During the 1940s, we were promoting campaigns for the widespread use of chemical pesticides with jingles like “DDT is good for me!” and videos showing people literally eating DDT by the spoonful:

In retrospect, of course, we know that we messed up.  We messed up bad.  Yet we kept developing and distributing more and more chemicals, which often end up becoming harmful environmental contaminants. Why does it seem as though we have failed to learn our lesson time and time again? 

Background

Environmental contamination is often treated as a local issue; however, it is rarely such.  Many contaminants are subject to long-range environmental transport, either through the atmosphere or ocean currents.  Many persistent organic pollutants (POPs), like DDT for instance, will be transported from lower latitudes (i.e., the tropics) through a process referred to as the ‘grasshopper effect’, and are eventually deposited in the Arctic, where they remain. Watch video

Many of these POPs are highly toxic and bioaccumulative, and will build up in very high concentrations within the fatty tissues of high trophic level organisms (i.e., near the top of the food web).  Ultimately, this negatively impacts the health of northern populations who often depend on these animals as part of their diet.  The big picture here is that when a chemical is manufactured or released, say, in North America, natural Earth processes will take what is temporarily a local issue, and distribute it such that environmental contamination becomes a much bigger global problem. 

Contaminants can end up in northern, Arctic cities where the concept of a ‘city’ itself is quite different from that elsewhere in the world.  In Arctic communities, hunting remains very important and crucial for families’ well being.  Often consuming animals with extremely high contaminant concentrations may impact northern cities more so than other urban cities where contaminants may not accumulate as much.

Let’s think about a contaminant like DDT.  DDT was believed to be completely safe for widespread use.  It was even sprayed over family picnics and rubbed in children’s hair to show that there were no immediate toxic effects.

Fast forward a few years, when the long-term bioaccumulative and toxic effects of DDT become known.  Newer contaminants have followed in the same footsteps; ‘surprise’ adverse environmental and health effects become known after the chemical becomes environmentally ubiquitous – but the damage has already been done. 

Development of New Compounds

The development of new, anthropogenic (i.e., human-made) compounds focuses on practicality and usefulness in the market – and understandably so. But this process should always keep in mind the long-term impacts these compounds may have for the health of the environment and ecosystems (including human health).  This is a key element of new economies – designing chemicals with the health of the planet in mind, not just the benefits or convenience it will bring to its users. 

Currently, the approach to regulating contaminants in Canada involves an initial universal screening process, assessing health and environmental safety.  Any modifications to a compound’s status are made if future research or events determine that it poses a threat to ecosystem health.  This has been flagged by some as a problem, as it is said to assume a ‘market now, study later’ approach. 

Consumer education is important to consider in general, especially for terminology.  Notice how I refrain from using ‘toxin’ throughout.  That’s because it doesn’t mean what everyone seems to think it means.  Often times (I’d say about 99% of the time), people are actually referring to ‘toxicants’.  Toxins are of plant or animal origin (i.e., biological in nature), and is not the correct term for human-made contaminants – fun fact!

Environmental Contamination and New Economies – Moving Forward With Remediation

New economies must include a larger focus on holistic remediation efforts.  Remediation efforts usually focus on a few contaminants known to be present in a specific area.  Larger-scale remediation efforts should include a search for and cleanup of all contaminants of significant concern for ecosystem and human health, rather than only taking care of specific chemicals as prerequisites for a project or development. If done properly (e.g., on a municipal level), there can be a lot of success in widespread remediation, which would hopefully encourage chemists, engineers, toxicologists ecologists, and others with the tools to collaborate and invest efforts into large-scale remediation.  If remediation were done on municipal scales, with the appropriate funding, it could become much more efficient and tackle a large issue at once instead of breaking it down into smaller pieces, which does not always eliminate the full issue of environmental contamination.

We must keep in mind that localized decisions regarding environmental contaminants are sometimes necessary.  For instance, DDT continues to be used in tropical areas of the world where malaria persists.

It’s essentially a trade-off between reducing the chance of contracting a potentially deadly disease, or risking long-term adverse effects of a bioaccumulative, toxic compound.  Understandably, the choice between immediate well-being and potential long-term health effects will lean towards short-term benefits (i.e., survival), and risking health problems in the future is a risk many governing bodies and individuals would be willing to take.

Urban dwellers must also question chemical alternatives.  When you see a water bottle labeled “BPA free”, is there simply another less infamous toxicant in its place that has just yet to get the same kind of negative attention as BPA?  Conversely, we cannot get so caught up in a product’s ingredients that we forget the first rule of toxicology: the dose makes the poison.  Everything is toxic at some doses – even water.  As consumers, it is not practical to base our purchasing and economic decisions solely based on an ingredient list.  Also be wary of ‘green washing’ – when products marketed as ‘green’ or ‘environmentally-friendly’ are either exaggerated or really no different from the ‘regular’ (and usually cheaper) version of the product.  See the CBC Marketplace story here: https://www.cbc.ca/marketplace/episodes/2011-episodes/lousy-labels; this should give you an idea of how the ‘green’ chemical movement really operates, how much of it is true, and how to be a smart chemical consumer in general.

Environmental health, through proper management of toxicants, is a significant component of real wealth.  How much does substantial material and financial wealth really matter in the long-term if it is accompanied by constant exposure to nasty contaminants such as metals, toxic POPs, and other dangerous chemicals (including carcinogens and endocrine disruptors)? It is time to see the benefits in holistic ecosystem health – large scale environmental remediation is just one component.

Mandy McDougall is currently completing her Masters degree in Resource and Environmental Management at Simon Fraser University, in Vancouver, Canada, and conducting her research project within the field of environmental toxicology.  Afterwards, she plans on attending law school to focus on bridging the gap between science and environmental policy within Canada.  She is passionate about contributing to insightful projects designed to improve the state of our environment on both small and large scales.

This blog is part of the ‘Voices of New Economies‘ series within Cities for People – an experiment in advancing the movement toward urban resilience and livability through connecting innovation networks.

The Voices of New Economies series is collectively curated by One Earth and The Canadian CED Network.

This series is an exploration of what it takes to build the economies we need – ones that work for people, places, and the planet. We are connecting key actors, finding patterns, noting interesting differences, and highlighting key concepts and initiatives. Together, this series offers insights into the new economies movement as it develops.

< BACK

Global Vision for a Social Solidarity Economy: Convergences and Differences in Concepts, Definitions and Frameworks 

The Global Vision for a Social Solidarity Economy: Convergences and Differences in Concepts, Definitions and Frameworks paper released by the Intercontinental Network for the Promotion of the Social Solidarity Economy is part of a process of debate and consultation that has been carried out throughout the years. Reflecting on practices, concepts and frameworks shaping social solidarity economy (SSE) is an ongoing process since the first meeting on the globalization of solidarity in Lima in 1997. The vision of SSE has been steadfast, but underlying concepts, definitions and frameworks have, and continue to evolve.

The actors of SSE are invited to use this document as a tool for reference, reflection and education in their activities for building and promoting an alternative model of development based on SSE. The global vision paper lays out the main elements that arose from the discussions and identifies areas to explore further.

ISSUES ADDRESSED IN THE GLOBAL VISION PAPER

• How is SSE defined in relations to its practices?
• What are the criteria and indicators for defining an initiative as being a SSE initiative?
• What different organizational/institutional forms/expressions are SSE and which are not SSE?
• How does SSE conceive development and (de)growth?
• What is the relationship of SSE with social movements?
• What is the relationship of SSE with capitalism and capitalist market?
• How does SSE address Sustainability and Ecology?
• What is the relationship of SSE with other “adjective” economies? (eg. green Economy; social enterprise; creative economy; popular economy; territory (or local) economy; community economy)

From the Introduction:

This paper is part of an ongoing process of discussion and debate about the concepts, definitions and framework of the social solidarity economy (SSE). RIPESS (Intercontinental Network for the Promotion of SSE) has engaged in this process from its first Global Forum on SSE in 1997 through to the present. The vision of SSE has been steadfast, but underlying concepts, definitions and frameworks have, and continue to evolve. In 2012, the RIPESS Board agreed to make the RIPESS Global Vision one of the main themes of the 5th Meeting of the SSE which was held in Manila in October 2013. We organized a global consultation process in which an earlier draft of this paper was widely circulated and each continent took on the responsibility of moving the dialogue through a mixture of live meetings, conference calls and electronic communication. There was also an electronic forum on the RIPESS website that was open for comments from anyone throughout the world. At the Manila Meeting there were around 100 people who participated in a lively and productive World Café exercise to further explore, discuss and share their views on the meaning of the SSE. This paper builds on the whole of this process, as well as the RIPESS Charter that was adopted in 2008 which lays out our values, mission and vision. 

Download RIPESS’ Global Vision for a Social Solidarity Economy

< BACK

For Women Transforming Cities, the present-day economic reality is one of increasing inequality that has disparate outcomes for marginalized communities. This is to say that economic inequality tends to fall along gendered and racialized lines (to name only two). Such inequality is echoed in the Canadian labour force, which is still arranged along these divisions, and gendered and racialized arrangements closely coincide with our focus on non-renewable natural resource extraction–an industry that largely employs men with access to good wages, benefits and entitlements, and one that we know heavily contributes to climate change. Combating climate change and inequality is a simultaneous battle, and formulating visions of a new economy need to be equally green and just. Natural and social costs of economic growth must be internalized into economic valuations because if we move towards making our economy green without addressing social inequities, we will be replicating the same structures that reinforce the exploitation of both the environment and the labour of women and marginalized groups.

What are some key elements of “new economies”?

Key elements of a green and just economy include:

• Reclaiming the union advantage: we need to recognize the vital role unions have played in women’s, and other marginalized communities’, equality and economic independence. Collective bargaining is important for job security as well as securing benefits and entitlements–all of which will ensure a more equitable labour force.   
• Decreasing precarious labour practices: increasing the amount of temporary, part-time, and casual work will continue deeply gendered and racialized divisions in the labour force. We need to properly value the care economy, increase minimum wages to living wages, attain pay equity, resist two-tiered wage systems that penalize younger workers, and ensure the consistent implementation of labour laws and regulations.
• Strengthening social infrastructure: access to affordable childcare, public transit, housing, and community and recreation services all play a vital role in equitable and green cities. In essence, accessible public services in the community that are vital for ensuring social equality are easily co-opted for the goals of a green economy. 

How does this relate to cities?

According to the 2011 census, 81% of Canada’s population lives in urban centres. Clearly then, transforming our cities into gender-sensitive, equitable and green economic centres is a priority. Cities drive the Canadian economy and Canada needs to recognize the importance of cities and invest in the well-being of local residents to foster a sustainable and inclusive future. Central to sustainability and inclusion is the need to focus on and deliver on the needs of the diversity of its residents equitably – including in terms of a good job and a decent living wage.

Grassroots Challenges to Inequitable Policymaking

Women Transforming Cities aims to transform our cities to work for all self-identifying women and girls by amplifying the voices of women and raising their issues for municipal policymakers. We hold grassroots-focused monthly cafes where women and allies in the community come together to discuss issues and brainstorm solutions that would make our communities more equitable. We also partner with other local organizations and service providers to increase the pressure on municipal policymakers to put an intersectional lens on all of their work that we believe will help implement the changes we want to see in our communities. Looking at public policies intersectionally means that we deny the belief that any one policy will affect all citizens (and groups of citizens) in the same way. Using an intersectional lens will account for disproportionately unequal outcomes of public policies, allows us to asses where inequalities are stemming from, and ultimately, allows us to make specific policy recommendations that would remedy such problems.

WTC is also part of the national coalition, Up for Debate 2015, which advocates for a federal leaders debate about women’s issues in the upcoming federal election. The debate will be an important part in getting politicians to address the measurably unequal economic outcomes of current Canadian policies for marginalized groups in both urban and rural communities.

What does real wealth mean to you?

Real wealth means self-identifying women and girls having real social, economic and political power, with the right to live in a healthy environment. If security, housing, childcare, transit or public spaces are either unaffordable or inaccessible then there are few real choices for women in structuring their lives and the lives of their families in our cities.

Jessica Knowler is a board member of Women Transforming Cities, a Vancouver-based organization that works to transform our cities to be inclusive of all women and girls, through community engagement, inclusive policies and equitable representation. Her community service work and research interests include the connections between precarious labour, food security and sustainable economies. The report Working Women, Working Poor (2014) by fellow WTC board member, Prabha Khosla, is the foundation for Women Transforming Cities’ position on new economies. The report can be found here: https://www.unifor.org/en/working-women-working-poor

This blog is part of the ‘Voices of New Economies‘ series within Cities for People – an experiment in advancing the movement toward urban resilience and livability through connecting innovation networks.

The Voices of New Economies series is collectively curated by One Earth and The Canadian CED Network.

This series is an exploration of what it takes to build the economies we need – ones that work for people, places, and the planet. We are connecting key actors, finding patterns, noting interesting differences, and highlighting key concepts and initiatives. Together, this series offers insights into the new economies movement as it develops.

< BACK

I’m really interested in the possibilities that arise from two realities:

1. There are multiple benefits of providing health care to people where they live. In order to keep people and communities healthy, the evidence tells us we need to prioritize offering accessible, interdisciplinary care and support in communities – and when needed, in individuals’ homes.
2. Current ecological, economic, and social imperatives call on us to rebuild our communities around locally-based, fair, and resilient economies.

Locally-based health care services, such as community health centres with interdisciplinary teams, have excellent health and wellness outcomes and are able to integrate with other community spaces and services that help keep people healthy and connected.

They also provide good, local, skilled (and green) jobs – one of the cornerstones of resilient local economies.

What are some key elements of “new economies”?

• An integrated approach to health – the health of individuals, communities, economies, and the environment is intimately connected. An understanding that health is more than treatment, it’s about taking measures to maintain and improve our health before we get sick. When people get sick in Canada, half of our health outcomes are a result of social determinants of health – things like access to early childhood care and housing.
• Community-based care – prioritizing the provision of care and support to people where they live.
• Universally accessible care – an economy where access to necessary care and support is based on need, not an individual’s ability to pay.
• Care that celebrates people – I work with a wellness centre that is led by –and for – transgender and gender diverse people. I’ve seen firsthand the remarkable power of providing care that celebrates gender diversity. It’s a simple concept, but one that I think could be applied to many other aspects of how we care for each other.

How does this relate to cities?

One of the projects I work on involves a mapping exercise with highschool-aged youth. Groups of participants get a large piece of paper and markers and are asked to draw what a healthy community looks like to them. Over the years I have been struck by the number of students who illustrate the importance of having health care services located near the other places and services that members of their families, especially elders, need to access. For instance, they draw clusters of grocery stores, immigration services, and community health clinics.

There is a real alignment between living in balance with our environment and supporting healthy communities and people. Just as clustering services and public spaces like parks, grocery stores, libraries around transit hubs supports vibrant communities and reduces the need for emission-intensive car travel, evidence shows that providing care for people in their homes, communities, and clustering multi-disciplinary teams in community health clinics have very positive impacts on people’s health. Moreover, localizing the provision of care localizes jobs.

What does real wealth mean to you?

Real wealth to me means the ability to connect with the land we live on, including an understanding of, and relationship to, the history of that land.

Along with that connection, real wealth is the ability to live in a way that is in balance with our environment.

In other words, the ability to live in a way that does not overburden the ecosystems to which we belong, and instead cares for them, is fundamental to our core sense of wellbeing and an antidote to the deep spiritually and economically destructive results of living out of step with the carrying capacity of our environment.

Adam Lynes-Ford is a father of two and an avid fisher and gardener. He served as National Director for the Canadian Youth Climate Coalition and is the founder of Eatable East Van, a community food sustainability network. Adam was a board member of YouthCO AIDS Society and is a former educator with the Gulf Islands Centre for Ecological Learning. He has served as Co-Chair of the Coalition to Build a Better B.C. and is a current board member of the Catherine White Holman Wellness Centre. He works as the Medicare Campaigner with the BC Health Coalition, an organization that champions a strong public health care system.

This blog is part of the ‘Voices of New Economies‘ series within Cities for People – an experiment in advancing the movement toward urban resilience and livability through connecting innovation networks.

The Voices of New Economies series is collectively curated by One Earth and The Canadian CED Network.

This series is an exploration of what it takes to build the economies we need – ones that work for people, places, and the planet. We are connecting key actors, finding patterns, noting interesting differences, and highlighting key concepts and initiatives. Together, this series offers insights into the new economies movement as it develops.

< BACK

What are some key elements of “new economies”?

• Rethinking what we value and how we measure success. What does success look and feel like at all levels of the economy? To answer this question we must be willing to redefine wealth and move beyond what our current economic systems value as indicators of success and well being. At a macro level, the Genuine Progress Indicator and the Gross National Happiness index offer positive approaches and at an organizational level, we might measure impacts based on the triple bottom line (people, planet and profit). At a personal level, my commitment to redefining wealth means making daily, conscious decisions about how I choose to spend or invest my family’s money and time. Sometimes this means, as a parent, I’m the odd mom out. Saying no to McDonald’s or no to my kids playing or buying Rainbow Loom Bands. And saying yes to my kids riding bikes to school (even in the rain) and sorting the weekly recycling. Most importantly, I don’t shy away from talking to them about why I make the choices I do.

• Rethinking our point of departure for creating businesses. Start with what is im(possible). Start with the large, system-scale problems that exist in the world or our communities (waste, poverty, unsustainable food systems, depleting oceans), and ask how we can build a business model that not only generates value but works at bringing positive change to these issues. I am inspired by business schools and organizations such as Bainbridge Graduate Institute, Presidio, and the Unreasonable Institute who are embracing this approach to entrepreneurship.
   
• Rethinking how we work together. I am passionate about creating the containers that support individuals to actualize their greatest potential to transform the world. By containers I mean businesses, organizations, and institutions that bring individuals together. What I often observe – whether it be in purpose driven businesses, non-profits or social enterprises – are people who launch organizations with clear purposes, values, or ideas of impact they want to make. At some point during their growth trajectory they fumble with how to operationalize the values and changes they are trying to make externally through how they function internally. The individuals in these organizations, so full of energy, creativity, and soul, get worn down by old embedded systems (patriarchy, capitalism, to name a few) that serve neither people nor planet. My work in this space takes inspiration from Carol Sanford’s The Responsible Entrepreneur and Frederic Laloux’s Reinventing Organizations who offer a new paradigm.

What role does the media play in new economies?

My work with OpenMedia gives me a deep appreciation of how important the Internet and digital tools are for new economies. How we describe, understand, and interact with media has changed dramatically in the last 20 years. The Internet is the critical tool to enable people to build a more connected and collaborative world. As Malkia Cyril, founder and Executive Director of the Center for Media Justice writes, “in a digital age, communities that have long been either the subject of debate or voiceless stereotype now have the means to control their own story.” This sharing of ideas and experiences creates the conditions for a new a economy.

OpenMedia’s vision is to unlock the enormous potential of the Internet through universal access. We use the Internet to save the Internet. We are building a community that is finding new ways of actively engaging people with depth and authenticity through online tools. We had over 300,000 people from 155 countries help create Our Digital Future, a crowdsourced policy report for free expression online. As a leader in the massive, grassroots campaign involving over 5 million people from across the U.S. and internationally, we fought for Net Neutrality and won!

How does this relate to cities?

Cities are the sandboxes for change. They are where people have easier access to the systems (bureaucracies, financial markets, scope of stakeholders) that are otherwise out of reach. A great example of the power of municipalities is OpenMedia’s upcoming work to educate, promote and support the swell of Municipal Broadband initiatives. As Cynthia Khoo, OpenMedia’s Policy Research intern states “more and more municipalities across Canada have taken it upon themselves to ensure affordable, citywide Internet access through community-based networks known as municipal broadband.” Local ownership and control over Internet infrastructure is a key component to thriving new economies of the future.

Alexa Pitoulis is the Managing Director with OpenMedia. Alexa brings over 15 years experience building and leading teams and projects for government and community organizations. A self-proclaimed kale-powered supermom on two wheels, she is a creative strategist driven by her passion for building regenerative social and ecological systems. With an MBA in Sustainable Systems from Bainbridge Graduate Institute, Alexa views organizations as living systems and is excited to bring this perspective to the “how” we work at OpenMedia. Inspired by Margaret Wheatley’s wisdom that “people support what they create“, Alexa is committed to authentic engagement and collaboration.

This blog is part of the ‘Voices of New Economies‘ series within Cities for People – an experiment in advancing the movement toward urban resilience and livability through connecting innovation networks.

The Voices of New Economies series is collectively curated by One Earth and The Canadian CED Network.

This series is an exploration of what it takes to build the economies we need – ones that work for people, places, and the planet. We are connecting key actors, finding patterns, noting interesting differences, and highlighting key concepts and initiatives. Together, this series offers insights into the new economies movement as it develops.

< BACK

What are some key elements of new economies?

New economies mean rethinking notions of value, innovation and the purpose of business. It requires collaboration with non-traditional business partners. At Interface, we are driven by questions like: what would it mean to be a restorative enterprise? I.e. how can we create economic value while also creating social and ecological value?

One example is our global partnership called Net-Works – a collaboration with one of our yarn suppliers, Aquafil, ZSL (Zoological Society of London) and villages in the Danajon Bank region of the Philippines, home to one of 6 double barrier reefs in the world, threatened by overfishing. In the last few years, Aquafil has expanded their ability to recycle discarded Nylon 6 fishing nets into carpet fiber.

Net-Works provides a new stream of recycled content for Interface products while generating positive impacts in vulnerable human communities and marine ecoystems by:

• Removing the nets (which can take hundreds of years to degrade) and thereby eliminating the detrimental environmental effects (eg. ghost fishing);
• Creating a new source of revenue for local community residents, and setting up community banking associations in the local villages. This creates savings accounts for local families to help build long term, sustainable livelihoods going beyond charitable donations and one-shot beach clean ups.

How do these relate to cities?

Cities play a key role in broader systems level collaboration toward closed loop economies (e.g. regionalizing carpet reclamation and recycling). They serve as important nodes of activity facilitating material throughputs, transfer of goods and services as well as waste management.

In what ways do you see footprint reduction, product innovation, and culture change as being linked?

It is hard to separate these things. When your company’s purpose, lens, mindset and culture are all driven by sustainability, it transcends all areas and activities. For example, we will not innovate and launch new products if they don’t bring us closer to reaching our mission zero goals to get off oil and eliminate any negative environmental impacts our company might generate by 2020. Interface does not exist in a vacuum. Rather, it operates within a much larger, more powerful, and some might say unsustainable economic system. What is the obligation of a global carpet tile manufacturer to leverage its influence and collaborate with others to facilitate broader systems change? Systems transformation begins with transforming ourselves, inspiring a culture of sustainability while adopting new business models and innovations that respect the biophysical limits of Earth.

What does real wealth mean for you?

Personally, real wealth means creating sustained health, wellbeing and quality of life. From a business perspective, it means creating more holistic value opportunities. At Interface, we are redesigning our operations and supply chain to generate positive impacts in buildings, communities and society in general.

It goes back to the question of what it might mean to serve as a restorative enterprise and generate social and ecological value along with economic. It also means making products that can enhance quality of life that work in a space to foster health and wellbeing by inspiring positive connections between humans and nature. Interface believes that false notions of humans as separate from nature’s systems are at the root of industrial ugliness. Biophilic design is a huge source of inspiration for us, and it is key to making products that not only have zero negative environmental impacts but also reconnect us with the natural world.

As Director, Sustainability Strategy with global carpet tile manufacturer, Interface, Nadine drives and develops sustainability leadership through education, community engagement and innovative market solutions.

With more than 18 years experience in the fields of environmental education, community development and planning, Nadine taught in the Faculty of Environmental Studies at York University and served as a research fellow with the Institute for Research and Innovation in Sustainability before joining Interface. Her areas of focus include sustainable business strategy, organizational change and learning, materials stewardship and ecological design. Based in Toronto, she serves on a number of local and international boards and committees including the Council for Clean Capitalism and the National Advisory Panel to the Chemistry Industry Association of Canada.

Nadine is a LEED Accredited Professional and is currently completing a PhD in Environmental Studies at York University. She studied sustainable business and worked at Schumacher College in England and obtained a Masters in Community and Regional Planning from the University of British Columbia. She also holds a Bachelor of Sciences honours degree in Environmental Science from the University of Guelph. Her work on sustainability education and organizational change, including the creation of a life-size board game on sustainability has been published in the International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education and International Journal of Environmental, Cultural, Economic and Social Sustainability.

This blog is part of the ‘Voices of New Economies‘ series within Cities for People – an experiment in advancing the movement toward urban resilience and livability through connecting innovation networks.

The Voices of New Economies series is collectively curated by One Earth and The Canadian CED Network.

This series is an exploration of what it takes to build the economies we need – ones that work for people, places, and the planet. We are connecting key actors, finding patterns, noting interesting differences, and highlighting key concepts and initiatives. Together, this series offers insights into the new economies movement as it develops.

< BACK