Theory And Practice In Sustainability: Building A Ladder Of Community Focused Education and Outreach Sue Thering with I Cheryl Doble Sue Thering is a Ph.D. candidate in the Faculty of Environmental Science at the SUNY College of Environmen- tal Science and Forestry (SUNY-ESF). She holds an M.L.A. from Cornell University and a B.P.S. Architecture from SUNY Buffalo. Recent activities at SUNY-ESF include teaching a sem- inar on sustainability through the Faculty of Environmental Studies, and working with the Center For Community Design Research through the Faculty of Landscape Architec- ture. Sue’s dissertation investigates the long term social and environmen- tal affects of participatory community planning and design and is based on ideas developed in this paper. Cheryl Doble is Associate Pro- fessor of Landscape Architecture at the SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry. She holds a B.S. and an M.S. from Syracuse University and an M.L.A. from SUNY-ESE Her research interests include design edu- cation, graphic communication, com- munity design, and citizen participa- tion in the design process. Abstract: Investigating the links between the emergence of the idea of"sustainability" and the rise of’participatory processes" in community planning and design offers a conceptual framework for developing and assessing programs and approaches to education, outreach, and professional practice in post-industrial society. The Idea of "Sustainability" C urrent literature suggests that social sustainability and environmental sustainability are two inter-dependent and mutually supporting aspects of a comprehen- sive approach to sustainability. Much of the literature stresses the impor- tance of intergenerational and intra- generational equity in the distribu- tion of both environmental resources and environmental quality, suggest- ing that concern for future genera- tions cannot be cause to ignore inequities within living generations (Brown-Weiss 1990; Brundtland 1987; ICUN 1980; 1993; PCSD 1996; Sachs 1995). The roots of the idea of sus- tainability may be seen in the merg- ing of the Social Justice Movement of the 1960s and the Environmental Movement of the 1970s (Eckersley 1992; Gare 1995; Merchant 1996; Rimmerman 1997). The discourse growing around the idea of sustain- ability suggests the need for research and reflection on how this merging of the two most powerful social move- ments of the late twentieth century may be affecting post-industrial soci- ety. Investigating the emergence of the idea of sustainabitity in the his- tory of Western thought lays the foundation for an understanding of changing social values and behaviors and suggests a definition of sustain- ability that may inform teaching, aca- demic research, and professional practice in post-industrial society,. A literature search found two classic studies that form a beginning point for this investigation one in the history and philosophy of science and one in sociology: The Structure of Scien- ti.fic Revolutions (Kuhn 1962), and American Ideologies (Dolbeare and Dol- beare 1976), respectively. Thomas Kuhn’s 1962 study of The Structure of Thering/Doble 191
Transcript
Theory And Practice In Sustainability: BuildingA Ladder Of Community Focused Educationand OutreachSue Thering withI Cheryl Doble
Sue Thering is a Ph.D. candidate inthe Faculty of Environmental Scienceat the SUNY College of Environmen-tal Science and Forestry (SUNY-ESF).She holds an M.L.A. from CornellUniversity and a B.P.S. Architecturefrom SUNY Buffalo. Recent activitiesat SUNY-ESF include teaching a sem-inar on sustainability through theFaculty of Environmental Studies,and working with the Center ForCommunity Design Research throughthe Faculty of Landscape Architec-ture. Sue’s dissertation investigatesthe long term social and environmen-tal affects of participatory communityplanning and design and is based onideas developed in this paper.
Cheryl Doble is Associate Pro-fessor of Landscape Architecture atthe SUNY College of EnvironmentalScience and Forestry. She holds a B.S.and an M.S. from Syracuse Universityand an M.L.A. from SUNY-ESE Herresearch interests include design edu-cation, graphic communication, com-munity design, and citizen participa-tion in the design process.
Abstract: Investigating the links between the emergence of the idea of"sustainability" andthe rise of’participatory processes" in community planning and design offers a conceptual
framework for developing and assessing programs and approaches to education, outreach, andprofessional practice in post-industrial society.
The Idea of "Sustainability"
C urrent literature suggeststhat social sustainability
and environmental sustainability aretwo inter-dependent and mutuallysupporting aspects of a comprehen-sive approach to sustainability. Muchof the literature stresses the impor-tance of intergenerational and intra-generational equity in the distribu-tion of both environmental resourcesand environmental quality, suggest-ing that concern for future genera-tions cannot be cause to ignoreinequities within living generations
(Brown-Weiss 1990; Brundtland 1987;ICUN 1980; 1993; PCSD 1996; Sachs1995). The roots of the idea of sus-tainability may be seen in the merg-ing of the Social Justice Movement ofthe 1960s and the EnvironmentalMovement of the 1970s (Eckersley1992; Gare 1995; Merchant 1996;Rimmerman 1997). The discoursegrowing around the idea of sustain-ability suggests the need for researchand reflection on how this merging ofthe two most powerful social move-ments of the late twentieth centurymay be affecting post-industrial soci-ety. Investigating the emergence ofthe idea of sustainabitity in the his-tory of Western thought lays the
foundation for an understanding ofchanging social values and behaviorsand suggests a definition of sustain-ability that may inform teaching, aca-demic research, and professionalpractice in post-industrial society,.
A literature search found twoclassic studies that form a beginningpoint for this investigation one in thehistory and philosophy of science andone in sociology: The Structure of Scien-ti.fic Revolutions (Kuhn 1962), andAmerican Ideologies (Dolbeare and Dol-beare 1976), respectively. ThomasKuhn’s 1962 study of The Structure of
Thering/Doble 191
Scient~c Revolutions is still requiredreading for courses in the natural andsocial sciences. Kuhn’s observationand description of how new discover-ies change the way scientists under-stand the world popularized thephrase "paradigm shift." Kuhn’sclaims created a major controversy inthe era of "objective science" when herevealed the subjective side of scienceby asserting that a scientific "truth"under one paradigm (a heliocentricuniverse, pre-Darwininan biology, andNewtonian physics), and a totally con-tradictory "truth" under a differentparadigm (geocentric universe, Dar-winian evolution, and Einsteinianphysics), can exist simultaneously.Kuhn’s controversial assertion wasthat when faced with competing para-digms, a scientist must make a com-pletely subjective choice: reject thedominant paradigm and adopt anemerging one; or refuse to accept thenew and keep working with the famil-iar. Kuhn suggested an analogybetween how a "paradigm shift" anda visual "gestalt switch" (theduck/rabbit drawing for example)each fundamentally changes the waythe world is seen and understood(Kuhn 1962, p. 85). Significantly,Kuhn observed and described howthis new understanding of the worldredefines both the questions and themethods deemed appropriate in sci-entific inquiry (Kuhn 1962: pp. 6,111-135).
Kenneth and Patricia Dol-beare’s 1976 study of American Ideolo-gies is still cited by political and socialscientists today (Dolbeare and Dol-beare 1976). The Dolbeares’s studysuggests that ideologies may be inves-tigated through three defining char-acteristics: 1. a worldview whichreflects an understanding of thestructure and function of society;2. the values andgoals believed legiti-mate and desirable for society as awhole; and 3. the behaviors deemedappropriate in attaining or maintainingthose values and goals. The Dolbearessuggest that ideological characteris-tics vary over time, most commonlythrough long-term social processes(Fisher 1995, pp. 157-160).
This brief summary provides aglimpse into how a synthesis ofKuhn’s "paradigm shifts" and the"three characteristics of ideologies" bythe Dolbeares can inform an investiga-tion into the emergence of the idea ofsustainability and refine its definition.Figure 1 illustrates how these studieswere synthesized to construct a modelfor this research. The model illus-trates how shifts in a society’s under-standing of the structure and func-tion of the natural world, its science,changes that society’s understandingof the structure and function of thesocial world, its worldview. The modelalso illustrates how this dynamic rela-tionship affects societal values and
eras. Medieval era "Science" wasbased on an understanding of theworld as a "Great Chain of Being"which began with the Creator andranks of angels, continued throughthe Pope, church hierarchy, monarchsand nobles, down to peasants and sav-ages. From there, the hierarchyextended from mammals down tominerals. Contemplation of naturewas an act of priestly devotion. TheMedieval understanding of nature isconsistent with that society’s world-view as exemplified in the feudalstructure. The path to eternal salva-tion was through duty and service, asdictated by church and feudal tradi-tion, and was based on one’s place in
Science Worldview Values & Goals
BehaviorFigure 1. Paradigm Dynamics
behavioral norms. The model offers aline of inquiry to investigate thesecharacteristics in major eras of West-ern civilization and an understandingof the emerging idea of sustainability.
Figure 2 outlines the character-istics of paradigm dynamics asrevealed in an investigation of theMedieval, Renaissance, Enlighten-ment, Industrial, and Post-Industrial
the "Great Chain of Being" (Bowler1992; Hart 1980; Livingstone 1992).
The era of Enlightenment was atime when scientific revolutions andsocial revolutions were mutually gen-erating activities. The Reformationand the Protestant work ethic rein-forced scientific discoveries thatbrought the earth centered universeand the Great Chain of Being intoquestion. Nature was now the abun-dant providence of a beneficent cre-ator accessible to all who would workhard and risk dangers. Conquering
192 Landscape Journal
nature through science promised toemancipate humankind from the fearof Nature, and from oppressive tradi-tion and superstition. The authorityof the church declined as the elite instate and merchant classes gainedpower (Berman 1988; Bowler 1992;Habermas 1993; Harvey 1990; Living-stone 1992; Porteous 1996).
With the loss of divinity innature and the decline of Churchauthority, an increasingly powerfulstate and merchant elite called onscience to explore and exploit theresources of the natural world. Unlikeprevious eras, which saw linear timein human history as progress toward aclearO~ defined end (salvation, revela-
(Bowler 1992; Gare 1995; Habermas1993; Hart t980; Harvey 1990; Hen-derson 1991; Horkheimer and Adorno1973; Livingstone 1992; Marx 1964).
According to this conceptualmodel, current ecological science hashelped shape an emerging worldviewwhich understands the structure ofsociety as a system of webs. While theconnections between this worldviewand social values that reflect a grow-ing concern for environmental qualityis very clear, what is striking are theindications of another major concep-tual transformation in Westernthought. Unlike previous eras, whichunderstood the structure of society ashierarchical, with the church, feudal,
Traditional/Non-traditional Politi-cal Behaviors. Social scientists haveresearched, documented, and theo-rized about the declines in traditionalforms of political participationthroughout the second half of thetwentieth century. Robert Putnam’sstudies of the decline in "social capi-tal" indicate steady declines in voterturnout, participation in traditionalsocial and political groups, and socialtrust in the age groups born since thelate 1920s (Putnam 1995a; 1995b).However, recent studies are revealingmeaningful increases in non-traditionalforms of political participation in agegroups born since the 1950s (Ingle-hart 1995; 1996).
Figure 2: Shifting Paradigms in Western Thought.
Era/Paradigm
Medieval
Renaissance
Enlightenment
Industrial
Post-Industrial
Science
Great Chain of Being
Humanism
Mechanical Control
Resources
Ecology/Complexity
Worldview
Feudal Order
Monarchy/ColonialSubjugation
Reformation
Global Order
Webs & Networks
Values&Goals
Salvation
Revelation
Emancipation
Progress
Sustainability
Behaviors
Churchelite-directed
State & Churchelite-directed
State & Merchantelite-directed
Technocracyelit-directed
Participatoryelite-directing
tion, emancipation), the Industrialera underwent a conceptual transfor-mation that undermined the teleolog-ical basis of Western thought: Tech-nological and economic progress itselfbecame the focus and goal of society.The technocracy (legitimated by theideas of Social Darwinism) controlleddecision making and directed behav-ior at all levels of social organization
monarchical, state, or technocraticelite dictating and directing socialand behavioral norms, an emergingpost-industrial worldview perceives asocial structure based on the non-hierarchical idea of webs. New scientificunderstanding of the world, correspon-ding shifts in worldview, and growingconcern for social justice and environ-mental quality suggest a major shiftin post-industrial society. If the modelof paradigm dynamics offered in fig-ure one is conceptually sound, thencurrent research would reveal evi-dence of changing social and politicalbehaviors and give evidence of "sus-tainabitity" as an emerging societallevel paradigm.
Based on nearly two decades ofresearch in social and political trendsof advanced industrial nations,Ronald Inglehart suggests that as aresult of the rapid economic develop-ment and expansion of the welfarestate following World War II, theformative experience of post-warbirth cohorts differs from oldercohorts in ways that lead them todevelop fundamentally differentvalue priorities. He argues that
TheringlDoble 193
Figure 3: Trends in Social and Political Behavior.
Declining Forms of Behavior: Increasing Forms of Behavior:(Elite-directed) (Elite-directing)
Election TurnoutPolitical Party AffiliationSocial Group AffiliationCampaigningDonating to Political Campaigns
Neighborhood and Community Groups & ProjectsGrassroots OrganizationsDirect Action ActivismCommunity "Visioning" ProjectsVoter Policy Initiatives and Referenda
throughout most of history, the threatof severe economic deprivation oreven starvation had been a crucialconcern for most people. Theunprecedented degree of economicsecurity experienced by the postwargeneration in most industrial soci-eties led to a gradual shift from"materialist" values toward "postma-terialist" priorities. These prioritiesinclude: protecting freedom ofspeech; a less impersonal, morehumane society; giving people moresay in important government deci-sions; giving people more say in theirjobs and communities; a society inwhich ideas count more than money;less concern about respect for author-ity; and more concern for protectingthe environment (Inglehart 1995;1996).
The behaviors involved with"postmaterialist" values include: thegrowth of grassroots organizations;neighborhood based clean-up, green-up, and safety patrol groups; socialand environmental direct actionactivism, including NIMBY protestsand ACT-UP demonstrations; andcommunity service programs (Ingle-hart 1995; 1996; Rimmerman 1997;Dowie 1995). Inglehart suggeststhese social and political behaviorsindicate a decline in "elite-directed"behavior and an emergence of innova-tive "elite-directing" forms of politi-cal behavior (Inglehart 1995; 1996)(Figure 3).
Elite-directed vs. Elite-directingPolitical Behaviors. Analyzing the dif-ferences between elite-directing andelite-directed behaviors in severalcase studies of citizen activismreveals four key dissimilarities:1) organizational structure; 2) spatial
focus; 3) temporal focus; and 4) deci-sion-making processes (Alinski 197 l;Braungart 1995; Inglehart 1995; Kem-mis 1990; Rimmerman 1997; Schneek-loth 1995; Teske 1997; Zepatos 1995)(Figure 4). Evident in this analysis isa shift in emphasis:J?0m remote, dele-gated decision-making based on hier-archical structures and short-termfocus; toward local, community basedparticipatory decision-makingfocused on long-term social and envi-ronmental issues. Significantly, thisshift in emphasis is where the connec-tion between the ethics and methods ofthe social justice and environmentalmovements, and the roots of the ideaof sustainability, are made evident.
A Working Defnition. Defining"sustainability" based on the linkingof history, theory, and research inboth the natural and social sciencessuggests that "sustainability" is anemerging paradigm in post-industrialsociety that is flattening traditionalhierarchical social structures underthe growing pressures generated by apositive feedback loop between thegoals of the social justice and environ-mental movements. Researchers’ pro-jections suggest that post-materialistvalues and behaviors are growing andwill continue to shift under conditions
of economic security in post-industrialsocieties (Capra, 1988; Eckersley,1992; Inglehart, 1995; 1996; 1997;Zepatos, 1997). In the second part ofthis study an attempt is made toscratch the surface of how this defini-tion and conceptualization of sustain-ability may inform professional prac-tice, academic research, and teachingin post-industrial society.
Education and Outreach in the Era of Sus-tainability.
Current research and critiquesof education suggest that withincreasing concern for social andenvironmental conditions, communi-ties increasingly turn to their institu-tions of higher education for lifetimelearning and outreach, revealing con-flicts between community needs andinstitutional structures and methods(Lempert 1996; Tierney 1998; Sin-nott and Johnson 1996). Figure 5 out-lines points of conflict that can beidentified by comparing two generalexpressions of community needs (for-mulated from the research presentedin part one of this study) withresearch and writing from currentcritiques of higher education (Berryand Gordon 1993; Brady et al. 1995;Guarsci and Cornwall 1997; Lempert1996; Kemmis 1990; Tierney 1998;Sinnott and Johnson 1996; Snow 1992;Orr 1996; Verba 1993; Verba et al.1995).
Increasing focus on long-term,community-level social and environ-mental issues and participatory dem-ocratic processes suggests: l) theneed for a multi-disciplinaryapproach to addressing complexsocial and environmental conditions;
Figure 4: Different Characteristics of Elite-directed & Elite-directingBehaviors.
Figure 5: Points of Conflict Between Community Needs andExisting Institutions of Higher Education.
Community Needs Existing Institutions
Minimum interdisciplinary communication1. A problem-based, multi-disciplinaryapproach to complex social andenvironmental conditions.
2. Citizens from all social and culturalbackgrounds and all skills andprofessions with knowledge andexperience in participatory decisionmaking processes.
Lack of communication links betweeneducational institutions, communitygroups, local governments, and NGOs.
Lack of social and cultural diversity inthe student body, faculty, andadministration.
Lack of lifetime learningopportunities.
Minimum opportunities to modelparticipatory democratic processes withinthe structures and methods of traditionalhigher education.
and 2) the need for a citizenry fromall social and cultural backgroundsand from all skills and professions tobe practiced and active in theprocesses of participatory decisionmaking.
The major conflicts with exist-ing institutions include: 1) minimuminter-disciplinary communication;2) a general tack of communicationlinks between institutions, commu-nity organizations, local level govern-ment, and non-profit organizations;3) a lack of social and cultural diver-sity in the student body, faculty, andadministration; 4) a lack of lifetimelearning opportunities; and 5)limitedopportunities to model participatorydemocratic processes within the hier-archical structures and traditionalmethods of higher education. It isimportant to recognize that theseconflicts are directly related to thehistorical development of formalinstitutions of higher education,which were structured in theMedieval era under feudal order andincreasingly departmentalizedthrough the scientific and industrialrevolutions to facilitate attainment ofthe societal goals of those eras, i.e.,efficient exploitation of resources,and technological and economicprogress (Lucas 1994; Sinnott andJohnson 1996).
Community Focused Education.Recognizing the deeply ingrainedsources of conflict between commu-nity needs and traditional institutionsof higher education reveals the needto turn a critical eye toward existingeducational programs in a way thatwill reveal which aspects are congru-ous and which are incongruous withthe needs of post-industrial society.To construct a systematic frameworkfor this particular task, a literaturesearch was undertaken to investigatepossible links between participatorydemocratic processes and education.This research uncovered two classicstudies in planning theory and educa-tion theory: Sherry Arnstein’s "Lad-der of Citizen Participation" (Arn-stein t969) and Benjamin Bloom’s"Taxonomy of Cognitive Objectives"(Bloom 1956). A process of analysisand synthesis of these two studiessuggests a basis for constructing therequired evaluation framework.
Written in the late 1960s, Arn-stein’s study is still frequently quotedin planning and political science liter-ature. Intentionally provocative, theLadder progresses from "nonpartici-pation" to "tokenism" to "degrees of
citizen power" by ascending eightrungs of the "Ladder of Citizen Par-ticipation." The first two rungs are"Manipulation" and "Therapy": theseapproaches are intended as a vehiclefor elites to "educate" or "cure" a tar-get public under the guise of partici-pation. "Informing" and "Consulta-tion" are seen to allow citizens a timeand place to voice their concerns, butoffer no assurances that their voiceswill be heeded. "Placation" offers citi-zen an advisory role, but no decision-making powers. "Partnership," "Dele-gated Power,’, and "Citizen Control"demonstrate increasing levels of citi-zen decision-making power fromnegotiating, to majority in decision-making, to full managerial power(Arnstein 1969, p. 217). Arnstein’sanalysis details the steps from a pre-tense of participation to meaningfulparticipation, demonstrating anunderstanding of and engagement indecision-making as a process.
Bloom’s "Taxonomy of Cogni-tive Objectives" written in 1956, isstill the cornerstone of much theoryand discussion of objectives in educa-tional programs. Bloom’s taxonomy isa nested progression of cognitiveskills intended to suggest approachesto setting educational objectives. Thelowest objective is "Knowledge": thebehavior expected is rememberinginformation received in a learning sit-uation (Bloom 1956, p. 62). The sec-ond objective is "Comprehension":this looks for behaviors and responseswhich represent an understanding ofthe message contained in a communi-cation (Bloom 1956, p. 89). The thirdobjective is "Application": this levelexpects students to apply their com-prehension of something in an appro-priate situation with no outside guid-ance (Bloom 1956, p. 120). Thefourth level is "Analysis": the objec-tive is to break down the informationmaterial into its constituent partsand detect the relationships between,and organization of the parts (Bloom1956, p. 144). The fifth objective is"Synthesis": this demonstrates aprocess of working with elements orparts and combining them in a way toreveal a pattern or structure notclearly evident before (Bloom 1956,
Thering/Doble 195
Figure 6: Arnstein’s "Ladder" and Bloom’s "Taxonomy."
Ladder of Citizen Participation Taxonomy of Cognitive Objectives
p. 162). The sixth and highest orderis "Evaluation": this level demon-strates the capacity for making judg-ments about value and involves theuse of criteria and standards forappraisal (Bloom 1956, p. 185).
These necessarily brief reviewsof two very thoughtful authors set thestage for an analysis and synthesis oftheir contents and their structures toform a basis for evaluating educa-tional programs aimed at meetingthe needs of a society concerned withcomplex social and environmentalissues and participatory decision-making processes (Figure 6). The fol-lowing section details how this inves-tigation analyzed and synthesizedArnstein’s "Ladder" and Bloom’s"Taxonomy" to construct an evalua-tion framework that reveals commu-nication structures, levels of multi-disciplinary integration, educationalapproaches, and levels of cognitiveobjectives in a progression up sixsteps of a "Ladder of CommunityOutreach" (Figure 7).
"The Ladder of Comrnunity Out-reach.’At the lowest rung of this Lad-der is "Educating the Public." Oftensimilar to a public relations cam-paign, the intent is to promote a proj-ect designed by community and aca-demic elites for issues identified bycommunity and academic elites. Thisoutreach expects no participation orcognitive engagement from the public.The second, third, and fourth rungsare traditional community outreachprograms. Each of these offers a valu-able community service. However, witheach step up the "Ladder," opportuni-ties for community participation,multi-disciplinary integration, andeducational objectives are increasedand the ideals of Community FocusedEducation are approached.
The fifth rung is represented byeducational approaches beingexplored in a few experimental pro-grams around the country. The idea
of "Community and Institutions inPartnership" reflects attempts topartner cultural and environmentalawareness with educational curricu-lum development. The most familiarexamples of this approach are the"Foxfire" program which began in thet960s and is grounded in Dewey’sprinciples of learning, and the "Eco-literacy" program initiated in 1991 byFritjof Capra, author of the Tao ofPhysics (Capra 1984, Bowers 1995).An important contribution to thisapproach is offered by "SecondNature," a nonprofit organizationwhich has been working since the late1980s to "expand the capacity of col-leges and universities to make an.environmentally just and sustainablefuture" (Second Nature, n.d.). Eachof these programs aims at higherorder cognitive objectives and devel-opment of skills in participatoryprocesses.
The sixth and highest rung,"Community Making as Education,"is offered here as an ideal form ofCommunity Focused Education, assuggested by the highest orders of"participation" and "cognitive objec-tives" given by Arnstein and Bloom.The best illustrations of this idealfound by this investigation are exper-iments in community participationand "visioning" projects. Unlike theother forms of outreach, where theimpetus, scope, and methods arelargely determined by academic inter-ests, these projects are generatedwithin the community by broad-basedconcern for long-term social and envi-
Figure 7: Ladder of Community Outreach.
Ladder of Community Outreach
Community MakingPartneios in Education and \CommunityPublic Meetings & SurveysExpert ServicesInformation disseminationEducating the Public
ronmental issues, i.e., sustainability.Also, unlike the other forms of out-reach which focus on particular issuesor problems, these projects focus oncommunity-making as an iterativeprocess by engageing a broad spec-trum of actual stakeholders from acommunity (which may or may notformally include academia) in aprocess of defining community goalsand, importantly, in developing par-ticipatory processes and tools to itera-tively assess and evaluate the effec-tiveness of programs and policiesaimed at attaining those goals (Hes-ter 1985; 1990; Maclaren 1996; Mul-laney 1997; PCSD 1996; Sawicki1996; Sustainable Seattle 1995;Williams 1996).
Community Participation andVisioning Projects. Randy Hester’s nowclassic retrospectives (Hester 1985;1990) on his work with the small townof Manteo, North Carolina recall andoutline the development of an experi-mental approach to citizen participa-tion in community planning anddesign. This approach has sinceserved as a model for community andneighborhood scale projects. Theprocess began with information gath-ering that identified what residentsliked most about their town and theirconcerns for the future. The need foreconomic development to support therebuilding of structures and infra-structure, which were in variousstages of decline and dilapidation,was identified as the major concern.This process also identified specificsocial activities and their places ofenactment essential to communitylife and community identity. Duringthe process of exploring how the ten-sion between the importance of pre-serving these places and the necessityfor development might inform com-munity decision-making, the idea of a"Sacred Structure" was generated.Hester’s analysis recalls how wide-spread community participation andsupport helped develop the SacredStructure Inventory into both apreservation device and a designinspiration which helped draft devel-opment codes and guidelines (Hester1985). Ten years after its develop-
ment, Hester reported how theSacred Structure continued to act asa framework to evaluate changes inthe community, both before and afterimplementation, in terms of impacton the most valued places and com-munity life (Hester 1990).
Virginia Maclaren writes aboutparticipation and community vision-ing at the urban and regional scales(Maclaren 1996). The examples shedraws on in her analysis include proj-ects in Seattle, Washington, TheRegional Municipality of Hamilton-Wentworth (Ontario, Canada), andthe Province of British Columbia.Maclaren’s study analyzes theprocesses followed by these munici-palities to engage broad-based com-munity participation in workingtoward a sustainable future. Heranalysis reveals a common processthat begins with a multi-stakeholder"visioning" exercise to identify howa community should appear at somespecified future date in order tobe regarded as a "sustainable com-munity." Specific social and environ-mental "indicators" are then identi-fied by the participant groups (exam-ples: quantities of municipal solidwaste; area of greenspace availablefor community use per capita; per-centage living below the poverty line;carbon dioxide emissions per house-hold; number of people participatingin civic activities). Baseline measuresof each "indicator"are collected anddocumented in a report which is dis-seminated throughout the commu-nity. Periodic measures of these indi-cators, published and disseminated inthe form of a "Sustainability Report"then become the basis for assessingand evaluating the community’sprogress toward the "sustainablecommunity" that was "visioned" instep one (Maclaren 1996).
Maclaren observes how evi-dence of positive progress is impor-tant for justifying past expenditureson sustainability initiatives and build-ing support for new initiatives, while
evidence of lack of progress towardsustainability can provide incentivesfor community groups to demandmore action from community leaders.Significantly, Maclaren observes howthese reports are used by individualsto educate themselves about sustain-ability issues and to evaluate howtheir own actions may contribute tosustainability goals (Maclaren 1996).
Summary and ConclusionsThe first part of this paper syn-
thesizes history; theory, and researchin both the natural and social sci-ences to illustrate and explore theconnections between increasing con-cern for social justice and environ-mental quality, increasing demandfor participatory decision-making,and the development of the idea of"Sustainability." Sustainability wasdefined as an emerging paradigm inpost-industrial society that is flatten-ing traditional hierarchical socialstructures under the growing pres-sures generated by a positive feed-back loop between the goals of thesocial justice and environmentalmovements.
The second part of this studydraws on the discussion and definitionof sustainability to reveal and illus-trate the incongruities between thegrowing need for a multi-disciplinaryapproach to complex social and envi-ronmental conditions, the need for aninformed citizenry who are practicedin the skills and processes ofparticipatory decision-making, andtraditional structures and methods ofhigher education and outreach. A"Ladder of Community Outreach"was constructed as a framework toevaluate and assess different forms ofcommunity outreach and educationprograms. This critique reveals thehighest ideals of community focusededucation: "evaluation" and "citizencontrol," are attained through broadbased citizen participation and"visioning" projects. Analyses of theprocesses involved in these participa-tory projects reveals an iterativeprocess of goal setting, developmentof strategies to attain these goals,and evaluation of progress towardthose goals.
Thering/Doble 197
A Summary StorySeveral years ago Cheryl Doble
was approached by community lead-ers of a small town in Upstate NewYork. Community residents were con-cerned about the economic declineevident in the dilapidated and vacantstructures and empty lots in theironce busy and well maintained vil-lage. These concerns were motivatedby an understanding of how the cycleof economic and physical declineaffects the social and environmentalfuture of their comlnunity. After sev-eral weeks of careful informationgathering and an iterative process ofparticipatory planning charrettes, acommunity "vision" was generated, aplan developed, and a strategy forimplementation was worked out withwidespread community support.Unfortunately, at the last momentthe town council withdrew its supportfor the project. This was, of course,very disappointing for everyoneinvolved, who by that time had feel-ings of "ownership" in the project anddedication to its goals. However,nearly a year later a note arrivedfrom one of the community membersinvolved in the visioning project.Attached to the note was a clippingfrom the local newspaper thatinformed her that the two town coun-cilors who were up for reelection hadbeen unseated. The note explainedhow the community members whohad participated in the visioning proj-ect had organized and chosen candi-dates from among themselves to runagainst the uncooperative incum-bents. Consequently, the project iscurrently underway.
Progress or Sustainability? Ourconclusions about theory and practicein sustainability are directed specifi-cally toward practice, teaching, andresearch in landscape architecture,and are largely informed by citizenparticipation and visioning projectslike those discussed above. Thesestudies and stories exemplify the con-nections between participatoryprocesses, objectives in communityeducation, and sustainability. In each
case, broad-based concern for bothsocial and environmental issues pro-duced innovative social processesthrough which participants practiceand demonstrate "the capacity formaking judgments about value thatinvolves the use of criteria and stan-dards," (see Bloom’s taxonomy inFigure 6) while they participate in aniterative process of "citizen control"(see Arnstein’s ladder in Figure 6)over decision making affecting thefuture of their communities. Theseare the qualities at the highest levelof the Ladder of Community Out-reach.
Significantly, the evaluativeframework of the Ladder of Commu-nity Focused Education and Outreachreveals how some unique aspects oflandscape architecture education canbe models for preparing future prac-titioners and academics in manyfields to participate in sustainablecommunity making as concerned citi-zens and as professionals. Theseaspects include: the "problem based"studio approach; the synthesis of eco-logical and social issues; frequentgroup projects in which the skillsinvolved in participatory decisionmaking are practiced; and impor-tantly, current experiments in com-munity outreach modeled after citi-zen participation and visioning proj-ects (Bloomer 1998; Hester 1990; Lee1993; Lewis 1996; Lyle 1994; Thayer1994). These findings suggest theneed for the profession of landscapearchitecture to continue to research,develop, refine, demonstrate, docu-ment, and disseminate innovativeapproaches to practice, teaching, andoutreach that build on these uniqueaspects of the profession while recog-nizing and engaging new challengesbeing revealed by the emergence ofthe era of sustainability.
Our conclusions suggest thattraditional structures and methods ofhigher education, formed fromMedieval hierarchies and departmen-
talized during the industrial revolu-tion, are increasingly incongruous withthe growing ecological thought andsocial conditions of post-industrialsociety: As concern for social justiceand environmental quality increasesdemand for participatory processes incommunity decision making, theKuhnian "choice" looms ever larger.Just as practitioners at the turn ofnineteenth century were compelled tograpple with a new understanding ofthe dynamic processes at work innature when the enlightenment andthe scientific revolution challengedthe static understanding of the world(Disponzio 1998), practitioners todayare grappling with a new understand-ing of how the synthesis of naturaland social processes are at work inshaping the landscape.
At the turn of the nineteenthcentury some practitioners chose toexperiment with the new questionsand methods revealed by the new par-adigm and they transformed the artof garden design into the professionof landscape architecture (Disponzio1998). If, as we conclude here, Sus-tainability is a new paradigm,redefining and revealing new sets ofquestions and new methods toapproach the challenge at the core ofthe profession: the artful integrationof social and environmental systems,we now have a choice to make aspractitioners and educators. We canchoose to recognize the changes inour society as indications of anemerging paradigm that may grow tofundamentally change the way weunderstand the world. We canapproach our work as practitioners,academics, and educators questioningthe underlying logic, structures, andvalues of what we do through the lensof this new paradigm. We can explorethis new way of looking at and think-ing about the world to see whatopportunities it opens up, testing itslimits and constraints, and participat-ing in its definition and development.And we can recognize the increas-ingly significant evidence of how theprocesses and methods we choose aswe engage in practice, teaching, andresearch in landscape architecturecontribute to the possibility of a sus-tainable future.
198 Landscape Journal
John Lyle, who made an impor-tant contribution to understandingthe idea of sustainability in Land-scape Architecture with his bookRegenerative Design for Sustainable Devel-opment, wrote about the significanceof the intersection of participatoryprocesses and education. Revealingly,Lyle quoted Thomas Jefferson: "Iknow no safe depository of the ulti-mate powers of society but the peoplethemselves; and if we think them notenlightened enough to exercise theircontrol with wholesome discretion,the remedy is not to take it fromthem, but to inform their discretionby education" (Jefferson quoted inLyle 1994, p. 269).
AcknowledgementsMany and sincere thanks to Elen Deming forfriendly encouragetnent and careful editing ofan earlier version of this paper, to RichardHawks and Richard Smardon for continuedsupport and encouragement, to Richard Braun-gart, Don Mitchell,Jim Palmer, and RichardSmardon for comments and feedback, and tothe anonymous reviewers for thoughtfulresponse and recommendations.
Note
1. The "theories" developed in this paper wereinspired by the "practice" of Cheryl Doble. Theideas were refined through her thoughtfulreflection on her experiences with communityplanning and design, her generous sharing ofreferences, and her friendly guidance. Her vig-orous critique and editing of earlier awkwardattempts made this paper readable. A "with"and expressions of gratitude leave me still verymuch in her debt.
ReferencesAlinsky, Saul. 1971. Rules for Radical~. New
York:Vintage.Arnstein, Sherry R. 1969. "A Ladder of Citizen
Participation." American Institute of Plan-ners Journal 35: 216-224.
Berman, Marshal. 1988.All That is Solid MeltsInto Air. New York:Penguin.
Berry, Joyce K. and John C.Gorden eds. 1993.Environmental Leadership: Developing Effbc-tive Skills and Styles. Washington,D. C.:Island Press.
Bloom, Benjamin S. 1956. Taxonomy of CognitiveObjectives. New York:David McKay Co.
Bloomer,Jennifer. 1998. "Teaching by Design:the Intimacies of Architectural Study".The Chronicle of Higher Education. 45 (3): B9.
Bowers, C. A. 1995. Educating for an Ecological~Sustainable Future. Albany, NY: SUNYPress.
Bowler, Peter. 1992. The Norton History of theEnvironmental Sciences. New York: W. W.Norton and Co.
Brady, Henry E., Sidney Verba, and KayLehman Schlozman. 1995. "BeyondSES: A Resource Model of Political Par-ticipation." American Political ScienceReview 89(2): 271-94.
Braungart, Richard G. and Margaret Braungart.1995. "Today’s Youth, Tomorrow’s Citi-zens." The Public Perspective. 6(5): 4-7, 57.
Brown-Weiss, Edith. 1990. "Our Rights andObligations to Future Generations forthe Environment." American Journal ofInternationalLaw. 84(1): 190-212.
Brundtland Comrnission. 1987. Our CommonFuture. New York: Oxford UniversityPress.
Capra,Fritjof. 1984. The Tao ofPhysics 2nd ed.New York: Bantam Books.
-- 1988. !’Physics and the Current Changeof Paradigms." in The World View of Con-temporary Physics, Does It Need a New Meta-physic? Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Disponzio,Joseph. 1998. "The Intellectual Ori-gins of Landscape Architecture."Unpublished paper presented at theCELA Conference 1998.
Dolbeare, Kenneth and Patricia Dolbeare.1976. American Ideologies. New" York: Ran-dora House.
Gare, Aaron. 1995. Postmodernism and the Envi-ronmental Crisis. London: Routledge.
Guarasci, Richard and Grant Cornwall. 1997.Democratic Education in an Age of Difference.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Hahermas,Jurgen. 1983. "Modernity, anIncomplete Project." In The Anti-aesthetic:Essays on Post-modern Culture. PortTownsend, WA: Bay Press.
Hart, Stuart L. 1980. "The EnvironmentalMovement: Fulfilhnent of The Renais-sance Prophecy?" Natural Resources Jour-hal 20(3): 501-22.
Harvey, David. 1990. The Condition of Post-Modernity. Cambridge: Blackwell.
Henderson, Hazel. 1995. Paradigms in Progress.San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Hester, Randy. 1985. "12 Steps to CommunityDevelopment." Landscape Architecture.Jam/Feb.: 78-85.
--. 1990. "The Sacred Structure in SmallTowns." Small Town 20(4): 5-21.
Horkheimer, Max, and Theodore Adorno.1973. The Dialectic of Enlightenment. Lon-don: Allen Lane.
ICUN/UNCEP/WWF. 1980. World ConservationStrategy: Living Resource Conservation forSustainable Development. InternationalUnion for Conservation of Nature andNatural Resources, United NationsEnvironment Program and WorldWildlife Fund: Gland, Switzerland.Agenda 21. New York: Oceana Press.
Ingtehart, Ronald. 1996. "Generational Shiftsin Citizenship Behaviors: The Role ofEducation and Economic Security in theDeclining Respect for Authority in Indus-trial Society." Prospects 26(100): 653-8.
--. 1995. "Public Support for Environmen-tal Protection: The Impact of ObjectiveProblems and Subjective Values in 43Societies." PS: Political Science &Politics"28(1): 57-72.
Putnam, Robert. 1995a. "Tuning In, TuningOut: The Strange Disappearance ofSocial Capital in America." PS: PoliticalScience &Polities. 8(4): 664.
-- 1995b. "Bowling Alone: America’sDeclining Social Capital."Journal ofDemocracy 6(1): 65-78.
Rimmerman, Craig. 1997. The New Citizenship.Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Robinson, Nicholas, ed. 1993. Agenda 21. Inter-national Union for Conservation ofNature and Natural Resources. NewYork: Oceana Press.
Sachs,Aaron. 1995. "Eco-Justice: LinkingHuman Rights and the Environment."World Watch Paper 127. Washington, D.C.: World Watch Institute.
Sawicki, David S. 1996. "Neighborhood Indica-tors: A Review of the Literature and anAssessment of Conceptual and Method-ological Issues."Journal of the AmericanPlanning Association. 62(2): 165.
Schneekloth, Lynda and Robert Shibley. 1995.Placemaking: The Art and Practice of Build-ing Communities. New York:John Wileyand Sons.
Second Nature. (no date) www. 2nature.org.Sinnott,Jan and Lynn Johnson. 1996. Reinvent-
ing the University. Norwood, NJ: AblexPublishing Co.
Snow,Donald. 1992. Inside the EnvironmentalMovement. Washington, D. C. IslandPress.
Sustainable Seattle. 1995. Indicators of Sustain-able Community. Seattle, WA: SustainableSeattle.
Teske, Nathan. 1997. Political Activists in Amer-ica. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univer-sity Press.
Thayer. 1994. Gray World, Green Heart. Nature,Technology and the Sustainable Landscape.New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Tierney, William G., ed. 1998. The ResponsiveUniversity. Baltimore: The Johns Hop-kins University Press.
Verba,Sidney. 1993. "The Voice of the Peo-ple." PS:Political Science & Politics.XXVI(4): 677-86.-, Kay Lehman Schlozman, Henry E.Brady. 1995. Voice and Equality: Civic VoLunteerism in American Politics’. Cambridge,MA: Harvard University Press.
![Untitled-1 [cdn.kitsune.tools] · Industrial Ladder Scaffold FRP Stool Ladder Aluminum Ladder Aluminium Tiltable Step FRP Wall Supporting Aluminum Wall Supporting Tanker Ladder —self](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/5f0ebf297e708231d440bd69/untitled-1-cdn-industrial-ladder-scaffold-frp-stool-ladder-aluminum-ladder-aluminium.jpg)
