In your view, what are three (or key) elements of “new economies”?

1. At the core, new economies have to be focused around people and protecting public interests, not falling prey to short-term, profit-driven private interests. They are designed with the real experiences of people in mind and both accessible and accountable to those people – not just the relative minority that most of the market caters to.
2. We are often told that the current mainstream economic system is theoretically focused on the most efficient allocation of resources, which is pitched as the equivalent of maximizing returns to the greatest number of people. But we also know that structural failures, varying political interests and simple lapses and incompetence lead to massive inequity. So the second element is that new economies understand and take into account questions of power and privilege. They are grounded in an understanding that the economy and power are intimately linked and changes in one have powerful implications for the other.
3. New Economies are normative, based on a set of values that center around questions of fairness, such as preventing oppression. Too often we hide behind shaky claims of objectivity and shake our heads sadly at the outcomes that follow. An approach that claims to be objective often fails to protect the basic values and rights that should be at the foundation of our society.

• Anne Jamieson • David LePage • Justin Ritchie • Michael Toye • Nabeel Ahmed Stay tuned for more posts in this series Check out last month’s series

How does this relate to cities?

As sites of concentrating both people and ideas, cities are ideal grounds for piloting new economies that are connected and accountable to communities. Those who are supporting the development or adoption of these new economies can garner feedback from communities even in the process of trying out new ideas. It can be easier to track and measure the progress of a system in a dense area – and easier for people to hold others accountable.

And of course, cities are where most people already live and where power relations are most clearly visible – this supports the development of the new economies I began to describe above.

How have your personal experiences shaped the way you view economies?

Living in the big, convoluted city of Karachi, Pakistan is what drove me to think about and understand political economy. It’s where I first understood how alternative models could flourish, when I learned about social enterprises and when I first began to poke holes in the mainstream economic system we live within. Since then my work has focused around helping great non-profits and social enterprises flourish, and in this I have been reminded over and over again of how pervasive economic and political structures are.

Even when initiatives think they are somehow free of these external influences, even when entrepreneurs resolve to stick to their values and never compromise on their beliefs, they eventually succumb and either submit or fail. The most stable, well-funded and well-respected organizations are the ones that go with the flow and don’t ruffle too many feathers. Large multinational non-profits know that it is risky to be too outspoken, to be too honest. This is deeply frustrating to me because it means that markers have been laid down about what constitutes acceptable speech or not, and clearly shows how economic dependence stifles freedom.

What does real wealth mean to you?

Real wealth is knowing that you and your loved ones are safe and comfortable. That’s a peace of mind that I think really gives people the freedom to pursue their dreams and passions (beyond having the means necessary, of course – but safety and comfort are based on material well-being). Most people in this world struggle for basic security (broadly defined) and a minimum level of comfort, so can never be the best versions of themselves because they may never have the opportunity to explore what that means, let alone meaningfully pursue it. That’s a huge loss and I think a feeling of safety, broadly defined, is something that all truly wealthy people enjoy.

Real wealth leads to real freedom.

---

Nabeel Ahmed helps non-profit social enterprises launch target-based sustainability programs in Ontario as Member Experience Manager at Sustainability CoLab. Nabeel worked at the MaRS Centre for Impact Investing as the Managing Editor of SocialFinance.ca before a fellowship with Aga Khan Foundation Canada in Kyrgyzstan. He is currently a Guest Editor on the New Economies theme with Cities for People and volunteers for a number of local and international non-profits. Nabeel studied public policy and administration at the University of Toronto after business school in Karachi. He enjoys cricket, culture (especially from the subcontinent) and good arguments.

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.

In your view, what are some key elements of “new economies”?

1. Holistic measures of progress: There are many new measures bubbling up (eg. Gross National Happiness), but they need to take a more central place in decision-making, and they need to be refined and expanded in what they measure and how well they measure.
2. Respect natural limits: I see this as one of the central flaws of our current economic system. Environmental goods and their externalized costs are a major blind spot; we need to internalize those costs and respect natural limits, especially in the context of climate change. We have to work with nature, not against it.
3. (Eco)systems thinking: the recognition of the influence of relationships, and that human beings are not only part of the world, but connected to the world. This includes relationships between people and nature, but also between people, including the new connections that technology is facilitating. Taking a systems lens to thinking about economy and society is a foundation for understanding the impacts of decisions and actions.
4. Democratizing the economy & localizing control: New technologies can facilitate crowdsourced investment, connections and participation, but in-person communities, human and social capital are crucial.  We are experimenting with the new ways technology allows us to connect, and re-discovering some older wisdom about organizing.  The bottom line is that there’s an essential role for human connections in democratizing the economy.

• Anne Jamieson • David LePage • Justin Ritchie • Michael Toye • Nabeel Ahmed Stay tuned for more posts in this series Check out last month’s series

Why is neighbourhood-level development important?

I think “communities” is the term most often used in CCEDNet, in part because it’s widely applicable, from geographic neighborhoods to communities of identity or interest. A community is a venue for people to get organized, connect and learn about each other, identify shared interests, challenges, opportunities to cooperate, and to change. For example, an immigrant community has specific needs – developing language skills, getting help to reach out to employers or starting businesses – and the foundation is that a community acts as an organizing vehicle to address those needs and create change.

How do these relate to cities?

Since cities have the highest concentrations of people, they are among the most dynamic places for connections, opportunities, and possibilities to be created. But the way they’ve been built has disconnected us from nature and each other. Cities need to be understood as part of broader regions. We need to recognize urban-rural relationships and the flows of goods and services, including ecological services, that a broader region provides. On the human side, there are many ways that cities can be better designed to deliberately create opportunities for relationships and cooperation, and connect the different spheres of our lives. Much of today’s built environment was created when zoning and building practices reflected an older mentality of separation. Integrating systems thinking into the design of cities can create opportunities for people to relate and care for each other better.

What are some major challenges to enhancing sustainable local economies?

In the New Economies world, there is a significant focus on business & finance, with valuable attention paid on growing more blended business models (social enterprises, BCorps, co-ops) and new finance models (impact investing, new types of investment capital, crowdfunding). These are creating lots of local opportunities for transition, which is exciting. However, I’d say there is less attention on places and people, from our angle of community economic development.  Ideally, we should be connecting the dots between all four pillars: business, finance, places and people.

Another one of our biggest challenges is communicating these opportunities to a wider audience, both professionals in various sectors and the general public, in a way that is meaningful and engaging.

A good example of a places- and people-centered project is the Quint Development Corporation in Saskatoon, which has a mandate for the city’s core neighborhoods. Among the local residents, there is a large Aboriginal population that has particular needs, so the employment and housing opportunities are combined with outreach that is tailored to their needs.

What does real wealth mean to you?

Real wealth means freedom, well-being, and happiness, for current and future generations, and fairly distributed for as many people as possible.

Based on an interview conducted by Jane Zhang

---

Michael Toye became Executive Director of CCEDNet in August of 2008, bringing a deep background in community economic development (CED) to the Director’s chair. Upon earning his Master of Social Work at McGill, Michael helped set up two worker co-operatives that provide research, consulting and training services related to CED and the social economy. Michael’s involvement with CCEDNet dates back to 2000 when he helped organize CCEDNet’s National Policy Forum while serving as a coordinator with the Coopérative de consultation en développement La Clé.

More recently Michael has deepened his knowledge of Canadian social policy and parliamentary process serving as a policy analyst at the Library of Parliament in Ottawa, while teaching courses on CED and social enterprise at Concordia University. Michael has written a number of articles and other publications on CED and the social economy, including co-editing the book, Community Economic Development: Building for Social Change.

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.

In your view, what are three (or key) elements of “new economies”?

A key part of developing a New Economy is through redefining what it means to have a viable investment. I see that now with divestment, a movement that is stigmatizing the idea of investing in fossil fuel infrastructure, and diverting those funds to invest morally for the future. In the past, ideas of natural capital and externalities weren’t available to us. Now we understand what environmental and human impacts are. The idea of financial return hasn’t incorporated that yet.

• Anne Jamieson • David Lepage • Justin Richie • Mike Toye • Nabeel Ahmed Stay tuned for more posts in this series Check out last month’s series

Finding the investment – financial and labour resources – to fuel this low carbon future will be very important. From a traditional cost-benefit analysis, it may be that a low-carbon economy never makes sense, and we may not be able to sell it to your typical CFO. But we’ll need to mobilize not only at the government and municipal level but also at the level of individual firms.

How does this relate to cities?

With the existing built infrastructure in North America, it’s still hard to get by without a car in many places. We are sprawled out, but on the verge of many new technologies that will change our relationships to vehicles. Whether it’s Uber or car-sharing, new options are slowly whittling away at the incentives for individual car ownership. In 10 or 20 years, things will look very different, and it won’t necessarily be for environmental reasons. Owning a car can mean $6,000 to $9,000 in gas and maintenance fees every year, and you may just decide that it makes more financial sense to spend a fraction of that on a car-sharing membership.

Cities will need to densify in a way that maintains mobility. Patrick Condon at UBC’s School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture has done a lot of work on regional planning in Vancouver and his modeling work shows that we can add  about 800,000 people to the city without building another highrise – it can all be done with four to six-story buildings. Vancouver is actually not that dense, though we like to think it so. Our expectations around returns on real estate biases Yaletown-style highrise development, but a study from the Vancouver Foundation shows that the sense of community in these kinds of buildings is not that great.  I hope we move towards more holistic regional planning that accounts for affordable real estate, and a retrofitting of suburbia that works with existing physical and social infrastructure.

How do we finance the shift to low carbon?

How municipalities will finance infrastructure will be the key question for coming decades. In Vancouver, sea level rise will become an issue. With all the municipality’s existing obligations like health, education, etc., how are we going to finance climate change adaptation needs? We need to retrofit the city’s water infrastructure, and the full costs of living are going to change. Where the money will come from is still an open question. Based on my recent research on fossil fuel divestment, one possibility is putting the money divested from fossil fuels into proactive funds or bonds or anything that can address the needs for infrastructure changes. We’ll have to look towards forward-thinking policy, and carbon taxes and pricing carbon always helps.

Can you share a few success stories of low-carbon transitions?

The city of Feldheim in Germany was forward thinking and has transitioned away from fossil fuel and nuclear electricity completely. Communities are starting to co-own and produce 100% renewable electricity, and that can actually be a revenue source for communities. From a financial perspective, borrowing rates are lower than anyone anticipated years ago and have stayed that way. When European governments had almost zero yielding debt, people are putting money into government bonds that only have less than 1% or negative returns – very risk-averse investments. So if you had the option to put your money into a solar farm, with a rate of return of three to five percent a year, that looks much more attractive.

Another great example is Solar City, which is using securitization of solar installations and bulk packaging them together as a financial instrument you can put money into, as solar is quite reliable as an investment. There are programs like Mosaic Solar in California that allows individuals to invest in solar installations and Abundance Generation in the UK which is a peer-to-peer platform to invest in renewable energy projects. Here in Vancouver, our credit union Vancity just started a fossil-free investment fund.

What does real wealth mean to you?

I like to go back to the early days of capitalism, when Adam Smith wrote about the “invisible hand” in 1776. That’s the idea that most people jumped on, but less talked about is his theory of moral sentiments: the moral developments of human society as a result of the pursuit of wealth. He wrote about a mutual sympathy, something like a physical force that ties society together. That’s the reason why trends go viral. We as humans have a deep innate desire to see our sentiments shared by others.

To me, real wealth is about prioritizing human well-being, healthy personal relationships, and biasing that before the accumulation of financial capital.

A good friend of mine who worked in several major investment banks told me that people don’t want money; they want the feelings that money gives them, and so often you can get those brain chemicals delivered by the experiences we purchase with money in different ways.

Based on an interview conducted by Jane Zhang

---

Justin Ritchie is a research analyst and digital media broadcaster who works on data motivated inquiries into a low carbon energy transition and financial systems at UBC’s Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability in Vancouver, BC. He is also the co-founder and producer of The Extraenvironmentalist Podcast and XE Live Broadcast video production company.

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.

After working in the non-profit and social enterprise arena for over three decades, David LePage founded Accelerating Social Impact (ASI) in 2013 to pioneer an unusual type of business – a Community Contribution Company. This hybrid enterprise model blends the traditional for-profit corporate model with a targeted social purpose, and allocates 60% of its dividends to this purpose. This differs from typical social purpose businesses and benefit corporations, who are not legally bound to divert profits from investors.

The purpose of ASI itself is to accelerate this blended business world and help invigorate the social value of business, from policy all the way to purchasing and supply.

• Anne Jamieson • David Lepage • Justin Ritchie • Mike Toye • Nabeel Ahmed Stay tuned for more posts in this series Check out last month’s series

In your view, what are some key elements of “new economies”?

I think it’s actually the old economy. In North America 2000 years ago, the Aboriginal communities had a thriving cross-continent trading system that went from Mexico to Quebec to Vancouver, based on the exchange of goods and services to create healthy communities. If you trace historically the exchange of goods and services anywhere, it was based on a culture of mutual benefit, or “what do you have that I need?” mentality.

It wasn’t until the industrial revolution that we developed this idea of “you can’t have what I have unless you pay me more”. We created workers and factories, exploitation and the profit motive.

What some call the “new economy” is what I call the “true economy” or “community economy” – the economy as a tool to help us create healthy communities. In the modern world, we’ve switched it around and made the economy the objective.

How do we make the leap to a community economy in the 21st century?

A recent article by Robert Reich looked at how many people employed now are actually producing material things. When you add in the new technology of 3D production and robotic construction, there aren’t many people making things. We’re just exchanging dollars and services. I think the conversation we’re having is about shifting the culture of today’s economy. It’s a new exchange, but we haven’t figured out how to shift from the old model of paying someone to make stuff and someone else buying it. The structure of our economy needs to catch up with how we function as a society.

What would a more just and equitable system look like?

We need to change the structure of the economy and what we value as a society. We still have a minimum wage that makes people poor, and that working at fast food restaurant is not a legitimate job. We need to rethink what’s considered professional versus a service. We now have doctors running businesses based on what they can charge, yet people working in the service industry – nurses, naturopaths, homeopaths, and others outside of mainstream – have to struggle because it’s not seen as professional. This applies to any industry, where the dichotomy of working and owning is just changing.

Another aspect is that we have to do the environmental, social and economic all together.  People complain about Walmart selling organic food because organic without a fair living wage is only halfway there.

More people nowadays are conscious of externalized social and environmental costs. The government has subsidized so many things to create a market for certain partners. We just don’t know what a McDonald’s hamburger costs, for instance. When we account for all of its impact on environment, society, and future generations, who’s going to pay $175 for a hamburger? We need to look past the artificially low prices, and be aware of the actual “costs” of what we’re buying.

Are today’s new sharing economy platforms good examples of “true economy”?

Again, people are saying this is all new, but libraries have been around for a long time, and they’re a great example of the sharing economy. Farmers have had co-ops for almost 200 years and other models like tool-sharing and credit unions. Calling it the sharing economy and exploiting people doesn’t make it any different from the traditional economy. Take Uber for example, where they charge people more at busier times. Instead of paying a taxi driver, you’re just paying this other guy. I think whenever we create a platform, we have to look behind the name and evaluate the exchange value.

How do these relate to cities?

As more opportunities arise, we won’t have everyone moving to cities but we may start having urban and rural cities again. In Canada especially, we have a concentration of people in urban areas, and rural communities are devastated in terms of jobs and opportunities. If we start to shift the meaning of a job or opportunity, people can start to be healthy in their own communities.

What does real wealth mean to you?

Real wealth is putting community ahead of the individual. It’s not just about financial capital but social, cultural, and environmental capital as well. What truly makes a community wealthy is having a balance, maybe even an abundance, of multiple capitals.

Based on an interview conducted by Jane Zhang

---

David LePage is a Principal with Accelerating Social Impact CCC, Ltd. (ASI), one of Canada’s first ever hybrid corporations. ASI CCC was created to serve and promote the emerging blended value business and social finance sectors. David works as a consultant, trainer and advisor with a cross section of social enterprises, social purpose businesses and social impact investors. He is a founder of Buy Social Canada, an initiative to promote social purchasing and social enterprise certification.

David is the Chair of the Social Enterprise Council of Canada. He serves as a Program Adjunct to the Sandermoen School of Business MBA in Social Enterprise Leadership. He is a member of the Social Enterprise World Forum Steering Group, the Canadian CED Network Policy Council, Imagine Canada’s Advisory Committee, and BC’s Partners for Social Impact. He is a Board member of the Vancouver Farmer’s Market and a Board member of Ethelo Decisions. David is the former Team Manager of enp-BC and played a lead role in the development of enp-Canada.

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.

2014 was a big year for CCEDNet as we continued improvements to our communications infrastructure and extended the reach of our message with new tools to different audiences.  Our ability to connect communities for change is growing tremendously, and we are seeing the results.

Click on the image below to read our 2014 Annual Review today!

ccednet_2014_annual_report_postcard.jpg

Every year, CCEDNet members are invited to submit nominations for CCEDNet’s Board of Directors. This year, there were four vacancies to be filled. 

Five eligible nominations were received by the deadline, leading our Elections Officer, Yvon Poirier, to call an election to fill the four seats on the Board.

The 2015 Election for CCEDNet’s Board of Directors was held through a new online system from April 29th to May 11th. The Elections officer approved a ranked-choice voting system as is used in Scotland.  By putting candidates in order of preference, the choices allow the election of four candidates who are supported by the majority of voters.

After validating the results, the Elections Officer declared elected for three-year terms:

• Christine Landry
• William (Bill) Ninacs
• Élodie Bedouet
• Ryan Gibson

These results were ratified at CCEDNet’s Annual General Meeting of the members on May 29. 

Congratulations to these amazing CED leaders from across Canada, who join CCEDNet’s dedicated Board of Directors.

 

---

Christine Landry     Winnipeg, Manitoba

Christine Landry has been with Community Futures Manitoba, the association of Manitoba’s 16 Community Futures organizations (CFs), since 2000.

As Project Coordinator, she works with the 16 CF offices to strengthen their capacity to assist rural, northern an Aboriginal communities in strengthening their business sector and build capacity for CED. Christine has been actively involved with CCEDNet, sitting on the annual CED Gathering planning committee since 2004. She was also a member of the planning committee for the 2009 National CCEDNet Conference in Winnipeg.

Christine works with Community Futures offices each year to plan their annual provincial conference, which is promoted to CED service providers across the province. She also handles the association’s marketing and communications activities. Recently she was pleased to be a member of CCEDNet Manitoba’s Interim Governance Committee to develop a model for improving communication and efficiency in the Network.
 

---

William (Bill) Ninacs     Victoriaville, Québec

My background includes management positions in the public and private sectors as well as wide experience in the community sector where I helped support service and advocacy groups, worker and consumer co-operatives, and other social agencies.  I have been active in CED for more than 25 years, notably as Coordinator of the first community development corporation in Québec and as Co-Director of the Canadian CED Network.  For more than 20 years, I have been a researcher in the field and on the subjects of empowerment-based interventions, local community development and the social economy, with publications in English and in French.  I have taught at the School of Community Economic Development at Southern New Hampshire University and in the CED program at Concordia University.  Currently I am also Associate Professor at the Université du Québec en Outaouais. 
 

---

Élodie Bedouet    Thunder Bay, Ontario

Élodie is Executive Director of the Association des francophones du Nord-Ouest de l’Ontario in Thunder Bay.  She has worked in CED with francophone communities in Ontario and the Northwest Territories for several years and has a keen interest in social enterprise.  Following graduate work in political science (specialization in international political economy) at the Université de Montréal, she did research for a UN agency in Chile on economic development and education and worked on youth inclusion projects with new technologies in Morocco.
 

---

Ryan Gibson    Halifax, Nova Scotia

I am keenly interested how we can better use community economic development to enhance rural and northern regions. Over the past ten years I have been working with voluntary organizations, communities, and government on CED initiatives focused on rural development, philanthropy, governance, and public policy. I am an assistant professor of geography at Saint Mary’s University and the past-president of the Canadian Rural Revitalization Foundation. I have been actively engaged with CCEDNet through a number of board committees and served on the executive. I would like the opportunity to continue my engagement with the Board of Directors to further advance CCEDNet’s mandate, to enhance CCEDNet’s presence in Atlantic Canada, and strengthen our membership engagement.