Page Contents:

1. Short History of a Loose-Knit, Sprawling, Kitchen-Table Initiative
   
2. Will the "Information Society" Save Us?
   
3. The Search for a Bridging Strategy
   
4. And For Those Who Despise or Fear Electronic Communications
   
5. The Medium is the Message (It really is)
   
6. A Word on Our Common Language (English perhaps, but…)
   

This phrase is used in a draft of a small book that we are currently working on ( The Information Society & Sustainable Development, with Patricia Mokhtarian, Jack Nilles, Horace Mitchell, Andrew Bibby, Andy Lake, Mattias Hoejer, Noel Hodson, Peter Johnston, Robert Pestel, Robert Theobald), and as I take a moment now in an attempt to provide you with some of the main lines of the story behind this site, those very words come to mind. Unpromising as such a phrase may at first glance seem, however, you may wish to refer to the piece in question to learn a bit about how such ventures can at times play a surprisingly important role in things done.

The Commons is a public interest initiative of EcoPlan which shortly will enter its fourth year. It has been created to provide concerned individuals and groups around the world with an easily accessible means of communications and group work for international collaborative undertakings which deal with the themes that have been the concern of our group since its founding in 1966: namely the challenge of improving our knowledge and control of technological and related organizational change as it impacts on people in their daily lives. (See The Commons - Statement of Purpose and Sustainability -- The Search for a Bridging Strategy)

This project builds on more than two decades of active involvement with and use of best available communications technologies in a daily basis (See First Words on the e/e). Our early tilt in this direction was in part the logical outcome of the fact that virtually all of our work from the beginning involved international contacts and cooperation. Beyond this, it also corresponded well with the insights I gained back in the mid seventies upon doing a world survey of the potential for telecommunications substitutes for (some kinds and parts of) transportation (See E. Britton bio, middle section), which convinced me that there were major advantages to be gained in many respects (environmental, costs, efficiency and life quality) by shifting over to these new technologies as quickly as prudently feasible . No less however, it reflects my sincere personal believe that our present ‘technologies’ of knowledge building in support of more effective public policy and private performance have revealed enormous deficiencies when it comes to dealing with the challenging web of problems and issues which can be summed up in that admittedly cumbersome word, sustainability. (See Tools for the Distance Participant, and Conquering the Brains on the Knee Syndrome ).

Back to top

Will the "Information Society" Save Us?

The emergence of the "Information Society" provides some grounds for (cautious) optimism concerning our collective ability to negotiate the heretofore quite unlikely move to a more sustainable society in our time. In the broad area of technology and society that it encompasses, enormous order-of-magnitude improvements are already being achieved in the performance of materials and services. This wave of innovation and accomplishment is still in its early stages. Beyond these, there is a to-now largely unrealized potential for bringing together and ‘cascading’ these new technologies in new synergistic ways which will permit productivity improvements in many sectors on a scale and at a speed never possible in the past.

The potential for approaching the sustainability objectives through positive actions such as those which these new technologies and approaches permit is something which needs to be kept to the fore, because it holds the key to the potential success of this approach. Most past arguments for sustainability have stumbled because they keyed on proposals which targeted reductions in current levels of use of inefficient technology, without any increase in the productivity of materials and energy (ex., a car ban in a city without accompanying measures to absorb and satisfy mobility and access demands).

But this need not be: technologies and organizational approaches now exist which offer potential solutions that go far beyond the reduced use of inefficient technologies (in this case, such things as telework, intelligent routing systems, access-oriented answers vs. mobility-oriented, etc.). This positive potential exists in virtually every aspect of our productive and people-serving systems.

Without wishing to trot out all the usual house arguments that lay claims for its exceptional growth, etc. potential, nonetheless it will be useful to recall briefly some of the broad lines of the reasoning behind the choice of what some call the "Information Society", and others the Electronic, Third Industrial Revolution, etc., etc., as the main lever in this particular push toward sustainable development.

At the heart of the Information Society lie most of the fastest developing areas of science, technology, business and human practice in these closing years of the century. In addition to telecommunications and information processing, its scope covers such things as microelectronics, integrated circuits, new materials developments, control systems, robotics, software engineering, and even biotech -- all of which are growing at rates never achieved at any previous time in history.

The most oft-cited indicator that reflects the speed of this progression is of course "Moore's Law", which states that the cost of computing and storage is reduced by 50% every eighteen months. There are many other such indicators, all based on actual achievements and a number of which even substantially exceed the observable performances that accord to Moore’s Law. These are not isolated or lab-only developments. One striking example is the fact of Internet’s traffic which is currently doubling roughly every nine months. These are phenomena that are occurring in a manner which is universal and bringing with them a whole universe of new ways of doing things and organizing ourselves.

These technologies are revolutionary above all -- and in sharp distinction with most technological progress in the past -- in which they (a) involve relatively small amounts of materials resources, and (b) permit substantial dematerialization in many domains. They are not (for better or worse) waiting for government policy decisions to shape either the pace or direction of their development. Aspects of these technologies do of course depend on government in some ways, but overall they are progressing at the speed they are without much reference to government positions on most of the issues involved.

But if this is all well and good for the rich "North", what about the four billion or so others who happen to share this planet and are not quite so well off? What might IS/SD mean for them, if anything?

To a considerably greater extent than any previous generation of technology, they have the potential of being directly transferable to the countries of the Third World, and quite possibly may do more than anything that we have passed on to them in the past to ensure their well-being in real terms. The potential for the Information Society to permit the developing world to achieve something much closer to sustainable development than anything that has been observed or planned for till now is something that is very real. That said, without the thoughtful participation of today’s advanced economic nations – who, above all, must be able to "lead by example" as enthusiastic and successful practitioners of this new model of economy and society -- the full potential of this transition will not be achieved.

Back to top

---

The Search for a Bridging Strategy

It is often claimed that the main reason for our inability to live sustainable lives lies in some combination of the selfishness of individuals, the breakdown of the family and the resultant dearth of responsibility in terms of providing for future generations, the lack of any broader sense of ethics on the part of the business community, or the short-sighted nature of government and politicians in these closing days of the 20th century. All of this is undeniably part of the problem, but only part.

Perhaps a better explanation for this breach has been that the fact that the various calls for sustainable development over the last years have either been too vague, insufficiently cognizant of the realities of the human condition, or so ambitious, far-reaching and complicated that most reasonable and otherwise responsible people and institutions are put off rather than mobilized for action. Put in other words, it would seem fair to say that the ambitions of the main proponents of sustainability have considerably outstripped their knowledge of what makes people tick.

Our challenge now is: how are we going to get from here (i.e., a notoriously unsustainable combination of practices and process) to there (at least a step in the direction of what might eventually prove to be a sustainable world). What we need, in effect, is to identify some sort of bridging strategy -- some sort of practical mechanism or series of steps that can move us toward a transition. In order to accomplish this, we have to leave end-state thinking behind us, and try to see if we can come up with something that properly reflects the foibles and the realities of the world we live in.

One point that has become clear to all by now is that, in the final analysis, sustainability is unlikely to be achieved through unilaterally mandated government regulations or laws alone. National and international government agencies have a role to play, but in the final analysis whatever is done must flow from and build on the awarenesses and freely made choices of individuals and groups throughout society. We interpret this to mean that in the push to sustainability the task at hand now is to develop and demonstrate acceptable alternatives in many aspects of daily life -- because sticks and threats alone will not suffice. These alternatives and incentives must be addressed to the individual citizens and groups that constitute our societies, including both public and private sectors as well as all those many combinations and groupings that lie between the two.

Back to top

And For Those Who Despise or Fear Electronic Communications

I have little difficulty in appreciating the fierce resistance that many thoughtful people, including some of my most eminent friends and associates, manifest when it comes to confronting, trying to understand, and eventually using these new tools as an extension of their own potential. Their reticence and reservations are altogether understandable. Despite the enormous improvements of recent years (and months!, computer-mediated communications are still often rough and uninviting, they often do not do what you would like them to do (at least not the first times around), they invariably involve learning curves (and the flexibility that must go with them), and they are not, of course, a full substitute for smelling, touching and the sorts of more meandering contacts and discourses which often are so important when you are trying to cook up a new idea or project with another person or group. But it also needs to be understood that there is more to this new wave of innovations than just somber text screens of Internet newsgroups and the like. What we have in hand today – with not only pages like these (and better), videoconferencing and a variety of group work technologies – is just the first pale refection of what the very near future will put at our disposal.

Those of us who have over the last decade or more had the opportunity to acquire these tools and work habits on a daily basis are often of little help to those who have yet to make the transition. In laying out this series of Web sites and the program that is The Commons, we have tried to be of some help to those who are making the changeover, but I would also like to recommend a small handful of books which are good reads in themselves, accessible and challenging at the same time, and which, I do believe, can be a great help to anyone who wishes to have a more profound feel for what is going on.

• Being Digital, N. Negroponte, Hodder & Stoughton, 1995
• In the Vineyard of the Text, Ivan Illich, U. Of Chicago Press, 1993
• Understanding Media, Marshall McLuhan, New York, Vanguard Press, 1957

Right behind these if you are still hungry for more, I would recommend;

• Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business, Neil Postman, Penguin 1985
• The Printing Press as an Agent of Change, Elizabeth Eisenstein, New York, Cambridge University Press, 1979
• The Real World of Technology, Ursula Franklin, Concord Ontario, Anansi Press, 1992

These fine books will of course lead you on to other good sources in turn. The point that I wish to insist on in all this is that, indeed, there is something very fundamental that is going on here, and that it stretches far beyond the considerations and vocabulary that are commonly used in these cases. And for at least one Web tour (one of many, but this one’s worth the trip), may I recommend as one starting place to stretch your mind a bit Welcome to World 3", a space devoted to exploring the nature of internetworked hypermedia design. Here is a sample of the sort of reflection that you will find there: "Gutenberg's 42-line Bible was published in the 1450s. It looked almost exactly like a handwritten codex of presentation quality. His Bible still made use of approximately 300 letters, ligatures, and abbreviations developed by contemporary scribes. Its pages were dark with ink, imitating the thick strokes of the scribe's pen. Gutenberg even left room for illuminated capital letters to be painted on the page. In the beginning of the age of print, the written word remained the paradigm. Elizabeth Eisenstein explained in The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe : "The absence of any apparent change in product was combined with a complete change in methods of production, giving rise to the paradoxical combination of seeming continuity with radical change." It took printers several decades to disrupt the seeming continuity and develop modern typography and book design. However, the books of early period were not inadequate or primitive: they functioned perfectly well as replacements for manuscripts." (Jay David Bolter)

The Medium is the Message (It really is.)

Misunderstanding, short-temperedness, even rudeness can be observed all too often in this ephemeral world of electronic communications. It can at times become almost as grossly antisocial as the signs that certain mad drivers, perhaps for the rest altogether civilized citizens, permit themselves to make from the sanctity of their speeding cars to the sinner at the wheel of the parallel vehicle. A quick and vigorous hand sign, an awesome scowl, a less than kind word, and speed on oh righteous Christian.

McLuhan had a lot of things quite right as he looked out into our world of electronics now fully thirty years ago. When he whispered us that the medium was the message, he was quite correct, at least when it comes to the little screen before your eyes this morning. This little square of light will do quite well for some jobs, and not so well for others. And since we risk to depend on it quite extensively in this cooperative venture, let me share with you the following which is born of long practice and careful observation.

This screen does quite nicely for reading and responding to short, preferably single point messages ("Dinner is served", "OK, I'll be right there."), but it is hardly the ideal means for viewing and coming to grips with more complex and longer communications, which really do far better on paper. The 80x25 or whatever screen that is before you, makes us prisoner of its physical limits; we tend to focus on what is right in front of us and become USA Today impatient. Once we get beyond -- absolutely tops! -- two screenfuls, and assuming of course that there is any merit at all in the thing in front of us, it is, thus, time to turn to your printer. One really does have to let eye and mind wander over vaster terrain when it comes to interpreting and profiting from these richer and more challenging communications. Imagine reading Tolstoy screen by screen. Perhaps you too would turn off, scowl and drive right on. No rude sign, of course!

A Word on Our Common Language (English perhaps, but…)

___Enter The Commons Here

Back to top