Tending our Organizational Webs
. . . Gale Wills

Economic Development and Spirituality
. . . Peter Harkness

Rethinking Development. . . Colin Stuart

Tending our Organizational Webs

Gale Wills - Kitchener Area MM

This article is the first in a series. My intention is to reflect back some of the concerns and questions that arose as I travelled in the ministry visiting Meetings and Worship Groups across Canada last year. I will try and be faithful to what I heard, but it would be impossible for me not to include some of my self on two counts. One is that I must take responsibility for raising some of the questions as I went, and the other is that I cannot help but have observations and reflections that are mine alone. My hope is simply that these articles will be seen as food for thought and not be taken as any attempt to prescribe.

The longing to reduce the amount of business we do, both in general and at Yearly Meeting, was possibly the concern that I heard most often as I travelled. It took several forms, from weariness of long agendas and frustration with the paper flow, or a sense that there are too many people serving on too many committees and anger at being asked to consider issues that are perceived as not related to the concerns of a Monthly Meeting. Often the longing was simply a wish for more opportunity for fellowship, sometimes accompanied by a reluctance to doing business of any kind.

Canadian Yearly Meeting is, comparatively speaking, a very small yearly meeting. We have approximately 1100 people to carry out all the work that needs to be done. Alongside Representative Meeting and Yearly Meeting in session, there are twelve standing committees, four ad hoc committees, plus the continuing Meeting of Ministry and Counsel, Board of Trustees, Young Friends, and a small "group" called the Epistle Summarizing Committee. In addition there are twenty-seven Friends who represent us to outside bodies, some to more than one group. All of this of course, is in addition to the work we do for our Monthly Meetings and for our Half-yearly Meetings and Regional Gatherings.

From a purely statistical viewpoint, this appears to be a complicated structure for so few people. However we do not understand human organizations on the basis of numbers. What do all these committees and people do? Do we really want it all done? Do we have a choice in every case? Complications can be with an agenda as well as with the organization itself. We can get some of the answers by reading our Organization and Procedure and the annual directory published with Yearly Meeting minutes. But most of the answers can come only from talking among ourselves.

The questions around too much business are influenced by the admitted fact that some people are comfortable and happy attending to administrative matters, others are interested in the activities that come with working for peace and social justice and have little time or patience for "paperwork." These are not necessarily two different groups, but making this distinction helps me in understanding why some are so reluctant to "do business" and others take up the administrative tasks with enthusiasm. Is there a danger of seeing the administrators as carrying a less important role than the activists? Should we not see the two as mutually dependent and equally important?

I am also aware that for some, thinking about organizations in any form is a challenge. This in turn is a challenge to those of us who are naturally comfortable with organizational concepts. We need to be patient with each other. I for one, cannot imagine a world with no formal links between monthly meetings, and those links in my mind constitute an organization. Thus tending an organization is tending the links between people. They are like the silken strands of a spider's web, very intricate and needing special skill to create and to maintain, but practically invisible. Remember that last time you struck down a web on the shed door and next morning, there it was again, glistening in the sunlight? Like the spider, we depend on a nearly invisible we of organization, and if it is swept away, we must create another to take its place.

The Discipline admonishes all of us to take up our responsibility for managing church affairs. Does this mean that we must all take up administrative work with enthusiasm? I think not. But it may mean that we have an obligation to consider very carefully how we support those who have the gifts and are willing to do the work of tending our organizational webs. The question then becomes how big a web, how intricate, and how many web tenders do we really need?

I once heard a long-time and active Friend mutter under her breath during consideration of a particularly difficult question on the floor of Yearly Meeting: "Quakers are really anarchists at heart!" How true this is. From coast to coast, I heard clear resistance to central authority, to a "representative" system, and to any practice that is perceived to have bureaucratic overtones. There is, I believe, nearly universal agreement among Friends in Canada that primary responsibility rightly resides with the local worshipping community. Organizations at a half-yearly or yearly meeting level are seen as creatures of a monthly meeting, never the other way around. In this regard, we already have a remarkably decentralized and relatively simple organization Is it possible to simplify it further?

Social anarchism as a non-violent way of organizing (no, this is not a contradiction in terms) has a respectable history and record of some success. The classic example is the short-lived success of the Spanish anarchists before and during the Spanish Civil War. We see it now in the cooperative movements, in community economic development projects, in the ways in which the campesinos have organized themselves in Central America. We may not name it as such, but I do believe that Friends have been sympathetic to forms of social anarchism consciously or unconsciously for generations.

It occurred to me as I travelled from city to farm and back to city again, that there may be a fin de siecle form of rural-urban split among Friends in the way in which we regard the need for formal organization. The informality and lack of -- even resistance to -- structure is a prominent characteristic of the small scattered meetings and worship groups I encountered in non-urban areas. It reminded me of a time many years ago, when I carried out a survey of how social planning was done in one of the rural counties in Southern Ontario and found to my surprise, (as an urban based planner), that they did not use or need formal planning organizations. My conclusion at that time was that we cannot impose the organizational structures that serve concentrated urban areas on rural ones. I doubt that this has changed, and I suspect that those of us who live and work in large urban areas think differently about the need for organization than those who do not.

How does a group of people go about simplifying an organization? We live in complex social organizations that are evolving rapidly, and resisting this, or standing outside of its flow requires enormous effort. On one hand we want to avoid a world iven over to excessive busy-ness and bureaucratic widging. On the other, we have available to us new technologies, including organizational techniques, that can help us navigate our way through the inevitable maze of modern life. As individuals, when we seek to simplify our lives, we weigh what we must give up and what we stand to lose against what we know we will gain. This is also true organizationally. What must we give up in order to gain the benefit of fewer committees and less business?

The gospel order of George Fox with its organization of monthly, regional and yearly meetings has served Friends well. But the practices may need adapting to modern times and circumstances. Should Friends in Canada find new ways to organize and conduct their business -- something that meets our unique needs? My travelling message about the gospel order could sound like my urging us to keep the traditional ways. I hope it was not heard that way. There may be a new gospel order to discover, and my concern is that we understand and practice the divinely led process of discerning what that may be. If we do, anything is possible.

Economic Development and Spirituality

Peter Harkness - Ottawa MM

Since soon after World War 2 Canada and other nations have been trying to assist poorer countries to increase food production, enhance personal incomes, advance health care and provide better quality education to a wider group of their populations. Such efforts have been termed international economic development and have been based on economic theory that postulated that the right inputs of money, knowledge and technology, at the appropriate times would lead to improvements in ordinary people's lives. An aspect of humanity that has been deliberately and officially excluded from these development plans and efforts has been the spiritual nature of both the donors and the recipients.

In the 1960's the World Bank assisted the Ghanaian Government to build a dam on the Volta River to generate electricity for the country. The assessment of the project included engineering studies to locate the best place on the river to get the most power for the least cost and to design the dam and electrical generation system. The Bank then looked for organizations and countries to provide financing and sought out the Volta Aluminum Company to buy large amounts of power over a long period of time to make the project financially viable. The dam was built providing Ghana, and later on from the same dam, Togo and Benin, with electricity with which it was intended that the countries would develop economically. It was all based on careful engineering and financial studies using mathematics, economics, and financial planning techniques and in fact, we know now 30 years later that it did achieve its major goal of electricity production.

Another project which the World Bank tried in Ghana was to help the rural people in the north to improve their lives in many ways. It was done on a large all-encompassing scale with much pre-measurement of conditions and many assumptions of costs and improvements that could be realized in food production, education and health. I do not know how this turned out in the end but when I last visited the area in the late 1970's, it did not seem to be going well. It seemed that changing rural people's lives was more difficult than building a dam and electricity generating and distribution facilities.

Development projects have led to some improvements in the material life of humans on this earth. However, many projects do not seem to achieve what they set out to do even after the expenditure of millions of dollars. This has led to consideration of how spirituality might make development work more effective.

The World Bank has had a conference on integrating spirituality into economic development and on June 19 and 20 of this year, the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) followed suit. In her opening remarks at the conference the Vice President of CIDA told the participants, no doubt a bit tongue in cheek but nevertheless probably with some validity, that "if such a subject is good enough for the World Bank, I guess it's good enough for us".

Over 100 attended from a wide variety of NGOs representing Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Baha'i and New Age approaches to spirituality as well as 1 or 2 individuals who appeared opposed to any spirituality at all, traditional or new. Indications of radical differences between the groups surfaced during the 2 days but were not pursued as the mood seemed to be one of trying to maintain at least a superficial unity.

The key note addresses (1 each day) were powerful and formed 2 solid poles around which the rest of the discussion took place.

On Day 1 we heard from Rosina Wiltshire, a black woman, who works for the United Nations Development Program promoting the full consideration and involvement of women in their projects. She spoke confidently and forcefully about her personal spiritual life and her belief in the value of and commitment to expression of it in her work. She said that the secular, rational, power-based economics that aid and development agencies have been using as a basis for their work for many years cannot lead to real development. For her a trust and encouragement of the spirit within - individually and collectively - will lead to a more just and equal world. She has found that those who think this way have a different attitude to their work which she intimated would lead to a different result. She feels that the women's movement has brought a spiritual dimension to development as shown in recent moves forward in concern for the environment.

On Day 2 Pierre Beamans, an old CIDA hand and now a Vice President with the International Development Research Centre, and as he said, a "practising and believing Roman Catholic", provided a believable and coherent challenge around which all or most could rally.

Pierre defined spirituality as:

• a relationship with God,
• a relationship with the rest of God's creation
• both human and in nature,
• a responsibility to nurture one's own growth and the growth of those around which will include a struggle against incompleteness.

He referred to problems in integrating spirituality and development as:

• the problem of evil/sin,
• the conflict between unity and diversity,
• God is One; God is Truth - but what Truth?
• the problem of freedom for individuals, families and communities leading to conflict,
• the problem of imposing values from one culture on another through development efforts.
• the problem of paying particular attention to youth.

He said the keeper of Spirituality is the major religions of the world and they must find ways to integrate Spirituality with Development.

Around the two keynote speakers were many others both formally on panels or individually in plenary sessions. Some notes from them:

Fatima Charaf-Eddine of the Lebanese association, Amel, made the rather startling remark, that, "Many of the activities of Hisballah are improving the everyday life of a large number of people in the south of Lebanon." This was startling because what we normally hear from that group is about the latest bomb or rocket they have set off killing or injuring Israelis.

A Micmac Elder, Noel Knockwood, gave the opening prayer in Micmac and English. And I was intrigued to note that the sound of the prayers, (the intonation and rhythm) was similar even though the languages were different.

Ellen Hayakawa, a biologist with Environment Canada, was called by God 2 years ago through a dream involving light and feelings of her being unified with God and all there is to bring talk of Spirit and Spirituality into the workplace. She has been following the call.

The conference was very interesting to me as a person with about 25 years of 'development' experience, most of it fuelled by the current aid theories of the time although I was also trying to follow my own Quaker-type spiritual path during this period. The question occurs to me, "Would the spiritual approach as described in the conference have made a difference to the projects I have seen?"

The Volta Dam project would be done with some refinements with or without particular spiritual considerations. More concern would be given to environmental effects but I don't know if extra study would lead to much different results. If the lake basin had been cleared of trees before it was flooded, fishing would have been easier after (nets would not get caught on the remains of trees) but it would mean extra investment earlier on which might or might not be considered recoverable. Local people whose lives and livelihoods were disrupted might be given more consideration but then again they might not. The impact on women would be given much more study and they would probably be more extensively involved in one way or another. So some improvements would be made just because the general consciousness of impacts of such projects has been raised. But what would a specifically spiritual approach do to such a project? - I don't know.

I also mentioned the large scale rural development project attempted by the World Bank in Northern Ghana and the difficulties it was experiencing when I last visited it in the late 1970's. How would a spiritual approach affect something like that? Again one would not start such a project now without extensive "participatory development" activities, i.e. one would send people out to talk to villagers at length to determine their concerns, interests and priorities before developing plans to affect their lives. And this participatory approach sounds much like what Rosina Wiltshire was describing as a spiritual way to work. So again, spiritual or not, development planning has changed for the better. But would a more intense and specific spiritual approach make it better? Again, I don't know.

Rethinking Development

Colin Stuart - Ottawa MM

I would like to share with Friends some rather oversimplified, but hopefully useful reflections on changes in international development. I believe we are coming to a much more realistic understanding of what development means by linking it to peace and justice, to democracy and civil society, to human rights and dignity, thus allowing ourselves to see more clearly what work and resources are needed for these fine words to be given substance in people's lives.

Reflection:

"Peace is not merely the absence of war, Peace is the presence of justice"

Query:

And what is justice but each person having what is needed to grow to be fully human?

Development then, if we are to use the word, is the practice of achieving justice and peace. It means that people, together, define their needs and make choices which will fulfill those needs, enabling them to become fully human.

Rhetorically we've always said that this is what development is about, however at a national and international level the practice has been very different and the results have been ambiguous at best, often disastrous. Past assurances given to ourselves and others that development is "progress," a linear and inevitable progression from what was "old" or "primitive" to that which is "new" and "better" are no longer secure.

from oral to written,
from bullock to tractor,
from shaman to doctor,
from midwife to obstetrician,
from donkey to lorry,
from candle to hydro,
from footpath to macadam,
from coconut milk to Pepsi,
from wood to plastic and steel,

From the 1950s through to the 1970s and early 80s we assumed that this progression was good, and that it was achievable if enough resources were poured in from outside, from aid budgets, from private investment or from international financial institutions. Many of these changes were indeed good, however they tended to become ends in themselves and were seen as inevitable as were the sometimes terrible human and environmental costs of accomplishing the changes. We still live with this understanding in our market driven world, but I think we are increasingly critical of what we see. In the old bi-polar world of East versus West there was even a competition to see which side would be able to invoke and inspire these changes in others and through the process gain their allegiance.

The sad difficulty is that from the perspective of the majority in many developing countries there has been only a marginal improvement overall (even this is questionable). In some countries where aid budgets have been spent and major investments made, there has been war and continues to be war (Zaire, Rwanda) with the disparities between rich and poor continuing to grow. In short, our assumptions and practice about progress and development have not worked well despite some success stories.

Friends are aware that Canada's aid budget has been falling, that on the international stage we are less generous as a country than we have been for many years. As a proportion of GNP our aid contribution has been falling. In 1994-95 alone, our aid budget fell by some 7.2% and Canada is not alone in this. Of 21 major aid giving countries, 15 cut their aid budgets in 1994-95. We are familiar with this process here at home where budget cuts have meant fewer resources available to the poorest in our society, particularly to First Nations peoples, to single parents, or to those with chronic medical needs. At the same time we also know there is an increasing gap between the wealthiest and poorest, both globally and in Canada. Many are being denied what they need, while a relative few have a superfluity of wants and gratifications.

The most obvious reason given for the reduction in development assistance is budget constraints imposed to reduce national deficits. This is true as far as it goes, but I think there are many deeper reasons for this change, reasons which reflect : a disillusionment with the conventional wisdom and practice about development which we have lived with since the 1950s and 60s; given the disillusionment, an unwillingness and perhaps incapacity, at least on the part of governments, to look at alternatives, and an eagerness to let development resources be subsumed into the current functioning of the international marketplace.

Even within the limited budgets of government for overseas assistance we are seeing the largest cuts being taken from the NGO sector with smaller cuts, sometimes increases, given to the private or for-profit sector. Trade and Canadian economic interests have been made the cornerstone of Canadian foreign policy and seem well on their way to constituting the entire edifice.

On the other hand the disillusionment is a healthy thing. We are seeing the mistakes and errors which have been made. This is a consequence of a substantial and positive subversive thread running through this whole process of conventional development. People at the grassroots, and those who work with them directly in some NGOs, have seen the changes and suffered the consequences of development. They have done their homework and their analyses and they are finding their voice today: so much so that most development agencies have recognized that there can be no truly human change without authentic participation and control by those who are the intended beneficiaries of development.

Equally important are some encouraging signs of development moving in the direction of peace and justice: Despite the emphasis on trade and the marketplace, peace building is slipping onto the agenda of government with some very modest allocations given to over to this work. The amounts are small and there are bureaucratic conflicts over who will manage the money, but at least it is on the agenda. Human rights and democracy are now embedded in the thinking of many people, both within development agencies and at the grassroots. This is not to say that human rights has the priority it deserves, especially when it comes to the hard edge of national or corporate economic interest. However, seen in historical context, human rights have become a far greater consideration in national and organizational policy that they were twenty or thirty years ago.

Democratic and popular participation in civil society are increasingly seen as a sine qua non for sustainable peace and justice. There is much very useful discussion today about civil society. Although the concept can be somewhat ambiguous, it signifies an autonomous "third sector" which is not dependent on the state, nor driven by the market and commercial for-profit interests. Without an active civil sector, that is without citizens who are able to exercise their rights and responsibilities collectively and individually it is impossible to have justice and peace.

Finally, environmental sustainability has become integral to justice, peace and development action, although there are certainly difficulties and serious setbacks in the present context of economic globalization and marketization of just about everything. It would be foolish in today's world to pretend that these are the predominant themes in development practice in Canada or in the world. The world is increasingly dominated and markets managed in the interests of a few companies and individuals which are Goliaths to the few Davids posed above. Nonetheless, I believe that what is being built is a new vision of what a just world can be. We are not there yet but we can begin to see the outlines.

Back to top of page

Back to The Canadian Friend home page

http://www.quaker.ca/cfriend/cf1-97.html
Copyright © Canadian Yearly Meeting, 1997

Last modified November 26, 1997