RIPESS (intercontinental network for the promotion of social solidarity economy)
Notes of the contribution from daniel tygel, RIPESS (intercontinental network for the promotion of social solidarity economy)
2nd HLPF meeting, session of July 2nd from 10am-1pm
I'd like to share only one recommendation from our experience for this debate to complement what has already been said with an element that was not sufficiently highlighted: Territory should be considered as a key strategy to move from silos to ingegrated policy.
The actors in the local communities have a sistemic view of their reality. They don't "naturally" think separating themes. They think at the same time about food sovereignty, quality of public services, traditional populations, women emancipation, decent work (not only subordinated, but also collective work), access to natural resources, etc.
So one strategy to succesfully build pulic policies is to base them on participatory multi-stakeholder instances in each territory. We've had experiences in Brazil in the production of Local and Endogenous Rural Development Plans, and now we are starting a process of developping Local Sustainable Development Plans, foccused on shifting the local development from a for-profit model to a social solidarity economy model.
In this sense, we perceive that technical efforts should be foccused much more in collecting and making data available in digested formats (opensource and open linked data), and in building efficient participatory methodologies for enabling the local construction of public policies of sustainable development through open and recognized spaces of dialogue. The efforts should also be foccused in building participatory mechanisms to monitor its implementation.
The communities and their people must have the right to decide which path of development are better suited by their perspective of development, based on popular knowledge and cultural inheritage, so that academic research and technology are rather in service of the people than an imposition over the people.
It's not the people who create silos. It's an excessive burocratic, cartesian and technocratic view that does that. And it's not a naïve option: there are powerful economic interests that prefer the silos for maintaining the political control. How can we reverse that unequal power relation? I'd like to hear your comments.
2nd HLPF meeting, session of July 2nd from 10am-1pm
I'd like to share only one recommendation from our experience for this debate to complement what has already been said with an element that was not sufficiently highlighted: Territory should be considered as a key strategy to move from silos to ingegrated policy.
The actors in the local communities have a sistemic view of their reality. They don't "naturally" think separating themes. They think at the same time about food sovereignty, quality of public services, traditional populations, women emancipation, decent work (not only subordinated, but also collective work), access to natural resources, etc.
So one strategy to succesfully build pulic policies is to base them on participatory multi-stakeholder instances in each territory. We've had experiences in Brazil in the production of Local and Endogenous Rural Development Plans, and now we are starting a process of developping Local Sustainable Development Plans, foccused on shifting the local development from a for-profit model to a social solidarity economy model.
In this sense, we perceive that technical efforts should be foccused much more in collecting and making data available in digested formats (opensource and open linked data), and in building efficient participatory methodologies for enabling the local construction of public policies of sustainable development through open and recognized spaces of dialogue. The efforts should also be foccused in building participatory mechanisms to monitor its implementation.
The communities and their people must have the right to decide which path of development are better suited by their perspective of development, based on popular knowledge and cultural inheritage, so that academic research and technology are rather in service of the people than an imposition over the people.
It's not the people who create silos. It's an excessive burocratic, cartesian and technocratic view that does that. And it's not a naïve option: there are powerful economic interests that prefer the silos for maintaining the political control. How can we reverse that unequal power relation? I'd like to hear your comments.