Well we did try our best to get the meets to take the volunteer carbon offsets program off the ground. The political scenarios are volatile with much push-pull in any direction, in every direction. Best keep are noses out of it all and keep our ears to the ground. we will of course do this but not in line with the mechanics of anticipation but the practicalities of outcome opportunities. Life is fun as always 🙂
Ugh! bad. Critical field data cannot be obtained. At wits end. Bad data from state sources not helping at all. We soldier on though, creating the heat maps for the chemical and soil testing. At least that data is reliable because it was obtained by our own research team.
We did something cool as a research team. Originally, we had planned to extract information through Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and Key Person Interviews (KPIs). That was before we decided to walk down the rivers. The minute we did that, we had entire rivers’ worth of data to content with. Not piecemeal through GN level treatment but at the level of the shared common. In fact, we found that when it comes to determining the dynamics of large scale shared commons such as rivers and forests of the size of the KCF, the whole game changes. How does one determine the interplay between upstream and downstream communities for example? Or, how do we make sure that activities in the mountains do not negatively impact the communities in the plains? Those questions had good answers in the good old days. Days when everyone worked together and understood the balance of nature. Now, it was each woman to herself so where did that leave us and our planned intervention? Up a river – literally. So we used our decades worth of experience and created a hybridized system of engagement where representatives of all communities living across a river basin were brought together to discuss the dynamics. In these, we did not engage them as we a team that was blanked on sensibilities of those communities. Far from it. We knew a whole lot about them and wanted them to reaffirm or confirm that which we already knew and bolster the arguments and add new ones if they thought fit. The process was called Shared Commons Organization, Regeneration and Enhancement- Community Analysis of Resource Dynamics (SCOARECARD). It was knew so obviously it got messed up in a few places but we swung the massive logistics effort, the engagement strategy and the information extract very well we believe. Lionel Thilakaratne, our treasurer played a crucial role in this effort that was based on tracing the realities of the river basin communities across seven decades of existence. A sample outcome document for the Heen Ganga basin can be found here.
Two great young people I must say. One is a hydrologist and the other a GIS mapper. Watching these two kids work together was a pleasure indeed. So much heart, commitment and above all, compassion. When I see people like these, hope kindles for the future of our kind.
In order to decide on the ways forward for the project, the GMSL hosted the ACTED team at the Hunnasgiri field office. The entire team of GMSL staff including our field staff comprising of Asoka, Amal, Aruna and Daya as well as our head office staff was present. The ACTED team were treated to the findings of the research team which was presented in a video. We believe that we came to an agreement on ways forward. Critically too we discussed the ways to work with state and local government officials and the requirement to be forthright but subtle in our approaches. Since the greens have a long standing and mutually trusting relationship with relevant officials, we believe we could swing this with the minimal fuss as long as we don’t try to comply with any particular rule book because Sri Lanka does not work that way. Anyway, after a short visit at the office, we went into the field, twisting and turning through the highland terrain and down to Meemure where we met with the redoubtable Nava, were treated to a soliloquy on the issues and a great lunch by him. Good work all around.
