentally, conversing at staff
meetings could become the norm of how our organisation operates.’
The Marion Cultural Centre is now under construction.

6. Deliberative Democracy Methods – Citizen Deliberative Councils
Citizen Deliberative Councils

Taken from Atlee T (2003) Using Citizen Deliberative Councils to Make Democracy
More Potent and Awake
www.co-intelligence.org/CDCUsesAndPotency.html
Citizen Deliberative Councils (CDCs) are temporary, face-to-face councils of a dozen

or more citizens whose diversity reflects the diversity of their community, state or
country. Usually council members are selected at random, often with additional
criteria to ensure gender, racial, socioeconomic and other diversity.
These diverse ordinary citizens convene for two to ten days (and occasionally longer)
to consider some public concern – to learn about it (often by hearing and cross-
examining diverse experts), to reflect on it together (usually with the help of a
professional facilitator or moderator), and to craft a collective statement which they
then announce to the public and/or relevant officials and agencies, often through a
press conference.
After that they disband. In current democratic visions featuring CDCs, they have no
permanent or official power except the power of legitimacy and widely-publicised
common sense solutions to compelling public problems.
Hundreds of CDCs have been held worldwide. It is now well demonstrated that with
this method ordinary citizens have a remarkable capacity to grapple with complex
problems and come up with useful recommendations that serve the common good,
thus realising the elusive dream of democracy.
Yet most citizen deliberative councils have been convened as isolated events or
sophisticated focus groups by organisations or agencies seeking input from the
public. Only in British Columbia, Canada, has one CDC, the Citizens Assembly on
electoral reform, been given the power to put a proposal directly to a vote by the
people in a regular election. And only in Denmark are a form of CDCs, the consensus
conference, officially convened as a periodic function of government to advise both
the legislature and the citizenry on major public issues.
Different forms of Citizen Deliberative Councils

The primary forms of CDC currently in use are the following:
• Citizens Juries – The basic and most widely practiced CDC with 12-24
participants. Pioneered in the US. www.jefferson-centre.org
• Consensus Conferences – Like citizens juries except:
o panelists participate more in selecting experts to testify before them
o testimony is taken in a public forum and a panel’s final product is a
consensus statement. Pioneered in Denmark.
www.co-intelligence.org/P-DanishTechPanels.html
• Planning Cells – Numerous simultaneous 25-person citizens juries (cells), all
addressing the same subject. Participants spend much of their time in 5-
person subgroups. The cells’ diverse final statements get integrated into one
Citizens’ Report. Pioneered in Germany.
www.planet-thanet.fsnet.co.uk/groups/wdd/99_planning_cells.htm

• Citizens Assemblies – In 2004 British Columbia, Canada, convened a panel
of 160 citizens (one man and one woman randomly selected from each
legislative district) to study and make recommendations on electoral reform.
They met every other weekend for a year, generating recommendations for
citizen approval in an election which, if approved, become law.
www.citizensassembly.bc.ca/public.
There is also a new form of CDC which, unlike the models above, does not start off
with issues and experts: The Wisdom Council is an experimental council using a
proven form of open-ended, creative group process to explore whatever citizens feel
is important. It is currently being piloted in several U.S. communities.
www.co-intelligence.org/P-wisdomcouncil.html
Finally, back in 1991 there was a one-time nationwide experiment in Canada that
offers a provocative glimpse of what might be possible with a national Wisdom
Council, The People’s Verdict. Maclean’s magazine, Canada’s leading newsweekly,
scientifically selected a dozen seriously different ordinary Canadians and then used
world class facilitation to help them come to an agreement on the future of Canada.
Maclean’s then gave extensive coverage to both the process and the results.
www.co-intelligence.org/S-Canadaadvrsariesdream.html
Some roles for Citizen Deliberative Councils

Among the many functions CDCs could play are the following:
• Issues Based CDCs
After studying balanced briefings and cross-examining a diverse spectrum of
experts, randomly selected CDC members could provide voters and decision-
makers with informed guidance about an issue, grounded in the values of the
community. Legitimate issue-oriented CDCs could be convened by the
mandate of legislatures, citizen petitions, prior CDCs or by other means
established by law or popular acclaim, when and as needed. They could
address issues broadly, identifying new possibilities – or they could choose
from a given set of options (in which case attention must be given to how
those options are chosen and by whom). Annual CDCs could be convened in
specified issue areas – economic policy, the environment, education,
defence, welfare, etc. – to provide an ongoing sense of the best ‘general
interest’ thinking in each of these areas. These Annual Issue Dialogues could
be set up such that the CDCs conferred with hundreds of their fellow citizens
in the random ‘jury pools’ from which they were selected, in televised forums
viewable by the entire population – a process that would be very educational
for everyone, especially if people were engaged in other forms of grassroots
dialogue and deliberation round these issues as part of the same participatory
effort.
• Open-ended or futures-based CDCs
Properly designed CDCs can act as a ‘time out’ for a community to reflect on
where it is and where it is headed, and to creatively tease out new directions
and options. Such councils would tend to have more or less open-ended
conversations. If the randomly selected participants were given tasks to do in
such councils, they would tend to involve the exploration of values, visions
and scenarios more than studying facts and existing proposals. No experts
may be needed except for the citizens themselves. The Wisdom Council and
Maclean’s experiments both fit this model.

Case studies of Citizens Jury
Case study 1:
An Issues-Based CDC: Bronte Catchment Citizens Jury Project
Taken from the NSW EPA’s Effective Stormwater Education website
www.environment.nsw.gov.au/stormwater/casestudies/index.htm
The Bronte Catchment Citizens’ Jury Project built on the work that was
undertaken as part of the Effective Environmental Education Project (NSW EPA)
– working with the community and small business. It developed, supported and
evaluated community and council activities to improve water quality at Bronte
Beach.
This project tried a new approach – pollution prevention using deliberative

decision making and community participation processes, which included:
• social research, community development, and active learning techniques to
profile community barriers to participation
• strengthening environmental education initiatives with participatory
strategies
• testing new deliberative processes in environmental management
• building democratic and environmental capacity across the catchment
• demonstrating the critical importance of council and community commitment
to participation in environmental management.
There were three main components to the project:

• community development activities with all sectors of the community,
especially those who aren’t usually involved in environmental management,
who may be prevented from participating, or who aren’t seen as having a
stake or an interest in the issue (such as tenants, visitors and traditional
owners)
• a trial of deliberative decision-making processes – a Citizens’ Jury and a
Citizens’ Telepoll
• a review of council activities and processes, to identify how the council
could reduce stormwater impacts.
The project was evaluated from start to finish by community members, council
officers, the project team, and other key government and non-government
stakeholders.
The Citizens’ Jury

Over 70 residents volunteered to participate in the Citizens Jury. Of them, 15
were selected as jurors on the basis of their availability for all three days of the
jury, and to ensure that a balance of demographic characteristics, environmental
attitudes, community participation and involvement in local government was
included.
The aim was not to look for the ‘right’ people, but to find a balanced range of
views and perspectives. The selection criteria was developed by a Planning
Group made up of representatives from the Environment Protection Authority
(EPA)3, Stormwater Trust, cross-factional stormwater, council officers,

community and precinct committee representatives, an observer from UNSW,
and the project team. The Planning Group prepared detailed reports and papers
for the jury to consider. It developed criteria to define the range of witness
perspectives, and recommended questions for the jury to address.
The Citizens’ Jury met for three days from 14–16 September 2001. They
considered specialist briefing material, heard and questioned expert witnesses,
deliberated together and tested the evidence, and produced a series of
recommendations around key questions. At the close of the jury, jurors presented
over 50 recommendations to an audience of stormwater, council officers,
community representatives, friends and family, and representatives from the EPA
and Stormwater Trust. Recommendations were directed to community groups,
council, state government agencies and departments, and non-government
agencies.
The jury recommendations outlined integrated solutions to stormwater pollution,

involving the community, council, businesses, visitors, and state government
agencies. They recommended stormwater source control approaches, especially
in the areas of community education, participation and urban design and statutory
planning controls.
The Citizens’ Jury recommendations have been used to develop a new

Integrated Stormwater Management Plan to direct environment levy-funded
priorities, and to establish an ongoing community consultation forum to review the
implementation of environmental initiatives, resulting from the project. The
Citizens’ Jury recommendations and final report to Waverley Council are
available at www.elton.com.au/bronte.htm.
A review of council activities and organisational support

The success of the community participation and deliberative democracy
processes would not have been achieved without significant support at all levels
and across all sections of the council. About one-third of project time and
resources was devoted to working with council staff and stormwater, which
included:
• reviewing the impacts of council policy and practice on stormwater quality in
the catchment
• consulting with staff (particularly operational and front-line staff) about
opportunities for change
• developing an evidence base to inform the community
• engaging cross-factional, multi-level support for the Citizens’ Telepoll and
Citizens’ Jury.
We talked to front-line staff, supervisors, managers, directors and stormwater

across all sections of the council. We conducted a formal survey with all groups,
and had focus group discussions with front-line and operational staff. The
emphasis was on the coordination, planning and integration of different activities
across the council.
This resulted in the establishment of a new cross-departmental and Director-led

Officers Stormwater Working Party, to support continued coordination and
planning of stormwater management initiatives. It also resulted in significant
organisational support for the implementation and integration of project outcomes
into ongoing council initiatives.

Outcomes for the community
The project demonstrated a shift in perspectives across community groups and
precincts, from minority and special interest views, to a position of collective and
general interest.
Extensive pre- and post-test social surveys conducted at the beginning and end
of the project demonstrated improvements in environmental attitudes, knowledge
and self-reported behaviour across the catchment, particularly regarding non-
visible pollutants and urban design and planning issues.
The project broadened community representation and participation in local

environmental issues, extending beyond the traditional participation of
established interest groups, to include ‘non-traditional’ participants in source
control initiatives. These participants included tenants, visitors, businesses,
traditional owners, schools, surf club members, and swimming and sports groups.
The participants also included the range of community volunteers who

participated in ‘hotspot’ photographs, and most particularly, residents who acted
as jurors in the Citizens’ Jury. They will continue to have a consultative role in
ongoing environmental planning.
Outcomes for the council

The project identified new community-endorsed directions for environmental
management policy and practice.
The outcomes of the project contributed to high-level council policy and planning
reviews. It established the terms of reference for a new Stormwater Working
Party and integrated, cross-departmental stormwater planning and resourcing.
The recommendations formed the basis of an Integrated Stormwater

Management Plan. It led to policy and procedure changes in catchment activities.
It acted as the basis for a trial of locality-specific planning across the council for
integrated environmental outcomes.
Lessons learnt
• Sustainable changes in catchment outcomes must involve the community.
The community and the council should work together, reviewing and
changing what they do.
• ‘Community’ needs to be defined more widely than simply rate-paying
residents – it should include all groups who impact on stormwater quality.
• Ordinary citizens, supported by good processes and information, can move
beyond a position of ‘special interest’ to general interest. They can produce
highly relevant and achievable recommendations, and the council should be
willing to support the process and its outcomes.
• An evidence-based approach, finely detailed planning, and clearly
structured processes are critical features of effective community
participation and deliberation.
• Successful community consultation and participation initiatives require
significant and intensive resources and support from the council, the
community, and other key state government and non-government agencies.

• Ambitious community consultation and deliberative processes, such as the
Citizens’ Jury, require high-level organisational and cross-factional political
support.
• These processes can be potentially threatening to officers who currently
manage stormwater issues. Elected representatives may see it as a
potential threat to representative democracy.
• Any specific community engagement process must occur in tandem with,
and be supported by, the council.
• Trans-disciplinary approaches and perspectives from a range of ‘players’,
including community development workers, volunteers and participants,
environmental scientists, engineers, elected representatives and others,
critically enrich the outcomes.
• Ongoing, integrated evaluation of what you are doing, why and how, is
paramount. This should be open, transparent, and informed by all
participants.
Case study 2: A Futures-Based CDC:

Our Ballina – A small, regional, town-based citizens' jury
Source: Lyn Carson & Kath Gelber (2001) Ideas for Community Consultation: A
discussion on principles and procedures for making consultation work, A report
prepared for the NSW Department of Urban Affairs and Planning.
In 1994, Lyn Carson was asked by the Ballina Information Service to conduct a
visioning exercise to gauge community opinions and ideas on development within
the Central Business District. A decision was made to train interested volunteers
as an exercise in community capacity building.
First, general information was distributed to all residents in a mailbox drop. Then
names were randomly selected, and those selected were visited in person by the
coordinators of the project. A venue was booked, catering was organised,
informational material gathered and speakers organised.
Some citizens selected were reluctant to participate – particularly older women

who felt they had little to contribute. On the day of the consultation, fifteen
participants turned up out of an expected twenty. The majority of participants
were older residents, reflecting the ageing population of the area.
After introductions, participants were given time to look at the displays and
develop some initial thoughts about the meeting process and the topic under
discussion. Then a town planner, a lecturer in planning, an employee of the
tourist information centre, a member of a local environmental society, a high
school student and a shire councillor each spoke and were available to answer
questions. During discussion time, residents took the opportunity to air their own
concerns.
This was followed up with small group work, involving modelling with clay,
crayons and other craft materials. This session was very successful and
animated, and developed some innovative suggestions. Each small group
reported back to the group as a whole on the key elements of their discussion,
and agreed on a list of five things they valued and wanted retained in the
planning process, and five things they would like to change. Priorities were voted

on, and volunteers agreed to compile a report for the local Council, the
participants and the media.
In the weeks that followed, participants continued to enquire as to the status of

the report. They said they found the process enjoyable and successful. The
report was used to lobby the local government to act on the group's
recommendations.
In this case, because participants and organisers were volunteers, the costs of
the jury amounted to only $400.
From Department of Planning and Infrastructure, WA and The Jefferson Centre (May 2005)
Citizens’ Jury on Community Engagement and Deliberative Democracy
http://dpi.wa.gov.au/mediaFiles/dialogue_conf_citizensjury.doc

7. Parish Mapping
Places, People and Parish Maps

By Sue Clifford, a Founding Director of Common Ground.
Taken from www.commonground.org.uk
Somewhere between the rainbow and the Internet a place that is important to you is
struggling to maintain its integrity.
Hundreds of small acts of clairvoyance may precede decisions to pull the hedge out,
to build on the allotment, to shut down the factory, to culvert the stream, to cease
running the festival, but they are achieved in separate pigeonholes, and their effect
each upon the other is hardly ever considered. Rarely is their cumulative impact upon
us discussed either.
As for the big decisions, arguments which tend to sway politicians and professionals
rely on quantifying (how many, how much, how big?), questions about quality and
equity which cannot be counted are too difficult, they get marginalised.
How common is it to hear someone say they love a place more because of recent
changes, or feel more a part of it? But these should be our aspirations – not to stop
change, or to seek to protect only the special things, but - to argue for good
surroundings everywhere for all of us. And to work together to achieve more nature,
as much history, rich landscape, fit and fitting buildings, as many peoples, the best
that our age can offer, in any part of the city and country.
Places are of our manufacture. We and nature conspire, actively or unconsciously, to

shift and balance, to accelerate or slow down, to experiment or reiterate. Whatever
happens on the World Wide Web, shards of histories, ecologies, economies and
cultures are heaped and sifted on bits and pieces of land. Many of us understand
ourselves in the world as much through a relationship with a small patch of ground
(or more than one) as with people, indeed it is hard to separate them.
The uniqueness of the grid reference is reinforced by the intersection of culture and
nature, the sympathy and intensity of their interplay make a place, and endow it with
a greater or lesser degree of local distinctiveness.
Local, really local, significance is rehearsed in a subtle dance of detail and patina: we
understand a place in close up, through stories retold, meanings shared,
accumulations of fragments and identities. Our appreciation of it is often only tested
when unsympathetic change threatens, or has already materialised.
But how responsible do we feel for the place and for the changes? All manner of
forces bear down upon every inch of soil, every city stone, and despite the intimacy
of their impact, many seem beyond our understanding, never mind control. How
much courage do we have to summon to stand out against actions we sense will
diminish the feel of the place, render it less significant to us in all its intricacies? We
are heavily implicated for better or worse. The moment of moving from passive
acceptance (‘it's such a shame, but what can you do....?’) to active engagement (‘it
could be so much better, what can we do?’) can come suddenly in reaction, or slowly
as proaction.

Parish Maps
Making a Parish Map is about creating a community expression of values, and about
beginning to assert ideas for involvement, it is about taking the place in your own
hands.
It begins with, and is sustained by, inclusive gestures and encouraging questions.
What is important to you about this place, what does it mean to you? What makes it
different from other places? What do you value here? What do we know, what do we
want to know? How can we share our understandings? What could we change for
the better? Turning each other into experts in this way helps to liberate all kinds of
quiet knowledge, as well as passion, about the place. Making a Parish Map can
inform, inspire, embolden.
So much surveying, measuring, fact gathering, analysis and policy-making leaves out
the very things which make a place significant to the people who know it well. The
great thing about making the map yourselves is that you can choose what to put in
and what to leave out. You need not be corsetted by convention or conscious of
fashion. You can decide on how to gather and discuss, the mix of natural history with
buildings, or legends with livelihoods, the scale at which you wish to work, what
boundaries to use, the materials, the symbols, the pictures, the words, the place
where the map is to hang. You can move at your own pace, be diverted into
appearing at a public inquiry, working to clear the footpaths, acting in the community
play ... because these are actually the point.
It is the feel of the place which ultimately makes us happy to be there, makes us want
to stay, work and play, to engage with it and each other. Social intervention in
continually creating and recreating the particularity of a place is not easy, it reminds
us that communities are driven by tension as much as compassion, that the fluidity of
insiders and outsiders needs constant bridge building, that it is hard work sustaining
enthusiasm and effort. The biggest step is the first one - Parish Maps are a way of
getting started.
Why Map?
Every day people negotiate their way through known and unfamiliar territory using
road, bus and tube maps or the city A–Z. From sketching a meeting place on the
back of an envelope to finding a site on the World Wide Web, maps are used as a
second language. And few of us can resist sinking into an old chart, with portraits of
mountains in soft watercolour, or hachured hills and railways everywhere. The Wind
in the Willows, Treasure Island and many more childhood books and films have lured
us into pinning down our own dreams or draughting real places in our own hand.
And there is a greater attraction. Seeing the map of Australia printed from their point
of view (with north at the bottom, and south at the top), or looking at our familiar atlas
made by adventurers from this small archipelago off the coast of Europe, reminds
one forcibly that whoever makes the map can choose, and enjoy, central position. A
map is an expression of power. It can offer basic information for control: the
Ordnance Survey has its origins in visualising the place by - or was it for - the armed
forces, hence the name.
Western cartography purports to be factual, conveying a true two dimensional picture

of our four/five dimensional world. But, any lover of maps will tell you of the
peculiarities and richnesses of charts of different Western cultures, different
conventions, endearing or infuriating mistakes, the challenges of updating, and of
necessary inaccuracies of representation (if motorways were really as wide as the
map portrays ...). And increasingly maps are made from satellite recording, ground

knowledge is regarded as less precise, less useful, more costly. While we gather
ever more facts about the planet, and share incredible amounts of research around
the globe, at each extension of scale, detailed place-based knowledge gained over
generations is lost, and wisdom mislaid. With each level of abstraction, we feel less
able to argue what we know, and less sure in our valuing of the unquantifiable
smallnesses which can make everyday life a delight and help nature and culture to
interact benignly.
Why Parish?
We are trying to focus on locality, the smallest arena in which life is played out. The
territory to which you feel loyalty, which has meaning to you, about which you share
some knowledge, for which indignance and protectiveness is easily roused, the
neighbourhood of which you have the measure, which in some way helps to shape
you.
This is the local, the actual place, where the reference is reality, indifference is
unusual, detachment is difficult. Here we are somehow entangled, although we may
behave thoughtlessly, responsibility tries to surface. It is here that values and facts
act upon each other and are passed on by us to create wisdom about nature, about
living, dying and remembering. And more prosaically, it is where 'strategy' and 'policy'
are tested to breaking point.
Y filltir sgwar, bro and cynefin: the Welsh have clung on to ideas which embody more
than physical locality – they describe deeply felt ties of familiarity, identification and
belonging. 'Heimat' in German also carries these meanings. Why have the English
never absorbed a word for this, and yet have such strong attachments to places?
It is in this sense of a self-defined small territory, that Common Ground has offered
the word parish, implying people and place together, to keep us grounded. But the
origins and other uses of the word are relevant and have proved redolent starting
points too.
The ecclesiastical parish has been the measure of the English landscape since
Anglo-Saxon times. Boundaries, some dating back more than a thousand years, are
often still traceable; here, history marches with nature and each is the richer for the
discourse. This tracery may be tangible in the city as the curving line of a street, or in
the country as the double bank and ditch dancing with butterflies. For although
dynamism is an identifying feature of nature, broad continuity creates the conditions
for the changes to build each on the other, species to diversify, ecosystems to
mature.
The civil parish emerged in the 1890s as the smallest theatre of democracy. Much
has changed since then: boundaries have been reworked, and in the city the ward
does not have the same ring, community councils in Wales and Scotland encompass
but do not imply territory. More of us have the right to vote, yet less of us are voting.
Desperation for better decisions parallels cynicism for politicians. Weaving a 21st
century environment and society has to be about constructing a more participative
and pliable democracy too.
Parish Maps have been promoted by Common Ground as a lively way of socially
exploring and demonstrating what people value in their own place, and as a means
to generating and liberating enthusiasms for doing something.
Knowing your place, taking some active part in its upkeep, passing on wisdom, being
open to ideas, people, development, change but in sympathy with nature and culture

which have brought it this far, will open the doors of dissent. But conversation,
tolerance and the passing on of memories, are civil sing forces. Whatever the forms
of knowledge we shall need for the next millennium, humanity and imagination must
take a high priority in organising them.
In making a Parish Map you can come together to hold the frame where you want it
to be, you can throw light on the things which are important to you, and you may find
courage to speak with passion about why all this matters.
The rainbow is as 'virtual' as anything yet imagined by the software wizards, and yet
in touching the ground it briefly holds both the intangible and the physical together, it
frames, focuses and reminds us of the enchantment and reality of our small world.
Case studies of Parish Mapping projects

Case studies 1 and 2 taken from Local Landscapes:
www.monmouthshiregreenweb.co.uk/locallandscapes/casestudies.html
Case study 1: Wye Valley Views – using photography

In 2001 the Wye Valley AONB were preparing their Management Plan and were
looking for ways to involve the local Community and Parish Councils. They invited
the 40 local councils to take photographs showing what they value about living in
the AONB. Each council nominated a local coordinator and were provided with a
disposable camera to photograph what they valued about their area. The AONB
unit processed over 1000 photographs and from these created a montage in the
shape of the AONB. The local coordinators also filled in a questionnaire that
asked them to identify local concerns/issues and the changes that had occurred
in the last 10 years and 30 years. The completed jigsaw of the AONB travelled
around the area at 14 public meetings in 2002. It provided a very useful
discussion point, allowing local issues and concerns to influence the development
of the new Management Plan for the Wye Valley AONB.
Case study 2: West Sussex Millennium Maps – creating community maps

West Sussex County Council was looking for ways to celebrate the Millennium
that would get local people involved. They decided on the idea of creating Parish
Maps, and this proved popular, as 87 local groups began making maps of their
own localities. The maps are as varied as their makers – some record historic
features and happenings, others record field names and locations of interesting
flora and fauna. Some areas wanted to record the vulnerability of their areas to
incursions by the sea, or to modern development. To all of the parishes, the
creation of their map was a statement of their own uniqueness, and people felt
that their area was important in a new way. A few parishes developed the project
further to revive the ancient practice of 'beating the bounds', walking right around
the boundary of their parish once a year. These events were combined with local
lunches and open-air church services. Others have evolved into further local
projects - one group has started an oral history project, another is preparing a
biodiversity map and trail and in another village an arts society has been started
as a result of working on the Parish map. Most map-making groups had up to 20
members, ranging in age from play groups to elderly people, and everyone had
something to contribute. More than 2500 volunteers have been involved in the
project throughout the County and 100 maps have been made.
Case study 3: Aveton Gifford Mapping Project

Taken from: England in Particular
www.england-in-particular.info/parishmaps/m-select.html

Aveton Gifford villagers awoke on Thursday morning to the strange sound of
silence – the bypass had been opened the day before and the high street was
once more theirs. A great party with trestle tables and large amounts of food
thoroughly reclaimed the street. Reinvigorated, the Parish Council approached
their District Council to make a leaflet for them, to encourage people to explore
the place on foot.
The South Hams Environment Service suggested instead that the residents make
a Parish Map for themselves and that the council would help by printing it: ’in the
process it is hoped that local people will create far more than a map – but shall
discover the place for themselves and highlight some of the features they would
like to conserve or improve, turning community art into community action’.
At a video show of the street party, a core group was formed who encouraged
people to gather together their feelings on wild life, history, buildings, trees and
more.
‘What's special about Aveton Gifford?’ asked artist Sally Tarrant faced with a
class of 8 to 10 year old pupils from the school. ‘Tell me what you like, what you
don't like and why’. With that she and two members of the Environment Service
left the classroom each led by a small group of excited and intrigued youngsters.
The story continues: ‘As we were taken around, we learnt which trees were
important. The “face tree” had a face on its bark, and its low bending limbs were
easily climbed. Pampas grass would hide you from invading tribes and, in the
middle of the stream, elvers could be found clinging like ribbons around a pebble,
yet disappearing at a touch. Led by our guides, we found hollow hedgerow trees
where you could lose your arm right up to the shoulder, drain covers and paving
slabs which made patterns of flowers and diamonds, and a collection of derelict
barns which were haunted. Certainly ghostly giggles could be heard as soon as
we got near! Quick-sighted and sharply observant, the children could teach many
a long-standing resident to see the village with new eyes’.
Elsewhere other research parties wandered the parish. Many evening jaunts
ended up in the pub, the conversations echoed around the place. They ran a
photographic workshop resulting in an exhibition with a slide show of rare archive
photos – it prompted lots of memories.
Mike Glanville, a local artist took on the hard work of bringing together the map,
which the South Hams District Council printed. They have revived Beating the
Bounds. The local baker reinvented Rammalation biscuits, which were customary
fare on Rogation Sunday, by making the 'Aveton Gifford Bun' and special ale –
Ganging Beer – was brewed.
Since then they have produced illustrated walks leaflets and sales of these and
prints of the map are helping to restore buildings of interest in the village for
public use. the map, which is acrylic on paper, has been printed as posters, which
have sold well, both locally and abroad.

8. Open Space Technology
Taken from www.openspaceworld.org
What is Open Space Technology?

Open Space Technology is one way to enable all kinds of people, in any kind of
organisation, to create inspired meetings and events. Over the last 20+ years, it has
also become clear that opening space, as an intentional leadership practice, can
create inspired organisations, where ordinary people work together to create
extraordinary results with regularity.
In Open Space meetings, events and organisations, participants create and manage
their own agenda of parallel working sessions around a central theme of strategic
importance, such as: What is the strategy, group, organisation or community that all
stakeholders can support and work together to create?
With groups of 5 to 2000+ people – working in one-day workshops, three-day

conferences, or the regular weekly staff meeting – the common result is a powerful,
effective connecting and strengthening of what's already happening in the
organisation: planning and action, learning and doing, passion and responsibility,
participation and performance.
When and why?

Open Space works best when the work to be done is complex, the people and ideas
involved are diverse, the passion for resolution (and potential for conflict) are high,
and the time to get it done was yesterday. It's been called passion bounded by
responsibility, the energy of a good coffee break, intentional self-organisation, spirit
at work, chaos and creativity, evolution in organisation, and a simple, powerful way to
get people and organisations moving – when and where it's needed most.
And, while Open Space is known for its apparent lack of structure and welcoming of
surprises, it turns out that the Open Space meeting or organisation is actually very
structured – but that structure is so perfectly fit to the people and the work at hand,
that it goes unnoticed in its proper role of supporting (not blocking) best work. In fact,
the stories and workplans woven in Open Space are generally more complex, more
robust, more durable – and can move a great deal faster than expert- or
management-driven designs.
What will happen?

We never know exactly what will happen when we open the space for people to do
their most important work, but we can guarantee these results when any group gets
into Open Space:
• All of the issues that are MOST important to the participants will be raised.
• All of the issues raised will be addressed by those participants most qualified
and capable of getting something done on each of them.
• In a time as short as one or two days, all of the most important ideas,
discussion, data, recommendations, conclusions, questions for further study,
and plans for immediate action will be documented in one comprehensive
report – finished, printed and in the hands of participants when they leave.
• When appropriate, and time is allowed for it, the total contents of this report
document can be focused and prioritised in a matter of a few hours, even
with very large groups (100s).

• After an event, all of these results can be made available to an entire
organisation or community within days of the event, so the conversation can
invite every stakeholder into implementation – right now.
• AND ... results like these can be planned and implemented faster than any
other kind of so-called ‘large-group intervention’. It is literally possible to
accomplish in days and weeks what some other approaches take months
and years to do.
The good news, and the bad news, is that it works. Good news because it gets
people and work moving, bad news because that may mean lots of things are going
to be different than before. Wanted things can appear, unwanted things disappear,
and sometime vice versa – but that's how life is. In short, then, Open Space brings
life back to organisation and organisations back to life.
Outcomes of Open Space Technology

Taken from: URP Toolbox
www3.secure.griffith.edu.au/03/toolbox/display_tool.php?pk1=1
The Open Space Technology event puts people of like interests in touch with one
another, allows people to exchange views and to understand a wider range of
viewpoints, and provides a sense of empowerment to shape the world towards the
kind of future the participants might desire.
Strengths
• Appropriate for use where there is a need for new ideas and the prevailing
climate is characterised by uncertainty, ambiguity and a low level of trust.
• Because there are a limited set of rules, the process is driven by the
participants.
• Absence of 'control' of the process means participants must be prepared to
go where the process takes them.
• Includes immediate summary and discussion.
• Provides a structure by giving participants opportunities and responsibilities
to create a valuable product or an experience.
Special consideration/weaknesses
• Facilities should be flexible to accommodate variable group sizes.
• A powerful theme or vision statement is needed to generate topics.
• A large number of participants are involved in the process (up to 500).
• The most important issues can sometimes be lost in the discussion.
• It can sometimes be difficult to get accurate records of results.
Case studies of Open Space
Case study 1:
The Victoria Urban Development Agreement Aboriginal engagement
strategy

From www.chriscorrigan.com This website contains lots of other longer case
studies chiefly working with First Nation peoples, includes some environmental
issues, e.g. fisheries.
In 2005 the federal, provincial, and municipal governments in Victoria, British

Columbia, Canada came together to create an Urban Development Agreement to
address inner city issues including poverty and homelessness. To engage with
the urban Aboriginal community we used an appreciative frame to tap and build
on assets and we implemented it using Technology of Participation’s focused
conversations, Open Space, and World Café These methodologies were chosen
to serve four areas of practice: opening – cracking the veneer for what really
matters; inviting – connecting people and drawing them in to the process; holding
– creating the conditions for emergence; and grounding – aligning resources, and
creating and supporting action.
To open, we invited our government clients to invest their hearts, asking, ‘why
does this engagement with the Aboriginal community matter to you personally?’
We also asked members of the community what was most important to them, and
as a result we built a substantial amount of Coast Salish protocol and process
into our work.
To invite, we contacted people one on one, asking how does the community want
to be engaged? Using that information we structured focused conversations to
explore economic, physical and environmental, and social issues. The first day,
after a huge investment in inviting, two people showed up. But these people were
connectors, advocates for street people, with deep, deep connections in the
homeless community. The conversations started with objective questions: ‘What
are the economic issues?’ then reflective questions: ‘Can you tell me some
stories about this?’ followed by interpretive questions: ‘What might happen to
change this?’ and then decisional questions: ‘If we were to use this process to
affect things, what will we do?’ The outcome was a list of priorities, made from the
heart. One idea was ‘Cedar Village’, a cultural precinct like a China Town, a
living community with economic activity, health centres, and social gathering
places.
On the second day of focused conversations, six people who talked about
traditional uses of food, growing food in community plots, harvesting wild foods
and importing them from all over Vancouver Island into Victoria. On the third day
we had ten people, and the government sponsors realised that we now had a
cadre of community leaders with whom they had not previously worked and who
had amazing ideas and commitment. The number one change we achieved was
activating previously untapped local leadership.
The practice of holding – creating and maintaining the conditions of emergence –

continued as the invitation went out for a community feast and gathering, a
cultural tradition. The gathering, which lasted two days, featured an open space
on the first day, with 100 people participating through the day. The community
created its agenda and talked about its issues, moving into planning around
issues such as the Cedar Village concept.
The last day, we grounded the work with a world café, asking the 45 community
services and homeless folks who came, ‘How do we make sure that this work
stays off the shelf and that stuff happens?’ In the end, a small committee of
people volunteered to ensure that ideas would stay alive.

When the Urban Development Agreement is been signed, it will begin a five year
process of getting ‘stuff’ done. Our work contributed a few high impact, emergent
ideas aimed at addressing complex issues: Totem City, food production, local
governance conversations, and a few other tangible, community driven,
community owned projects supported by many levels of government. The
conversation continues in Victoria within the community and with government
partners.
Case study 2:
Casuarina Project 2001 Community Conference & 2002 Community
Gathering
Taken from: Victorian Local Government Association website
www.vlgaconsultation.org.au/openspace.shtml
The Casuarina Project is Surf Coast Shire's community capacity-building

program. The Casuarina Project was developed by Council's Rural Development
Committee to assist local people develop skills which enable them to commence,
or continue to be involved in, community activities. The program includes skills
such as facilitation and group processes, using the media, resourcing projects,
team building, project management and group dynamics. The Casuarina Project
involves eleven days of training including two weekends and seven Friday
sessions. Participants agree to work on a community project as part of the
Casuarina Project.
Project Aims:
Conducting an open space event as part of the Casuarina Project has a number
of aims including:
1. Firstly, participants are able to see in action the facilitation process used in
'Open Space Technology' as designed by Harrison Owen. This is one
facilitation technique being demonstrated and practised as part of the
Casuarina Project. So the aim of including the open space event is to
demonstrate and learn from the way open space operates as a technique.
2. Secondly, participants can utilise the open space conference as an
opportunity to conduct workshops and practise skills they have been
learning in facilitation and discussion techniques. Conducting workshops
also provides them with an opportunity to gather community input and
feedback about the community project ideas that they are working on as
part of the Casuarina Project.
3. Thirdly, participants utilise the weekend event as a team building live-in
program.
Consultation aim:
From a local government point of view, the open space event is used as a means
of generating data and identifying issues of importance to local communities
within the municipality. In both events, the consultation topic was based around
the theme of ‘building dynamic communities – the issues and opportunities’.
While the open space event is promoted and open to all residents/ratepayers of
the Surf Coast Shire, the event actually tends to attract people from the township
where the event is based, and therefore the data generated generally provides an
insight into that local community. Using Open Space Technology encourages
people to conduct discussions around issues that they are passionate about, and
this format is relevant where community issues are being sought.

What happened?
In 2001, approximately 60 people attended a two-day conference held at Deans
Marsh a small rural community in the foothills of the Otways.
In 2002, approximately 55 people attended a one-day community gathering in

Anglesea.
Target population
Members of the Surf Coast community who are interested in, and passionate
about, their local community. It's a very general invitation and distributed broadly
across the municipality. Casuarina Project participants are also encouraged to
promote the event in their local community and through their own community
networks.
Level of participation
The Open Space Technology process/philosophy clearly puts the responsibility
for participation and engagement on the individual – ‘whoever comes are the right
people’. So the success of the event should never be measured by how many
people attended.
Participation is also whatever the participants make it. Open Space Technology
has a very adult style about it, and enables people to feel free to participate in
many ways/forms including as a facilitator of a discussion, a bee buzzing around
various discussion groups, or as a butterfly, quietly observing the proceedings.
But the rules of open space encourage and require positive contribution from
participants.
Negatives
Traditionally open space events are held over two-three days. This can be difficult
for local government staff and community members. The good thing is that they
also work very well in a one-day format.
Unless the topic is particularly precise and specific, the Open Space Technology
format doesn't necessarily provide a basis on which to make decisions about
particular issues, but they can generate and provide insight into the feelings
within the community about broad issues. I haven't tried using Open Space
Technology with a specific issue or for a specific decision which needs to be
made i.e. about a local project but I guess you could.
Publicly promoting open space events can be a challenge because people are
not sure of what they will be letting themselves in for and therefore they tend to
be a little suspicious or unsure of the term 'open space'. Some people may be
more attracted to the process than the topic and attend to witness 'open space'
rather than participate in the discussion.
Positives
Long-term feedback suggests that the open space event held in Deans Marsh
had a galvanising effect on the local community. Open space does have the
ability to really open up dialogue in communities.
Open Space Technology is very empowering and refreshing for community

members to be able to have their say on community issues in an open and very
democratic style. Everyone is as equally able to facilitate a discussion on their
choice of topic.

The process engages people about who's responsible for making things happen,
and for a local government this can be a very attractive component of the Open
Space Technology. It encourages participants to think that they are equally
responsible for their own community, and that it's not just the council who needs
to do x, y, z. It helps to shift the way people think about the burden of
responsibility a little bit, including, for example, who's responsible for creating
vibrant communities.
Open space is a great way of building a sense of community and refreshing

people who think they are the only ones who care. There is a real sense that
individuals are revitalised when they get together with a group of other people
who also care about their local community.

9. Photovoice
From www.photovoice.com/method/index.html
The Photovoice concept was developed by Caroline C. Wang and Mary Ann Burris.
The full article contains more detail about the theoretical underpinnings of
Photovoice.
Photovoice is a method that enables people to define for themselves and others,
including policy makers, what is worth remembering and what needs to be changed.
Caroline Wang
Goals
Photovoice has three main goals:
• to enable people to record and reflect their community's strengths and
concerns
• to promote critical dialogue and knowledge about personal and community
issues through large and small group discussions of photographs
• to reach policy makers.
Photovoice is highly flexible and can be adapted to specific participatory goals (such
as needs assessment, asset mapping, and evaluation), different groups and
communities, and distinct policy and public health issues.
Stages
The stages of Photovoice include:
• conceptualising the problem
• defining broader goals and objectives
• recruiting policy makers as the audience for photovoice findings
• training the trainers
• conducting photovoice training
• devising the initial theme/s for taking pictures
• taking pictures
• facilitating group discussion
• critical reflection and dialogue
o selecting photographs for discussion
o contextualising and storytelling
o codifying issues, themes, and theories
• documenting the stories
• conducting the formative evaluation
• reaching policy makers, donors, media, researchers, and others who may be
mobilised to create change
• conducting participatory evaluation of policy and program implementation.
Community training and process

The first photovoice training begins with a discussion of cameras, ethics, and power;
ways of seeing photographs; and a philosophy of giving photographs back to
community members as a way of expression appreciation, respect, or camaraderie.
The curriculum may then move to address mechanical aspects of camera use.
Community people using photovoice engage in a three-stage process that provides

the foundation for analysing the pictures they have taken:
• Selecting – choosing those photographs that most accurately reflect the
community's concerns and assets
The participatory approach dictates this first stage. So that people can lead
the discussion, it is they who choose the photographs. They select
photographs they considered most significant, or simply like best, from each
roll of film they had taken.
• Contextualising – telling stories about what the photographs mean
The participatory approach also generates the second stage, contextualising
or storytelling. This occurs in the process of group discussion, suggested by
the acronym VOICE, voicing our individual and collective experience.
Photographs alone, considered outside the context of their own voices and
stories, would contradict the essence of photovoice. People describe the
meaning of their images in small and large group discussions.
• Codifying – identifying the issues, themes, or theories that emerge
The participatory approach gives multiple meanings to singular images and
thus frames the third stage, codifying. In this stage, participants may identify
three types of dimensions that arise from the dialogue process: issues,
themes, or theories.
They may codify issues when the concerns targeted for action are pragmatic,
immediate, and tangible. This is the most direct application of the analysis. They may
also codify themes and patterns, or develop theories that are grounded in data that
have been systematically gathered and analysed in collective discussion.
Conclusion
Photovoice turns on involving people in defining issues. Such an approach avoids the
distortion of fitting data into a predetermined paradigm; through it we hear and
understand how people make meaning themselves, or construct what matters to
them. Photovoice, to paraphrase Glik, Gordon, Ward, Kouame, and Guessan, is not
simply the shuffling of information around, but entails people reflecting on their own
community portraits and voices and on what questions can be linked into more
general constructs or can be seen to be interrelated. It is a method that enables
people to define for themselves and others, including policy makers, what is worth
remembering and what needs to be changed.
Strengths
• provides pictorial evidence of community issues (a picture being worth a
thousand words)
• provides an alternative means of expression which may help include those
who are more visual than literate
• allows detailed information to be collected from individual participants
• provides a snapshot of an area or issue from which to develop indicators and
to gauge changes/responses
• can easily be used in the media (print/television/interactive A/V technologies).
Special considerations/weaknesses

• can be costly, e.g. cost of disposable cameras, developing film
• requires staffing and the coordination of participants
• if photos are pasted onto a larger poster type presentation, can be difficult to
store and protect (may need photocopies taken for storage/distribution).
Examples of Photovoice projects
Example 1: Photovoice — telling stories with pictures

From Land and Water Australia River and Riparian Lands Management
Newsletter Edition 30 2006 www.rivers.gov.au/acrobat/riprap30_1.pdf
How people think and feel about something relates to how they behave in relation
to it. The Native Vegetation & Biodiversity project in the Traprock region of south-
east Queensland used an innovative method called ‘Photovoice’ to understand
some of the psychological and social factors that influence landholders’
decisions. It is always easier to tell a story with pictures, and this method is also
useful in capturing the thoughts of people who may not normally be verbally
expressive but have important things to say.
Participants used a disposable camera to take pictures on their properties and

were given ‘framing’ questions’ to provide focus for the subjects of photos.
Researchers had a taped conversation with participants to discuss particularly
meaningful photos that communicated a significant theme or story. Participants
then attended a focus group to share photos and perspectives related to each
framing question, and put together a collection of photos that best represented
the issues from a regional perspective. Analyses of the dialogue and pictures
shed light on place characteristics related to the land that were implied in
participants’ land management, for example, history, belonging, value, identity
and commitment. Responses were clustered around the themes of Biodiversity’,
‘Sustainable Production’ and ‘Sense of place’, as well as the relationships
between people and places.
Example 2: Photovoice Project in Yunnan Great Rivers Area, The Nature

Conservancy, Yunnan, China
In Yunnan, China, The Nature Conservancy adapted the Photovoice
methodology to promote a participatory approach to environmental health. This
Ford Foundation-supported project involved 100 villagers in northwestern Yunnan
to inform the Yunnan Great Rivers Project. The Nature Conservancy and the
Chinese government applied photovoice as an assessment approach to help
create and protect a system of national parks on 6.5 million acres of
environmentally sensitive land.
The reason that the Yunnan Women's project was so fruitful was that it provided
a way for the women themselves to express what they need most. In other words,
this methodology set in place a frame that turned the objects of the study into the
doers.
(Wang Shao Xian,Professor and Chair Emerita, Demography,Beijing Medical University)
Example 3: Mapping Assets and Building Community Ties: Photovoice

Involving Flint Youth, Adults, and Policy Makers
From paper delivered at the 6th Rural National Health Conference, Ann Larson,
Combined Universities Centre for Rural Health; Elsie Mitchell and Marisa Gilles,
Gascoyne Public Health Unit

http://www.nrha.net.au/nrhapublic/publicdocs/conferences/6thnrhc/larsonpaper.htm
In collaboration with the Flint Neighborhood Violence Prevention Collaborative,

three groups of participants – youth, adults and policy makers – are using
photovoice as a tool to document and discuss their interpretations of community
health in this Charles Stewart Mott Foundation-supported project known as ‘Flint
Photovoice’.
To ensure that participants' policy and program recommendations can be carried

out, policy makers are typically involved at the outset of all photovoice projects.
Flint Photovoice marks the first time that policy makers are also participating in
taking pictures, telling stories, and contrasting their expertise and
recommendations with people at the grassroots.
Looking, listening and learning from young people through photographs: a

photovoice project with young Aboriginal people in Carnarvon, Western
Australia
The method used to engage young Aboriginal people to discuss their sexual
health is called photovoice. It is a participatory action research method. As far as
we know, this is the first time photovoice has been used in Australia.
To obtain community involvement and to maximise the opportunities for

organisations to benefit from the project, we formed an Aboriginal Community
Reference Group, comprised of representatives of key community-controlled
organisations and invited individuals with a longstanding interest in youth health
issues. This group approved the concept of photovoice, assisted in identifying
interested young people and gave guidance in the selection of photographs for
the exhibition. In the future this group will reconvene to discuss how to address
the issues raised by young people and how to continue to involve young people
in determining priorities for policy and programs.
Through the summer of 1999-2000, young Aboriginal people were recruited to

take photographs with disposable cameras provided by the project. The young
people were asked to:
take pictures that show what young people in Carnarvon think about HIV. Your
pictures should show whether or not HIV is important to young people; in what
ways are Carnarvon Aboriginal youth protected from HIV; and what are the
reasons young people may be at risk.
The young people returned the cameras and attended a taped interview at which
they explained why they took each photograph. They also selected photographs
they wanted displayed at an exhibition. At the interviews, photographers were
asked to group their photographs in themes. They were then asked to tell the
interviewer about each photograph in each group. Probes and prompts were be
used to explore how the young person saw particular subject matter related to
HIV. On occasion the interviewer would probe to clarify the young person’s own
values regarding the subject matter, such as drinking in public places or HIV
education messages. The photographs nominated by the photographers, along
with related text from the interviews, were displayed at a public exhibition in
Carnarvon on 25–27 October 2000. The exhibition was held in a community hall.
Approximately 100 people visited the exhibition, with about 60 present for the
opening. Photographs were displayed in themes: services, activities with friends,
graffiti and vandalism, sexual health, school, and outdoor activities. Comments in

the visitors book were very positive. Most adults reflected that they found young
people’s views ‘thought-provoking’ and supported more opportunities for young
people to have ‘a voice in their community’. There are plans to display the exhibit
in other venues in Carnarvon and surrounding areas.
In Carnarvon we found photovoice to be a powerful tool to engage young

Aboriginal people in public health issues. There were challenges in implementing
the project. However, in this case, the winning solution was the involvement of an
Aboriginal health promotion officer who combined knowledge of the community
with an unswerving commitment to learning from young people rather than
imposing her views on them.
An additional strength of photovoice, beyond that of conventional qualitative

research methods, is the public display of the photographs and text. As we have
mentioned, we do not yet know if the exhibition will have a direct bearing on
young peoples’ interest in public health. For the wider community and for the
Public Health Unit and other services, the exhibit has created a window of
opportunity to challenge them to look, listen and learn from young people instead
of deciding what is best for them from afar.

10. Participatory Learning and Action Approaches
Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) is an umbrella term for a range of similar
approaches and methodologies, including Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA), Rapid
Rural Appraisal (RRA), Participatory Learning Methods (PALM), Participatory Action
Research (PAR), Farming Systems Research (FSR) and many others. The common
theme to all these approaches is the full participation of people in the processes of
learning about their needs and opportunities, and in the action required to address
them.
Participatory approaches offer a creative approach to investigating issues of concern

to people, and to planning, implementing, and evaluating development activities.
They challenge prevailing biases and preconceptions about people's knowledge. The
methods used range from visualisation, to interviewing and group work. The common
theme is the promotion of interactive learning, shared knowledge, and flexible, yet
structured analysis. These methods have proven valuable in a wide range of sectors
and situations, in both the North and South. Participatory approaches can also bring
together different disciplines, such as agriculture, health and community
development, to enable an integrated vision of livelihoods and well-being. They offer
opportunities for mobilising local people for joint action.
Here we consider two examples of PLA: Participatory Rural Appraisal and Reflect.
A) Participatory Rural Appraisal

From www.worldbank.org/wbi/sourcebook/sba104.htm
Participatory rural appraisal (PRA) is a label given to a growing family of participatory

approaches and methods that emphasise local knowledge and enable local people to
make their own appraisal, analysis, and plans. PRA uses group animation and
exercises to facilitate information sharing, analysis, and action among stakeholders.
Although originally developed for use in rural areas, PRA has been employed
successfully in a variety of settings. The purpose of PRA is to enable development
practitioners, government officials, and local people to work together to plan context
appropriate programs.
Participatory appraisal evolved from rapid rural appraisal - a set of informal

techniques used by development practitioners in rural areas to collect and analyse
data. Rapid rural appraisal developed in the 1970s and 1980s in response to the
perceived problems of outsiders missing or miscommunicating with local people in
the context of development work. In PRA, data collection and analysis are
undertaken by local people, with outsiders facilitating rather than controlling. PRA is
an approach for shared learning between local people and outsiders, but the term is
somewhat misleading. PRA techniques are equally applicable in urban settings and
are not limited to assessment only. The same approach can be employed at every
stage of the project cycle and in country economic and sector work.
Key tenets of PRA

• Participation. Local people's input into PRA activities is essential to its value
as a research and planning method and as a means for diffusing the
participatory approach to development.
• Teamwork. To the extent that the validity of PRA data relies on informal
interaction and brainstorming among those involved, it is best done by a team

that includes local people with perspective and knowledge of the area's
conditions, traditions, and social structure and either nationals or expatriates
with a complementary mix of disciplinary backgrounds and experience. A well
balanced team will represent the diversity of socio-economic, cultural, gender,
and generational perspectives.
• Flexibility. PRA does not provide blueprints for its practitioners. The
combination of techniques that is appropriate in a particular development
context will be determined by such variables as the size and skill mix of the
PRA team, the time and resources available, and the topic and location of the
work.
• Optimal ignorance. To be efficient in terms of both time and money, PRA
work intends to gather just enough information to make the necessary
recommendations and decisions.
• Triangulation. PRA works with qualitative data. To ensure that information is
valid and reliable, PRA teams follow the rule of thumb that at least three
sources must be consulted or techniques must be used to investigate the
same topics.
Some PRA tools

PRA is an exercise in communication and transfer of knowledge. Regardless of
whether it is carried out as part of project identification or appraisal or as part of
country economic and sector work, the learning by doing and teamwork spirit of PRA
requires transparent procedures. For that reason, a series of open meetings (an
initial open meeting, final meeting, and follow up meeting) generally frame the
sequence of PRA activities.
Other tools common in PRA are:

• semi-structured interviewing
• focus-group discussions
• preference ranking
• mapping and modelling
• seasonal and historical diagramming.
Organising PRA
A typical PRA activity involves a team of people working for two to three weeks on
workshop discussions, analyses, and fieldwork. Several organisational aspects
should be considered:
• Logistical arrangements should consider nearby accommodations,
arrangements for lunch for fieldwork days, sufficient vehicles, portable
computers, funds to purchase refreshments for community meetings during
the PRA, and supplies such as flip chart paper and markers.
• Training of team members may be required, particularly if the PRA has the
second objective of training in addition to data collection.
• PRA results are influenced by the length of time allowed to conduct the
exercise, scheduling and assignment of report writing, and critical analysis of
all data, conclusions, and recommendations.
• A PRA covering relatively few topics in a small area (perhaps two to four
communities) should take between ten days and four weeks, but a PRA with a

wider scope over a larger area can take several months. Allow five days for
an introductory workshop if training is involved.
• Reports are best written immediately after the fieldwork period, based on
notes from PRA team members. A preliminary report should be available
within a week or so of the fieldwork, and the final report should be made
available to all participants and the local institutions that were involved.
Sequence of techniques
Mapping and modelling are good techniques to start with because they involve
several people, stimulate much discussion and enthusiasm, provide the PRA team
with an overview of the area, and deal with non-controversial information. Maps and
models may lead to transect walks, perhaps accompanied by some of the people
who have constructed the map.
The current situation can be shown using maps and models, but subsequent
seasonal and historical diagramming exercises can reveal changes and trends,
throughout a single year or over several years. Preference ranking is a good
icebreaker at the beginning of a group interview and helps focus the discussion.
Later, individual interviews can follow up on the different preferences among the
group members and the reasons for these differences.
PRA case study

From www.participatory-london.org.uk/news.htm
The NX Project was a partnership between a number of local organisations

(Magpie, GAP Research, the Deptford Discovery Team, Milton Court
Employment Resource Centre, and Goldsmiths College). The aims of the NX
Project were to use a community development approach to regeneration,
focusing on the process rather than outcomes. Also to use the process of
involvement to provide local people with training and experience in the kinds of
skills they would need in an area which would be hosting more regeneration
initiatives. We hoped to involve local people at every stage of the project and
decided early on to make use of participative approaches as we knew that we
need to make our work open, accessible and, above all, fun!
Involving local people

We began by sending out a postcard to every household in our target area, which
said NEW IDEAS FOR NEW CROSS – LETS DO IT DIFFERENTLY. The
postcard invited local people to attend an introductory meeting. From this we built
a core group of trainees, plus a pool of occasional volunteers. The trainees were
offered 3 hours training a week in community research and project development,
over three terms, plus additional basic skills support as required. They then met
together on a further day to carry out practical work.
There were a number of issues that needed to be addressed throughout the

training program:
• Community Research doesn't mean a great deal to many people, and it
was not immediately clear to trainees and potential trainees about the
progression or relevance of the topic – this made it more difficult to recruit.
• We had designed the course to be flexible & responsive – this meant it
was hard to accredit.
• The trainees were immediately required to carry out ‘real’ research – there
was little opportunity for them to practice on exercises.

• The training was based in a building with no disabled access – therefore
people with disabilities were excluded.
• The training program we offered did not attract young people – we
addressed this by carrying out a discrete piece of work with local youth
organisations, training a group of young people to undertake their own
research.
• Although we had a large childcare budget, there is a lack of childcare
available locally, and this caused problems.
• The greatest success of the training program was that, early on, the
trainees chose to become more involved in the NX project as a whole.
They joined the Work Group (in effect the project steering group) and
engaged in prioritising the work program, and planning the training
program and other activities. The majority of those trainees and
volunteers have now gone on to paid employment, either in the Get Set
for Citizenship projects, or through New Cross Gate New Deal for
Communities.
We also ran a series of monthly public meetings, that we called the NX Forums
which aimed to reach out to local residents, schools, community groups,
businesses and agencies. We aimed to make these Forums as unlike a public
meeting as we could, as we recognised that getting local people out on a cold
evening to a draughty church hall wasn't working. The NX Forums were open
events hosted by different local organisations at different venues (giving host
organisations an opportunity to showcase their own work), at different times of
day, days of week, and with different themes. The Forums tended to be based
around a series of participative activities, and used a variety of props and tools (of
which more in the next section ...).
Some examples of NX Forums are:

• an evening forum in a local motor workshop project which works with
teenagers
• an after-school session in the playground of a local primary school
• a number of fun days in local parks – the Friendly Gardens Fun Day
included a dog show, a nature walk, and a debate in a skating circle
• a Friday night party organised by young people, at which attendees had to
complete a number of tasks before gaining entrance to the party.
We found that we were able to make each event unique by combining venues
with appropriate props and activities. The attendance at Forums ranged from 20
people to over 200.
Using participative approaches

We made a decision at an early stage to provide training in participative tools and
techniques, as well as the more formal research methodologies. The trainees
wholeheartedly agreed with the principle that the research we would carry out in
our local area should be interesting and fun for those who take part in it, rather
than draining information from them.
Participative appraisal is an approach to research that has been used in

developing countries to enable local people to obtain, share and analyse
knowledge of their life and conditions in order to plan and act according to that

knowledge. PRA recognises that ‘people have a greater capacity to map, model,
quantify, estimate, rank, score and diagram than outsiders have generally
supposed them capable of’.
The skills underpinning effective participatory appraisal are good facilitation and
communication skills, listening, asking open-ended questions, encouraging and
enabling people to express themselves. Participative appraisal also uses
methods which anyone can do, and encourages people to innovate and invent
their own techniques. This is what we focused our training program on.
The use of participative approaches really engaged the interest of local people.
Once we took the NX Project "on the road" through a series of monthly public
events (the NX Forums), the use of participative approaches helped us to
overcome ‘meeting’ issues (hierarchies, whose agenda?, talking shops etc) and
enabled a wide diversity of people to contribute. Participation also addressed the
‘fear of research’ (is this representative, is our sample right, the tendency to keep
data to oneself until the end of a project) and, in a number of circumstances, led
to local people and organisations being inspired to take action.
The participative tools that we found particularly useful were:

• Problem wall / solution tree: one of the trainees was inspired by a picture
in a textbook to build an 8' x 8' wooden tree. This is now in the Museum of
London Collecting 2000 exhibition, and we have built a new one, plus a
series of smaller desk top trees (bonsais!)
• Drawing and building maps of our area: what it's like now, future maps,
mobility maps etc. For one event, local nurseries brought along a large
model made of cardboard boxes of what the children valued in the area
and what they would like to see in the future (a zoo, so that they could
wave to the giraffes!)
• Walking, talking and taking photos: the trainees and volunteers spent a
great deal of time walking around New Cross and Deptford with local
people, and mounted exhibitions of photographs of ‘problems and
opportunities’. We got through large amounts of coloured dots and post it
notes when we took these exhibitions out.
• New tools: recognising the value of the visual and the innovative, the
trainees constantly invented and built new tools, and we now have a
library of props including the Snakes and Ladders Game, the Pathways
Prop, the Mood-o-meter, and the …
We found that one of the main challenges of using participative approaches was
that the mass of data that is gathered can be difficult to manage and to analyse.
We needed to refine how we collected and reflected on information.
B) The Reflect Approach

Abbreviated excerpts from www.reflect-action.org . Full article available online.
What is Reflect?
Reflect is an approach to learning and social change. Key to the Reflect approach is
creating a space where people feel comfortable to meet and discuss issues relevant
to them and their lives. Reflect aims to improve the meaningful participation of people
in decisions that affect their lives, through strengthening their ability to communicate.

Reflect was developed through innovative pilot programs in Uganda, Bangladesh and
El Salvador between 1993 and 1995. It started as a fusion of the political philosophy
of Brazilian educator Paulo Freire with the practical methodologies developed for
Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA). Other significant influences were the ideological
approach to literacy and gender analysis.
Key elements of the Reflect approach

Reflect is based on a series of core principles and elements, derived both from the
theoretical foundations in Freire and PRA, and from evolution of the approach
through practical application and experience.
• Power and voice
Reflect is a process that aims to strengthen people’s capacity to communicate
by whatever means of communication are most relevant or appropriate to
them.
• A political process
Reflect is premised on the recognition that achieving social change and
greater social justice is a fundamentally political process.
• A democratic space
Reflect involves creating a democratic space – one in which everyone’s voice
is given equal weight. This needs to be actively constructed, as it does not
naturally exist.
• An intensive and extensive process
Reflect is rarely a short or one-off process. Groups usually meet for about two
years, and sometimes continue indefinitely. Often they meet three times a
week – sometimes up to six times a week and rarely less than once a week.
Each meeting may take about two hours.
• Grounded in existing knowledge
Reflect begins with respect and value for people’s existing knowledge and
experience. It is not about importing information or transferring knowledge.
• Linking reflection and action
Reflect involves a continual cycle of reflection and action. It is not about
reflection or learning for the sake of it, but rather reflection for the purpose of
change.
• Using participatory tools
A wide range of participatory tools is used within a Reflect process to help
create an open or democratic environment in which everyone is able to
contribute. Visualisation approaches are of particular importance (maps,
calendars, diagrams, matrices and other graphic forms developed by PRA
practitioners) and can provide a structure for the process. However, many
other participatory methods and processes are also used, including theatre,
role-play, song, dance, video or photography.
• Power awareness
All participatory tools can be distorted, manipulated or used in exploitative
ways if they are not linked to an awareness of power relationships. Reflect is
a political process in which the multiple dimensions of power and stratification
are always the focus of reflection, and actions are oriented towards changing
inequitable power relationships whatever their basis.
• Coherence and self-organisation
Reflect needs to be used systematically. The same principles and processes
that apply to others also apply to ourselves, within our own institutions and

even our personal lives. The focus of the process should always be towards
self-organisation, so that groups are self-managed, where possible, rather
than being facilitated by, or dependent on, outsiders.
Starting a Reflect process

We cannot start working with others using the Reflect approach until we have spent
some time reflecting on our own power, and particularly our relationships with those
with whom we work.
• Understanding the context
It is important to collect basic information concerning the present situation of
the potential participants in the Reflect process. This may take many forms,
depending on the objectives, the organisation, or the people involved. This
information can serve both as a basis for planning and designing the process,
and for future monitoring and evaluation. The process of collecting baseline
information may be integrated into the early stages of the Reflect process so
that participants monitor for themselves.
• Identifying entry points
When considering introducing Reflect into a new area, you will need to decide
whether to form new groups or work with existing local groups. This will be
self-evident or predetermined in some contexts. Existing groups may be
informal (people who gather in one place but are not a clearly constituted
group) or formal (with a constitution, established objectives, existing work) or
somewhere between the two.
Building interest
• Local orientation
Many people will need to know about Reflect, including local leaders, officials
and influential agencies, if they are to help with, rather than hinder, the
process. One day or half-day orientation sessions should be sufficient.
• Mobilisation
Getting people to join a Reflect group can take many forms. It may be that the
demand is already clear, or it may be necessary to hold a public meeting or
arrange a theatre show to inform people of the process. By using some form
of participatory approach and by breaking some norms and formalities you
can give everyone a flavour of what to expect.
Facilitators
• Recruiting facilitators
Finding good facilitators must be given the highest priority, as facilitators are
the single most important factor in making the Reflect process effective.
When building on existing groups, the facilitators may already be determined.
In other cases people can be encouraged to volunteer as potential facilitators
at the initial mobilisation. Where possible the future participants in the process
should have a say in who will be their facilitator. Ideally it should be someone
from the same community as participants, sharing their identity and status,
respected and respectful.
• Training facilitators
The focus of facilitator training should be on the process rather than the
content. Reflect principles and processes should be fully applied, respecting

the existing knowledge and experience of the participants, using participatory
processes and engaging in a power analysis of issues arising.
• Peer support
It is important for facilitators to receive intensive support in the first weeks of a
Reflect process. The best support for facilitators will be each other, as they
will have a shared experience and will understand each other.
• Ongoing training
It is important to hold refresher training workshops at least once a year,
preferably more often. The focus of these refresher workshops might be
defined through the facilitators’ forum meetings, through ongoing participatory
monitoring by participants or through support visits to circles by local
coordinators or other resource people.
Monitoring and evaluation

• Monitoring the process
The role of monitoring the Reflect process should not be seen as the preserve
of any one group of people. Certainly participants must be at the centre of
monitoring their own progress, proposing their own objectives, indicators and
modes of measurement. However, facilitators, trainers and other resource
people are also participants in the process and need to establish their own
objectives and indicators, to be revisited in the light of their experience and
the changing nature and direction of the process. Ideally, in all contexts, this
monitoring should form an integral part of the Reflect process; the cycle of
action and reflection leading to new action and new reflection. Documenting
and recording the process from different perspectives is not a neutral or
detached activity, but one that forms part of the continuing flow of the
process. It is important to be aware of the power dynamics involved in
monitoring and to include reflection on that as part of the monitoring process.
• Evaluation
There are many different reasons for evaluations. Some are required by
donors or are part of organisational procedure. Where this is the case, the
terms of the evaluation may be determined from outside, but as much as
possible the nature of that power relationship should be unveiled as one part
of the evaluation process. In other cases, evaluations are for internal learning
and can be used as an opportunity to enrich the process, with all participants
in the process standing back to gain some perspective and see the larger
picture.
Reflect case study: Reflect in Action in Oxford

By Pippa Bobbet (edited version)
In 1997, staff members at Oxford Development Education Centre participated in

some basic training in Reflect-Action provided by Actionaid's International
Education Unit. Since then, a wide range of projects have been undertaken using
this approach – training local facilitators and contributing to local community
development initiatives.
There is a lot of buzz in Oxford around Reflect-Action. Over 100 people have
been part of training events since 1999 – from 7 day accredited courses to one
off tasters. We know that at least 50 have used the approach in their paid or
voluntary work.

In January 2003, a regeneration project, which was working on the poorest estate
in Oxford, received some funding to develop a locally based strategy to tackle the
drugs problem on the estate. A group of local people were trained in Reflect-
Action approaches and then ran workshops, street-based participatory sessions
as well as one to one sessions to find out the views of the estate residents. This
culminated in a report and presentation to a wide range of agencies who could
deliver some of the recommendations and the setting up of a local community
based organisation staffed by local people who could deliver some of the actions.
The community based organisation is currently delivering courses in drugs
awareness, working on drugs awareness in schools, researching the placement
of used needle bins and setting up of a drop in centre where people can go to get
information on drugs services like help with detoxification and rehabilitation. They
use Reflect-Action in the day to day running of the organisation.
In September 2003, a group of professionals were preparing to submit bids for

adult learning provision on the same estate. One of the concerns was that
residents were not consulted or involved in developing the ideas for the bids so
the group decided to set up a meeting for local people to help with the shaping of
the bids. The aim was to share knowledge and skills in bid writing with the local
residents as well as develop bids that were relevant to local concerns and needs.
With a greater awareness of the source of resources and the process of getting
hold of them (something usually only available to professionals) the local
residents would be in a better position to take an active role in the future. Based
on Reflect-Action approaches, the day resulted in the writing of four integrated
bids worth over £1 million – three of which were firmly based on the approach of
Reflect-Action itself. Many of the people who had never been involved in bid
writing before commented on how interesting and enjoyable the day had been.
This is only the beginning. It is important that this style of working becomes the
norm when new projects are devised and that community wide involvement
precedes the bid design days.
In January 2003, an area of Oxford called ‘Cowley Road’ was awarded over £1
million for redevelopment to make it safer, less congested and less polluted. This
project was the result of a wide scale participatory mapping process to ask the
local community what their priorities were for the area. A key part of the bid and
the reason it was funded in the first place was that the project promised genuine
involvement of the local community in the development of the ideas for what the
£1 million was going to be spent on. In November 2003, 16 local facilitators were
trained in Reflect-Action methods preparing them to run workshops with a range
of different groups to find out where people feel unsafe on the Cowley Road and
why. A later stage will involve the interpretation of the workshop data by the
group and from there, the design professionals will draw up plans which the
community will comment on twice more before they are implemented.
So where has all this got us? The achievements of this approach could be
assessed as follows:
• an ever widening number of meetings, projects and organisations drawing
on participatory approaches which promote a more democratic involvement
of the people affected by their decisions
• small community based organisations led by local people have arisen
directly from the process
• a major impact on a local single regeneration budget scheme – their
evaluation document strongly recommends the continuation of Reflect-

Action work as a significant strand of community work in the area in the
future.
• personal change is clearly described and demonstrated by participants
• large and small scale planning and evaluation processes more frequently
conducted with these participatory principles in mind
• a growing network of local grassroots people trained in Reflect-Action
helping with each other's initiatives and projects and who are continuously
developing their skills to be able to deliver more ambitious projects with
greater levels of independence.

11. Planning for Real*
*Planning for Real"® is a registered trademark of The Neighbourhood Initiatives
Foundation. Organisations wishing to run exercises described as ‘Planning for Real’®
events, provide ‘Planning for Real’® training or advertise themselves as users of a
‘Planning for Real’® approach should first contact the Foundation to discuss using
the technique to its full effect and to obtain permission for the use of the trademark.
What is Planning for Real?

From www.huntsdc.gov.uk/Planning/OxmoorPFR/planning_for_real.htm
Planning for Real is essentially a community development tool, it aims to involve a

wide range of people in a practical process to determine their needs & priorities. The
focal point is the community building a large-scale model of the neighbourhood.
• The making of the model brings people together, enhancing awareness and
discussion about the place where you live.
• ‘Showing off’ the parts of the model celebrates the creativity that has gone
into the making and publicises the public events.
Using the model

The model comes together to be used on a number of open days. Cards are made to
reflect issues and options that cover topics such as traffic & transport, open space,
maintenance, housing and so on. A ‘hand of cards’ is selected by individuals, that
best express their individual views and ideas, and placed on the model where they
want to record an idea or a problem. There are blank cards to write your own ideas
on too. The cards are collated at the end of the day, recorded and analysed.
Information to make it ‘real’

Alongside the model is a display that gives details of physical & funding constraints
and opportunities, to make the process ‘real’ and not just a wish-list. Participants are
invited to ‘stick a dot’ against their preferred option on a range of subjects, such as
types of porch, different uses of open space etc.
The information gathered will be fed back to the Steering Group with
recommendations to act on. Arising from the consultation, a masterplan for the future
of the area, will be drawn up and further consulted upon, so that it can form
‘supplementary planning guidance’ for developments in the future.
Planning for real:

• allows people to have their say without needing to speak to an audience
• encourages informal discussion of ideas
• removes the confrontation which often exists at a conventional public meeting
• makes the consultation process more fun and rewarding for everyone
involved
• stimulates informal contacts between the community and officials throughout
the Local Plan process.
Outcomes from Planning for Real

Taken from: URP Toolbox
www3.secure.griffith.edu.au/03/toolbox/display_tool.php?pk1=2

Planning for real delivers a design or plan that incorporates community needs and
issues, and that will therefore be more acceptable and useful to the community, and
will give the community a sense of ownership of the plan that may incorporate
elements of community monitoring and maintenance.
Strengths
• Provides a three-dimensional model that may help people better envisage the
changes suggested for the neighbourhood.
• Offers a hands-on' approach that allows participants to visualise the preferred
future for an area.
• Particularly effective in mobilising community support and interest.
• Specific projects are identified and implementation is set in motion.
• Has advantages for those who are more visual/tactile in their approach.
• Can help bridge language barriers in mixed language areas.
Special considerations/weaknesses
• Requires commitment from decision makers to follow through on suggestions.
• Needs commitment from participants to stay for two and a half hours to
participate in the whole process.
• Can be expensive to develop a three-dimensional model.
• If building a model with volunteers and found materials, can take three
months to collect materials and create the model in easily movable sections.
• Can take two-three months for follow up and feedback.
Case study: Planning for Real process

From www./charnwoodonline.net/regeneration/realreport/woodthorpe/
Introduction
Woodthorpe was one of the three areas of Charnwood in which The
Neighbourhood Initiatives Foundation (NIF) were asked to consult the local
community on what improvements to local amenities would lead to a sustainable
improvement in the quality of life for residents of all ages as part of Charnwood's
SRB bid.
The other two areas were the town of Shepshed and an inner area of
Loughborough – Hastings and Lemyngton – which are both heavily built up
electoral wards having a high black and ethnic population.
In contrast Woodthorpe is a large residential area of Loughborough which has

developed from the 1950's onwards. The housing is modern and the population
comprises mainly young families. The area is well served by local schools shops
and other amenities.
Why Planning for Real

‘Planning for Real’® (PfR) is a hands on community led consultation technique
that engages local people in making decisions about their area. ‘Planning for
Real’ consultants have long been convinced that the real 'Experts' on what is
needed to regenerate a community are the local residents. After all, many of them
have lived in the same tightly defined geographical area for many years.

In many areas of Woodthorpe there may be four generations of the same family –
all living within walking distance of each other. Common sense therefore dictates
that there is an enormous amount of local knowledge and expertise that no-one
from outside, no matter how well qualified, can hope to match.
‘Planning for Real’ not only recognises this – it actually harnesses this intimate
local community expertise and uses it as a power source to fuel change.
One of the key techniques that PfR uses is to engage local residents of all ages
and use them as facilitators, model makers and hosts so that the team of local
activists is engaged all the way through the process from making the model to
working up the Action Plan. An important part of the process is training local
activists in the background and methodology of PfR.
In Woodthorpe, we were able to use Shelthorpe Primary School as our base and
the training session was held there on the evening of Monday 12th February. The
session was very well attended by an excellent cross section of the local
community, not only local residents but also Officers from Charnwood BC and
staff from Shelthorpe School.
All the participants agreed to help at the ‘Planning for Real’ events which was
very pleasing, as involving local people is crucial to the success of the process,
as they have an invaluable knowledge of the area and community.
Making the model

This took place over two days in Shelthorpe School – Wednesday February 28th
and Thursday 1st March. Under the watchful eye of their teacher, Mr Mitchell, the
children of Class 5M all worked extremely hard and by the end of the first day had
finished painting the base boards. On the second day they made houses and
other buildings and completed the model. It must be stated here that it was due to
the local knowledge of both the children and Mr Mitchell that the model was so
well made. The children were from a mixed ability class, yet their enthusiasm
showed no sign of flagging over the two days despite the complexity of the task.
The Planning for Real event 10/3/01

Once they had made the model the children had a go at their own PfR session by
pointing out the areas they felt could be used to provide facilities for themselves
and their peers. They were all told about the PfR day that was to be held in the
School on Saturday March 10th. In order to encourage children to come to PfR
days we booked Mr and Mrs Chucklechops (two well known children's
entertainers), Pinxtons Puppet Theatre, Filbert Fox from Leicester City FC and
Newshound, the mascot of the local radio station.
Refreshments were also laid on to encourage residents to stay and really enjoy
the occasion. St Johns Ambulance kindly sent a splendid First Aid team but,
thankfully, their services were not required. The local Police also came along with
their anti-crime campaign stand and material. The PfR day was a tremendous
success with over 220 adults and many children (including the ones who had
made the model) coming along to 'have their say' in a relaxed and enjoyable
atmosphere.
Whilst the PfR event was under way the facilitators encouraged residents to put
down issue cards, write their own suggestions on white cards and talk to them
about the next stages of the PfR process – Prioritisation and Action Planning

sessions. The follow on sessions were held on Saturday 24th March at
Shelthorpe School, from 11.00am to 2.00pm.
Prioritisation and action planning Saturday March 24th Shelthorpe School

The PfR sessions generate what may best be described as 'raw data' which,
although useful in itself, then needs to be refined into a series of Action Plans.
The first part of this process is the Prioritisation process, usually done by using
Now Soon Later sheets.
First of all the Issue cards are laid out on table around the room under their
original headings. Large 'Now Soon Later' sheets are placed on table with Issue
cards placed at the base. Participants then take the Issue cards and place them
on what they consider to be the appropriate band – Now Soon or Later.
It is emphasised to the residents taking part that once someone has placed an
Issue card on the 'Now Soon Later' sheets it must not be moved. If anyone
wishes to disagree with the Priority band they must do so by placing a red card
with 'Disagree' written on it.
After this session the Priority chosen is written on the back of the Issue Card and
then a discussion takes place over any cards which have a 'Disagree' card on
them.
These discussions are often extremely fruitful as it allows a full and frank
exchange of views to take place between residents. The aim of the facilitator is to
manage the discussion and bring about an amicable conclusion that is a
satisfactory compromise to all parties.
If this cannot be achieved within a reasonable time then the facilitator often
removes the cards and leaves it to be discussed later at a mutually agreed later
date. Participants are then asked to choose an Issue they feel strongly about,
such as Traffic, Crime or Community Facilities. They then form a group around
the table on which those Issue cards are laid out.
Once they have organised themselves into Issue groups they are asked to look at
the cards on their table and see if any of them could be put together in related
groups. For example issues around traffic may contain many cards calling for
Speed Humps or Pedestrian Crossings all in a relatively small area. These could
all be grouped together and looked at rationally - some could be discarded and
those that are kept could form the basis of an Action Plan calling for a Traffic
Study in the neighbourhood.
Once this has been determined the next question that needs to be addressed is
'Who should the partner for the Action Plan be?'
One the Issues have been Prioritised, the next stage is to put each Issue against
an appropriate 'partner'. The partner may be an agency such as the Council, the
Police, another voluntary group; or they may feel that they can tackle the Issue in
question themselves with a little help or money.
All the Issue and Ideas cards are prioritised and partnered in this way and after
an intense three hour session, a series of Action Plans emerge which form the
blueprint for a working partnership between the local community and colleagues
from Local Government and other the relevant agencies.

Where can I find more tools for EfS and stakeholder
engagement programs?
General websites Includes general principles, methods
Community Builders NSW (tools) and scenarios (issues) for
www.communitybuilders.nsw.gov.au/ community planning as well as a
This site is an interactive electronic comprehensive reference list for
clearing house for everyone involved further reading.
in community level social, economic
and environmental renewal including General toolkits
community leaders, community & (See also further reading/information
government workers, volunteers, in the EfS – What is it? section)
program managers, academics, policy
makers, youth and seniors. A lot of Aslin, H.J. & Brown,V.A. 2004
useful information on community Towards Whole of Community
participation and case studies. Engagement: A Practical Toolkit.
Murray-Darling Basin Commission
The Co-Intelligence Institute www.mdbc.gov.au
www.co-intelligence.org/
Lots of information and articles on The Education for Sustainable
processes of community dialogue and Development Toolkit
deliberation. www.esdtoolkit.org/
The Education for Sustainable
International Conference on Engaging Development Toolkit is an easy-to-use
Communities, Brisbane, August 2005 manual for individuals and
www.engagingcommunities2005.org/h organisations from both the education
ome.html and community sectors. It includes
Conference papers. tools for managing change, creating
community goals and introducing the
Lynn Carson’s website on Active concept of sustainability as well as
Democracy: Citizen Participation in case studies.
Decision Making
www.activedemocracy.net/ Effective Engagement: Building
Lots of good information and relationships with community and
publications about Deliberative other stakeholders
Democracy techniques including Book 1: An Introduction to
Citizen’s Juries. Includes case studies Engagement
from across Australia. Book 2: The Engagement Planning
Workbook
PLA Notes Book 3: The Engagement Toolkit
www.iied.org/NR/agbioliv/pla_notes/in State of Victoria, Department of
dex.html Sustainability and Environment 2005
Published three times a year by the Available for download from
Sustainable Agriculture and Rural www.dse.vic.gov.au/engage
Livelihoods Program of the
International Institute of Environment URP Toolbox
and Development. www3.secure.griffith.edu.au/03/toolbox
Frank exchange of experience and /. The URP Toolbox is a large and free
views on participatory learning and resource of principles and strategies to
action, by and for practitioners in the enhance meaningful stakeholder
field. (IIED.) involvement in decision-making. It
includes 60 community involvement
The Community Planning Website. tools with a good search facility.
www.communityplanning.net/

Empowering People: A Guide to Scottish Centre for Regeneration
Participation Community Engagement How
www.undp.org/cso/resource/toolkits/e To…Guide
mpowering/intro.html www.pt.communitiesscotland.gov.uk/st
from the UN Development Program ellent/groups/public/documents/webpa
website. ges/scrcs_006693.hcsp#TopOfPage
Includes a ‘Community planning
Beyond Fences: Seeking Social partners' guide’ for those working in
Sustainability in Conservation agencies responsible for delivering
www.iucn.org/themes/spg/Files/beyon public services.
d_fences/beyond_fences.html
Participatory tools and process on Integrated Approaches to Participatory
information gathering and assessment, Development (IAPAD) Participatory
communication, planning and conflict Mapping Toolbox.
as well as evaluation and monitoring www.iapad.org/toolbox.htm
are provided throughout this book. A number of different participatory
Although conservation based much of mapping approaches are explained
the information and tools are highly including 3D mapping, GIS mapping
relevant to all community participation and Photo mapping.
processes.
Victorian Local Government
Eldis Participation Resource Guide Association Consultation and
www.eldis.org/participation/index.htm Engagement Resource Website
A massive resource with manuals, www.vlgaconsultation.org.au/
guides and toolkits concerning includes the Community Consultation
participation in all spheres of Resource Guide: The Red Book
environment and development. Keep Very clear and with examples of
drilling down and you could get lost applications in councils.
forever!
Partnerships
www.co- www.pt.communitiesscotland.gov.uk/st
intelligence.org/CIPol_ComunityProce ellent/groups/public/documents/webpa
sses.html ges/cs_011419.hcsp#TopOfPage
A toolbox of processes for community Scottish Centre for Regeneration How
work separated in to different to Guide ... Partnership Working
groupings such as national, state or Includes a directory of tools and
large community citizen deliberation guides to help with all aspects of
and policy guidance, community self- partnership working, a directory of
organisation or group/community articles which provide different
reflection and ‘issue exploration’. perspectives and experience and a
directory of case studies outlining
Focusing on Citizens: A Guide to organisations’ experience of
approaches and methods partnership working.
www.communityplanning.org.uk/docu
ments/Engagingcommunitiesmethods. Tools for mobilising the public sector,
pdf business and civil society as partners
in development, Ros Tennyson, Prince
Participation Works! 21 techniques of of Wales Business Leaders Forum,
community participation for the 21st 1998. 1-899159-84-3.
century Excellent how-to on partnerships
www.neweconomics.org crammed with useful checklists, tips
The New Economics Foundation and and sample documents.
the UK Community Participation
Network

Visioning/Futures Thinking Who is driving development?
See also the Futures Thinking section Reflections on the transformative
in EfS – What is it potential of Asset-Based Community
Development (ABCD)
www.drs.wisc.edu/people/faculty/gree www.stfx.ca/people/gcunning/ABCD/P
n/community.htm ublications/ [Accessed 17 May 2006]
Green G, Haines A & Halebsky S
Building Our Future: A Guide to Mathie A & Cunningham G From
Community Visioning. Clients to Citizens: Asset-Based
Community Development as a strategy
Community Visions Pack for community-driven development
New Economics Foundation, 1998. (2003)
www.neweconomics.org/gen/uploads/ Development in Practice, Vol13 No 5
doc_18920003301_Howto.doc www.stfx.ca/people/gcunning/ABCD/P
Contains how-to on setting up a ublications/ [Accessed 17 May 2006]
community visioning exercise,
briefings on future search, guided CDS/Coady ABCD Manual
visualisation and participative theatre, Contains many case studies of ABCD
and case studies. in action and lots of information on
how to conduct an ABCD strategy
Imagine at New Economics www.coady.stfx.ca/resources/abcd/CD
Foundation website S_manual.pdf
www.neweconomics.org/gen/participat
ion_imagine.aspx A Guide to Evaluating Asset-Based
Considers why visions matter. Community Development: Lessons,
Challenges, and Opportunities, by
Community Vision to Action Forums Tom Dewar (1997)
www.anei.org/pages/51_community_fo www.northwestern.edu/ipr/abcd/abcdt
rums.cfm opics.html
Asset-Based Community Community Based Natural

Development (ABCD) Resource Management
Making Headway Building Your CBNRM Network www.cbnrm.net/
Community: How to get Started; An [Accessed 17 May 2006]
Asset Based Community Development A collection of resources for those
Toolkit Central Coast Community working in the area of natural resource
Development Working Party 2003 management. It provides a powerful
www.communitybuilders.nsw.gov.au/d set of broad, robust and useful
ownload/Making_Headway_ToolKit.pd networking tools aimed at linking
f This is an excellent document with stakeholders. As a complete,
NSW case studies and good workshop integrated, and adaptable knowledge
resources. management tool, CBNRM Net is
presented as a service to the global
The Asset Based Community CBNRM community of practice.
Development Institute
www.northwestern.edu/ipr/abcd/abcdt Photovoice
opics.html www.photovoice.com
Lots of information on ABCD This website explains the theory
behind Photovoice and gives a
John P. Kretzmann and John L. number of case studies of its use.
McKnight, Building Communities from
the Inside Out: A Path Toward Finding Centre for Popular Education, UTS
and Mobilizing a Community's Assets www.cpe.uts.edu.au

Has good information and case the arts and environmental fields,
studies on Photovoice as well as other distinguished by the linking of nature
tools. with culture, focussing upon the
positive investment people can make
Story Circles in their own localities, championing
Making Connections Denver Story popular democratic involvement, and
Circle Tool Kit by inspiring celebration as a starting
www.makingconnectionsdenver.org/to point for action to improve the quality
olkit/459276171485348StoryCircleTool of our everyday places. Although
kit.qxd.pdf [Accessed 18 May 2006] uniquely British there are many
Although targeted at neighbourhood interesting ideas in this website.
regeneration this tool could be easily
adapted to use for e.g. community Recharging the Power of Place
workshops. Valuing local significance The National
Trust and Heritage Link
The World Cafe www.cpre.org.uk/resources/pub/pdfs/h
www.theworldcafe.com/ eritage/recharging-the-power-of-place-
Lots of information and examples report.pdf
about this innovative process A very comprehensive report on
Including two interesting articles: engaging communities in landscape
conservation measures.
• The World Café Community
(2002) Café to go: A quick Planning for Real
reference guide for putting Neighbourhood Initiatives Foundation
conversations to work www.nif.co.uk/planningforreal/
• Brown J, Isaacs D& The World Appreciative Enquiry

Café Community The World International Institute for Sustainable
Café: Living Knowledge Development
through conversation that www.iisd.org/ai/
matter in The Systems Thinker
2001 Vol 12 No 5 Appreciative Enquiry and the Quest
www.appreciative-inquiry.org/
Future Search
www.futuresearch.net/ The Thin Book of Appreciative Inquiry
Future Search Network website, which Sue Annis Hammond, Kodiak
contains a clear, concise description of Consulting, 1998, 0-9665373-1-9
the methodology involved in a future Handy introduction to this technique.
search activity.
Open Space Technology
Systemic Thinking Open Space World
WWF Scotland Linkingthinking: New www.openspaceworld.org/news/
perspectives on thinking and Resources, tools and tips for Open
Education for Sustainability Space Technology.
www.wwflearning.org.uk/data/files/linki
ngthinking-302.pdf www.openingspace.net/ Papers about
Lots of information and activity ideas Open Space.
for systemic thinking themes. It is
school based but is easily adapted. www.chriscorrigan.com This website
contains lots good info. And includes a
Parish Mapping number of case studies chiefly working
www.commonground.org.uk/index.html with First Nation peoples, includes
Common Ground is internationally some environmental issues, e.g.
recognised for playing a unique role in fisheries.

Deliberative Democracy Participatory Action and
Techniques Learning
Deliberative Democracy covers a wide See also readings under Participation
array of different citizen participation and Partnerships in EfS – What is it?
tools aimed at involving the public
more actively in policy decisions. Resource Centres for Participatory
Action and Learning
Deliberative Democracy Consortium www.rcpla.org/
www.deliberative-democracy.net/
Gives much more information on Participatory Learning and Action (PLA
Deliberative Democracy and contains Notes)
The Deliberative Democracy www.iied.org/NR/agbioliv/pla_notes/in
Handbook (for sale). dex.html
Participatory Learning and Action is
The Australian National University the world's leading informal journal on
Citizen’s Jury Project participatory learning and action
http://cjp.anu.edu.au/ approaches and methods.
Discussion and case studies on 2
Juries run in NSW and Queensland Institute of Development Studies
Sussex (IDS) – Participation
The Co-Intelligence Institute
www.co-intelligence.org/ www.ids.ac.uk/ids/particip/
The nonprofit Co-Intelligence Institute Through the work of the Participation
(CII) promotes awareness of ‘co- Group, the Institute of Development
intelligence’ and of the many existing Studies serves as a global centre for
tools and ideas that can be used to research, innovation and learning in
increase it. They explain more about citizen participation and participatory
what is ‘co-intelligence’ in the website. approaches to development.
Department of Planning and

Infrastructure, WA and The Jefferson
Centre (May 2005) Citizens’ Jury on
Community Engagement and
Deliberative Democracy
http://dpi.wa.gov.au/mediaFiles/dialog
ue_conf_citizensjury.doc
A comprehensive and interesting case
study from Western Australia. The jury
considered water issues in particular.
The Jefferson Centre

www.jefferson-centre.org/
Originator of the Citizens Jury process.
Includes a Citizens Jury Handbook.
Centre for Wise Democracy

www.wisedemocracy.org/
Set up to support the development of
Wisdom Councils and Dynamic
Facilitation.
Chapter 8: Evaluation of Education for

Sustainability Programs 

Evaluation of Education for Sustainability
Programs

What is the purpose of this section? ....................................................... 144
What are the key concepts of evaluation in Education for Sustainability?

..................................................................................................................... 144
Measuring Effectiveness: Evaluation in Education for Sustainable

Development (a paper by Council for EE, UK) .................................................... 146
Measuring the success of Environmental Education programs

(excerpts from a paper by Hoffman & Thomson, Network for EE, Canada) .................... 154
Where can I find out more about evaluation of EfS programs?............. 164
References.................................................................................................. 166
© Ed Carswell

To introduce:
• the key concepts of evaluation in Education for Sustainability
• the document Measuring effectiveness: Evaluation in Education for
• excerpts from Measuring the success of Environmental Education
programmes
• links to further resources on evaluation.
What are the key concepts of evaluation in Education

for Sustainability?
Evaluation is an integral part of any Education for Sustainability program and the
evaluation plan should be developed in the planning or design phase of the program.
There are a number of key reasons for evaluating programs including:
• to measure learning
• to assess progress
• to improve the quality of your program
• to enhance accountability
• to communicate results
• to build up a body of evidence of effectiveness in EfS.
The above should be assessed using both formative and summative evaluation
techniques.
Formative evaluation produces information that is fed back during the course of a
program to improve it, a more informal method of this is known as ‘feedback’.
Summative evaluation is done after the program is finished and provides

information about its effectiveness.
Programs will normally generate both outputs, outcomes and impacts.

• Outputs are materials or resources that are generated as part of the
educational project. They are the tools for the achievement of the outcomes.
Outputs are usually measured as are statistics and indicate hardly anything
about the changes in participants. Examples of outputs could be maps,
reports or brochures.
• Outcomes are results related to the project objectives. They describe the
changes that occur in people, organisations or communities as a result of
your program. These are the actual benefits or changes for participants during
or after the program. There are two types of outcomes:
o educational outcomes which can be expressed in terms of enhanced
learning such as increased knowledge, enhanced skills or positive
changes in attitudes
o issues-based outcomes such as increased levels of recycling.
Outcomes are often hierarchical, i.e. there may be different levels of

outcomes. Outcomes can be thought of as the structure that needs to
be in place in order to provide the environment for achieving the
impacts. Another way of thinking of outcomes is as stepping stones
towards the ultimate impacts or the vision. Examples of outcomes
could be increased levels of understanding of an environmental issue,
improved management of an environmental reserve, new legislation,
or enhanced capacity to work for the achievement of conservation
goals.
• Impacts are the longer term changes that you hope the project will help
create and underlines why the project is important 1 2 . Impacts can also be
educational or issues based. Examples of impacts could be long term
improvement of the biodiversity of an ecoregion, increased numbers of an
endangered species or an active engaged citizen.
In Education for Sustainability we are more interested in the outcomes and impacts
of a program.
Examples of outputs, outcomes and impacts from the Mentoring Local

Government in EfS project
Output Outcome Impact
The handbook Increased capacity to Local government using

identify elements of education and learning
effective EfS practice. processes effectively as
a tool for sustainability.
There is also a need to differentiate between an effective program and a successful

program. A successful program is one which has achieved its planned objectives or
outcomes. An effective program is one which has high impact. It is a strategic
program which makes good use of resources (or outputs) to maximise impacts.
Any evaluation should look at the following aspects of the program:

• Planning
• Design
• Management
• Processes
• Outcomes
• Impacts.
and should follow the following cycle:

• Plan evaluation
• Choose evaluation
• Collect data
• Analyse evidence

• Communicate results
• Revisit purposes
• Find out/review needs.
This is only a brief summary of the key concepts of evaluation of EfS programs. The
following excerpts from two documents develop these themes in more depth.
Measuring Effectiveness: Evaluation in Education for

Paper by the Council for Environmental Education, UK
Text-only version downloaded from www.cee.org.uk
CEE Copyright 2004
Who is this guide for?

Do you work in an organisation involved in environmental education and Education
for Sustainable Development (ESD)? As part of your job, do you need to know how
effective your learning programmes are? Do you need to provide feedback to your
users, funders, managers, colleagues, partners or other interested groups?
If the answer to any of these questions is yes, then this guide will help you and your
organisation. It provides a model to help you to integrate evaluation into the planning
and delivery of learning programmes. It also directs you to relevant sources of
information on existing evaluation tools.
Why evaluation?
Thinking about evaluation needs to be integral to the planning and implementation of
learning programmes as this enables you to determine from the outset how you will
make judgments, based on evidence, about the outcomes, value and quality of a
programme.
What are the benefits of evaluating in ESD?

• to measure learning – to find out who has learned what
• to assess progress – to find out whether objectives have been met
• to improve the quality of your programme – to reflect on what is happening
and plan further developments
• to enhance accountability – to demonstrate results to funders, managers and
colleagues within the organisation
• to communicate results – to those directly involved, to colleagues within the
organisation, and to wider audiences
• to build up a body of evidence of effectiveness in ESD – to help understand
what works (and in what ways) in a variety of contexts.
Evaluation ... scary idea?

In 2003, the Council for Environmental Education carried out a survey of existing
evaluation practices amongst government agencies, professional associations, and
non-governmental organisations working in the sector. The findings showed that,
although many recognised the importance of evaluation, it is not always
straightforward to measure the effectiveness of learning programmes in relation to

sustainable development. The survey highlighted what people saw as the main
barriers:
• difficulty of measuring long-term results of programmes
• lack of time and resources
• lack of internal expertise
• differing requirements from funders and managers.
However, carrying out your own evaluations does not need to be onerous or take up
disproportionate amounts of time. It can be enjoyable and professionally rewarding.
Plan the evaluation

What is the purpose of your evaluation?
Depending on the time and resources available, you need to decide what you want to
find out and the reason for doing it.
• Do you want to focus on the outcomes of the programme, the whole process,
or both?
• Do you want to gather information during the programme to review progress
and make adjustments as you go along (formative evaluation)? Or only to
make judgements about the overall effectiveness of the programme
(summative evaluation)?
• How will your evaluation be linked to your partners’ and funders’ interests and
requirements?
It is important to be clear about what your evaluation can and cannot do. You need to
be selective and realistic about what you want to measure. Asking realistic questions
will enable you to gather information that is meaningful and relevant to your
organisation. For example, it will be difficult to find evidence that your programme
has encouraged long-term change in participants’ values and behaviours. It might be
more appropriate to find out whether it has encouraged and/or enabled them to think
critically about how they live their lives.
What do you need to find out?

As part of the planning or review of your programme you will have identified the
needs of your participant groups. Deciding whether you have met these needs has to
be part of your evaluation. You will also have identified clear objectives. Part of the
process of setting objectives is to agree desired outcomes (including learning
outcomes) that will be measurable to varying degrees. These will help define what
you are trying to achieve and the information you need to collect to measure what
has actually been achieved.
Areas of learning in Education for Sustainable Development are likely

to include:
• knowledge and understanding
learning new knowledge, viewing prior knowledge in new ways, applying
knowledge to new contexts, enabling deeper understanding, acquiring new
insights, appreciating inter-connectedness
• intellectual, practical and social skills
becoming more skilled, being able to do new things, being able to do things in
new ways, being innovative and creative

• worldviews, values and attitudes
changing perceptions, understandings, convictions and feelings about
yourself in relation to other people and the world, knowing what you believe,
knowing what you value, and why
• actions and lifestyles
getting involved, arguing for personal viewpoints and actions, making a
difference, re-thinking how you live and why
• enjoyment and satisfaction
being engaged, having fun
• learning
learning about how people learn, learning how you learn, knowing when/what
you have learned.
Evaluation jargon
Goals
The intended outcomes (may be expressed as aims or objectives).
Activities
What is done in a programme and how (focus/content/method).
Inputs
Materials and resources that are used in a programme.
Outputs
The material products that result from a programme (tools for the achievement of
outcomes, e.g. training courses delivered, resource produced).
Outcomes
Achievements or changes brought about by a programme. These can be tangible
and/or provide a supportive context for longer-term development.
Impacts
Everything that accrues from a programme whether positive or negative, intended or
unintended, long-term and short-term.
Choose your approach
Who will be involved?

Depending on what you want to know, you need to decide who will be included in the
collection of information (staff, facilitators, participants, volunteers, partners, end
users, others). Try to make the evaluation as participative as possible so it captures
the various perspectives of those directly involved in the programme (e.g. include
participating teachers in formulating questions to measure the effectiveness of your
education programme). If you have to sample views, how large must your sample be
to obtain useful and representative data?
What kind of data do you need to collect?

Decide on the kind of information you need to collect or generate as part of your
evaluation. Do you need to collect descriptive or narrative data based on experiences
and perceptions (qualitative data)? Or do you need to collect numerical data based
on scores and frequencies (quantitative data)? You may need to collect both.

What methods will you use?
Select appropriate ways of collecting evidence by asking yourself questions such as:
• Are we involving a wide enough range of people in order to obtain different
perspectives?
• Is our approach user-friendly, time-efficient and cost-effective?
• Are we in danger of collecting data we don’t need?
What is Validity and Reliability?
Validity: Does your method or tool measure what it is supposed to measure?
Reliability: If someone else used the same method or tool, with the same group at
the same time, would they obtain similar results?
Use more than one source of data

To improve the quality of your data, and to reduce bias, use more than one method
of collecting information and gather views from different groups of respondents. This
is called triangulation. For example, questionnaires, direct observations and face-to-
face interviews could be used to gather the various perspectives of those involved
(e.g. project managers, volunteers, parents, young people, local residents, partners,
local businesses, etc). Evidence of success (or otherwise) is most plausible where a
variety of perspectives, collected in different ways, point more or less to the same
conclusion.
Why do we need to collect data? What is data and how do we collect it?
Select the appropriate tools to collect the information you need in relation to your
evaluation aim and questions. Many tools are available, providing step-by-step
guidance and templates. To save time and effort, you might try to use or adapt them
(see Resources, pages 8/9). Make sure that the tools you use are appropriate to your
audience (e.g. if you work with children or people with learning difficulties). You also
have to think about who will be involved in the collection of data (e.g. staff, external
evaluators, the participants themselves). Decide when you need to collect your data
and how often.
Questionnaires and surveys might be best to find out about an increase in

knowledge and understanding after a short session at a centre or use of a new
resource. They are not expensive and can be easy to analyse, quick to administer,
and can gather a lot of data. BUT the questions need to be worded carefully,
respondents’ interpretations of questions may vary and they do not allow
measurement of progress on more complex aspects of learning. It is always
necessary to pilot a questionnaire.
Interviews with open questions might be better to gather more in-depth information
and insights into what has been learned. They are more flexible, allow clarification of
responses and allow unanticipated outcomes to be uncovered. BUT they can be
intensive, time consuming and expensive. They are dependent on the person
doing the interview. Data need to be transcribed and can be hard to analyse and
compare.
Focus groups are useful to gather ideas and different viewpoints about what has
been learned in a short time. BUT the information gathered cannot always lead to
generalisations and responses can be difficult to analyse. Meetings are difficult to
schedule and need the skills of a good facilitator.

Observations (structured or unstructured) can be useful in obtaining data about how
people think and feel, and what they do. BUT they tend to be expensive and time
consuming, require certain skills to conduct, and the data collected might be difficult
to categorise and analyse.
Analyse evidence
Now that you have collected and processed your data, how do you make sense of it
in relation to your evaluation aims and questions?
Evaluation allows you to think about what has been learned, what you might do
differently next time and how you can build on the most successful areas of your
programme. It can also contribute to changes and development in your organisation.
You need to ask questions such as:

• To what extent were our aims and objectives achieved? How do we know?
What evidence do we have?
• To what extent did participants meet their own objectives?
• To what extent did our partners meet their objectives?
• To what extent were the approaches/learning activities appropriate?
• What else did we learn?
• What else happened that was significant?
• What might we do differently?
• What will we do next?
Communicate results
To strengthen the case that education and learning are key to sustainable
development, good practice needs to be shared and disseminated.
Decide with which groups, both inside and outside the organisation, you need to
communicate. How will you tell them about what has been achieved through your
programme?

• What achievements should we communicate (including how we overcame
unforeseen problems) and to whom?
• What are the compelling stories to get us noticed and engage the media and
other groups?
• What are the best mechanisms to have an impact on those who influence and
support ESD (policy makers and others)?
• How can we make the language accessible to our audiences?
A review meeting with participants, partners and other interest groups might be the
best way to communicate results to those directly involved in the programme.
A written report or verbal presentation might be more appropriate for colleagues in

the organization or funders.

A conference can provide feedback to other organisations working in the sector,
policy makers, funders, researchers and a wider audience.
A case study can enable readers to think critically about their own work and refine
their practice in ways appropriate to their own needs and context.
A journal article, newsletter or press release can target different interest groups,
for example, young people.
A summary or report on your website can reach a wider audience and get
feedback.
Revisit purposes
What is next? How do you want to modify and improve your programme?

• What are the strengths of our programme and how can we build on this?
• What new areas of work are needed?
• Do we need to review priorities and resources (staff, budget, training, etc)?
• Do we need to set up, continue or extend partnerships (link to a new
audience, gain funding, develop resource)?
• How will we review our education policy in relation to what has been learned
and what is needed?
Find out/review needs

Learning programmes are most likely to be successful if they:
• respond to real needs, as established through research and consultation with
participants
• target a specific audience
• provide something new and appropriate for the audience
• fit in with priorities at local, regional and national level.
The evaluation cycle
Plan evaluation
• What is the purpose of our evaluation?
• How can the evaluation be linked to the partners’ and funders’ interests and
requirements?
• What do we need to find out to gauge our achievements?
• When do we need to be doing this?
• Have we allocated resources for the evaluation?
Choose approach
• Who will we involve in the evaluation?

• What kind of data do we need to collect?
• What methods will we use and why?
• How will we ensure these are valid and reliable?
• Are we using more than one source of data?
• Are we involving a wide enough range of people to obtain different
perspectives?
Collect data
• What are the best tools to collect the information we need and to engage
people?
• Can we adapt existing tools or do we need to devise new ones?
• When do we need to gather the data (before, during and/or after the project)
and how often?
• Who will be involved in the collection of data (staff, external evaluator,
participants, etc)?
Analyse evidence
• What do the data gathered tell us about:
o the overall effectiveness of our programme?
o what went well/poorly?
o who learned what?
o what needs doing as a result?
Communicate results
• What achievements do we want to communicate, and to whom?
• What are the best ways to communicate these effectively?
• Is the language accessible to our audience?
• What are the best ways of having an impact on those who influence and
support ESD - policy makers, practitioners and others?
Revisit purposes
• How can we build on the strengths of our programme?
• What new areas of work (or emphasis) do we need to consider?
• Do we need to:
o review objectives, priorities and resources?
o set up, continue or extend partnerships?
o review our education policy?
Find out/review needs

• What are the real needs of our participants?
• Which audience do we need to target?

• Do we provide something new through our programme?
• Does it fit with priorities at local, regional and national level?
This guide was developed by a CEE Working Group, supported by the

Department for Education and Skills (DfES), the Department for Environment,
Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) Environmental Action Fund and National Grid
Transco.
CEE Copyright 2004

This publication may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium for
research, private study or for internal circulation within an organisation. This is
subject to its being reproduced accurately and not intentionally used to mislead. The
material must be acknowledged as CEE copyright and the title of the publication
specified.
The printed version of this document is available from: Council for Environmental
Education, 94 London Street, Reading, RG1 4SJ Tel: 0118 950 2550 Fax: 0118 959
1955 Email: enquiries@cee.org.uk.

Measuring the success of Environmental Education
programmes
The following excerpts are taken from Hoffman, J. and Thomson, G., 2003 Canada:
Network for Environmental Education. Measuring the success of Environmental
Education programmes www.cpawscalgary.org/education/evaluation
What is Evaluation?
Evaluation is a scary word. My experience has been that as soon as you use that
word, people get their backs up and feel like they are going to be evaluated, and
hence judged. It gets personal very easily.
We as humans evaluate all the time. Listen in on conversations and you’ll hear: ‘I
loved that movie last night’. ‘He is a terrible cook!’ ‘That car isn’t worth the price
they’re charging.’ In more formal terms, most of us have been evaluated by teachers
through the school system or by employers in the work place – often leaving us with
negative connotations about both the process and the end results.
Evaluation is a term that is used to represent judgments of many kinds. What all
evaluations have in common is the notion of judging merit. Someone is examining
and weighing something against an explicit or implicit yardstick. The yardsticks can
vary widely, and include criteria such as aesthetics, effectiveness, economics, and
justice or equity issues.
One useful definition of program evaluation is provided below, with an analysis of its
components:
Evaluation is the systematic assessment of the operation and/or

the outcomes of a program or policy, compared to a set of explicit or
implicit standards, as a means of contributing to the improvement of
the program or policy.
(Weiss, 1998)
Dr. Weiss breaks the definition down into several key elements, which serve to
highlight the specific nature of evaluation:
Systematic assessment: this emphasizes the research nature of evaluation,

stressing that it should be conducted with rigor and formality, according to accepted
research canons. Therefore, an evaluation of an environmental education program
should follow specific, well-planned research strategies, whether qualitative or
quantitative in nature. Scientific rigor can take more time and be more costly than
informal methods, yet it is an essential component of successful evaluations. This is
especially so in education, where outcomes are complex, hard to observe, and made
up of many elements that react in diverse ways.

The activities and outcomes of a program are the actual focus of the evaluation –
some evaluations study process while others examine outcomes and effects. An
educational program evaluation would usually look at both the activities of the
program (how it’s delivered, by whom, etc.) and its outcomes for participants (skills,
knowledge, attitudes, values change, etc.).
Standards for comparison: this is a set of expectations or criteria to which a

program is compared. Sometimes it comes from the program’s own goals or mission
statement, as well as from the objectives of program sponsors, managers and
practitioners.
Improvement of the program: the evaluation should be done not to point fingers or
assign blame but to provide a positive contribution that helps make programs work
better and allocates resources to better programs.
A. Evaluation Planning: A Background
One does not plan and then try to make circumstances fit those plans.
One tries to make plans fit the circumstances.
General George S. Patton, 1947
‘Begin at the beginning,’ the King said gravely, ‘and go on till you
come to the end: then stop.’
Lewis Carroll, 1865
Evaluation has become very popular over the past two decades, as an important tool
for program funding and decision-making, organizational learning, accountability and
program management and improvement. How do we as environmental educators go
about developing evaluation programs that work for us?
Evaluation planning can be a complex and cyclical process. One must identify the
key questions for a study, decide on the best measurements and techniques to
answer the questions, figure out the best way to collect the data, develop an
appropriate research design, implement it and promote appropriate use of the
results. Here are some evaluation definitions and descriptions to provide some
background.
Formative and Summative Evaluation

Michael Scriven introduced these two terms, formative and summative, in 1967, to
describe the evaluation of educational curriculum. Formative evaluation produces
information that is fed back during the course of a program to improve it. Summative
evaluation is done after the program is finished, and provides information about its
effectiveness. Scriven later simplified this distinction, as follows: ‘When the cook
tastes the soup, that’s formative evaluation; when the guest tastes it, that’s
summative evaluation.’ (In Weiss, 1998, p. 31)
Programs are seldom ‘finished’; they continue to adapt and modify over time, in
response to internal and external conditions. Therefore, the need for ‘formative’
information continues – to be fed back to program staff to improve the program.

Outcome and Process-Based Evaluation
Focusing on the results of a program or its outcomes is still a major aspect of most
evaluations. Outcomes refer to the end results of a program for the people it was
intended to serve – students, teachers, and volunteers – whoever your audience is.
The term outcome is often used interchangeably with result and effect. Some
outcomes of a program are the results the program planners anticipated. Other
outcomes however are effects that nobody expected – and sometimes that nobody
wanted – yet are important information for program improvement. Change is a key
word here – what is the change that results from a particular program? Is it an
increase in something, such as knowledge? Or a decrease in something, such as
environmentally detrimental behaviour?
The process of a program is also important to evaluators – a systematic assessment

of what is going on. Evaluators need to know what the program actually does – what
is actually happening on the ground. Sometimes process is the key element of
success or failure of a program – how is it delivered, what services does it provide, is
there follow-up, do students like it? Studying program process also helps one to
understand outcome data.
Initially, there seems to be a lot of similarity between formative-summative and

process-outcome evaluations. However, the two sets of terms have quite different
implications. Formative and summative refer to the intentions of the evaluator in
doing the study – to help improve the program or judge it. Process and outcome have
nothing to do with the evaluator’s role, but relate to the phase of the program studied.
Often there is a combination of evaluations going on – the study of a program’s
process or what goes on during a program, in a formative sense, combined with a
look at outcomes – the consequences for participants at the end.
B. Conditions Unfavourable for Evaluation

There are four circumstances where evaluation may not be worthwhile: review your
program with these in mind before beginning.
1. When the program has few routines and little stability.

This might be the case with a new program that needs to be piloted and
established before any systematic evaluation can occur. It can also occur if the
program has no consistent activities, delivery methods, or theories behind it.
However, a formative evaluation done through a pilot phase may help identify
these gaps more clearly.
2. When those involved in the program can’t agree as to what it is trying to

achieve.
If there are big discrepancies in perceived goals, staff are probably working at
cross-purposes. Again, the coherence of the program is in doubt, and while a
process-based evaluation might be helpful, an Outcomes-Based Evaluation
would have no criteria to use.
3. When the sponsor or program manager sets limits as to what the evaluation
can study, putting many important issues off limits.
This occurs rarely, when the sponsor or manager wants a ‘whitewash’ job from an
evaluation. Avoid at all costs!
4. When there is not enough funds, resources, or staff expertise to conduct

the evaluation.

Evaluations call for time, money, energy, planning and skill: it is important to
ensure these are in place for a successful product. This is beyond a doubt the
single most prevalent reason that program evaluations are either not done or are
not adequate.
Pros and Cons of Evaluation Instruments

The following table is a summary of the advantages and disadvantages of different
evaluation instruments.
Instrument Advantages Disadvantages
1. Questionnaires 9 Inexpensive. U Wording of questions

and Surveys 9 Easy to analyze. might bias responses.
9 Easy to ensure anonymity. U No control for
Types include: 9 Can be quickly misunderstood questions,
1. Self-administered. administered to many missing data, or untruthful
2. Interview people. responses.
administered 9 Can provide a lot of data U Not suitable for examining
by telephone. 9 Easy to model after complex issues.
existing samples. U Can be impersonal.
U By telephone:
respondents may lack
privacy.
2. Interviews 9 Can allow researcher to U As a rule not suitable for

get a full range and depth younger children, older
Types include: of information. people, and non-English
1. Informal, 9 Develops relationship with speaking persons.
conversational client. U Not suitable for sensitive
interview. 9 Can be flexible with client. topics.
2. Standardized, 9 Can allow you to clarify U Respondents may lack
open-ended responses. privacy.
interview. 9 Interviewer controls U Can be expensive.
3. Closed, fixed- situation, can probe U May present logistics
response irrelevant or evasive problems (time, place,
interview. answers. privacy, access, safety).
9 With good rapport, may U Often requires lengthy
obtain useful open-ended data collection period
comments. unless project employs
9 Usually yields richest data, large interviewer staff.
details, and new insights. U Can take much time.
9 Best if in-depth information U Can be hard to analyze
is wanted. and compare.
U Interviewer can bias
client’s responses.

Table Seven: Pros and Cons of Evaluation Instruments (cont’d)
3. Focus groups 9 Useful to gather ideas, U Not suited for

different viewpoints, new generalizations about
insights, and for improving population being
question design. studied.
9 Researcher can quickly U It can often be difficult
and reliably obtain to analyze responses.
common impressions and U A good facilitator is
key information about required to ensure
programs from group. safety and closure.
9 Can be efficient way to get U It can be difficult to
much range and depth of schedule people
information in short time. together.
9 Information obtained can
be used to generate
survey questions.
4. Tests 9 Test can provide the "hard" U Available instruments

data that administrators may be unsuitable.
Types include and funding agencies often U Developing and
1. Norm-referenced. prefer. validating new, project-
2. Criterion- 9 Generally they are specific tests may be
referenced. relatively easy to expensive and time
3. Performance administer. consuming.
assessment tests. 9 Good instruments may be U Objections may be
available as models. raised because of test
unfairness or bias.
5. Observations 9 If done well, can be best U Can be expensive and

for obtaining data about time-consuming to
Types include behaviour of individuals conduct.
1. Observations. and groups. U Needs well-qualified
2. Participant 9 You can view operations of staff to conduct.
observations. a program as they are U Observation may
actually occurring. affect behaviour of
9 Observations can be program participants
adapted to events as they and deliverers.
occur. U Can be difficult to
interpret and
categorize observed
behaviours.
U Can be complex to
categorize
observations.

Table Seven : Pros and Cons of Evaluation Instruments (cont’d)
6. Documentation 9 Can be objective. U Can also take much

and Record Review 9 Can be quick (depending time, depending on
on amount of data data involved.
involved). U Data may be difficult to
9 Get comprehensive and organize.
historical information. U Can be difficult to
9 Doesn’t interrupt program interpret/compare
or client’s routine in data.
program. U Data may be
9 Information already exists. incomplete or
9 Few biases about restricted.
information. U Need to be quite clear
about what looking for.
U Not a flexible means to
get data.
7. Case Studies 9 Fully depicts client’s U Usually quite time-

experience in program input, consuming to collect,
process and results. organize and describe.
9 Can be a powerful means to U Represents depth of
portray program to outsiders. information, rather
than breadth.
The above table is a compilation of information take from the following documents and sources: Carter
McNamara’s Basic Guide to Program Evaluation; EHR/NSF’s User-Friendly Handbook for Project
Evaluation; and SAMHSA – CSAP – NCAP’s Getting to Outcomes.
What is Outcomes-Based Evaluation?

Outcomes-Based Evaluation is quickly becoming one of the more
important means of program evaluation being used by non-profit
organizations. Is your program really doing the right activities to bring
about the outcomes you want? Or are you just engaging in busy
activities that seem reasonable at the time? Funders are increasingly
questioning whether non-profit programs are really making a
difference.
(McNamara, 1999)
Outcomes-Based Evaluation looks at the impacts, benefits, or changes to your

clients – students, teachers, etc. – as a result of your efforts during and/or after their
participation in your program. It helps you find out if you’re really doing the right
program activities to achieve some pre-specified outcomes. Outcome-Based
Evaluation is a method of evaluation that is based on a program logic model; the
measurement of the success of a program relies on the measurement of several
components of the logic model system.
Program Logic Model

A logic model is an approach to planning and managing projects that helps us to be
clear both about what our projects are doing and what they are changing. The word
‘logic’ is used because of the logical link between the system components: inputs are
a necessary precondition to activities; activities need to take place before outputs are

possible, etc. Think of your program as a system that has inputs, activities, outputs
and outcomes:
Outcomes Impact
Inputs Activities Outputs (a.k.a. (a.k.a
‘Objectives’) ‘Goals’)
(Note: Indicators are not part of the logic model – but they are a critical part of the
evaluation process. See text below for more information.)
Input: The materials and resources that the program uses in its activities. These are
often easy to identify, and are common to many organizations and programs. For
example: equipment, staff, facilities, etc. These are the resources you need to get the
resources you seek.
Activities: Activities are what you do to create the change you seek; they are what
you do with the inputs you have. Under the headings promotion, networking,
advocacy, or training, you describe what the project is doing.
Outputs: Outputs are the most immediate results of your project, and each relates
directly to your activities. More importantly, outputs create the potential for desired
results; they create potential for your outcomes to occur. Outputs are usually
measured as are statistics, and indicate hardly anything about the changes in clients.
(Example: 61 students attended our Ecology Camp).
Outcomes: Outcomes describe the true changes that occur to people, organizations
and communities as a result of your program. These are the actual impacts, benefits,
or changes for participants during or after your program, expressed in terms of
knowledge, skills, values or behaviours.
Outcomes may be expressed in terms of enhanced learning, such as increased

knowledge, a positive change in perceptions or attitudes, or enhanced skills. For
example, an objective of your program might be to ‘demonstrated increase
awareness of the causes and prevention measures of climate change’. Outcomes
many also be expressed in terms of physical conditions, such as the development of
school-grounds garden.
Impact: This describes your vision of a preferred future and underlines why the
project is important. It refers to the longer-term change that you hope your project will
help create.
Measuring Outcomes: The success of a program is measured using indicators that

measure any or all of the three logic model components of output, outcome, or
impact.
Outcome Indicators: These are what you can see, hear, read, etc. and suggest that
you’re making progress toward your outcome target or not. Indicators can be
established for outputs, outcomes, and impacts. Indicators are measured using
‘instruments’ such as questionnaires or surveys, and may be either quantitative or
qualitative. Indicators can be envisioned as the ‘flags’ that let us know we’re on the

correct path. They answer the question, ‘How will you know when you’ve achieved
the outcome?’ They are the measurable, observable ways of defining your outcomes.
They define what the outcome looks like.
Outcome Targets: These specify how much of your outcome you hope to achieve.
Splash and Ripple

Here is one image to help people understand and use outcome
measurement. The rock is like a material Input; the person holding the
rock is like a human resource Input. The act of dropping the rock is like
an Activity. When the rock reaches the water, it creates a Splash –
these are your Outputs. The ripples spreading out from the splash are
like your Outcomes, then later your Impacts. The edge of the pond
represents the geographic and population boundaries of your project.
(Plan: Net Ltd, 2002)

B. General Steps to Outcomes-Based Evaluation
With a basic understanding of the process and language of Outcomes-Based
Evaluation, we can start to think about how one would set about conducting it. Carter
McNamara has produced many handy resources on how to understand and conduct
Outcomes-Based Evaluation. The following is adapted from his Basic Guide to
Outcomes-Based Evaluation in Nonprofit Organizations with Very Limited Resources
(1999) and provides a very succinct set of steps that environmental education
organizations can easily follow.
Step 1. Get Ready!

• Start smart! Pick a program to evaluate. Choose one that has a reasonably
clear group of clients and clear methods to provide services to them.
• If you have a mission statement, a strategic plan or a goal(s) statement for
this program, haul it out of the filing cabinet you’ve jammed it into, and
consider it.
• Ask for some money. Consider getting a grant to support developing your
evaluation plan – while this is not vital to the process, evaluation expertise to
review your plans can be extremely beneficial and insightful. Many grantors
will consider assigning up to 15% of total budget amount to an external
evaluation; make sure you ask about this.
Step 2. Choose Your Outcomes.

• Choose the outcomes that you want to examine. Make a ‘priority list’ for these
outcomes, and if your time and resources are limited, pick the top two to four
most important outcomes for now.
• It can be quite a challenge to identify outcomes for some types of programs.
Remember, an outcome is the benefit that your client receives from
participating in your program (not a statistic). McNamara suggests using
words such as ‘enhanced’, ‘increased’, ‘more’, ‘new’, or ‘altered’ to identify
outcomes.
• Consider your timeframe and what you can evaluate within it. McNamara
suggest that within 0-6 months, knowledge and skills can be evaluated; within
3-9 months, behaviours; and within 6-12 months values and attitudes. Try
linking these short-term outcomes (0-3) months, with long-term outcomes (6-
12 months).
Step 3. Selecting Indicators

• Specify an indicator for each outcome.
• Choose indicators based on asking questions like: What would I see, hear,
read about clients that means progress toward the outcome? For example:
‘30 of the 200 students who participate in CPAWS Grizzly Bear Forever!
Program will demonstrate one new environmental stewardship activity within
two months of the program’.
• If this is your first outcomes plan that you’ve ever done or the program is just
getting started, don’t spend a lot of time trying to find the perfect numbers and
percentages for your indicators.
Step 4. Gathering Data and Information

• For each indicator, identify what information you will need to collect or
measure to assess that indicator. Consider the practicality of collecting data,
when to collect data and the tools/instruments available to collected data.
Basically, you’re trying to determine how the information you’re going to need
can be efficiently and realistically gathered.
• Data collection instruments could include, but are not limited to: surveys,
questionnaires, focus groups, checklists, and observations. See Appendix
One for more information on the pro’s and con’s of each survey method.
Step 5. Piloting/Testing
• Most likely you don’t have the resources to pilot test your complete outcomes
evaluation process. Instead, think of the first year of applying your outcomes
process as your pilot process. During this first year, identify any problems and
improvements, etc. and document these. Then apply them to your program
evaluation the following year for a new and improved process (see Step 6).
Step 6. Analyzing and Reporting

• Analyze your data. You may have collected quantitative (i.e. numerical) or
qualitative (i.e. comments) data. To analyze comments, etc. (that is, data that
is not numerical in nature): read through all the data, organize comments into
similar categories, e.g., concerns, suggestions, strengths, etc; label the
categories or themes, e.g., concerns, suggestions, etc; and identify patterns,
or associations and causal relationships in the themes.
• Report your evaluation results. The level and scope of information in report
depends for whom the report is intended, e.g., funders, board, staff, clients,
etc.
• Remember that the most important part of an evaluation is thinking through
how you’re going to incorporate what you learned from it into the next round
of programming. That’s the real value, beyond reports to funders,
accountability, etc.: its the learning that comes through looking at what
worked and what didn’t and applying that learning.

Where can I find out more about evaluation of EfS
programs?
Canada: Network for Environmental
Development Education Association, Education.
2001. Measuring effectiveness in www.cpawscalgary.org/education/eval
development education London: DEA. uation
www.dea.org.uk/info/projects/effective Model for evaluation of environmental
ness/ An electronic uses pack education programs, using illustrative
developed from a 2 year research examples from existing programs and
project conducted by DEA, providing a providing tips to select appropriate
framework for measuring effectiveness evaluation tools.
and examples of good practice. Easily
adapted to Education for Sustainability Learning through Landscapes, 2004
projects. Measuring success: a guide to
evaluating school grounds projects
Fien J, Scott W and Tilbury D (2002) Winchester: Learning through
Exploring principles of good practice: Landscapes.
learning from meta-analysis of case www.ltl.org.uk
studies on education within About school projects: principles and
conservation across the WWF network practices of evaluation in relation to
Applied Environmental Education and school grounds projects; a six-step
Communication 1:153-162 model of the evaluation process in
action.
Fien J, Scott W and Tilbury D (2001)
Education and conservation: lessons Sara Burns and Joy MacKeith,
from an evaluation Environmental Triangle Consulting (2006) Explaining
Education Research Vol 7 No 4 the difference your project makes: A
BIG guide to using an outcomes
Groundwork/New Economics approach
Foundation, 2000 Prove it! Measuring http://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/er_ev
the effect of neighbourhood renewal al_explaining_the_difference.pdf
on local people London: New This guide sets out some of the main
Economics Foundation. steps that you will have to take to plan
www.neweconomics.org and manage a project using an
Report resulting from the evaluation of outcomes based approach.
Barclays Site Savers, a national
program to reclaim derelict areas for Scott, W. and Gough, S., 2003.
community use. Sustainable development and
learning: framing the issues London:
Heritage Lottery Fund/Arts Council of Routledge Falmer.
England, 2002 Culture and learning: Chapter 10 explores how we can know
creating arts and heritage education that sustainability is being promoted or
projects. London: Arts Council of enhanced; argues for a view of
England. monitoring and evaluation as integral
www.artscouncil.org.uk/information to learning; sets out a range of
Guide to help people working in the procedures.
arts and heritage sectors to plan,
deliver and evaluate education Scott, W. and Gough, S., 2004. (Eds)
projects. Key issues in sustainable development
and learning: a critical review London:
Hoffman, J. and Thomson, G., 2003 RoutledgeFalmer.
Measuring the success of Chapter 10 comprises two key
environmental education programs readings from the literature on
sustainable development and

evaluation, and two specially
commissioned critical commentaries
on these readings.
Stokking H., Van Aert, L., Meilberg, W.

and Kaskens, A., 1999.
(1999) Evaluating Environmental
Education. Gland, IUCN Commission
on Education and Communication
http://app.iucn.org/webfiles/doc/CEC/P
ublic/Electronic/CEC/Books/Evaluating
_Environmental_Ed.pdf
Illustrates logistics and thought
processes of carrying out an
evaluation; explains when and how to
use different evaluation tools.
The Australian Evaluation Society

www.aes.asn.au/
Membership includes twice yearly
Evaluation Journal of Australasia
The Centre for Public Agency

Sustainability Reporting
www.publicagencyreporting.org
The Centre was launched in March
2005 and its mission is to improve the
sustainability performance of public
agencies through the practice of
reporting. The Centre is a not-for-profit
entity, which seeks to build capacity in
public agencies to undertake
sustainability reporting and to facilitate
the development of best practice in
sustainability reporting by
public agencies.
The Evaluation Center,

Western Michigan University
www.wmich.edu/evalctr/
The Evaluation Center's mission is to
advance the theory, practice, and
utilization of evaluation. The Center's
principal activities are research,
development, dissemination, service,
instruction, and national and
international leadership in evaluation.
Woodhill J and Robins L Participatory

Evaluation for Landcare and
Catchment Groups: A Guide for
Facilitators
www.greeningaustralia.org.au

References
1
Fien J, Scott W and Tilbury D (2002)
Exploring principles of good practice:
learning from meta-analysis of case
studies on education within conservation
across the WWF network Applied
Environmental Education and
Communication 1:153-162
2
Hoffman, J. and Thomson, G., 2003
Measuring the success of environmental
education programs Canada: Network for
Environmental Education.
www.cpawscalgary.org/education/evaluati
on [Accessed 4 July 2006]

Aries - Education For Sustainability Local Gov Handbook

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Aries - Education For Sustainability Local Gov Handbook

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Education for Sustainability

The handbook served as a resource to support the participants in the local

Copyright: © Commonwealth of Australia 2007

Citation: Delgado, L (2007) Education for Sustainability in Local Government:

The project was conceptualised by Daniella Tilbury, ARIES, Macquarie University,

The Project Process 11

Tools and techniques for EfS and 61

Evaluation of EfS programs 143

ARIES Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability

DEC NSW Department of Education

DEWHA Australian Government Department of the Environment and Water

DEST Australian Government Department of Education, Science and

EFS Education for Sustainability

EPA NSW Environment Protection Authority

IIED International Institute for Environment and Development

IISD International Institute for Sustainable Development

KIG Key Informant Group

LA21 Local Agenda 21

LGA Local Government Association

NEEC National Environmental Education Council

NGO Non-Governmental Organisation

NSESD National Strategy for Ecological Sustainable Development

PAR Participatory Action Research

PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal

UNDESD United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development

UNEP United Nations Environment Program

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation

WSSD World Summit on Sustainable Development

The Mentoring Local Government in Education for Sustainability project sought to

Key questions addressed by this section:

What is this handbook for? ...........................................................................2

What does this handbook contain?..............................................................2

How should this handbook be used?...........................................................2

Who funded the Mentoring Local Government in Education for

Who faciliated this project? ..........................................................................3

Why was this project funded?.......................................................................3

Who was this project for? .............................................................................4

Who participated in this project?..................................................................5

Who were the key stakeholders in this project? .........................................6

Which were the essential readings for the project?....................................8

Education for Sustainability in Local Government: Handbook 1

What is this handbook for?

What does this handbook contain?

How should this handbook be used?

Education for Sustainability in Local Government: Handbook 2

At the end of each section you will find a list of further

Who funded the Mentoring Local Government in Education for

For more information visit www.deh.gov.au/education.

Who facilitated this project?

Why was this project funded?

Education for Sustainability in Local Government: Handbook 3

This project draws upon previous initiatives developed by Macquarie University in

This project has been developed in the belief that:

• the ideas and concepts of Education for Sustainability offer an effective

• there is a need to build capacity of local government staff in developing

• learning is best undertaken in an active, supportive and non-

• local government needs to integrate sustainability across all facets of

• local government needs to more actively engage stakeholders within

Who was this project for?

Education for Sustainability in Local Government: Handbook 4

The participating councils were:

Auburn Council (NSW) Towards Sustainability

Going Places – Travel Reward