imperialism in local sustainability initiatives

I work in environmental education and sustainable development. Recently, a colleague asked if what we do is like unto colonialism and, whilst I think there was a little bit of jest in his question, I do think he was overall serious.

In the anti-racism space we talk a lot about cultural imperialism: here and here and here are some examples. But I don't see a lot of talk about cultural imperialism in the environmental/greenie space.

That's not to say that there's no talk about environmentalism/ sustainability and racism. There is an awesome post up at debunkingwhite filled with links to posts about food/sustainability + whiteness/privilege: links here. I haven't read all of the links yet, but so far it has been good reading about class and privilege. And in the space in which I work, even as a highly educated, middle class person who passes as white, I spend a lot of time feeling excluded from the sustainability discourse by dint of the fact that it's so western/white oriented. But that's not really imperialism.

When we're working in the green space in specific communities in our own countries and areas, can this count as imperialism? We're coming in, sometimes from outside (especially if we're engaged by a school/a business/a local council to come in and educate the students/the employees/the local community), to educate. Often, at least in my role as facilitator and educator, I can't do a lot of top down legislative regulatory stuff, that is a cornerstone of imperialism, but there is an assumption that what I'm doing and teaching is right (do the right thing! be green! tread lightly! etc), and that everyone should change their behaviour to conform with what I'm teaching. Sometimes this is generalities (live green!) and sometimes this is made up of specifics (recycle! change your diet! use less water!). And certainly if I'm brought in from outside, there's an expectation there that I'm right and everyone should listen to me.

But is that imperialism?

I should note that I do think that a lot of sustainability initiatives on a larger, global scale often are sustainability imperialism, but that's not really what I'm trying to work out.

Some further reading on global sustainability imperialism:

• Biofuels, Trade and Sustainability
• Beyond ecological imperialism
• The fight against eco-imperialism

I couldn't find any articles on the idea of imperialism at the educational-local level; I wonder if I'm looking in the wrong places?

working from the wrong assumptions

Today I was at a behaviour change + sustainability conference that worked on the open space format.* At the very last minute (literally, the facilitator said "I think this is our last one" and then I dashed past him to write one up) I put up a poorly articulated question that sounded like:

how can we work for/with people from disadvantaged groups in terms of behaviour change and other issues?

I wasn't sure if this would get much interest. Of the thirty to forty panels that went up, only mine and another even touched at all on social issues, so as the time I had assigned neared, I became increasingly concerned.

In the end, about 20 people turned up. Which was exciting!

I really wanted to talk about this topic because in the space in which I work (I don't mean my company, I mean the industry/area), I find that a lot of organisations and learnings are coming from a place of middle class assumptions. There's this basic assumption that when organisations (or me, on behalf of client organisations) do environmental/sustainability work in the community, that community has an equal level on which it stands.

Maslow's hierarchy of needs is exactly what it sounds like, and at the bottom of the pyramid are physiological things like breathing, food, water, and sleep. The second level of the hierarchy looks at safety, like having shelter, being employed, having health, your family being okay. I find that a lot of programs, especially top down programs, assume that everyone is well above this level - that is, everyone has a job (or is supported), everyone is healthy, it is all things equal.

The reality is, that this assumption means that there are groups who don't fall into these sections, and they are completely unaddressed by most generic community sustainability programs in Australia. There are a few targeted programs, but not that many.

Anyway, here are my notes from today's session:

• middle class attitudes to sustainability
• inability and disinterest do not have a correlation (no greater than in any other group) - more that (low socio-economic) groups want to change but have many barriers
• access - go out to groups, don't expect them to come to you (e.g. rural farms)
• organisational flexibility is very important
• ask them what works for them / what they are able to achieve (esp. if you give them assistance)
• make consequences clear, work together
• should we place greater emphasis on social change at a societal level?
• social norms
• people who are vulnerable want to make themselves and their kids/family feel not not-normal
• many orgs are setting aspirational images that are unrealistic (eg marketing brochures of happy white families in clean houses)
• the community often has the answer <--this also promotes engagement

* there's no timetabled talks. you sit in a big room and people get a piece of paper and write on it something they want to talk about, or a question, and then they assign it to a time slot, and hope that people turn up.