The Concrete Gardener

Questions of Responsibility: South African and U.S. Politics

2008-09-29T13:17:00.000-07:00

I've been thinking about U.S. politics (just listening to NPR on the way to work keeps it in my mind all day!) and, of course, South African politics. I was pondering how politics relates to social responsibility and stewardship (two themes in The Concrete Gardener) and would love to hear your thoughts.

There's the obvious-- the right to vote implies a responsibility.

There's also a lot of ambiguity about what this relationship between social responsibility and politics could, or should be. I know the phrase "social responsibility" means a whole lot of different things, so I guess I should be more specific. I'm thinking about it in the context of consuming carefully, taking care of the environment, and being engaged in issues of injustice. All of which can be pretty time consuming, right? I thought of a few questions around this ambiguity:

1) Is it worth my time?
2) What should I do if my candidate isn't elected?
3) Does it matter? Should I really care about this, if my life has always been the same independent of who is in power?

I think when it comes to people's time, our passions and priorities can be our guide-- but only to an extent. That is, it's silly to get super-engaged in something that doesn't really excite us, just because it seems like it fits with living socially responsible lives. Yet the act of voting should involve some process of truly understanding the candidates. The rest: campaigning, participating in local elections, I think that's what can be based on your passions. So back to the essential: knowing the candidates.

There's a vague idea out there that politics is a dirty business, and therefore engaging at any level is bound to get you dirty. I can relate to this feeling. In particular, if you stand with a particular candidate, you may be standing with him/her despite the fact you disagree strongly on some issues. Putting in my lot with an imperfect leader feels a little dangerous in terms of the person I'm trying to come across as, right? There's often little nuance in politicians messages (because they must deliver sound bytes), yet usually a lot of thought behind our own beliefs.

But it seems like it's better to be engaged, informed and involved than not, even it means voting a more simplistic message than you dreamed of. Even if you turn out to be totally wrong about a candidate, it doesn't mean your politics or your identity need come crashing down. I've often struggled to put my opinions out there for fear that a) I'm wrong and being obnoxious or b) my opinion will be misinterpreted. But I think it's worth putting it out there to be tested.

Related to question 3), I think even if your life personally has not changed significantly under different administrations, don't assume it's all the same. Try to find out why it matters, and to whom. Leadership always changes things. Check out the candidates websites, for a start, and look at fact checking websites to see if they stretch the truth.

I think question 2) is pretty important. My opinion on this is that you should build up the candidate who is elected, by generating conversation about that candidate and in local politics, and by complaining through channels that might just facilitate change. It's just too easy to undermine a candidate in a totally unhelpful way, by attacking him or her in incredibly general terms. This usually just makes me more angry and frustrated. It's a lot more empowering to generate conversation that is specific and complain through channels that may evoke change.

Poverty as the Cause of AIDS?

2008-09-26T04:49:00.000-07:00

As Mbeki is forced out of government, I've been thinking about one of the things that made him and his health minister unpopular internationally. He's famous for saying, in 1999, that poverty (and therefore not the HIV virus) was the cause of AIDS. It was deeply unpopular internationally (and at home), because there was a sense that he was undermining the reality that AIDS is caused by the HIV virus, which is transmitted by body fluids, not poverty. It's interesting (I think, in the context of issues of imperialism, colonialism, and racism) that the international community (or at least the media I was exposed to at the time) assumed Mbeki had some sort of weird voodoo/communist belief that they had to counter with a biology lesson, rather than that he was speaking in the political realm, with a political motive that was important to engage and question.

There are three points I would like to propose:

1) Thabo Mbeki knows that HIV is a virus, that HIV is transmitted by body fluids, and that the only way for someone who is HIV + to live well for an extended length of time is through anti-retrovirals.
2) Curb your enthusiasm if you think a new government automatically means better HIV/AIDS policy. Jacob Zuma likely doesn't truly know at least one of the above.
3) Maybe Thabo Mbeki isn't completely wrong.

Going to point (2) first: Jacob Zuma, when on trial for rape a couple of years ago, said that he had consensual sex without a condom with an HIV+ woman, and protecting himself by showering afterwards. This was a major step back for HIV/AIDS education. In resource-limited countries like South Africa, preventing the spread of HIV/AIDS may be even more valuable (because it has potential to become less resource-driven) than finding ways to make ARVs accessible.

1) and 3)
South Africa fought (and won) a battle against big pharmaceuticals to allow South Africans access to cheap drugs. They did this while Mbeki was president.

Nancy Krieger of Harvard school of Public Health has, for decades, posited the ways that poverty is the root cause of many diseases. This is super-intuitive on one hand (look at life expectancies in poor countries, or even amongst certain minorities in the United States), and far less intuitive on the other (wait, what about the bugs/cholesterol/cancer cells?).

Perhaps optimistically, I interpret Mbeki's statements to mean "if it wasn't AIDS, it would be something else. It's poverty and inequality that causes people to die young in our country." I think this is ultimately true.

In public health, there is a powerful move towards understanding the root causes of disease and disability. There’s a tension in this relationship. Pulling hard from one side is the idea that you should tackle what you can handle, as well as the idea of personal agency and responsibility. From the other side, if someone really doesn't have a reasonable choice to live a healthy life, shouldn't we be looking at society? I wonder if we can walk that line where we acknowledge agency while focusing our energy on making good choices real and attractive solutions to age-old problems.

Social Entrepeneurship, Life, and Zuma

2008-09-20T08:02:00.000-07:00

Jo Hunter Adams

I recently read a book called "How to Change the World" by David Bernstein. It was a collection of life histories of influential people that the author had interviewed. I wanted to share two things.

Many of the stories were linked to an organization called Ashoka. I was struck by the idea that you can't hire people when it comes to social change. He argued that you can't create a social entrepeneur. This idea really helped me to make sense of my discomfort with many international aid agencies. I'm critical in a limited (and often ignorant) way. On the one hand, "what do I know?!" On the other hand, "something's wrong with this picture!" (particularly, when outside, terribly well-paid professionals are brought in from the outside). There's a positive to be gleaned from this picture. That, in every community there are social entrepeneurs, traders in social change, who international aid agencies can join and share a vision with. I am really excited about that idea, of generating income or support with the understanding that the vision is something bigger that you may not be able to totally get your head around.

The second message I found powerful was that there is no end to what can be achieved by an individual who doesn't care who gets credit. Enough said.

In other news, Zuma.
As many of you know, Mbeki has been given three days to leave government. It's virtually impossible to overestimate the way that this news alters South African politics.

Although I'm not implying that the world will end or that South African life will change day to day, I just think it's a massive turn, because it is a move that is completely based in a vendetta, which is being placed above the good of the nation. My personal opinion is that if an individual (and the ANC as a party) can place personal good this far above collective good, and ignore the political process that has been so essential in holding the country together, there's a lot for us to be worried about. I'm obviously not in South Africa, so if those of you who are would like to speak to this, I invite you to do so.

Thanks everyone.

Giving to Change

2008-09-20T07:27:00.000-07:00

Jo Hunter Adams

Giving to Change is now available here!

This is my very first, very short e-book, and is 100% free. I wanted to share some of our experiences this past year, where my spouse and I have been learning how to give financially for personal and social change.

It's a pretty small file, so you shouldn't have a problem downloading it to your computer. I've been trying to work out how to make a pdf freely available and I can't upload it to this site, so I had to use a free hosting site. Once you get to the hosting site, you'll click "download file."

If you don't feel like downloading a file, let me know and I can invite you to view through google docs. I would use google docs exclusively, but unfortunately it requires individual invitations.

Thank you so much for your support!

Arboretum, September 19

2008-09-19T16:38:00.000-07:00

It's that time of year again: Basil Pesto and Tomato sauce

2008-09-16T04:24:00.002-07:00

Using up the last of the tomatoes and basil before the cold weather comes...

Fair Trade: Two Dimensions of Meaning

2008-09-06T14:54:00.000-07:00

Jo Hunter Adams

I've been reading two books recently, both with the words "Fair Trade" in the title. I've been mulling over these two concepts of Fair Trade. On the one hand, fair trade is a term used to describe the compensation a farmer or group of farmers receive for their products and labour. The implication is that much trade is unfair. On the other hand, fair trade is a term used when economists are looking more broadly at what might be just and profitable at a national and international level. They're deeply interconnected. However, they also bring with them the idea that some trade might not be fair, and that trade at the interpersonal and interstate level is not just about the bottom line, but about what that bottom line might mean for producers and consumers, communities and societies.

Justice and Capitalism
I'm no economist, but something about products-that-don't-make-the-most-profit-they- possibly-can doesn’t ring true. At the micro-level, farmers making relationships and trading directly with buyers (often in other countries) seems to overcome this: they are essentially offering a different product to the consumer. The cost and the profit can be placed on a marginally separate scale.

When it comes to countries trading with countries, however, I get a little fuzzy because intuitively, it seems that countries (and their trade negotiators) need to be negotiating on behalf of their country. I can imagine myself: even if ethically and morally I strongly believed that a trade was not fair, I would work within the legal parameters and standards of the system to ensure the best deal for South Africa. That would be my role, as I would not be acting as an individual, but on behalf of others.

That may be one of the most profound challenges of consensus-building in international trade. In Fair Trade for all, Stiglitz and Charlton argue that trade is extremely complicated, and much of the time those making decisions do not understand the full ramifications of their actions. This may be true, but it makes me uncomfortable. The system should not be so complicated that it's all you can keep in your head at one time. Sure, political leaders should have economic advisors; but leaders should also be able to understand the big picture enough make decisions based on their knowledge of their constituents-- the rich and the poor (economists do not, and should not be expected to, have such a relationship with a community or country). Political decision-makers should bring to the table some knowledge of what works on the ground. Instead, Stiglitz argues that this is not the case.

He defines fair trade both in terms of impact and in terms of the process used to reach a decision:

1. Agreements should be assessed in terms of impact on development.
2. Agreement should be fair
3. Agreement should be arrived at fairly
4. Agenda limited to trade related and development friendly issues.

These tenets were not helpful for me to get around the issue of who traders and decision makers are representing when they come to the table. It seems that whoever is invited to the negotiating table is immediately more powerful than those who they represent: in such a situation, how can the interests of small “informal” traders every truly be represented?

He also argues that unfair trade makes poverty everyone's responsibility. At the time of writing, three times as much was lost in trade source restrictions as all the overseas development poor countries receive from all sources. I find this compelling if only to decrease our smugness over helping those “in need”.

Reading “Fair Trade for all” and “Javatrekker” together helped me to conceptualize how one type of fair trade feeds into the other. While fair trade at a macro-level seems to naturally slip towards very complex abstraction, fair trade between farmers speaks concretely to exactly the challenges of bringing small traders and farmers who have been disenfranchised by unfair trade, to the table.

I’m not sure where my readers are in their understanding of fair trade, so bear with me if I’m going over the basics or assuming too much about your knowledge.

Ideally, fair trade of specific products (coffee, chocolate, sugar) bring together ethical buyers and sellers so that they can negotiate a good profit for both parties. Since there is a direct relationship between buyer and seller, the negotiation seems far less abstract, and far less complicated. Such a relational model seems concrete. The challenge here is that buyers (and most sellers) are up against an entire system.

A one minute summary of Fair Trade is as follows:
- Farmers are given a living wage for their products
- Products are farmed using environmentally sustainable methods
- Farmers have the right to unionize
- Fair trade certification is provided by an independent body, which assesses whether or not these standards are being upheld.

I’m not saying anything new here, so perhaps I should break in with a bit of what Dean Cycon wrote in Javatrekker.

“Providing a fair wage is much better than providing charity.” (xv)

Although the book has strong critiques of the mainstream system, I found it compelling that as a Fair Trade business, the writer's "Dean's Beans" was doing extremely well. This in itself, may speak as much to the skill of the businessman, but it also speaks to the possibility of creating profitable, fair trade businesses.

As for the critiques of the system, one of my favourite stories was of a 28 year old non-Kenyan employee of the World Bank. The system was set up so that this individual was in the position to define what an entire industry (the Kenyan coffee trade) needed to do to be successful. The government was essentially held hostage by these recommendations; if the recommendations were not followed, World Bank loans would not flow into the system. Thus, structural adjustment meant that the government has to listen to a 28 yr old, via the world bank. Cycon acknowledges that the 28 year old was super-intelligent. The critique is of one individual, an outsider, whose opinion was valued more than a collective, or of a farmer, etc.

More on this soon...

Arboretum

2008-09-06T14:52:00.001-07:00

The Latest from the Arboretum

2008-09-02T19:15:00.000-07:00

Vermicomposting: Results and 4 Quick Lessons

2008-08-31T14:23:00.000-07:00

I harvested my first set of compost (castings) today! It's really amazing what ten worms can do in a few weeks (see above).

Some things I have been learning since starting to vermicompost:

(1) Variety is important, particularly if you're adding acidic scraps; don't add too much of one thing.
(2) Make sure it doesn't get to hot for the worms (this summer, that was the main problem at first.
(3) If fruit flies arrive, mix the compost so that their eggs get buried and fruit scraps are not exposed. Don't feed for a while if these little flies are a major problem.
(4) Worms can even eat disposable paper cups-- They will just leave that tiny bit of waxy paper.

Thanks for reading!

Arnold Arboretum, wild strawberries, and a little ladybug at the beach

2008-08-30T11:33:00.001-07:00

The Grameen Bank: Part 2

2008-08-24T13:14:00.000-07:00

Jo Hunter Adams

Mohammed Yunus' history of the Grameen bank, Banker to the Poor, was written in 1999, and offers some perspective on the movement. I enjoyed it because it faced some of the challenges to the movement head-on, and so made it easier to understand the motivations and ideas that made micro-lending a success in the case of the Grameen Bank.

To recap, the movement started in the 1970s with an encounter with poverty. A woman earned dismal profit (2c) weaving stools every day. Her profit kept her stuck where she was- with nothing. All she needed was the capital to be autonomous. Yunus saw possibility.

The concept of lending without collateral was revolutionary, and in a way, still is. In Bangladesh, only the rich were permitted to get loans. The argument was that filling out and processing forms would make lending to the poor unprofitable. That is, even before thinking about collateral, lending to the poor just didn't seem worthwhile.

Today, the Grameen bank is sustainable. At the time of writing, the standard amount of interest was 20% per year, as compared to 15% per month for other non-bank sources of loans in Bangladesh.

Yunus discovered that one of the main reasons that individuals failed to pay their loans back was the daunting size of the payment at the end of the loan period. Instead, in the Grameen bank the payments are weekly, very small and therefore not too daunting.

What is striking is that everything in the structure of the bank is oriented towards long term change. For example, a branch of the bank is not permitted to expand until it has a 100% repayment rate. Its foundation and management has to be really good before it begins to reach more people.

It also tries to prepare borrowers for the long term. Each individual who receives a loan deposits 5% of the loan in a group fund. This group fund is meant to protect the borrowers during hard times. As a result, rather than running away from the loan when severe financial hardship strikes, the borrower is able to ride out the storm.

Criticisms of microlending come from both sides of the political spectrum, and Yunus provides some defense in Banker for the poor. One argument is that the bank depends heavily on the cultural context concerned. Although it is clear that Grameen relies heavily on personal relationships and social pressure, it is not clear why these relationships couldn't exist universally.

Another common criticism of the Grameen Bank is that it diffuses righteous anger around inequality. Therefore the poor, rather than being a constant reminder to the rich, become poor but content. Rather than protesting an unjust system, the poor are thinking about minor entrepeneurial activities. I have heard a similar criticism of Mother Theresa, who, critics argue, didn't change the system itself, but only made the system seem less horrific.

My response is that it is very hard to change a system. Microlending that is repaid does, at some level, actually change the system itself. The poorest of the poor may not be as visible if a bank is truly successful, but this visibility may shift rather than actually disappear. If an individual was struggling to survive, I would also argue that they were not in a good position to protest an unjust system.

People also ask "why is no skills training required to get a loan?" Yunus argues that although skills training is available and important, the very poor in Bangladesh often have immense fear of trainings. It would be an impossible barrier for some people who DO have the skills necessary to manage, repay, and benefit from their loan. Yunus turns the "trickle down effect" upside down; if the poorest of the poor are doing better, he argues, the effect will "bubble up."

Importantly, Grameen is doing all types of other things to show the world that doing business with and for the poor CAN be profitable. They are involved in telecommunications, healthcare, and even fish farming.

The challenge to us may be to look closely at this business model as an alternative to the dependency model still lived out by many aid agencies. There are plenty of ways this type of business model is already lived out in the informal sector, so I am not intending to introduce anything new or revolutionary. I am just thinking about how the informal sector deserves a new name, maybe a name that evokes a little more respect?

Poor Countries in Debt: Part 1

2008-08-24T12:14:00.000-07:00

Jo Hunter Adams

“Sometimes in life one has to admit that things just aren’t working. This is one of those times.” p178 The Debt Threat, Noreena Hertz.

Last week I spoke about how Mohammed Yunus and the world bank think of credit as an opportunity for the poor to survive and better themselves. I will also talk more about the Grameen in a post in the next week, but for now I would like to talk about the debt that plagues many of the poorest nations in the world. This post is based on my reading of The Debt Threat by Noreena Hertz. Debt and Credit are two sides of the same coin.

Most of the debt of poor countries did nothing to help them grapple with poverty. Yet today, debt repayment makes poverty more intractable than ever.

"Much of the debt of poor countries is left over from the 1970s - and often arose through reckless or self-interested lending by the rich world." (Noreena Hertz) In the height of the cold war, wealthy countries used their wealth to buy the friendships of other countries. They attempted to win countries over to their political system by implying that system was synonymous with abundant resources. Not surprisingly, lenders were less interested in where the money was spent than on how it served them politically.

Just as quickly, at the end of Cold War, debts were suddenly due. Before reading The Debt Threat, I had not connected the concept of "sustainable development" with the end of the Cold War. Hertz makes this connection. And it's a powerful one! Suddenly, development needed to be sustainable, not based on loans, at the same time that loans were no longer politically necessary. Understanding the origins of the system is really helpful for making sense of why "sustainable development" is generally not terribly sustainable. Hertz is arguing that the driving force behind sustainable development was political; it was not based in the inherent dignity of self-sufficiency.

The impact of debt repayment is dire. Instead of spending money on health care or social infrastructure, funds are spent servicing loans. The argument that many advocated of debt-forgiveness make is that if all debt were to be cancelled, there would be no real negative impact on the countries or institutions who own the loans. The $150 billion would not be missed-- it would not impact stock value, employees, or governments. Yet the payment of the debts has a huge impact. If debt were canceled it would free up money to tackle infectious diseases and maternal and child health.

One could argue that the money used for debt repayment will never be used for infrastructure in countries that have corrupt governments. And many of the governments with the most debt are also the most corrupt. This argument doesn't strike me as reason to hold on to debt. After colonialism (another breeding-ground for corruption), the existence of abundant credit bred corrupt politicians.

Hertz argues that making an entire country meet subjective standards of good governance may not be the job of those holding the debts or advocating for debt forgiveness. It may only be their role to create islands of good governance.

Hertz also provides a framework for the forgiveness of debt. She argues that sovereign debts should be canceled and considered illegitimate if three conditions apply:

1 The regime borrowing money lacked democratic consent.

2 The monies were used in ways that were inimical to the interests of the population

3 The lender knew that monies would be used in such a way

Hertz also argues that a nation should be able to declare bankruptcy, under specific conditions. Her line of reasoning makes sense-- why should one try to draw blood from a stone?

I recommend The Debt Threat because it provides a framework in which to think about when and how to cancel debt without encouraging irresponsibility. I was left wondering how colonialism-imperialism-slavery fitted into this paradigm of debt and indebtedness. It's a relationship I would like to process more fully, and probably could use some help thinking about.

A Few Resources

Jubilee Debt Campaign http://www.jubileedebtcampaign.org.uk/

Questions and Answers on debt relief http://www.jubileedebtcampaign.org.uk/?lid=98

Jubilee USA: http://www.jubileeusa.org/

The Grameen Bank: Part 1

2008-08-19T12:24:00.001-07:00

Jo Hunter Adams

I've been thinking about how to use The Concrete Gardener as a tool for my own learning, as well as a tool to facilitate other people's learning. One way to do this might be through book-centered topics. Where, ordinarily, I might read a book and then forget about it, here I can share a few key points as I go along, and perhaps be more likely to remember the stories and approaches I convey to you.

Unfortunately, I seldom find enough time to read and write, so please bear with me as I try to figure out the minimum amount of time needed to produce good quality content. My wager is that I'll get better with experience.

After I learned about the Green Belt Movement at the end of last month, I wanted to learn more about really large community based movements that seem to work. An obvious choice was the Grameen bank. I first read The Price of a Dream by David Bornstein, and am currently starting Banker to the Poor by Mohammed Yunus himself. I wanted to write one article before encountering what Yunus has to say about his "own" movement.

Laying the Foundation
The word "Grameen" comes from the Bangla word gram, or village. As I learned about the origins of the movement, I was struck by how long it took before The Grameen Bank really became a bank, or really began at all. Mohammed Yunus spent five years in a small, extremely poor village in Bangladesh (Jobra), walking and talking with long-time residents, and learning about their needs and priorities. Although he was from Bangladesh, he was an extremely well-educated professor and so belonged, quite literally, to a completely different world. I thought about what this would mean, both in terms of the way that 6 month- 2 year contracts work in the Development/NGO industry, and in terms of my own life trajectory. Either way, five years is a long time. Reading about the process, however, these five years seemed to be one of the most important keys to the success of the Grameen Bank. The Bank has been such a success because it started as something people wanted. It might also have been a success because it suited a specific geographic context, and foundations had been carefully laid in the place where the first branches were built.

What is the Grameen Bank?
In short, the students of Yunus, and Yunus himself, determined that small, short-term credit could make the difference between extreme poverty and progress. The response to this need became the Grameen Bank.

The Bank challenged the notion that only credit that requires collateral is credit that works. Rather, they said, lending to the very poor can be sustainable. In order to receive a loan, a prospective member must join a group of five individuals, who pay back a portion of their loan during their weekly meeting. The five individuals are responsible for all the loans within the group. This allows for a degree of self-supervision. Loans generally start small enough to be paid within one year.

The idea behind this strategy is that poverty reduction can best be achieved through the creation of assets. In opposition to the trickle down effect, The Grameen Bank model argues that wealth can bubble, or trickle, up.

***
I think one of the most important questions Yunus, and The Grameen Bank, raise, is the question "Is Credit a Human Right?" Thinking about the bank from a position of very limited knowledge, I can't help but think that the world's common approach to credit is all wrong. In the United States, much individual (and perhaps even national) debt seems to lead to time poverty, a lack of career choices, stress and fear. In the coming weeks, I will be talking about Third World Debt, another kind of credit that has lead to absurd and pernicious decisions that affect the health and livelihoods of millions. Yet credit has tremendous potential for the poor, for whom it can mean increased freedom and decision making power.

Other Organizations/Banks involved in Microfinance
Accion International
Kenyan Rural Enterprise Program
Kiva

An Interesting Leaf Disease

2008-08-06T04:39:00.001-07:00

Green Roofs

2008-08-05T17:51:00.000-07:00

Jo Hunter Adams

As some of you might remember, last year I described the beautiful garden on the roof of BMC, administered by The Food Project. Since then, I've been learning about Green Roofs overall. And so, it seems, has Boston, even the Natick mall is onboard with plans for a green roof well underway.

In places with extreme temperatures, green roofs generally mean less cooling is needed in the summer, and less heating is needed in the winter. If set up correctly, they actually lengthen the lifetime of the roof significantly. And if you can't afford to formally set up the entire space as a green roof, you can also use large pots, or even kid's paddling pools, as a means of creating a green space on top of the world. It seems elegantly simple: the heat that used to make summer unbearable is now used for photosynthesis. It's essentially turned into heat that you can eat.

Wellesley grads/current students, have you ever ventured to the roof of the science center? I keep on thinking about that space and how it could be used for growth. Of course, Wellesley does not have the same space issues that the city of Boston has, but with all the incredible scientists (and plant physiologists) there seems to be an opportunity to turn an energy disaster (how much must it cost to heat all that empty space in the Focus?!) into a space of innovation and research.

Planting Green Roofs and Living Walls by Nigel Dunnett and Noel Kingsbury is a great resource for thinking about how to plant and green your lives. They explain Green roofs without focusing on food production, but rather on creating architecture that is consistent with an existing landscape, rather than in opposition to it. It gives wonderful technical insight into how you could actually do this in a way that keeps your plants alive for the long term, and keeps your roof strong.

As for me, though, I'm really interested in roofs as a potential space for food production. In American cities, the poor (and, to an extent, the rich) eat food that is damaging to their health. I can attest to the fact that produce just doesn't taste the same in the U.S., as compared to South Africa. Empowering individuals in apartments in even the most urban of urban areas means that food production is no longer outside of the hands of the people who want to eat well. Having food in spaces that are accessible and safe (on the rooftops of residents' buildings, for example) means that gardening does not need to be an elite leisure activity. Here's a great link to the potential of rooftop spaces as spaces of food production.

When one enters New York city, the first thing one sees is the Bronx-- seemingly never-ending high rise buildings in the polluted haze that's the result of being a main corridor into Manhattan for ever type of truck and commuter. I wonder what it would be like to have good, fresh food growing in accessible places in the Bronx?

(Picture from "American Wick Drain")

Some of the Benefits of Green Urban Roofs
(From Urban Design Tools)
Reduce city “heat island” effect
Reduce CO2 impact
Reduce summer air conditioning cost
Reduce winter heat demand
Potentially lengthen roof life 2 to 3 times
Treat nitrogen pollution in rain
Negate acid rain effect
Help reduce volume and peak rates of stormwater

Links
Grow Boston Greener
Boston's Urban Forest Coalition

7: Arnold Arboretum

2008-08-04T16:15:00.000-07:00

I got close to a butterfly yesterday.

Day 6 Arboretum

2008-08-01T15:29:00.000-07:00

A whole ecosystem in a tree.

I managed to find a bee laden with pollen. Amazing.

Day 5, Arnold Arboretum

2008-08-01T04:39:00.000-07:00

Enjoy Boston Every Day of the Week (On the Cheap!)

2008-07-31T06:21:00.000-07:00

In Boston, there are many options for enjoying the city without spending too much money. Here are a few snapshots!

Sunday

Today, the section of Memorial Drive between Western Ave and JFK Street is closed for people to bike, walk and play games along the Charles River. Harvard square is a short walk away and you could look at the Harvard Bookstore and the Harvard COOP for a great selection of books. I take note of the books currently being recommended, and then order them via Interlibrary Loan.
Memorial Drive: 11am-7pm, every Sunday from June-Mid-November
Price: Free

Monday

The Sculpture part at DeCordova Museum is free on Mondays, when the museum itself is closed. Over 35 acres with about 75 artworks scattered on the grounds. A great place to take pictures, go for a walk, enjoy artwork or just relax.

When: Monday's, dawn to dusk
Where: DeCordova is located in Lincoln, MA, about 30 minutes drive from Boston.
Cost: Transportation to and from the museum.

Tuesday

Let's make Tuesday a walking day. Boston Public Library in Copley Square is one of the most beautiful Boston landmarks. Inside, you can enjoy the fountain in the courtyard area, walk on the marble staircase and check out murals painted by Singer Sargent, the most successful American painter of the early twentieth century.
There are plenty of events held at the library, so you could plan your trip around something special, or just be spontaneous.
Nearby the BPL is a Trader Joe's, where you could get a few snacks and walk over to the Boston Common, via Copley square.
A Day Downtown: Business hours at the BPL are 9-9, Mon-Thurs, and 9-5, Friday-Sunday. Trader Joe's is open from 9am-10pm every day.
Cost: The cost of a few snacks!

Wednesday

On Wednesday, take advantage of Boston's Museum of Fine Art's free day and check out a new area of town at the same time. The MFA has both contemporary and non-contemporary art, so there's something for everyone to enjoy.

Nearby the MFA is the Isabella Stuart Gardner Museum. The Isabella Stuart Gardner museum used to be a home of the art collector of the same name, and she specified in her will that her art should be kept for posterity. The garden changes with the seasons-- viewing this garden (pictured) is a truly unrivalled experience. If you are a resident in the Boston area, it's very likely you can get a museum pass through your local library. For example, here's the list for residents of Watertown. If you are a Watertown resident, you can get a pass for all the museums I mention in this article (to visit for free any day of the week!), and many more. You can visit the Museum of Science, The Boston Children's Museum, the Peabody Essex Museum, the Harvard Museum of Natural History, and the Garden in the Woods, to name just a few.
Cost: The MFA is free on Wednesdays or with a museum pass from most local libraries; the Isabella Stuart Gardner Museum costs $5 with a museum pass.

Thursday

The Institute of Contemporary Art is a new Boston museum on the waterfront, featuring the art of many major and upcoming contemporary artists. On Thursday evenings after 5pm, you can visit the museum for free. In the spirit of encouraging young artists, Harborwalk Sounds are a series of ongoing concerts featuring talented young musicians. The stadium seating (pictured right)-- freely accessible all week round-- offers a breathtaking view of the harbour.
Transportation note There is not very much free parking, but the ICA is accessible via the silver line.
When 5pm-9pm, Thursdays, or any time with a library museum pass.

Friday

A Mango smoothie at Panera in Watertown will cost you about $4 in the summer, but the experience is well worth it: there's plenty of space to sit inside or outside, and you make use of free wireless or check out the sculptures around Arsenal Park. On occasion, there is also free live music. Arsenal Park reaches back towards the river, so the possibilities remain endless. There's always plenty of space to park your bike or car. You can also visit the Panera Bread's in Coolidge corner, Brookline and in Lexington. Panera offers the opportunity to relax in the city cheaply, and perhaps even avoid a monthly fee for wireless at home!

Saturday

A few steps away from Forest Hills T Station (the last stop on the orange line), the Harvard Arboretum in Jamaica Plain is an oft-overlooked gem for Boston residents. As many of you know, I've been on a mission to spread the news about the Arboretum (see Day 4), and so I couldn't let this post go by without mentioning it. Entry is free, and you can enjoy a picnic, a bike ride with your kids, or just a short walk. The collection of bonsai (pictured) dates back to the 18th century, and if you're lucky you may see a turtle in one of the Arboretum's many ponds. Once you're in Jamaica Plain, check out Centre Street, the bustling center of the neighborhood. Harvest Co-op is located nearby on South Street, where you can choose from a variety of excellent quality produce and grains.

Day 4, Arnold Arboretum

2008-07-31T04:39:00.000-07:00

The pond is already much greener.

...And a start of a series of pictures of the beautiful bonsai...

The Green Belt Movement by Wangari Maathai

2008-07-30T10:59:00.000-07:00

Jo Hunter Adams

The 2004 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, Wangari Maathai talks about the Green Belt Movement, started in 1977.

Since 1977, over 30 million trees have been planted by the movement, and thousands of women provided with opportunities to build livelihoods.

The story is full of hope and possibility, as well as strong leadership. The movement was a simple, deeply rooted response to a problem.

Simplicity: The movement has an extremely clear goal. The steps involved in promoting tree planting is simple enough that each step towards planting trees can be replicated to prevent trees being wasted or the program being exploited.

Deep Roots: Derived from a structure that was grounded in the reality of the communities involved. Communities seem to make the choice to be a part of the movement, so the way that the movement grew was intensely organic and as result, much stronger.

Incentives: Even given the relative scarcity of resources, the Green Belt Movement sought to show respect for those choosing to join in and plant trees. As such, planting trees meant simultaneously building livelihoods.

Democratic Leadership: Maathai states that any organization—even a grassroots non-profit—needs to be democratically led from day 1. I thought of how true this likely is. For a movement to have longevity, it has to have a depth of vision and a breadth of power that makes it more than just the extension of our individual selves.

Wangari Maathai on Peace and the Environment

2008-07-26T07:05:00.000-07:00

(From Wangari Maathai's Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech in 2004)

"Some people have asked me what the relationship is between peace and the environment, and I say to them that many wars are fought over resources, which are becoming increasingly scarce across the earth. If we did a better job of managing our resources sustainably, conflicts over them would be reduced. So, protecting the global environment is directly related to securing peace."

Day 3, Arnold Arboretum

2008-07-26T05:14:00.001-07:00

Bonus

Day 2, Arnold Arboretum

2008-07-25T04:46:00.000-07:00

Day 2-- lots of rain in Boston, so had to run to get this one.