A GARDEN IN THE SKY / S.F. museum's roof puts green building techniques to the test

A GARDEN IN THE SKY / S.F. museum's roof puts green building techniques to the test

Collapse (book) - parece bueno!

Collapse (book) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ejemplo de conservación y manejo sustentable de un territorio

En el archipiélago de las islas Marías, declarado área natural protegida desde el año 2000, se encuentra el único penal en el país que es ejemplo de rehabilitación y readaptación social. La isla María Madre ha sido colonia penal desde principios del siglo XX, en ella se recluyeron a los más peligrosos criminales y presos políticos; sin embargo, ahora es un penal de alta seguridad con reos de baja peligrosidad, lo cual, sumado a la posibilidad de estar libre en la isla, trabajar y convivir con sus familias, favorece la readaptación y el deseo de los colonos por dejar atrás la delincuencia. Como parte de un área natural protegida, su riqueza biológica exige que se garantice un manejo sustentable del territorio y la conservación de sus recursos naturales. Esta dualidad ha establecido un reto que implica que, a través de una planeación y manejo participativo del territorio, se alcancen ambos objetivos. La realización de un diagnóstico participativo, impulsado conjuntamente entre la Secretaría de Seguridad Pública y el Instituto Nacional de Ecología, ha dado los primeros resultados, los cuales han permitido diferenciar al territorio insular por sus condiciones físico-bióticas y describir las necesidades más evidentes para la conservación de sus ecosistemas y para cubrir las necesidades de uso de los recursos naturales. El objetivo de este artículo es compartir una experiencia que ha sido positiva y útil para lograr un diagnóstico rápido con fines de conservación y manejo sustentable de un territorio, y que tal vez pueda ser de utilidad para otras aplicaciones.
www.indihouse.com

En cuanto a la protección de las especies en peligro de extinción

Calderón prometió presentar e iniciar el Programa de Conservación y Recuperación para las especies mexicanas en peligro de extinción. México es un país megadiverso, que ocupa a nivel mundial el primero y el segundo lugar en diversidad de reptiles y mamíferos, respectivamente. Solo en el siglo pasado se perdió más de la mitad de los recursos forestales del país, “desapareciendo o disminuyendo hasta el peligro de la extinción valiosas poblaciones o especies de fauna y flora no maderable asociadas a esos ecosistemas” (INE). Fueron principalmente las políticas, programas y estrategias dirigidas al aprovechamiento de recursos forestales maderables, ganadería, agricultura y pesca, los responsables de este deterioro ambiental, ya que no tomaron en cuenta los costos futuros de no proteger la flora y fauna.
www.indihouse.com

Recopilará PRD firmas para remover a consejeros del IFE. - Prodigy / MSN Noticias

Recopilará PRD firmas para remover a consejeros del IFE. - Prodigy / MSN Noticias

proyectos de impactos ambientales

MIRAGE: Related Campaigns

Kakapo Recovery Programme: Home Page

Kakapo Recovery Programme: Home Page

The official website of Komodo National Park, Indonesia.

The official website of Komodo National Park, Indonesia.

ahi les va un tip

Reviven a El Fénix con Pidiregas.

Fuente: Reforma.
11/04/2007

Por primera vez en su historia, Pemex Petroquímica recibió la autorización de la Secretaría de Hacienda para financiar uno de sus proyectos bajo el esquema Pidiregas. Se trata de la segunda fase del extinto proyecto El Fénix de la Administración de Vicente Fox, que consiste en la construcción de un nuevo tren de aromáticos y el cual es necesario para producir materias primas que demanda la industria química. Sin embargo, Abraham Klip, subdirector de Planeación de Pemex Petroquímica, ya detectó los primeros obstáculos del proyecto antes de que éste arranque formalmente. Explicó que debido a la falta de integración de la cadena en la industria química, derivada de la histórica falta de inversiones, Pemex no podrá aprovechar en su totalidad los residuales del crudo utilizado como materia prima en la elaboración de productos, a diferencia de lo que sucede en complejos similares en otros países, lo que disminuye la rentabilidad del proyecto mexicano.


informacion pirateada por:
www.indihouse.com

lean esto y diganme si no hay algo raro

Proyectos de Mecanismo de Desarrollo Limpio (MDL)

XIV Congreso Internacional Ambiental de CONIECO
27 de Septiembre de 2006

http://www.conieco.com.mx/pdf/Alejandro_Lorea.pdf



www.indihouse.com

El Pacífico sur contra la pesca de arrastre - Prodigy / MSN Noticias

El Pacífico sur contra la pesca de arrastre

este el mes de la RAZA, vean esto

MEChA mass murderer has ties to Marcos Aguilar of the Academia Semillas del Pueblo school in Los Angeles.
para ver el video en youtube visita este link
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=The+Aztec+Al-Qaeda&search=Search
para mas info visiten este link
www.immigrationwatchdog.com


www.indihouse.com

Suman nueve los muertos por tromba en Coahuila - El Universal - Los Estados

Suman nueve los muertos por tromba en Coahuila - El Universal - Los Estados

Storm kills 10 along Texas-Mexico border - Weather - MSNBC.com

Storm kills 10 along Texas-Mexico border - Weather - MSNBC.com

En peligro de extinción las cactáceas de México.

México ocupa el primer lugar en diversidad de cactáceas, pero también es el de mayor amenaza para estas plantas, donde la Echinocactus grusonii, de Querétaro, ya tiene reporte de desaparición por saqueo, informó la especialista María del Carmen Mandujano

http://noticias.prodigy.msn.com/ciencia/articulo.aspx?cp-documentid=4717043

www.indihouse.com

Razones Para Oponerse a la OMC

La Organización Mundial del Comercio está escribiendo una constitución para todo el mundo. A los ministros de
comercio que la inventaron y a los intereses de las corporaciones que ellos representan les gustaría que creamos que
su propósito es inspirar crecimiento y prosperidad para todos. En realidad, la OMC ha sido la principal herramienta
utilizada para arrebatar el control democrático de los recursos a nuestras comunidades y ponerlo en manos de las
corporaciones. Está creciendo un movimiento internacional que se opone al gobierno de la OMC por parte de las
corporaciones y propone reemplazarlo con una economía global democrática que beneficie a las personas y sostenga
las comunidades en que vivimos. Importantamente, estamos ganando!

1. La OMC es Fundamentalmente Antidemocrática
El plan de acción de la OMC afecta a todos los aspectos de la
sociedad y el planeta, pero no es una organización democrática
y abierta. Las reglas de la OMC las escriben las corporaciones
con acceso desde dentro a las negociaciones para beneficio
propio. Las aportaciones de los ciudadanos hechas por
organizaciones laborales, pro-derechos humanos, ecologistas y
de protección de derechos del consumidor son ignoradas
constantemente. Incluso las solicitudes de información más
simples son denegadas, y los actos se celebran en secreto. Quién
ha elegido a este gobierno global secreto?

2. La OMC No Hará Nuestras Vidas Más Seguras
A la OMC le gustaría hacernos creer que la creación de un
mundo de “libre-comercio” fomentará la paz y comprensión
globales. Al contrario, la dominación del comercio internacional
por los países ricos en beneficio de sus intereses particulares
estimula el odio y resentimiento que hacen nuestros países menos
seguros. Para labrar una seguridad global verdadera, necesitamos
acuerdos internacionales que respeten los derechos de las
personas a la democracia y sistemas de comercio que fomenten
la justicia global.

3. La OMC Pisotea los Derechos Humanos y los Derechos
Laborales
Las reglas de la OMC ponen los “derechos” de las corporaciones
a ganar beneficios por encima de los derechos humanos y
laborales. La OMC alienta una “carrera hacia abajo” en salarios
al enfrentar a unos trabajadores contra otros en lugar de
promover pautas laborales reconocidas internacionalmente. La
OMC ha decretado que es ilegal para los gobiernos el prohibir
productos basándose en la manera en que son producidos, como
por ejemplo con el trabajo de niños.

4. La OMC Privatizaría los Servicios Básicos
La OMC está intentando privatizar los servicios públicos básicos
como la educación, la salud, la energía y el agua. La privatización
significa la venta de bienes públicos - como las ondas
radiofónicas o las escuelas - a corporaciones privadas
(normalmente extranjeras) para que rindan ganancias en vez de
beneficiar al público. Los Acuerdos Generales sobre el Comercio
de Servicios (o GATS) de la OMC incluyen una lista de unos
160 servicios amenazados, como el cuidado de menores y
ancianos, aguas residuales, basura, mantenimiento de parques,
telecomunicaciones, construcción, banca, seguros, transportes,
envíos por vía marítima, servicios de correos, y turismo. En
algunos países la privatización ya está ocurriendo. Los que
menos pueden pagar por servicios vitales - comunidades obreras
y de gente de color - son los que sufren más.

5. La OMC Está Destrozando el Medio Ambiente
La OMC está siendo utilizada por corporaciones para
desmantelar protecciones del medio ambiente a nivel local y
nacional conseguidas con mucho esfuerzo, que son atacadas
como “barreras para el comercio.” La OMC está intentando
desregular industrias incluyendo la tala de árboles, la pesca, el
servicio público del agua y la distribución de energía, lo cual
supondrá la explotación adicional de estos recursos naturales.
6. La OMC está Matando Gente
La OMC defiende los derechos de Propiedad Intelectual
Relacionados con el Comercio (TRIPs) - patentes, derechos de
autor y marcas registradas - a costa de la salud y vida humanas.
El apoyo de la organización a las companias farmaceúticas en
contra de los gobiernos que intentan proteger la salud de sus
ciudadanos ha tenido consecuencias serias en lugares como el
Africa sub-Sahariana, donde se encuentra el 80 por ciento de
los casos nuevos de SIDA en el mundo. Los países en desarrollo
ganaron una victoria importante en el 2001, cuando se acordó
implementar los mecanismos de importación paralela y
autorización obligatoria que son esenciales para salvar vidas, de
manera que los países pudieran proporcionar medicamentos
necesarios a sus ciudadanos de forma más económica.
Desafortunadamente, en septiembre 2003, se negociaron nuevas
condiciones que haría mas difícil para los paises producir estos
medicamentos. De nuevo, la OMC muestra su preferencia para
proteger los ‘derechos de ganancias’ para corporaciones por
encima de salvar la vida de los seres humanos.

7. La OMC Hace que Aumente la Desigualdad
El libre comercio no está funcionando para la mayoría del
mundo. Durante el período más reciente de crecimiento rápido
en comercio e inversión globales (1960 a 1998) la desigualdad
empeoró tanto a nivel internacional como dentro de los países.
El Programa de Desarrollo de la ONU indica que el 20 por
ciento de la población mundial más rica consume el 86 por
ciento de los recursos mundiales, mientras que el 80 por ciento
más pobre consume sólo el 14 por ciento. Las reglas de la OMC
han acelerado estas tendencias al abrir países a la inversión
extranjera haciendo por tanto que sea más fácil que la producción
vaya allá donde la mano de obra es más barata y más fácil de
explotar y donde los gastos de protección del medio ambiente
sean más bajos.

8. La OMC Hace que Aumente el Hambre
En los países en desarrollo tanto como cuatro de cada cinco personas
viven de la agricultura - ya sea cultivando productos para la
exportación o para alimentar a sus familias. Los agricultores
producen suficiente comida para alimentar a todo el mundo - pero
por el control corporativo de la distribución de alimentos, alrededor
de 800 millones de personas sufren malnutrición crónica. Según
la Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos, la comida es un
derecho humano. El principio más importante en el Acuerdo Sobre
Agriculture de la OMC es que deben ser las fuerzas del mercado las
que regulen la política agraria en lugar de un compromiso nacional
que garantice la seguridad alimenticia y mantenga un nivel de
salarios adecuado para las familias agricultoras. Las normas de la
OMC han permitido que se inunde a los países pobres con comida
producida industrialmente mediante fuertes subsidios estatales,
minando así la producción local y haciendo que aumente el hambre.

9. La OMC Perjudica a los Países Pequeños y Pobres y
Favorece a las Naciones Ricas y Poderosas.
La OMC supuestamente funciona basándose en un consenso,
con el poder en la toma de decisiones repartido equitativamente
entre todos. En la realidad, muchas decisiones importantes se
toman de forma que los representantes de algunos países ni
siquiera son invitados a las reuniones celebradas a puerta cerrada
- y luego se anuncian los “acuerdos” que los países pobres o
pequeños ni sabían se estaban negociando. Muchos países ni
siquiera tienen suficiente personal en el ámbito de comercio
para poder participar activamente en todas las negociaciones.
Esto supone una seria desventaja para los países pobres a la hora
de representar sus propios intereses, de manera que las
normativas se establecen para beneficiar a aquellos países que
tienen mayor capacidad negociadora. De la misma manera,
muchos países son demasiado pobres para defenderse de los
desafíos de la OMC provenientes de los países ricos, y cambian
sus leyes antes que tener que costear su propia defensa.
10. La OMC Mina la Soberanía Nacional y la Toma de
Decisiones a Nivel Local
La disposición de la OMC de “nación más favorecida” requiere
que todos los países miembros de la OMC se traten
equitativamente unos a otros y que traten a todas las
corporaciones de estos países equitativamente sin tomar en
cuenta su historial. Las normativas locales que tratan de premiar
a compañias que contratan a residentes locales, utilizan
materiales domésticos o adoptan costumbres ecologistas
prudentes son básicamente ilegales en la OMC. Según las
normas de la OMC, los países en desarrollo tienen prohibido
crear leyes locales que los países desarrollados siguieron con
anterioridad, como el proteger a industrias domésticas nuevas
hasta que puedan competir en el mercado internacional. La
aprobación de la OMC requiso que secciones enteras de leyes
estadounidenses fueran redactadas de nuevo para ajustarse a las
reglas de la OMC. Muchos países incluso están cambiando sus
leyes y constituciones anticipando futuras o posibles reglas y
negociaciones de la OMC.

11. Existen Alternativas a la OMC
Hay organizaciones de ciudadanos que han desarrollado
alternativas al sistema corporativo de gobierno económico
internacional. Juntos podemos trabajar para construir un
espacio político que promueva una economía global democrática
que cree trabajos, asegure que cada persona tenga garantizados
sus derechos humanos a comida, agua, educación y atención
sanitaria, fomente la libertad y seguridad y preserve el medio
ambiente que todos compartimos para las generaciones futuras.

12. La Marea se Está Volviendo en Contra del Libre
Comercio y de la OMC!
El movimiento internacional de reacción en contra de la OMC
está creciendo. Las manifestaciones masivas de protesta en
Seattle en 1999 reunieron a más de 50.000 personas opuestas a
la OMC - y lograron cerrar la sesión. Cuando la OMC se
reunió en Qatar en el 2001, los negociadores de Comercio no
pudieron conseguir sus objetivos de expandir de manera
espectacular el alcance de la OMC. La 5ta Ministerial de la
OMC tuvo lugar en Cancún, México, en Septiembre de 2003.
Se movilizó muchas personas de movimientos sociales,
especialmente los campesinos mexicanos, quienes lograron una
victoria importante para los pueblos y la democracia. Los paises
en desarollo negaron dejar avanzar los propositos de los paises
ricos de ampliar la OMC-y lograron descarillar a la OMC!
Mas información sobre la OMC en español:
Red del Tercer Mundo
www.redtercermundo.org.uy
Alianza Social Hemisferico (anti-ALCA)
www.asc-hsa.org
CIEPAC Chiapas, Mexico (967) 674-5168 www.ciepac.org
www.globalexchange.org
www.indihouse.com

No Comas Tortuga Marina 2006 - Campaña de COSTASALVAjE

Marina de FONATUR Se Convierte en una

asi se empieza

FIDEL NO SE QUEDA CALLADO!

In his article, the 80-year-old revolutionary asserted that President Bush's support for using crops to produce ethanol for cars could deplete corn and other food stocks in developing nations, putting the lives of 3 billion people at risk worldwide.

YOU HOMERS OUTHEHOUSE LISTEN UP!

www.indihouse.com

ALGUNA SUGERENCIA?

Peak Oil. It's the greatest crisis of the 21st Century.

With a consumption rate of 85 million barrels every day, the world has, at best, only about 30 years left of oil.

www.indihouse.com

COMO esta La Movida En Mexico?

La Movida En Mexico

tiene que ser particular al Pais, puesto que nos regimos por medio de costumbres y valores.. buenas, malas o ambas

los invito a comparar sus Ideas en este blog para desmitificar "el poder" "el gobierno" "el sistema" y sean analizados y descompuestos en sub-partes y asi conozcamos mejor al que distorciona nuestro sentido comun el"PODER", que se esconde detras de su obscura naturaleza y origen, culpando a las victimas.

EL SISTEMA ES :
EL CAPITALISMO, EL SEXISMO, EL RACISMO, EL IMPERIALISMO, LA HOMOPHOBIA, EL ESTADO BUROCRATICO Y LA DOMINACION DE LA NATURALEZA

EL SISTEMA DOMINA:
GOBIERNO Y ECONOMIAS
FAMILIAS Y CULTURAS
LAS CIENCIAS Y LA PSICOLOGIA DEL INDIVIDUO



www.indihouse.com
esto no es un proyecto utopico

Que opinas de los "Yes Men"?

Los Yes Men son un grupo de activistas que practican lo que ellos llaman "Corrección de identidad". Pretenden ser personas poderosas y portavoces de organizaciones prominentes, aceptando las invitaciones recibidas en sus páginas web para aparecer en conferencias y programas de televisión; luego usan su autoridad recientemente adquirida para expresar la idea de que las corporaciones y organizaciones gubernamentales a menudo actúan en modos deshumanizantes hacia el público en general.
Su método usualmente es la sátira: haciéndose pasar por portavoces corporativos o del gobierno, suelen hacer comentarios chocantes y denigrantes sobre los trabajadores y consumidores, sólo para descubrir que, en vez de causar sorpresa o enojo, su broma es recibida con entusiasmo o de forma indiferente por su audiencia.
Los Yes Men han pretendido ser portavoces de organizaciones tales como la OMC, McDonald's, Dow Chemical, entre otras.


posted by
www.indihouse.com

What is your take on the yes men?

The Yes Men are a group of culture jamming activists who practice what they call "identity correction". They pretend to be powerful people and spokespersons for prominent organizations, accepting invitations received on their websites to appear at symposiums and TV shows. They use their newfound authority to express the idea that corporations and governmental organizations often act in dehumanizing ways toward the public. Elaborate props are sometimes part of the ruse.

posted by
www.indihouse.com

Indepth Arts News:
"6 Billion Perps Held Hostage: Artists Address Global Warming" 2007-03-11 until 2007-06-17 Andy Warhol Museum Pittsburgh, PA, USA
The exhibition, 6 BILLION PERPS HELD HOSTAGE! Artists Address Global Warming, showcases a diverse collection of art works, including textiles, videos, paintings, drawings, inflatables, photography and music, all directing attention to the topic of global warming. These works serve to raise awareness of our current state of affairs, including U.S. policy, natural disasters, the destructive power of corporations, and the harmful effects of carbon production in the food industry as well as initiate public dialog about the issue. The exhibition is a collection of works by Andy Warhol and contemporary artists, including The Yes Men, Preemptive Media, Jay Critchley, The Institute For Figuring, Hugo Kobayashi, Trevor Paglen, Marjetica Potrc, Cai Guo-Qiang, Greg Kwiatek, Bobby Pickett and Horseback Salad, Steffi Domike-Suzy Meyer-Ann Rosenthal, and Bob Bingham. 6 Billion Perps Held Hostage! will be on view from March 11 – June 17, 2007.
Known for impersonating some of the world’s most powerful corporate executives at conferences, on the web and on TV, The Yes Men, “standard issue revolutionaries,” expose the nastiness of evildoers such as Halliburton and Dow Chemical, targeting large corporations and leaders who put profits ahead of everything else. The Yes Men present SurvivaBalls, inflatable orbs whose communication systems, nutrient gathering capacities and defense mechanisms ensure the safety of corporate managers from Mother Nature.
Artist and activist Jay Critchley’s visual, conceptual, and performance work have traversed the globe, and have included theater, film, and music. Critchley invites us to Martucket Eyeland Resort and Theme Park, his most recent project that surfaced because of Cape Cod’s unrestrained development, traffic congestion, water degradation and air pollution. This vacationer’s paradise features wind and solar energy technology, a new and advanced power plant, an oil drilling installation, the exclusive Traffic Jam Carbon Club, Chapel of Our Lady of Nuclear Options, the Vanishing Oyster Bar & Grill, and the Climate Change Casino & Sweat Lounge. The piece received an award from the Boston Society of Architects and is accompanied by its own theme song, written and performed by the artist.
Also contributing to the exhibition are a local team of artists, Ann Rosenthal, Suzy Meyer, and Steffi Domike, who have created Food, Carbon & the Commons. By emphasizing the detrimental effects of carbon production induced by the transportation of foods, these artists urge viewers to think globally and consume locally grown food. Slovenian artist and architect, Marjetica Potrc, presents Pittsburgh in a Time of Global Warming, a project inspired by her two-month residency in Brazil that draws on her experience with Ashaninka Indians of the Amazon, and which urges Pittsburgh to connect its past and present to a possible future by melding communications technology with sustainable living practices. Potrc was the recipient of the 2000 Hugo Boss Prize. The Institute For Figuring, an educational organization dedicated to enhancing the public understanding of figuring techniques, smash together the worlds of crochet, non-Euclidean geometry, and tropical wonders with its Crochet Hyperbolic Coral Reef. Australian co-directors and twin sisters Margaret and Christine Wertheim are crocheting a coral reef to mirror the Great Barrier Reef with which they grew up. Margaret will host a lecture and presentation of their work, as well as a public crochet demonstration. The I.F.F. is among many contemporary discoverers of traditional craft helping to re-establish its hipness, and transforming the relationship between artist and amateur, art and craft.
Complementing the diverse nature of the exhibition is Preemptive Media, a group of artists, activists and technologists who create their own style of beta tests, trial runs and impact assessments based on independent research. Artist, writer, and experimental geographer, Trevor Paglen, blurs the lines between social science, contemporary art, and geography to construct unfamiliar, yet meticulously researched perspectives on the world. Pittsburgh native Greg Kwiatek’s large complex paintings of monstrous faces are derived from his photos of seaweed and other low-tide debris, and Hugo Kobayashi, a former comic strip writer for LA View, invites us to read six of his skinny paintings like unreeling film strips. By merging the graphic techniques of cartoon illustration and commercial design with a painterly brushstroke, Kobayashi crafts paintings that possess both personal and global relevance.
Bob Bingham, Associate Professor of Art at Carnegie Mellon University, creates art that incorporates systems of growth, live plants and natural materials with mechanical and electronic devices. Imagining a future where technology and nature exist in a symbiotic relationship, Bingham proposes architectural layouts that provide a solution to global warming. Known for his literally explosive work, Cai Guo-Qiang draws on a variety of symbols, contemporary narratives, traditions and materials such as feng shui, fireworks, Chinese medicine, dragons, roller coasters, and gunpowder. Having recently held a solo exhibit at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Cai Guo-Qiang presents two monumental gunpowder drawings, Clear Sky Black Cloud and Black Fireworks: Project for IVAM, as well as three videos of his ephemeral explosion performances. Cai received the Golden Lion Prize at the Venice Biennale in 1999. Bobby Pickett and Horseback Salad introduce The Climate Mash, a revised version of Pickett’s 1962 hit “Monster Mash” that reveals the "zombies" and "vampires" of global climate change. Featuring well-known Halloween characters based on photographs of President George Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, members of Congress and oil industry executives, The Climate Mash highlights the threat of global warming and the lack of response by the White House.
Several of Andy Warhol’s works, such as his Death and Disaster paintings and Endangered Species prints will be displayed along with those of the contemporary artists. Warhol’s Death and Disaster paintings reflect the prominence of images of disaster in the media, and reveal the numbing effect of the mass reproduction of such images. Warhol’s series of ten color screen prints of endangered animals from around the world create a dynamic tension between art and reality, and his paintings of flowers yield respect to that which is alive. Warhol’s Seismograph, created in response to a major earthquake in Italy, will be on view for the very first time, and complements 6 Billion Perps in its recognition of a natural disaster.
“The artists in this exhibition have radically different approaches to global warming, some works are politically charged, and others are purely aesthetic. 6 Billion Perps merges satirical comedy, traditional and non-traditional techniques to create a powerful and dynamic perspective on this very urgent issue. The works will be seen at an important time, as the topic of global warming is now so prominent, as it should be, given that the United States is by far the largest contributor of greenhouse gases in the world, and Pennsylvania ranks 3rd among the 50 states in these emissions…” says Matt Wrbican, Archivist at The Andy Warhol Museum.
Although extremely diverse in nature, all of the works in the show address global warming, the man-made disaster that is changing our planet, and threatening life as climates are transformed.





source


http://www.absolutearts.com/artsnews/2007/03/12/34399.html





posted by
www.indihouse.com
Cow Picture by
Scott Pena

www।indihouse।com

Al Servicio de la Comunidad

Public Interest

 

Prepared by

 

Erick S. Pena

Environmental Planning Student

 

 

 

 

 

 

"So widely invoked and so ill-defined"

Michel P. Brooks

 

 

 

ENSP 311

Steven C. Orlick, Ph.D

Introduction to Planning

Spring, 2006

 

 

In benefit of the "public interest" I will contribute to this endless technical argument and for the Interest of the planning community I will give my thought on the whole concept behind "Public Interest". In addition I will discuss a controversial "case study" were the "public interest" comes to play. But first I will introduce this term by comparing Michel P. Brooks to Richard E. Klostermans' opinion, which seemed to have done to much analytical thought over these two words, especially the later.

On one side we have Klosterman, who wrote his article in 1985, called "A Public Interest Criterion" It is long and tedious and I don't recommend it to anybody that doesn't enjoy getting very confused while they read. Since I had to read the whole thing, I might as well talk about it, he starts out by giving a history background on the word "Public Interest" and states that even though the word has been around and played an important role in planning, "public interest is often rejected as a vague criterion whose application cannot be rationally defended or empirically verified". His paper "suggests" that --it is empirically verifiable-- just as much as Science. His argument is based in response to three fundamental objections "public Intrest" seems to have:

1. "Public interest can be interpreted in many conflicting ways." He argues that because it is conflicting it , it is "appropriate evaluative criterion, comparable to the criterion of scientific method"
   
2. "Need not been taken seriously because they are only value judgments which cannot be empirically tested or rationally defended." He argues that "not only empirical evidence is required to support value judgment but this evidence is restricted by the evaluation being made"
   
3. "Seems contrary for professional planners to use concepts such as public interest to impose their views on the public at large". He argues that an appropriate criterion whose use in evaluating public policies can be rationally defended.
   

In other words he believes that there is a public interest, "the collective and the individual interests" Nevertheless, after all he acknowledges that that public interest in some location will cause an opposite effect in some other location.

 

Brooks on the other hand, does not think Public Interest is possible. He writes that "Ideally a planner confronted with a difficult professional decision should be able to consult the public interest concept for guidance, using it as a template to differentiate the more public serving outcomes from those that are less so. Alas, such a template doe not exist." Brooks also considers other ideas from other others who have tried to put give a meaning to public interest. He mentions "any change which harms no one and which makes some people better off, must be considered to be an improvement" but he found out this is impossible. Then he analyzed another that says that "change is an improvement if those who gain evaluate their gains at a higher figure than the value which the losers set upon their losses" this idea seemed excellent in theory but when it came to real life it didn't exactly go through since it encountered "usual glitches". I could name more examples of peoples ideas on what public interest is or should be, but I limit going straight to what brooks thought "he suggested that in fact ,that values –those of the planner, and those of the diverse individuals and communities whom the planner serves—constitute the real bedrock of planning. Planners plan, ultimately because they hold values that impelled them to do so."

 

The opposing opinions of these two are actually not that opposing. It might just be that they are stuck with the word and can't seem to find different words to encompass the impossibility of satisfying all public.

 

Klosterman expects people to view public interest from his perspective, based on his complex explanations. If I am the average citizen and I hear the term public interest, I would interpret it from the simplest of all perspectives, –not Klostermans'--, that is to say it should interest all public, then I can either agree or disagree. (and surely, that will always be depending on my individual interest regarding the specific case). Therefore individual interest and public interest is the same thing for the common individual. On the other hand, the individuals that represent the common individuals are groups who make it part of their duty to represent the "public interest", therefore, they should see public interest from alternative perspectives. Brooks says that these people have the right to be part of the ones who make decisions on public interest since they are the ones who care to represent the people, and I agree with that. Also he states that the planner should be the one who makes decisions on public interest since he has values that ultimately led him to become a Planner, thus entailing him to represent "public interest"

 

I want to extend brooks idea, since it is what most fits mine, I think that Planners aren't standing up for themselves as respected professionals for some reason I'm still working on figuring out. It makes perfectly good sense to me that I can compare an architect and a (person) client to a planner and the city (client). If I hire an architect to design my house, it is because I don't know how to design houses and the architect does. Even though the architect has to work around my wants and needs for the design to be successful and fit for me, he is still the one with the expertise on space, function, and form (aesthetics). Nevertheless, I rarely hear of an architect being successful in doing this that is why most people have the idea that architects are only called upon to help the wife decorate the house. In the same manner a planner is a Professional and is called upon by the city for his expertise and interest (values). The planner should come up with the public interest based upon the cities wants and needs, just like an architect designs the house, thus it is permissible and expected that individual planners have a particular style and value some things more than others when making decisions on public interest.

 

I'm not saying that a planner should be omnipotent nor an architect should, especially when they have lost track of their profession and concentrated on their cities or companies revenues. If this was the case then these professionals should be judged, cited and reminded that their job is to do what is "best" for the Earth --then the community-- by a board that maintain the integrity of the profession. But I personally don't think this can ever be achieved in a truly ethical manner, since human representatives are easily blinded by power and common individuals prefer individual comfort to world reality; leaving all the silliness to the interest groups and those rare world conscious professionals battling for a Utopia. It's funny how once we realize that both Planners are a luxury that poor communities don't have, and Architects are usually a luxury for rich people. Nevertheless the fundamentals of both these professions are for the "Public Interest…" this just makes me wonder why there is so much confusion about the "public interest" situation –isn't it obvious that public interest stands for "Power Interest".

 

I am only a student with a naive mind, and currently quite ignorant in the politic system, therefore my opinion is not for you to believe or even to try to process, doing this might not be beneficial for your health; I recommend you to stop reading and check out the sales on your Sunday paper. Nevertheless, I do have to finish with the case study discussion I promised.

 

In this scenario I am the Downtown Development Planner of a City and I have been placed in charge of locating temporary showers and toilets downtown. To solve the problem I arrange for eight port-o-potties and site showers to be placed in alleys and be regularly serviced. –The problem with the homeless was solved. Nevertheless after a while commercial tenants want these removed since its hurting their sales, among other good reasons.

 

I have to write my report where I make a decision on the issue and "draft recommendations to the Task Force on The Homeless". Considering that I have been directed by the City Council to "conclude that the pilot project was a failure and to recommend immediate removal of the facilities" and that my boss just wants the problem to go away.

 

Those are the situations and the positions established to me. So I first go to my ethic code as a planner, but very quickly I eliminate those in order to get my job done (goal) so I look at my job description: the book says I should be concerned for all citizens including homeless, but since that raises an ethical issue again I discard it and proceed to the next (alternatives), now I look at my watch and stop looking for alternatives since I remember that I've been "directed" by the City Council to remove the facilities and It seems like he has the power in this case and there is nothing I can do about it. Thus, I write my report instructing to remove the facilities, and tell the "Task Force for The Homeless" that this project was a failure but we will continue working in future projects to resolve the homeless situation, in the name of public interest. This temporarily concludes this case study and my boss can hand me the next case he would "just like to go away". Later I might get an invitation from the city council to a reunion where I can meet other important, powerful people who need strings pulled in order to grow and generate more revenues and make the economy stronger in the name of Public Interest, and I can feel ethically good about all my actions by believing this.

 

 

En busca de un plan maestro mundial

City of Rohnert Park

General Plan Analysis

 

 

 

 

 

Prepared by

 

Erick S. Pena

Environmental Planning Student

 

ENSP 310

Wayne Goldberg

Introduction to Planning

Fall, 2006

 

 

 

 

Rohnert Park

was founded as a master-planned community on the former site of the Rohnert Seed Farm, located along the Northwestern Pacific railroad right-of-way. The original 1954 master plan was based on the "neighborhood unit" concept of clustering single-family homes around local schools and parks. The master plan featured eight neighborhoods, each with 200 to 250 homes, a 10-acre school, and a five-acre park.

 

A city's general plan has been described as its "constitution" for development – the framework within which decisions on how to grow, provide public services and facilities, and protect and enhance the environment must be made. California's tradition of allowing local authority over land use decisions means that the State's cities have considerable flexibility in preparing their general plans.

 

The Plan I analyzed was adopted in July 2000, it gives a fine capsule of Rohnert Parks History then, it summarizes the purpose of the plan in easily understood every day language, then it goes on to list the objectives of the general plan. I think this approach is good and comprehensible, unlike the previous plan from 1990, which is done in a more classic format, which is not a simple for the average citizen to follow. In any case, this General Plan of Rohnert Park is an revised and updated version of the 1990 Plan, therefore it is not quite clear to me if the new horizon year of the plan is for 10 more years or 20. It is clear in this Plan that General Plans typically look out 20 years in the future, what is not certain to me is if that is what is meant by Horizon Year of the Plan.

 

The most important elements in the plan, Just by looking at the Table of Contents I would think it to be "hosing", simply because it has more sections on this theme. Nevertheless, It is not very far from "health and safety"; "open space, parks and public facilities" and "land use and growth management". Giving "transportation"; "community design" and "noise" issues a lesser value of importance.

But by looking at the "General Plans and Objective list" and assuming that they'd be listed in an importance manner, we have the first three listed relating to Growth:

• Establish a 20-year Urban Growth Boundary
  
• Keep the city's small-town feel
  
• Provide for slow, managed, and predictable growth
  

And by reading the first line in this Chapter 2: Land Use and Growth Management/2.1"Background and context":

"Land use and growth management represent the prime planning concerns of most Rohnert Park residents." I fall out of any doubt on that this is the most important element of the Plan. Therefore concluding that the community especially values the growth problem that Rohnert Park is going through and therefore have a comprehensive and consistent plan for a long term solution.

This chapter as well as the rest of them are not complicated to read nor to understand, as I mentioned earlier, It provides simple non-complex words, it is brief, and gives plenty of facts, data and charts without overdoing it, thus making it actually interesting and also being completely clear on what the community vision is.

Before opening it, I thought I would primarily address Growth issues, since that is the biggest issue in California in general, and the world, for that matter. But I was curios to find out if a little town Rohnert Park) that seemed to me (coming from Mexico City) very rural, comfortably sustained and surrounded by nature and farmlands, to have so extravagant issues that where particular to the area and not only particular, but regarded as most important, for example Increasing and fomenting bicycle use, since it is small and it's a town that has an enormous relationship with the university it hosts. Nevertheless, even though it does mention it as one of the plans objective, it is not primordial. I'd like to compare this plan objectives with any big city ones and see the difference in values. Since personally I am a very skeptical individual, and thus I have a feeling there I won't find much difference.

Although I can't say since I haven't done it yet, but I could imagine myself being the city council of SFO and taking this list of objectives, adding a few objectives that are current issues and characteristic of the city and disregarding the few issues that where only applicable to Rohnert Park, and with this having the community satisfied.

I acknowledge that every General Plan has a lot of technical work put into it. I give these fellow analysts and researchers the credit they deserve, I am not trying to disaccredit anybody, in fact I hope they got their pays worth, for a is a very tedious and at times monotones job, what they do. Nevertheless, given the opportunity to view the world from a students perspective, I am not concerned really for who probably put together about 80 to 90 percent of the pages inside these City General Plans, but for those who decide on what the plan objectives are and how they come up on deciding them.

I have been introduced to the term "Public Interest" and I am not convinced a simple and "subjective" term, like the latter, is convincing enough to me, to give "it" the trust and faith of the city or my city ,if it was the case. Also we have talked in class about how the community is the one that proposes its objectives based on its "wants and needs", nevertheless I quite often found things to not add up right….somewhere in the process of analyzing all this, my reasoning just blurs and the communities' interest become "what the city wants the communities' interests to be". Because this is only my hypothesis waiting for a few brave planners to explore, and because I am in this particular quest, it would be somewhat hypocritical of me to try and suggest an improvement to the current Rohnert Park City General Plan or on any Plan, before I am certain that "Starting from Scratch" isn't the best step to make. After this --focusing on the most important environmental issues is primordial, but not how it affects the particular city, but how the city affects the whole World." Once this is established we can plan our cities based on our limitations.

Since our limitations are real, we have learned ways to hide or overlook them, even though growth is a limitation, and its most valued objective in the analyzed General Plan, what I am proposing is a plan that is not only comprehensive only in terms of "the entire incorporated area" and the "cities it connects" or even what effect it has on California, or the whole United States, but one that ---is geographically comprehensive with the whole world. Taking into account that all humans --even if they aren't Americans-- deserve the same right to have all the General Plans in the world working with each other, "interrelated", —in an equal manner. Therefore, before doing any kind of little community or big city plan –I need to come up with a World Plan.

Hopefully others will join.

 

 

 

 

 

M. p>BRookS

The critical question is: How much freedom con we afford to sacrifice to allow governmental planning function to operate