|
BACKGROUND
BRIEFING PAPER ON
SELF-HELP ACTION Exploring
possibilities for Small Generalisable Written 10 Oct1997 Last updated
April 2014. This paper is a complimentary
briefing paper associated with the Laceweb documents: ·
Self Help
Action Rebuilding Wellbeing in the SE Asia Oceania Australasia Region ·
Background
Briefing Paper on Possibilities For Unfolding Self Help Action On
Bougainville CONTEXTS
As at 1998, Sixty Billion
dollars flows into the SE Asia Oceania Australasia Region in Aid money. Japan
is by far the largest donor country. AusAid combined a few years ago with
Austrade to run the conference, 'Aid business is good Business'. The head of
the Japanese Aid body was present. Government Aid and trade hand in hand with
transnational companies. Typically, 'aid' work generates economic 'activity'
for companies from the donor country,
and the expressed aim was for every dollar of aid to generate seven dollars of follow-on business. That is, the
additional money potential of aid 'follow-on' economic activity in the region
is in the order of $420 Billion ($420,000,000,000). Aid is driven by 'money
politics'. Disadvantaged indigenous
and small minority people in the Region typically live in 'contested
geographies'. Governments and multinationals want the same area for other
purposes - timber, mining, power, water and the like. Most of the trauma
facing the focal people in the Region is traceable to decisions by the very
governments and multi-nationals who are in the act of dispensing the
$60,000,000,000 in 'aid' or linked to the business activity connected with,
or flowing from 'aid' action. Refer Key Indigenous
Issues).
In controlling this
massive 'aid', vested interest ensure that local indigenous and disadvantaged
small minorities have little or no say in anything that happens. When Aid
bodies speak of 'self-help' for 'local people' it is a far cry from what is
being proposed in the Laceweb Self-Help documents. CAVEAT
The suggestions in
'Laceweb – Self-Help Action' document are based on the use of extremely
dynamic, powerful and effective socio-emotional and socio-economic processes.
These approaches have evolved in the Laceweb over the past 50 years. The
approaches outlined in the document, when applied by competent, experienced
enablers, are extremely powerful. However, if these processes are attempted
by unqualified, unskilled and inexperienced people, not only could they be
completely ineffectual, they could result in people being disillusioned.
Currently, few are equipped as enablers to use these processes. Laceweb
Enablers support locals to be more able to do things for themselves. Local
enablers may evolve as part of the process of rebuilding Well-being. AN ALTERNATIVE OR
COMPLEMENT TO SERVICE DELIVERY What is being suggested
in this document is pervasive 'Self=Help'. It is not 'service delivery
'dressed up' to give locals 'a sense' of self-help. It is just what it says -
local grassroots people helping themselves and having all the say about how
things happen and what happens. In contrast to the
Laceweb way, pervasively, 'infrastructure development' ‘community
development’ and other and 'service delivery' involves someone doing
something for someone else. Typically, bureaucrats within the government
agencies of donor and recipient country decide what happens. The 'Service' is
delivered and supported by bureaucracy. This is 'poles' apart from what is
being recommended here. While possibly starting
in very small ways, the suggestions contained in the links at the bottom of
this page are potentially comprehensive in their scope towards generating an
alternative or a complement to 'expert-driven' service delivery processes.
Starting in very small ways may allow what works in meeting local priorities
and aspirations to be repeated and expanded. Small beginnings may allow
far-reaching Well-being change in the Region. WELL-BEING AS FOCUS
Most Well-being issues
revolve around what we do, or not do as we go about our daily lives; that is,
our culture. Throughout the Region much well-being loss can be attributable
to business decision makers (For Example, Panguna Copper mine in Bougainville).
A very small proportion of loss of Well-being relates to the action of germs,
viruses and chance occurrence. In general terms, a very
large proportion of Well-being loss is self-imposed or imposed by outsiders
or locals - violence, torture, and trauma, domestic violence, lack of mutual
respect, becoming insane, poor eating habits and life styles, polluting,
causing soil erosion, lack of exercise and laziness, and so on. It is
trivially true that if people stopped behaviours like the ones mentioned,
most Well-being issues, currently needing millions to resolve, could be
solved without spending a cent. But it is not that simple. Throughout the Oceania
Australasia SE Asia Region, Well-being influences are being generated that
are placing the impetus for Action back at the place where it breaks down -
with the local people as they go about their lives. Indigenous and Small
Minority people have been, since the 1970's, taking self-help wellbeing
action and asking for and needing nothing from government in order to
carry out this wellbeing action - they just get on with it! Refer Government
Facilitation of Grassroots Action. It is pervasively local
Action. Small groups engage in Action and keep using practices that work for
them. Others become involved and initiatives, starting at the local
grassroots level where it is happening, work their way outwards to include
more and more of the wider community. The links below do
explore engaging in self help wellbeing action that may require funding and protocols for
funding have
been evolved. EXPLORING POSSIBLE
FUTURES Typically, small
initiatives start with local action to address some aspect limiting or
effecting wellbeing. For this, no funding is typically required. Later, there
may be the exploring together of small and larger barter/trading
opportunities and the real-playing of setting up and running these, and the
evolving of action may be generating a wide range of positive behavioural
outcomes. People may take on board a wide range of skills. Behaviours may
change in the process. More ambitious
initiatives may be real-played. Sculptures and models may be created. Small
pilot projects may be trialled as appropriate to context. The need to seek
outside resources (including experts as 'resource people') may be recognized
and how to do this may be explored and experienced. Other potential
initiatives requiring greater financial, labour and other resources may be
taken through to final conceptual stages before review by funding sources.
Typically, a number of initiatives may be developed in tandem. Those income-producing
Actions that may involve money to get them started may be modelled,
real-played, mini-trialled, and acted out until a highly refined experiential
action model emerges. A number of these may be evolving simultaneously. Attention may be paid to
how these various models fit together, as well as exploring the scope for
economies through integrating aspects of the different possibilities (for
example, situating a number of projects close to each other to use a common
access path). Scarce funding may mean that the villagers may have a number of
projects that have to be put on the back-burner or dropped. Participating in the
process may generate skills in selecting the initiatives to be put forward
for approval by funding sources. All involved in the evolution of the
experiential models may have already worked together on many issues not
requiring funding. They may have, in this process, gained refined skills in
cooperative Action. This Action together may prepare them for pervasively
owning and effectively operating small and large economic initiatives. For example, a key to
'low risk' economic endeavours is creating ongoing contexts where generating
of goods and/or services is to meet existing requests. Generating goods and
services in the hope (often vane) of exchanging them, is a higher risk.
Enablers may support the local people in creating the first scenario. DEVELOPING A BROAD
COMPETENCE BASE WITHIN VILLAGES 'Nurturing culture'
involves ways of joint Action having potential to spread and enrich the Well-being
competence base throughout the local community. The potential is for the
further expanding and spreading of the local wellbeing experiences, knowings,
capacities and wisdoms. The process mitigates
against generating a few who have the power and influence that comes from
being the possessor of scarce knowledge which is jealously guarded.
Initiatives may be involving everyone in acting together to take back ability over their lives. Typically, any experts
already present or emerging in the villages may be used as 'resource people' and less as 'power
brokers' and 'decision makers'. These role parameters may apply to any
'outside' expert who may become involved as well. People may be engaged in
passing on diverse Well-being skills - for example, in providing
community-based family and individual wellness support. All involved may gain
experience of competence by the very nature of the process of increasing
wellness and creating new initiatives. Well-being competence may
be refined and passed on in everyday life in natural settings. Often this
entails embodied knowing that has not reached consciousness. People are
transformed in having grace and elegance in doing things that they may find
hard to put into words. Others copy the process and also experience embodied
knowing. Experiential learning. As well, this may occur
during specific structured contexts. Increasingly, people may be intuitively
appropriate in their responses to each other. There may be acts that are
perfect for the moment which also contain the seed of realistic generalisable
policy. Complementary Papers:
·
Self Help
Action Rebuilding Wellbeing in the SE Asia Oceania Australasia Region ·
Background
Briefing Paper on Possibilities For Unfolding Self Help Action On
Bougainville Short Version
of Previous Page. Trauma Healing
Workshop Manual
|
