Herersquo;s something that got me thinking:

The Story of Stuff is a 20-minute, fast-paced, fact-filled look at the underside of our production and consumption patterns, with a special focus on the United States. All the stuff in our lives, beginning from the extraction of the resources to make it, through its production, sale, use and disposal, affects communities at home and abroad, yet most of this is hidden from view. The Story of Stuff exposes the connections between a huge number of environmental and social issues and calls for all of us to create a more sustainable and just world. Itrsquo;ll teach you something. Itrsquo;ll make you laugh, and it just may change the way you look at all the stuff in your life forever.

Naturally, the topic is far from new to GlobaLab. I have been looking at the political economy of globalisation for months now. I agree with many of this moviersquo;s positions, and love its simple and entertaining tone. Well done to Annie Leonard and to all those involved for translating into an easily-graspable short film some of the complexities of the global economy, particularly the commodity chains that form the backbone of world trade.

Yet, I canrsquo;t help pointing out: itrsquo;s not that simple. Describing the problem as one of ever-collapsing natural resources and abused Third World workers fighting the evil and conspiratorial plans of multinational corporations with the help of selfless international NGOs might look good on film, but is it an actual reflection of the real world?

I am not a great admirer of corporations, or a blind believer in the transparency of their CSR policies, but branding them all as Earth-destructors does not do justice to the good many of them do (in terms of job-creation, economic growth, research into innovation - including into clean energy), nor will it help change the way they behave.

And similarly, the omnipresent sanctification of NGOs fails to disclose their deep accountability limits and underlying political interests. According to One World, the NGO sector scores lower than the corporate and intergovernmental sectors when it comes to transparency, so it is legitimate to question many of their claims, especially their Doomsday positions on the environment and development.

But on one point I fully agree: consumerism lies at the centre of this system, so if we want to change it we have to start thinking of creative ways to change peoplersquo;s attitude towards stuffhellip;

By next year, more than half the worldrsquo;s population will for the first time in history be living in cities. Currentrsquo;s Mariana van Zeller tours Lagos, Nigeria, the worldrsquo;s fastest-growing ldquo;Megacityrdquo;, creating a thought-provoking vision of one of Africarsquo;s most difficult cities.

Donrsquo;t miss it.

Timothy Garton Ash reassures us from the pages of The Guardian about the new-born EU Constitution - sorry, erhellip; Lisbon Reform Treaty:

Now this amending treaty of Lisbon, modest and hedged about with qualifications though it is, should enable the union to work just a little bit better when - assuming all 27 member states ratify it - it comes into force in January 2009. But a noble constitutional document, comparable to that of the United States, it is not. It more nearly resembles the instruction manual for a forklift truck. In itself, it will do nothing to convince Europersquo;s citizens, or the rest of the world, of what the European Union is good for. But it will help the EU to do things that may convince them. Now that the end of this long, disappointing constitutional debate is at last in sight, it should free us to concentrate on what this union does, rather than what it is, or says it is. In fact, the EU will define what it is by what it does. 

Wonderful. While the US mantra on Iraq appears to be ldquo;Donrsquo;t pay attention to what wersquo;re doing, just to what wersquo;re sayingldquo;, TGA is telling us: ldquo;Donrsquo;t listen to what the EU is saying, just look at what itrsquo;s doing!ldquo;

Strange world we live in. Call me unsophisticated, but whatever happened to ldquo;Turning words into deeds?ldquo;

The Economist reviews this week Forces for Good, a new book about exceptional NGOs, which according to the weekly are too few and rare to be worthy of the illustrious paperrsquo;s attention. The authors, Leslie Crutchfield and Heather McLeod Grant, surveyed thousands of (US) nonprofits, and finally concentrated their attention on a sample of 12, which they believe have achieved the highest levels of impact.

These included America’s Second Harvest, Habitat for Humanity and - much to the Economistrsquo;s delight - the notoriously right-wing Heritage Foundation, a proof that this was a ldquo;serious piece of research, not the usual sentimental tosh that gets written about left-leaning NGOsrdquo; [sic!].

The Economist once again shows its contempt towards the NGO sector and its lack of understanding of its internal diversity. Kicking off with a series of scathing (and unreferenced) remarks about social enterprises, which seem to reduce the debate to a pathetic comparison between the successes of Google and those of the Grameen Bank (apples and oranges, anyone?), it then sings the praises of the 12 selected nonprofits for their excellent  achievements (data, anyone?). The fact that social enterprises and nonprofits might not actually be one and the same thing, or that being based (as the 12 selected organisations are) in the US as opposed to Bangladesh might offer considerable advantages to - for example - making the most of market forces does not seem to be a relevant piece of information for the illustrious weekly.

The Economist is not alone in displaying a lack of understanding towards the complexities of the third sector, and of social enterprises in particular. Roger L. Martin amp; Sally Osberg - echoing Muhammad Yunus - have already made a plea on the pages of the Stanford Social Innovation Review for strengthening the definition of social entrepreneurship [PDF], but definitions are not enough when we are facing the challenges of applying them to different cultural contexts. We might reach an agreement on what a social enterprise might be in the US (therefore what parameters we can adopt to evaluate its success), but this does not mean we can apply this model to the whole world.

Aside from these important theoretical considerations, ldquo;where is the social-entrepreneurial equivalent of a for-profit start-up like Google or Microsoft [hellip;]? where is the evidence of massive social change?rdquo; - asks an irritated Economist.

The answer is Kick-Start, a Kenya-based organisation that develops and promotes technologies that can be used by dynamic entrepreneurs to establish and run profitable small scale enterprises. As reviewed by the MITrsquo;s Innovations journal, Kick-Start has started 50,000 new businesses, generating $52 million a year in new profits and wages, and is directly responsible for a 0.6% increase of Kenyarsquo;s GDP.

Now, can someone at the Economist more interested in facts than in rhetorical preaching let me know if Google can be said to have had a comparatively similar impact on the US economy and on its social needs?

The European Council on Foreign Relations organised today its first briefing, presenting the results of a world-wide survey (PDF) conducted by Gallup International on the balance between hard and soft power. The survey covered a range of questions on the global influence of several international actors, including the EU, the US, China and India. Mark Leonard, Executive Director of the ECFR, chaired a somewhat drowsy panel that included Lord Desai, Robert Kagan and Ivan Krastev. The conclusions? Since the EU is the least hated of all the major powers, this should be interpreted as a sign that it should be given greater clout internationally. Alas, the newly-born think-tank gave away a strangely familiar smell of old habits.

A proper debate with the audience, packed with policy wonks and senior civil servants, never really kicked off. The elephants in the corner were carefully left dormant. If the EU has more power, what does this mean for the Member States? Can we realistically expect them to step aside and let go the reigns, especially those that have never really lost the appetite for world domination? And if it develops a stronger role internationally, will this come at the expense of its real (or perceived) soft power? And does all this matter at all, since the Commission has been promoting a stronger global role for the EU long before anyone was asked whether they supported it or not? How does this fit with the idea of a democratic Europe? Or is foreign policy - as Kagan was suggesting - something that should be still dealt with by the old boys in the corridors of power? None of these provocative questions was really raised during the debate.

Instead, discussion turned quickly to the US - why everyone hates it, why it doesnrsquo;t matter, why it should, etc. - while the topic of the EU was pushed aside. Clearly, even for the panelists there were more interesting subjects to discuss. To be fair, the ECFR made an effort to engage the broader public in the debate, for example by posting some interesting throughts on the survey (but receiving only 1 response at the time of writing). However, the briefing was strangely reminiscent of those dull Brusselite luncheons where everyone is too polite to start a proper discussion. The only one who did, Lord Desai, ranted on about a chart in the handouts, only to be gently told that he was reading it upside down, and then made some completely unfounded statements about how the Enlargement and the Single Market have failed (sic!). Everyone else sat silently in their dark suits (even the very few present women appeared dressed for a funeral). This was hardly stuff that gets people excited about the EU in the world.

Now, I know I am being a little harsh, but this is because I really think the ECFR has huge potential, and I want it to succeed. However, if it truly wants to rock the debate on Europe - especially in the UK - itrsquo;ll have to be a little more daring and provocative than today. So here are my 3 little suggestions to make the next event more captivating and perhaps memorable:

1. A more diverse panel: less pompous academics (notoriously allergic to criticism) and younger, more unconventional thinkers with strong and sustained views on the subject could have generated a much livelier debate, and perhaps generated 2-3 more challenging ideas about the role of Europe in the world. For example him. Or her.

2. A richer audience: I am not sure who everyone in the audience was, but if my understanding of English fashion doesnrsquo;t fail me, most were civil servants, press officers (not journalists) and the odd think-tank refugee. People from more diverse backgrounds (business, media, NGOs, even students) could have thrown in some hard questions at the survey and at the panel. In line with the ECFRrsquo;s stated objective of being truly 2.0, why not - for example - invite next time also a sample of some of the most provocative and interesting British Euro-bloggers (them, or him, to begin with)?

3. A cooler venue: the Foreign Press Association felt like one of those old boysrsquo; clubs, where men used to go smoke cigars and discuss politics away from the madding crowds. The ECFR debates should happen instead in exciting new venues, where businessmen, artists, creators, or architects hang out, and where think-tanks rarely set foot. London is awash with exciting places where to hold events. One example for all, the Bloomberg Space:

There, I said it all. Now letrsquo;s hope I havenrsquo;t just secured my banning from all future ECFR eventshellip;!

Ethan Zuckerman remains my No. 1 favourite blogger of all times, and given how much I struggle to update GlobaLab at least 2-3 times a week, while trying to work and retain a decent social life, I am in awe at his amazing prolificacy.

A quick browse at his last few entries would be enough to feed an average personrsquo;s brain for 6 months. Over the last few days, hersquo;s been busy reporting from the PopTech conference, which he describes as ldquo;the annual three-day gathering of scientists, inventors, geeks, philosophers and thinkers in coastal Maineldquo;. The event is a catwalk for amazing projects and ideas that are truly transforming the world. If you havenrsquo;t followed the event, you can read Ethanrsquo;s posts on some of the most interesting presentations, including (but there are more):

• Chris Jordanrsquo;s images of consumerism, trying to convey the sheer absurdity of our waste-prone societies;


• Jessica Flanneryrsquo;s presentation of Kiva, the online-based initiative that is rocking the micro-credit world;


• Paul Polakrsquo;s designs for the rural poor, on which Paul and PSD had already commented;


• Adrian Bowyerrsquo;s breeding machines, which bring us a step closer to the Matrix (watchout, Jon!);


• Louanne Brizendinersquo;s study of male and female brains, which wonrsquo;t please those advocating gender equality;


• John Shearerrsquo;s research into wireless power transmission, which might one day move beyond lighting Christmas trees;


• Sheila Kennedyrsquo;s portable light systems for the developing world, adopted by Mexican women to read and cook meals into the night;


• Jonathan Harrisrsquo; digital story telling, and his ldquo;We feel finerdquo; collection of online human emotions;


• Dan Gilbertrsquo;s analysis of happiness and risk, which tells us - basically - that humans are dumb and selfish;


• Chris Luebkemanrsquo;s study of sustainable vs. unsustainable cities, which pitches Ski Dubai against Dongtan Eco City (guess who wins?);


• Claire Nouvianrsquo;s observations of the deep oceans, that reveal alarming damages by human activities to deep sea ecosystems;


• Victoria Halersquo;s non-profit drug company One World Health, reminiscent of the $1 ASAQ malaria treatment;


• A conversation on Islam facilitated by John Esposito, that tells us that Americans hate Muslims (no, really?);


• and finally Zainab Salbirsquo;s presentation on Women for Women International, which is helping women who have survived war rebuild their lives.

It took me good part of the day to read them all, and there are many more celebrity bloggers who reported from the event, including BoingBoing, Next Billion, and a few (but not many) non-English speaking bloggers.

If this isnrsquo;t enough for you, check out Ethanrsquo;s earlier post about a new initiative to fight counterfeit pharmaceuticals in Ghana (hopefully soon the whole of Africa), mPedigree, which will use mobile phones to track drugs from their original producers all the way to the pharmacy shelves, allowing each buyer in the chain to ensure that they’re dealing with a legitimate product. Or check out the entry in which he takes a good shot at unravelling the complex situation in Somalia, in response to the Onionrsquo;s eye-opening video Situation in Nigeria Seems Pretty Complex, a must see for all Africanists:

In The Know: Situation In Nigeria Seems Pretty Complex

What can I say? Ethan, you are my personal hero!!!

From globalisation to nanotechnology, vote here for the Drivers of Change that you think will influence your area of work.

The Washington Post showcases an amazingly visionary project, the World Digital Library, which plans to digitize the accumulated wisdom of humankind, catalogue it, and offer it for free on the Internet in seven languages:

The World Digital Library will make available on the Internet, free of charge and in multilingual format, significant primary materials from cultures around the world, including manuscripts, maps, rare books, musical scores, recordings, films, prints, photographs, architectural drawings, and other significant cultural materials. The objectives of the World Digital Library are to promote international and inter-cultural understanding and awareness, provide resources to educators, expand non-English and non-Western content on the Internet, and to contribute to scholarly research.

They donrsquo;t come more visionary than this onehellip;

[via Jon]

The Independentrsquo;s Johann Hari writes a long overdue report on Francersquo;s secret involvement in the Central African Republic, the most forgotten and under-reported country of Africa.

This is classical, old-fashioned war-reporting and political journalism, an uncompromising indictment of Francersquo;s foreign policy in Central Africa (and Africa more generally), and a very uncomfortable read for those who still think *we* are the good ones, and *they* are the underdeveloped ones. Francewatcher will be pleasedhellip;

A few good sources exploring the themes of social entrepreneurship and microcredit.

Beyond Good Intentions reproduces an article from the International Trade Forum on innovative approaches to reduce poverty through trade, which are bringing business, NGOs, government and aid agencies together. Examples include Bespoke Experience, a social enterprise creating high-end tourism lodges in Mozambique, and using its profits to enable communities to work their way out of poverty.

NOW and PBS review the debate on microcredit, and whether itrsquo;s really pro-poor or simply exploiting the most vulnerable, with a focus on Compartamos, the Mexican non-profit turned for-profit microfinance institution at the centre of a fierce debate. It contains an excellent interview on the subject with Muhammad Yunus, the world-renowned founder of the Grameen Bank and father of microcredit, who also wrote another good piece on Social Business Entrepreneurs here.

The IHT writes about the current wave of scepticism over social marketing, a market-inspired strategy to get the poor to start using mosquito nets by asking them to pay a minimum price for them, which the WHOrsquo;s director Dr. Arata Kochi bluntly describes as a pointless approach to reach the most vulnerable.

Clearly, no one has informed of such policy-shift Ben Affleck and Matt Damon, whorsquo;ve been visiting Tanzanian hospitals implementing government-backed and USAID-funded net distribution facilities adopting a social marketing strategy, allegedly very successfully.

Ok, I am late. I was meant to post this yesterday to tow the line with the rules of Blog Action Day, but didnrsquo;t have time. But really, in California itrsquo;s still the 15th. And the blogosphere is allowed to be chaotichellip;

Well, I am certainly not an environmental expert, but you donrsquo;t have to be a genius to understand that we are at a historical turning point on environmental thinking. Most of the environment-related blogs and sites I read - such as Grains of Sand, the outstanding blog of Caspar Henderson, award-winning writer and journalist on environmental affairs, who also writes on the Open Democracy site - agree that addressing environmental degradation and climate change should be the top priority for all politicians. Celebrating Al Gorersquo;s Nobel Peace Prize, Alex Steffen writes on WorldChanging:

ldquo;There is no longer any reasonable debate about whether or not we need to move with all possible speed towards a different way of living on this planet. To argue the contrary is now to prove oneself morally bankruptrdquo;.

Point taken, you wonrsquo;t hear a whisper from this blog, sir! But while there is (not) much talk of historical responsibilities, EcoEquity and of the right of developing nations to achieve our levels of economic welfare and prosperity, in practice most realist observers would admit that such rights will be trampled in the name of national economic self-interest.

With Western politicians more interested in wooing political constituencies, how can we expect them to make fair choices about who should bear the costs of carbon emission reduction? Are we honestly so deluded to think that the US and EU will consider slashing their economic growth perspectives, harm their own national companies, cause unemployment and possibly even political unrest, in order to help China, India or Brazil become wealthy, highly-industrialised nations? If we are, then perhaps we should simply ask Father Christmas to bring us a new atmosphere on 25 December.

The truth is, as a number of critical political ecologists concerned about international development put it, that the climate change debate could prove to be the hardest hurdle to jump for nations trying to develop. As Tim Forsythe and Zoe Young put it on Mute Magazine:

ldquo;There seems to be consensus among global elites about where to start (be afraid, be very afraid … but always trust the government), how to address the challenge (change development patterns in the South to ‘offset’ carbon emissions produced by business as usual in the North), and who is responsible (mainly you and me). Real doubts and arguments are suppressed while market-friendly ‘solutions’ are served up on a nice, glossy platerdquo;.

For example, northern corporations - supported by government policies - are increasingly buying out large quantities of land to convert into lsquo;carbon sinkslsquo;, often in areas where land tenure and land use rights are in dispute, so they donrsquo;t have to reduce their carbon emissions.

Many environmentalist would already have me gunned down for what Irsquo;ve written so far, but let me reassure them: I really do love trees! Irsquo;ve planted about 20 so far myself! But I just canrsquo;t see how we can expect our governments to solve this situation while lifting millions of people out of poverty.

So, what is to be done? Are we - generally concerned individuals, who are passionate about global justice, yet also care about passing on to our children a world where the air is breathable and the seas still populated by fish schools - just condemned to take sides? If we do not agree with this state of play, are we to be considered environmental foes?

I refuse to bow to this logic. The answers to the problems of climate change, environmental degradation and sustainable development are far more complex and intertwined than what wersquo;re being told so far. On the one hand, we need to invest serious money into researching and identifying appropriate technologies to the economic development needs, energy consumption requirements and environmental challenges of developing countries. This would show developing nations that we are not just paying lip-service to the press when we say we want to help them fight poverty.

On the other hand, we need to engender a behavioural shift in the developed world, recognising that the neo-liberal economic principles that govern our economies and societies are also part of the problem, so itrsquo;s unrealistic to expect people not to discount the future when the socio-economic structures that surround them are giving them the opposite message. This is about much more than switching to energy-saving light bulbs. Itrsquo;s about questioning one of the founding tenets of contemporary capitalism: consumerism.

Addressing climate change requires a deeper re-thinking than most governments, corporations and - dare I say - radical environmentalists are ready to concede. Gore is right: this is the end of the beginning. But - in Kevin Smithrsquo;s words - another end of the world is, indeed, possible.

You know a book is good when not one, but three different friends write to you unprompted to recommend it. And you know itrsquo;s a masterpiece when it spawns a Facebook fanclub group! So today I bought Stuffed and Starved, Raj Patelrsquo;s new study on the absurdities and political interests lying behind the current global food system, which leaves millions fighting obesity while millions more struggle to get a meal a day.

Felicity Lawrence on The Guardian sings its praise:

Unless you are a corporate food executive, the food system isnrsquo;t working for you. If you are one of the worldrsquo;s rural poor dependent on agriculture for your livelihood - and roughly half the global population of 6 billion fall into this category - you are likely to be one of the starved. If you are an urban consumer, whether an affluent metropolitan or slum-dwelling industrial labourer, you are likely to be one of the stuffed, suffering from obesity or other diet-related ills.

Raj Patelrsquo;s fascinating first book examines this apparent paradox. His thesis is that the simultaneous existence of nearly 1 billion who are malnourished and nearly 1 billion who are overweight is in fact the inevitable corollary of a system in which a handful of corporations have been allowed to capture the value of the food chain. Moreover, government policies through history have been designed to control our food. Their aim has been to provide cheap food for the urban masses and so prevent dissent at home. The instruments of colonial command may have been replaced with newer mechanisms that give a greater role to the private sector, but control our food they still do with disastrous social consequences, despite all the neo-liberal rhetoric of free trade and choice.

Another book joining my awful backlog of to-do readinghellip;

With the launch of the first issue of its quarterly journal, Knowledge Politics - the think-tank dedicated to exploring the implications and possibilities of the development of an ‘information society’ - has entered the arena of online academic journals, offering an innovative and open space for reflection and dialogue on how technology (and in particular Information Communication Technologies - ICTs) is affecting the social, political and economic universes. In addition to the journal, KPrsquo;s site also offers a number of thematic portals, ranging from Internet Governance and Information Society Theory, to Knowledge Economy and Digital Rights.

Apart from the fact that the journal and the other publications by KP are exploring some truly interesting issues, this post is actually about shameless self-promotion, since one of the published papers (PDF) was written by me. Itrsquo;s about Web 2.0 and international NGOs, and the political implications of the changes in online knowledge management practices for the operational and advocacy activities of non-governmental agencies. The vignette above neatly summarises the prevailing attitude of NGOs towards Web 2.0 (and ICTs more generally) and their role in development. My position is, of course, rather differenthellip;

In true Web 2.0 spirit, comments and feedback - especially from NGO staff - are most welcome!

Like almost 10,000 other bloggers, I am taking part in Blog Action Day on 15 October. For once, the blogosphere will resonate with one, common topic: the environment.

Itrsquo;ll be interesting to see if and how this will work, and whether it will have a lasting impact. Personally, I have always been fascinated by how the blogosphere can become a social mobilisation tool, so Irsquo;ll be posting and checking the results closely.

Paintalicious writes about Claudio Ethos, the talented graffiti artist who was recently filmed (above) while working in Grottaglie, Italy:

We are entering into an incredibly productive phase of urban street art, where talented artists like Brazilian Claudio Ethos are creating stunning and dramatic artworks. Ethos’ artworks contain sharp social commentary obviously inspired from the “sprawling metropolis” of Sao Paulo - the new “shrine to graffiti”. While many street artists today prefer the stencil method, Ethos prefers to paint using freehand style to create these unique figurative paintings. They would indeed enrich the surrounding of any living space.

You can find most of Claudio’s work at ekosystem.org. Unfortunately, street art is usually short lived, gone within days or certainly weeks after it is completed. The only permanent record of these works are photographs. Here are [28] more photos for the record, capturing ethos’ spectacular ephemeral pieces… more…

[via Wooster Collective]

No, I am not talking about a new train (although the London-Paris Eurostar is about to be moved from Waterloo to Kingrsquo;s Cross, which is very exciting for me, since I live within walking distance of the station), but about a new pan-European initiative, headed by Mark Leonard, and staffed with lots of young bright things: the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR).

Its purpose? Amongst others, to develop a more coherent and vigorous European foreign policy, in order to tackle an increasing number of global challenges, including climate change, world poverty, nuclear proliferation and the surge of violent extremism.

There havenrsquo;t been many interesting reactions to the birth of the ECFR within the blogosphere so far. Mark Leonard set the tone a few days ago as a guest-blogger on the Economist, while others - including the Dubliner Magazine, the Cult of the Dead Fish and Infowars - simply followed his lead, reproducing the press-release from the launch. Personally, I think the blogosphere should be more about opinion-making than info-replication, so here is my personal take on the new initiative.

Three things excite me about the ECFR. First: its young leadership and unreserved Europhilia, which brings a breath of fresh ideas and enthusiasm to a political debate about the future of Europe that has recently been - to say the least - soporific. Second: its decision to base its headquarters at the heart of the eurosceptic London and its satellite offices in Berlin, Madrid, Paris, Rome, Warsaw and Sofia. This will bring a truly pan-European perspective to the debates, allowing in particular the voices of the South and East to be heard, as opposed to the claustrophobic and incestuous rants of most Brussels-based think-tanks. Third, its very interactive website, blog-inspired, simple to access and to navigate, a sign that the ECFR is serious about taking to people, and is generally a modern, forward-looking organisation.

But while there are many reasons to celebrate, two aspects at least concerns me. The ECFR is heavily-backed by Soros, and while I personally like the man and his ideas, he has certainly made quite a few enemies across the European Neighbourhood. His involvement in the initiative is welcome, for it gives it financial viability, but the ECFR should also ensure it maintains a degree of separation between the issues itrsquo;s trying to tackle and the political interests of those who are backing it, lest it be quickly dismissed as Sorosrsquo; Council on Foreign Relations.

In addition, it is supported by a string of European politicians and analysts who are all-too-keen to see a stronger Europe in the world. While a more vigorous foreign policy might be the right answer to many of todayrsquo;s global challenges, it should never come at the expense of Europersquo;s aimed neutrality, and of the recognition of its responsibilities towards the developing world, which call for caution every time we are tempted to undermine their sovereignty. Preventing genocide is of course admirable, but the last thing we need is another baton-wielding US, bullying nations into doing what we think is right (more often for us than for them). A respect for diversity should, above all, remain at the core of Europersquo;s foreign policy.

Having said that, I very much look forward to seeing the new star rise high above the other European constellations and I wish good luck to Mark and to all this team!

While wersquo;re still struggling to get the third sector officially recognised in most policy circles (the European Commission, for one, has no Directorate General dealing directly with this ever-expanding sector), there are some who are already envisaging the rise of a fourth one:

Over the past few decades, the boundaries between the public (government), private (business), and social (non-profit/non-governmental) sectors have been blurring, while a Fourth Sector of organization has been emerging. The archetypal Fourth Sector model is sometimes referred to as a For-Benefit organization, and the sector itself is also referred to as the For-Benefit Sector. There are a wide variety of other Fourth Sector models and approaches, bearing different names and emphasizing or embodying different aspects of the For-Benefit model.

Herersquo;s a comprehensive list of what typology of organisation is included in the sympathetic patterns of the fourth sector. The idea has triggered over-excited reviews in the American press, interest from educational circles, and of course the odd glance from the donor community.

Personally, I like the term and its ideal mash-up of exciting initiatives (triple bottom line, Open Source, sustainability, social enterprises, etc.) that are transforming the way the third sector operates. Yet, it is not very clear why an entire new classification is needed, especially for organisations like cooperatives and social enterprises, which have been around for ages.

Are we witnessing the rise of an entirely new sector, or the slow and painful transformation of the old third sector? And if a fourth sector were to emerge, shouldnrsquo;t we be more clear about which parts of the third sector are excluded, and why?

On Africa Visual Media - itself a really interesting blog on African and Africa-related cultural artifacts in film, photography, television, and print- I came across a post about a visit that photographer/street artist JR made to the banlieues or ghettos that ring Paris after the 2005 riots. The upclose portraits (blown up to poster-sizes) of the young men and women whom he photographed were then pasted across Paris, an open-air (and illegal) exhibition entitled lsquo;28mm - portrait of a generationlsquo; that - in Kamau Mucokirsquo;s words - brings the gallery to the street and forces Parisians to confront the images of these youths who are usually depicted as rioting, violent hoodlums.

Below is an excellent video of the shooting and pasting of the portraits he took in collaboration with Ladj Ly:

This is not the first time JR uses photographs as a social mobilisation and activism tool. He was also behind the Face2Face project, on which I blogged in the past. With a number of other artists - such as the Bolognese graffiti creator BLU, with whom he collaborated on the Outsides project in Wuppertal, and to whose genius I will dedicate another post soon - he wants to use public spaces as vehicles for his strong political messages. Thus, breaking the ostentatious separation between lsquo;artrsquo; and lsquo;lifersquo;, he transforms his pictures into posters and makes open space photo galleries out of our streets.

Simply amazing.

Below, I am reproducing an extract from a really interesting post on Studio 501c - a blog devoted to exploring ways in which new ICTs can benefit social organisations - on organizations that have sponsored a youth or teen blogging project. Some examples are well known, other new to me and worth investigating. The full post can be accessed here.

ldquo;[hellip;] Britt Bravo wrote of one organization that has a blog on which teens post but which, because of safety reasons, prefers not to be publicized widely. Britt also mentioned:

• the Young Caucasus Womenrsquo;s Project, which she and Beth Kanter were a part of in the spring of 2006 and


• New Moon Magazine, which has a blog that girls can submit to.

Beth Kanter kindly posted my email query to her blog and suggested these resources:

• Shaping Youth


• Global Kids (web site and blog)


• TakingItGlobal


• MacArthur Spotlight Blog: Digital Youth Discuss Digital Media

In response to her post:

Michaela Hackner of World Learning wrote, ldquo;Wersquo;re in the process of developing strategies for this, starting with our study abroad blogging pilot this fall. We also host a Serbian youth program that we are planning to introduce to Vox.rdquo;

Lisa Canter said to ldquo;take a look at this dynamic NY youth organizationrdquo; mdash; www.girlsclub.org (Click on ldquo;A Day in the Life.rdquo;)

Nick Booth shared www.frankleytalk.com, which is ldquo;just getting started and is based in a neighbourhood in Birmingham (England).rdquo;

Marshall Kirkpatrick shared the resources below and suggested I look at ldquo;variations on this queryrdquo; at http://snipurl.com/1qexf (danah boydrsquo;s blog).

• www.youthnoise.com/


• www.netsquared.org/kahlon


• http://ypulse.com (Says Marshall, ldquo;Therersquo;s some coverage of the topic there. See http://snipurl.com/1qexe for an example.rdquo;)

[hellip;]

nonprofits, nota bene: Michaelarsquo;s idea of using Vox for a youth project is a great one. This free platform allows bloggers to create members-only groups called ldquo;neighborhoods.rdquo; Users can log onto the neighborhood page to see recent posts from all other members. As the Vox site says, ldquo;You can choose the privacy level for every post, every picture, every sound clip, every video. Put up posts for the world. Put up posts for just your family. Or just your friends.ldquo;

Two excellent Web 2.0 initiatives  for development and social change that that embody all that is exciting about this new collaborative technology:

ShareIdeas.org is an online community and a wiki for sharing ideas on how to use mobile communications for social and environmental benefits. ShareIdeas.org belongs to the growing global network of individuals and organizations that use this virtual gathering place to communicate - and collaborate.

Focuss.eu provides a high quality search engine for practitioners, researchers and students in the area of global development studies. Other than generic search engines, like Google and Yahoo, focuss.eu indexes a specific choice of electronic resources, selected by librarians, researchers and practitioners working in participating institutions. The resources are selected based on their relevance for the development studies and the quality of the information. Since its inception in October 2006, a number of development-oriented academic centres and organisations have started adopting and promoting this tool more widely.

Via maestroalberto, an image by someone who clearly doesnrsquo;t see the world in very positive terms.

I suppose I am still an optimist. Maybe I spend too much time reading amazing stories about people trying to make the world a better place, and not enough about those who are trying to destroy ithellip;

A brief, yet comprehensive, overview of practical examples of Web 2.0 usage in the international development sector, by Joitske Hulsebosch:

Via Natasha Hanshawrsquo;s blog, Exploring Development, I found out about Tori and Ericrsquo;s project lsquo;Beyond Good Intentionslsquo;, a documentary film about inspiring stories of international aid. Herersquo;s the trailer.

And from their website, an outline of their project:

ldquo;We are currently living in an age where endemic poverty, natural disasters, and war are defining factors in the lives of much of the worldrsquo;s population. However, we are also living in an age of extreme generosity in which the desire to help others who are less fortunate is quite strong. Perhaps even you have been compelled to donate your time or money to help people in remote parts of the globe. But have your good intentions been enough to produce effective changes for those who need it most?

We are two filmmakers who are embarking on the journey of a lifetime to look beyond good intentions to discover what really works in international aid.

Our documentary film is taking us around the world to ten different countries over the course of a year including Colombia, Peru, Argentina, India, Cambodia, Laos, Indonesia, Madagascar, Mozambique, and South Africa. We are actively seeking out effective examples of international aid and inspirational humanitarians who are making the world a better place through their work.

Our film will document a remarkable journey of discovery as we attempt to answer the question, ldquo;What really works in international aid?rdquo; We are ready to be inspired. Are you?

Tori Hogan, co-founder of Beyond Good Intentions, spent the last three months of 2006 filming and interviewing aid organizations and inspirational individuals in Colombia, Peru and Argentina. The trailer is a rough cut of this filming and an introduction to the documentary.rdquo;

Last post of the day and of the month, since I am going back home tomorrow and wonrsquo;t have Internet access (gasp! horror!) from our Tuscan retreathellip;

In May 2007, over 300 participants gathered to discuss the 21 Projects that had been selected by the NetSquared community as having the greatest potential to leverage the social web to create social change.

This was a real talent contest between several innovative ideas, from Kabissarsquo;s proposal to strengthen Web 2.0 applications across the African continent through their network of over 950 local organisations, to Yankanarsquo;s idea to help non profits located in developing countries adopt and benefit from social web tools, without advanced technical skills, financial resources for infrastructure or english language knowledge.

Only 3 made it to the final stage:

• MAPLight.org, a project aiming to illuminate the connection between money and politics, connecting campaign contributions and votes for U.S. Congress, while providing groundbreaking transparency so that bloggers, journalists, and citizens can hold legislators accountable.


• Miro, an open source, open standards video. Their pitch: ldquo;We are to Google, AOL and YouTube what public television is to the big networks. We are a nonprofit, fully open source and open standards, dedicated to creating the next Firefox of web video.rdquo;


• Freecycle.org, an initiative that has empowered globally local social networking, with the purpose of creating a gift economy/community: ldquo;The magic: it’s easier to give something away than throw it away amp; keeps it out of landfills; a cyber-curbside; a digital segue from commodity to communityldquo;.

Although these are all really good projects, itrsquo;s a shame that none seems to address directly the needs of communities in developing countries, which some of the other proposed projects did.