Presentation from the Circle of Sustainability

Presentation from the Circle of Sustainability

Circle of Sustainability

Report to NCR-SARE AC

November 2008

Introduction

Communicating with communities is essential for NCR-SARE to understand "sustainability" and to development sustainable solutions to NCR agriculture. Hopefully, NCR-SARE will discover that by focusing on communities and their issues NCR-SARE will in turn discover all of the wonders and advantages of understanding biological and cultural diversity extant in the region.

Committee Event1

An Administrative Council (AC) committee called the “Circle of Sustainability” (CoS) conducted listening sessions with First Nations in the Dakotas. The following is an accounting of those reservations visited by the CoS in North and South Dakota:

-Reservations visited – TurtleMountain, SpiritLake, FortBerthold, Standing Rock, Cheyenne River, Rosebud and Pine Ridge.

-Reservations not visited – Yankton, LakeTraverse, Lower Brule, Crow Creek and Flandreau.

CoS Observations2

  • Sustain water access, quality, and quantity in the grassland ecosystem and its farming and ranching activities.
  • Recognize and integrate cultural and biological diversity. This is very broad in its concept and application and includes ecological/cultural components (for example, horses and their connection with people, community, and agriculture), diverse energy sources, and external social constraints and services.
  • Prioritize the inclusion and education of youth and include the wisdom and advice of elders.
  • A youth component was universally well received and emphasized by all entities on the reservations
  • Gardens/gardening play(s) a multi-functional role in communities that is directly related to overall health.
  • “Health” must be the goal or value base for sustainable actions for all components – economic, environmental, nutritional, mental, social, etc.
  • Community participation and decision-making by consensus is critical to sustainability.
  • The capacity of communities to know and use their history and the ability to monitor the effects of current actions will enhance the sustainability of actions taken.
  • A community-based focus was universally well received by all entities on the reservations
  • Listening sessions were successful in delivering the message of SARE and nurturing a well-received interaction with the reservations. The listening session format enabled accomplishments that had not been achieved by other institutions and events with a higher level of accountability (outcomes).

Existing Barriers3

-There is an enormous barrier to USDA and FSA within Native American communities because of past events (and in contrast to a reception for NRCS)

-The physical distance (large tracts of land) between our stakeholders makes it difficult to get the word out about SARE

-Shortage of people, from SARE and partnering institutions, on the ground in contact with the agricultural communities

-Limitations of one PDP coordinator assigned to cover all of the Dakotas

-The complexity of federal programs - federal programs that do not communicate among themselves yet overlap in program and in stakeholders, and federal programs that are not administrated to assist stakeholders but rather to delineate oversight boundaries

-The complexity of governance and programs on reservations – the presence of multiple entities that overlap in stakeholder and program but do not have the same end-goal

-Fractionated land ownership (e.g., deeded, tribal, allotted, non-tribal)

-Federal assistance is dispensed in the form of funding but lacks the support to assist the stakeholder in follow-through for application, receipt and set-up for management of projects.

-Program ownership is a strength toward the success of a project within unique communities. NCR-SARE does not always foster projects that strive to instill ownership. Projects that function with a dependency on NCR-SARE disintegrate when SARE departs; e.g., gardens and farmer markets that did not promote ownership by the community.

-Static and pre-defined criteria of sustainable agriculture are less than optimal for different circumstances and changing parameters within communities. Often a potential stakeholder can provide more accurate criteria of sustainable agriculture in their community. Criteria, personalized to the community, should be part of the stakeholders proposal wherein their proposal addresses what is sustainable within the community and how the proposal will achieve that quality.

-The most valuable report and evaluation comes from the community associated with, and that was to benefit from, the project(s). Utilizing reports and evaluations generated by PIs and/or individuals from outside the community generates documents of lesser value.

-A 3-year funding structure with uncertainty of additional funding is a deterrent to our stakeholders with challenges that require more than 3 years support to achieve meaningful results (e.g., acceptance and establishment). The short-term commitment is seen as disingenuous.

-The greatest gain to be achieved in communities comes from within the community in contrast to efforts and projects that originate from outside the community

-“Savior” efforts (individuals or organizations that interact with the reservations to “save” them from their peril) have poor performance records. All programs should originate from a desire of an end-user within the community not a desire from outside the community. "If you've come here to help me, you're wasting your time. But if you've come because your liberation is bound up with mine, then let us work together". Lilla Watson

-Each community is at a different place in their efforts to achieve sustainability. Attempts to bring all the Native American communities together in time and space are unrealistic. SARE should approach each community as an independent entity. Native American communities are not working toward convergence of their communities.

Event Outcomes

-Better understanding, and better relationships between -

  • extension and the native nations
  • SARE and extension
  • SARE and native nations
  • AC and PDP

-Better understanding of agriculturally-based communities within the NCR

-Demonstration of the effectiveness of listening sessions for successful interactions with Native American communities and First Nations

-List of recommendations for NCR-SARE (embedded below(

-New program recommendation for NCR-SARE (i.e., community-level program(

-The finding that changes, e.g., movement to more community-based activities/functions (made by/in NRCS with the 1997 Working in Harmony Program) have had positive results and that NRCS has developed evaluation parameters for community-based activities/functions

-Integration of CoS activity and listening sessions into SARE and Extension plans of work in North Dakota and South Dakota (a written report is in development by SDSU and NDSU)

-Adoption by the NCR-SARE Diversity Committee of several of the CoS action points

CoS Interpretations4, 5

-NCR-SARE current programs –

  • Our multi-faceted portfolio of programs is not end-user-friendly to the stakeholder.
  • One barrier to our stakeholders is the compartmentalization of complex issues into highly specialized categories; e.g., research, education, farmer, rancher, professional development, etc.
  • Our stakeholders should not struggle to understand the design and structure of our programs. We should maximize the opportunity for our stakeholders to interact with our programs by using their input to enhance the accessibility and implementation of our programs.
  • A community-level focus may alleviate the end-user-unfriendly nature of our programs.

-NCR-SARE future programs that strive to connect environment, economics and community –

  • NCR-SARE should consider a program structure with the intent to support a locally-directed, community-focused, agriculturally-based program that implements components of sustainable agriculture as a strengthening and stabilizing force in a community. Locally-directed means delegating the funds to an advisory board within the community. Community-focused means a collection of one or more activities will be supported that are selected by the advisory board with input from the community and, where requested, assistance of NCR-SARE. Agriculturally-based means the community level projects supported by the program align with sustainable practices. For brevity, this is referred to as the Connections Grant Program.
  • The traditional administrative function of the TC, FRG and PDP should shift, in part, from an evaluation-focused exercise(s) to a resource- and assistance-focused exercise that responds to requests for assistance by the advisory board of the community-level project.
  • Two levels of competitiveness could be utilized. The first level is in the selection by NCR-SARE of the project to support. The second level is the community selecting activities to be supported by the funds delegated to them.
  • The Community that is impacted by the project should be integral in the project evaluation component of the program.

CoS Recommendations (•) and Action Steps (◦)

  • Include representation from Native Nations on NCR-SARE’s program committees (e.g., AC, TC, FRG, PDP)
  • Requires AC discussion and decision. There are over 50 Native Nations in the NCR. What is best method for representation? Suggest consultation with Federally Recognized Tribal Extension Program (FRTEP).
  • Present 2008 CoS Listening Session findings to PDP state coordinators to be considered for inclusion in state’s needs assessments and programming.
  • Send findings to PDP regional coordinator with description of CoS listening session methodology, 2008 results, and suggestions for future collaboration between CoS and state PDP coordinators.
  • Present at 2008 CoS activity report to North and South Dakota PDP coordinator to be forwarded to all participants of 2008 listening sessions.
  • Formalize the Circle of Sustainability as a permanent program of the NCR-SARE. The CoS could be organized with the following responsibilities and objectives:
  • Establish the Circle of Sustainability
  • Organized administratively to respond to the NCR-SARE Administrative Council
  • Membership will include volunteer NCR-SARE alumni and personnel from other SARE administrative units
  • Provide an outreach function for NCR-SARE. This will include the continued development of the community-based listening sessions
  • Administer a new grants component that strives to integrate environmental, social, and economic variables for sustainable outcomes. This new component will provide the means for submission of proposals that connect stewardship, profitability, and people. The “Connections Grants Program” will be coordinated by two co-chairs in a manner similar to the Technical Committee. It will also provide proposal review support to other grants programs currently categorized as “social/economic”. The Connections Grants program will be supported with an identified funding line
  • Assume some aspects of the tasks and functions originally assigned to the AC’s Compass Committee and have the CoS and the Compass Committee coordinate their tasks
  • Provide the opportunity and organization required for an internal programmatic review of the NCR-SARE every nine years or as requested
  • Establish a chairperson for the CoS, provide the chairperson membership on the AC, have the AC approve CoS committee membership, and seek AC approval for CoS activities in a manner similar to that of the TC, FRG, and PDP
  • Maintain and present an annual report of CoS activities and recommendations
  • Decide on funding source for CoS.
  • Appoint a CoS chairperson for program initiation.
  • Recommend the following be addressed by the CoS:
  • Immediately develop CoS mission statement
  • Set 2009 and three-year priorities, objectives and annual budgets through discussions between CoS, PDP, TC, FRG and AC-Compass committee members
  • Respond to 2008 listening session participants and follow-up commitments
  • Present the results of CoS brainstorming and deliberative discussions at the AC meeting in November 2009
  • Finalize a 2010 CFP for the Connections Grants program prior to the AC meeting in March 2009

1History of CoS:

The mission statement for the North Central Region (NCR) of the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) program is to: "Strengthen rural communities, increase farmer/rancher profitability, and improve the environment by supporting research and education". That mission statement suggests that "sustainability" is an outcome of the integration of community health, business profitability, and environmental integrity. The AC's current challenge is to more fully-express the definition of sustainability in our program's calls for proposals and our guidelines for evaluation.

An AC committee called the "Circle of Sustainability" (CoS) has taken on the goal of communicating (listening and engaging) with communities of the region. This function can be an extremely valuable contribution to our program and to our understanding of the dynamics of agriculture and rurality in the North Central region. It could, and should, aid NCR-SARE in refining definitions, discussions, and program calls related to the three-legged stool of sustainability - social responsibility, environmental integrity and economic prosperity. Potentially, the only entities with the capacity of evaluating and adopting solutions based on a real synthesis of the stool legs, are communities. Community is defined here as a social grouping of people living in a definable geographical area within a definable agricultural ecosystem.

In the past year the AC approved funding to support an internal initiative to communicate with Native Nations of the NCR in order to broaden the AC’s understanding of the Region and all of its biological and cultural diversity. This initiative began with the AC meeting in Bismarck, ND in the summer of 2007 and continued in 2008 with CoS listening sessions on seven reservations in the Dakotas.

2 These observations were made in many different contexts on all of the nations visited and are listed without priority. The Circle of Sustainability feels strongly that all of these observations must be integrated into the agricultural focus of SARE programs and projects. The Circle of Sustainability also promotes the listening session methodology as a technique that will work in any community as long as there is a focus on issues and a context that accepts the need for consensus and integration of options for economic, environmental, and social actions.

3 The list identifies barriers that were common themes across the 7 reservations visited by CoS Summer of 2008. The culmination of these barriers indicates that we went, we listened, and we learned that SARE can not serve in its current form. A meaningful interaction can not occur from afar.

4 Shortfalls of CoS:

-Did not fully integrate a response of, and potential involvement with/from land grant extension programs and personnel

- Did not fully integrate a response of, and potential involvement with/from the PDP program

-Did not fully integrate PDP coordinators and state extension educators as essential partners to the follow-through of the listening sessions until late in the planning exercise

5 Shortfalls of NCR-SARE:

-Weak on programs targeting 25-27 year old group which represents average age on most reservations, and on programs targeting youth

-Lacking a method(s) to correct for inconsistencies between actual populations sizes versus census in unique communities

-Absence of an assessment or integration of community “buy-in” in proposals

-A mechanism is missing for integrating the effect of land ownership and land control issues into proposals

Top View