Guest guest Posted October 5, 2001 Report Share Posted October 5, 2001 Dear Mark and Prabhus, PAMHO. AGTSP. The last part of the WHY has been bothering me as far as grammar and possible meaning. Is this adjustment all right? WHY To reinvigorate ISKCON farm communities in accordance with the wishes of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, The ISKCON Ministry of Cow Protection and Agriculture presents a Rural Development Plan to: 1) Establish sustainable principles and practices of land use which encourage participation in lifetime-protected cow-based agriculture, 2) Establish lifestyle security to the participants. > A little editing done on the following. Comments Please. WHAT The ISKCON Rural Development Plan is to follow the sructure of a mainstream Sustainability Development Plan. Sustainability development plans are used across the range of civil society - in Governments, Non-governmental Organisations (NGOs) and in Business. They have a logical structure that is not only easy to follow but also easy to translate from a solely ISKCON concern into a more secular concern. The structure of the ISKCON Rural Development Plan as a Sustainable Development Plan is as follows: 1) It is to be Sustainable, therefore it must balance environmental, social and economic land-use issues as part of the spiritual instructions outlined by Srila Prabhupada; 2) It is to follow a development process delineating the starting position we are in (A), the end result we want to see (Z), and the means to get from A to Z; 3) It is to outline a coherent and concise Vision backed up with timely and practicable Mission Statements with their subsequent detailed Action Plans. I made some changes here. Comments please.> Vision: The Vision is to establish ISKCON farms which: 1) Manage according to established sustainable principles and practices of land use which encourage participation in lifetime-protected cow-based agriculture and 2) Provide lifestyle security to the farmers. > The following I am finding a bit confusing. One thing is the audit. If I am understanding correctly this would involve getting reports from ISKCON farms answering some questions that we need to know the answers to. Reporting within ISKCON is historically extremely irresponsible. I just came across a letter form Srila Prabhupad dated 1970 in which he expresses his disappointment with the GBC in not reporting to him as he instructed them to do. It will be very difficult to get a proper audit of all the farms. Even extending it to the end of 2002 will not change things because managemnet is always changing, etc., etc. How to handle this? This needs to be discussed before we go forward. We can make adjustments to the development Plan for our purposes or needs. Also if the above is all right as it is. My thoughts are in reaction to the following paragraph. > The Vision of the ISKCON Rural Development Plan > clearly states the goal that the plan seeks > to achieve. To outline specific Mission Statements to > attain to this Vision it is necessary to > delineate what are the desired characteristics of the > type of land use, participation and security > that the vision outlines. By observing the present > state of development in ISKCON farms plus > observing Indian rural life with the eyes of the > teachings of Srila Prabhupada it is possible to > obtain an A and a Z. A simple general audit of said > farms according to environmental, social > and economic criteria in conjunction with the type of > land use, participation and security that > the vision outlines will then clearly show the > differences. It will then be possible to develop a > sliding scale, an A to Z, that ISKCON farms can then > compare themselves to and between, > using the scale as a benchmark to attain to, plus > identifying some as best-practice farms from > which practices can be adopted. Your servant, Chyadevi > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2001 Report Share Posted October 7, 2001 Dear all, PAMHO. AGTSP. Personally Chayadevi, I thought it better to keep the wording in the initial presentation part as one paragraph, without spliting it into component parts. The latter is often better done later when the preliminary statement is analysed in depth and segmented into its component parts. For example, you segmented the Sustainable Development Plan, with which I agree, because that is the detail not the first statement. But what I say in the above is just a matter of style not substance, so either way is OK. In terms of the reports from ISKCON farms, I completely agree with you. I have just been reading over the Standards that you made before, and whilst highly comendable I shudder to think how the Ministry can do anything with the reports by enforcement when you have no funding and when there is no impositional structure to change bad practise. For this reason I think we need to look more at a carrot than stick in the development plan. The work I did below was a prior copy, the latter copy I sent was better. I am getting a better idea of how to proceed, and rather that it being one based on reports and non-existence sticks I see it in another light. I think we need to develop some measurability of progress to take us from A to Z, that all farms can measure themselves by, and a basket of practices to facilitate the transitions. This way benchmarks can be developed with best-practice farms pulling the benchmark up from A to B....to Z. What is it that needs measuring? - Environmental (land use), Social (participation (by both producer and consumer)) and Economical (lifestyle security - land, farm animals, people (farmers)). If the above can be given specific qualitative properties that can be quantified then we have an A to Z sliding scale. And that can be the development ladder. The first step then would be to create the statistical framework and then for a generalised audit, based on the framework, of present farms via the participants on the conference. This would then give a generalised picture of our starting point(s) - A (B,C). Any location-specific audit would be part of the development plan further down the line, but it would be one that each farm could judge itself by and in comparisson with other farms, whilst observing a basket of practices that the other farms are adopting. It would therefore be led from the bottom-up not imposed from the top-down, which anyway has no stick worth hitting with. The bottom-up, meaning each and every farm, would see a clear development process, varied models to adopt to succeed, and would in themselves be inspired to adapt to and adopt various practices that are being shown. I hope this makes sense. I know it is very developmentesque, but this is what is the new development paradigm and believe me its a lot better and more pertinent than the top-down one. This way people actually change of their own volition, with their own empowerment. It just requires the facilitative develoment process to act as a catalyst for change. NB. I hope to have a web site up soon to post our up-dated versions. As Chayadevi is the chairperson, I suggest she has the password. Mark > The last part of the WHY has been bothering me as > far as grammar and > possible meaning. Is this adjustment all right? > > WHY > To reinvigorate ISKCON farm communities in > accordance > with the wishes of His > Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, > The > ISKCON Ministry of Cow > Protection and Agriculture presents a Rural > Development Plan to: > 1) Establish sustainable > principles and practices of land use which encourage > participation in > lifetime-protected cow-based agriculture, > 2) Establish lifestyle security to the > participants. > > > A little editing done on the following. Comments > Please. > > WHAT > The ISKCON Rural Development Plan is to follow the > sructure of a mainstream > Sustainability Development Plan. Sustainability > development plans are used across the range > of civil society - in Governments, Non-governmental > Organisations (NGOs) and in Business. > They have a logical structure that is not only easy > to follow > but also easy to translate > from a solely ISKCON concern into a more > secular concern. > The structure of the ISKCON Rural Development Plan > as > a Sustainable Development Plan is > as follows: > 1) It is to be Sustainable, therefore it must > balance > environmental, social and economic land-use > issues as part of the spiritual instructions > outlined > by Srila Prabhupada; > 2) It is to follow a development process delineating > the > starting position we are in (A), the end > result we want to see (Z), and the means to get from > A > to Z; > 3) It is to outline a coherent and concise Vision > backed up with timely and practicable > Mission Statements with their subsequent detailed > Action Plans. > > I made some changes here. Comments please.> > Vision: > The Vision is to establish ISKCON farms which: > 1) Manage according to > established sustainable principles and practices of > land use which encourage > participation in lifetime-protected cow-based > agriculture and > 2) Provide lifestyle security to the farmers. > > > > The following I am finding a bit confusing. One > thing is the audit. If I am > understanding correctly this would involve getting > reports from ISKCON > farms answering some questions that we need to know > the answers to. > Reporting within ISKCON is historically extremely > irresponsible. I just came > across a letter form Srila Prabhupad dated 1970 in > which he expresses his > disappointment with the GBC in not reporting to him > as he instructed them to > do. It will be very difficult to get a proper audit > of all the farms. Even > extending it to the end of 2002 will not change > things because managemnet is > always changing, etc., etc. How to handle this? This > needs to be discussed > before we go forward. We can make adjustments to the > development Plan for > our purposes or needs. Also if the above is all > right as it is. My thoughts > are in reaction to the following paragraph. > > > The Vision of the ISKCON Rural Development Plan > > clearly states the goal that the plan seeks > > to achieve. To outline specific Mission Statements > to > > attain to this Vision it is necessary to > > delineate what are the desired characteristics of > the > > type of land use, participation and security > > that the vision outlines. By observing the present > > state of development in ISKCON farms plus > > observing Indian rural life with the eyes of the > > teachings of Srila Prabhupada it is possible to > > obtain an A and a Z. A simple general audit of > said > > farms according to environmental, social > > and economic criteria in conjunction with the type > of > > land use, participation and security that > > the vision outlines will then clearly show the > > differences. It will then be possible to develop a > > sliding scale, an A to Z, that ISKCON farms can > then > > compare themselves to and between, > > using the scale as a benchmark to attain to, plus > > identifying some as best-practice farms from > > which practices can be adopted. > > Your servant, > Chyadevi > > > > > > NEW from GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month. http://geocities./ps/info1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2001 Report Share Posted October 7, 2001 Dear Mark and Prabhus, PAMHO. AGTSP. I see what you are saying about the preliminary statement being one paragraph so I have adjusted it. So we have the WHY, WHAT,VISION WHY To reinvigorate ISKCON farm communities in accordance with the wishes of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, the ISKCON Ministry of Cow Protection and Agriculture presents a Rural Development Plan to establish sustainable principles and practices of land use that encourage participation in lifetime-protected cow-based agriculture and provides lifestyle security for the participants. > WHAT The ISKCON Rural Development Plan is to follow the structure of a mainstream Sustainability Development Plan. Sustainability development plans are used across the range of civil society - in Governments, Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs) and in Business. They have a logical structure that is not only easy to follow but also easy to translate from a solely ISKCON concern into a more secular concern. The structure of the ISKCON Rural Development Plan as a Sustainable Development Plan is as follows: 1) It is to be Sustainable, therefore it must balance environmental, social and economic land-use issues as part of the spiritual instructions outlined by Srila Prabhupada; 2) It is to follow a development process delineating the starting position we are in (A), the end result we want to see (Z), and the means to get from A to Z; 3) It is to outline a coherent and concise Vision backed up with timely and practicable Mission Statements with their subsequent detailed Action Plans. VISION The Vision is to establish ISKCON farms that manage according to established sustainable principles and practices of land use that encourage participation in lifetime-protected cow-based agriculture and provide lifestyle security for the farmers. >The bottom-up, meaning each and > every farm, would see a clear development process, > varied models to adopt to succeed, and would in > themselves be inspired to adapt to and adopt various > practices that are being shown. This has been the idea. The idea is to inspire in this case, this is not a case of enforcing even if the assets were there to do so. When this passes as ISKCON Law a devotee can bring it to his/her authorities and say I'd like to dothis please facilitate, it is ISKCON Law. > The first step then would be to create the statistical > framework and then for a generalised audit, based on > the framework, of present farms via the participants > on the conference. This would then give a generalised > picture of our starting point(s) - A (B,C). Please suggest something. > > NB. I hope to have a web site up soon to post our > up-dated versions. As Chayadevi is the chairperson, I > suggest she has the password. > > Mark > That is impressive. Your servant, Chaydevi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2001 Report Share Posted October 7, 2001 Dear all, PAMHO. AGTSP. First, thankyou Chayadevi for your encouragement. Second, it would be nice to have more of the cow conference devotees put there piece forward. In my case, I am presently unemployed in the UK with loads of time on my hands and a body of knowledge, skills and ideas that I have been wanting to work upon for a long time. So please forgive my excessiveness in aiding in the formation of the RDP. But I would like more critical participation from others involved here to offset my input. >From Chayadevi, > I see what you are saying about the preliminary > statement being one > paragraph so I have adjusted it. > So we have the WHY, WHAT,VISION > > WHY > To reinvigorate ISKCON farm communities in > accordance > with the wishes of His > Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, > the > ISKCON Ministry of Cow > Protection and Agriculture presents a Rural > Development Plan to establish sustainable > principles and practices of land use that encourage > participation in > lifetime-protected cow-based agriculture > and provides lifestyle security for the > participants. > > > WHAT > The ISKCON Rural Development Plan is to follow the > structure of a mainstream > Sustainability Development Plan. Sustainability > development plans are used across the range > of civil society - in Governments, Non-governmental > Organizations (NGOs) and in Business. > They have a logical structure that is not only easy > to follow > but also easy to translate from a solely ISKCON > concern into a more > secular concern. The structure of the ISKCON Rural > Development Plan as > a Sustainable Development Plan is as follows: > 1) It is to be Sustainable, therefore it must > balance > environmental, social and economic land-use > issues as part of the spiritual instructions > outlined > by Srila Prabhupada; > 2) It is to follow a development process delineating > the > starting position we are in (A), the end > result we want to see (Z), and the means to get from > A > to Z; > 3) It is to outline a coherent and concise Vision > backed up with timely and practicable > Mission Statements with their subsequent detailed > Action Plans. > > > VISION > The Vision is to establish ISKCON farms that manage > according to established > sustainable principles and practices of land use > that encourage > participation in lifetime-protected cow-based > agriculture and provide > lifestyle security for the farmers. > >The bottom-up, meaning each and > > every farm, would see a clear development process, > > varied models to adopt to succeed, and would in > > themselves be inspired to adapt to and adopt > various > > practices that are being shown. > > This has been the idea. The idea is to inspire in > this case, this is not a > case of enforcing even if the assets were there to > do so. When this passes > as ISKCON Law a devotee can bring it to his/her > authorities and say I'd like > to do this please facilitate, it is ISKCON Law. > > > The first step then would be to create the > statistical > > framework and then for a generalised audit, based > on > > the framework, of present farms via the > participants > > on the conference. This would then give a > generalised > > picture of our starting point(s) - A (B,C). > > Please suggest something. The three criteria are environmental (specifically land use principles and practices of lifetime-protected cow-based agriculture), social (specifically supply-side production (the farmer) and demand-side consumption (the consumer)), and economic (specifically short-term and long-term viablity of both the system and in particular the workers to achieve lifestyle remuneration). During the last few months we have had a reasonable amount of information shared about these criteria on this conference. I am sure for the past N years you have had much more. We do not need to have a wide and detailed audit of all ISKCON farms, we should work with the devotees on this conference to audit there farms and therefore start the A,B,C scale to find best practices and benchmark criteria. This I don't feel will be problematic. The first step though, as I see it, is to get the framework agreed upon, which means finding specific qualities within the above env, soc, econ criteria, quantifying them and observing their interactions thus giving each criteria a different waiting. For example, shown below is a list of detailed criteria, but which are the most important criteria? Is it production per year, profit, workers employed, staff remuneration, amount of cows and oxen, amount of working cows and oxen, amount of milk produced, price of milk and ox-powered-derived crops, amount of production donated to the dieties, the percent of forest cover, the amount of land owned or rented, the amount of grant aid given by public or charitable purse, the amount of funds secured in the land trust? So many criteria, so many differences of importance. If we go down the development road that is being suggested then the above, finding the criteria to place in a weighted framework, will be much of our work. My suggestions, though highly incomplete and unstructured: Environmental: Land use principles and practices of lifetime-protected cow-based agriculture - initial work outlined in Standards. Major work to look at - increasing production and productivity in terms of land and cow/ox. Land - to use land in a sustainable form that will in the long term increase fertility and bio-diversity, whilst at the same time producing for the short and longterm needs of the participants. Key issues beyond the Standards - agroforestry, agro-ecology, permaculture (all basically the same thing), organic or biological farming, biodynamics, food quality, water resource management. Social: Supply-side production - the farmer. Means for the farmer to produce and manage land whilst earning a living. Key forms - working as self sufficient, CSA or in a stand-alone enterprise. Key issues - productivity per worker, skills, knowledge, ability, training, workers rights, remuneration, land security, health insurance, pensions, etc. Partnerships between CSAs, charities, public or enterprises - linking with existing organic farmers to form joint ventures. Demand-side consumption - linking the consumer to the producer via a market mechanism, either CSA or straight purchase. ISKCON should look at Temple and Restaurant Supported Agriculture (TSA & RSA), as that was most definately in Prabhupada's instructions, and also in the Standards. In fact the latter could lead CSA as it provides an 'incentive and subsidy' base for the intial experiments to be made in setting up a yearly cropping system. Economic - specifically short-term and long-term viablity of both the system and in particular the workers to achieve lifestyle remuneration. Assets, liabilities, cashflows, profits, losses, land trust endowments, pay structures, dividends, etc. Ratios between land (cows), labour and secured capital as backing. Complex formulae of present inputs and future returns - main example is breeding to mature herd (present gain, future liability) and forestry (present loss, future gain). Obviously, there is a lot of work to be done to create a simple audit framework to garner a sliding scale of development. Whilst many of us here may have real experience working the land, there may be few who have the development training to develop this system. I only have training with little experience of implimenting it. I am hoping Ananda Maya and others have what it takes. Otherwise and notwithstanding, I do not feel it a bad idea to seek funding to take our plan to a professional in Environmental Management Systems (ISO 14001) for analysis (I am hoping to start a masters in this in April). There are groups all over the place, who with lesser ambitions and plans seek and gain good funding for their work and pay well their employees. This should be the case here. Balahbadra Prabhu and others should never have to work as they do. We need to secure funding in the medium to long term and take this into the professional arena. Mark NEW from GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month. http://geocities./ps/info1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2001 Report Share Posted October 7, 2001 Dear all, PAMHO. AGTSP. First, thankyou Chayadevi for your encouragement. Second, it would be nice to have more of the cow conference devotees put there piece forward. In my case, I am presently unemployed in the UK with loads of time on my hands and a body of knowledge, skills and ideas that I have been wanting to work upon for a long time. So please forgive my excessiveness in aiding in the formation of the RDP. But I would like more critical participation from others involved here to offset my input. >From Chayadevi, > I see what you are saying about the preliminary > statement being one > paragraph so I have adjusted it. > So we have the WHY, WHAT,VISION > > WHY > To reinvigorate ISKCON farm communities in > accordance > with the wishes of His > Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, > the > ISKCON Ministry of Cow > Protection and Agriculture presents a Rural > Development Plan to establish sustainable > principles and practices of land use that encourage > participation in > lifetime-protected cow-based agriculture > and provides lifestyle security for the > participants. > > > WHAT > The ISKCON Rural Development Plan is to follow the > structure of a mainstream > Sustainability Development Plan. Sustainability > development plans are used across the range > of civil society - in Governments, Non-governmental > Organizations (NGOs) and in Business. > They have a logical structure that is not only easy > to follow > but also easy to translate from a solely ISKCON > concern into a more > secular concern. The structure of the ISKCON Rural > Development Plan as > a Sustainable Development Plan is as follows: > 1) It is to be Sustainable, therefore it must > balance > environmental, social and economic land-use > issues as part of the spiritual instructions > outlined > by Srila Prabhupada; > 2) It is to follow a development process delineating > the > starting position we are in (A), the end > result we want to see (Z), and the means to get from > A > to Z; > 3) It is to outline a coherent and concise Vision > backed up with timely and practicable > Mission Statements with their subsequent detailed > Action Plans. > > > VISION > The Vision is to establish ISKCON farms that manage > according to established > sustainable principles and practices of land use > that encourage > participation in lifetime-protected cow-based > agriculture and provide > lifestyle security for the farmers. > >The bottom-up, meaning each and > > every farm, would see a clear development process, > > varied models to adopt to succeed, and would in > > themselves be inspired to adapt to and adopt > various > > practices that are being shown. > > This has been the idea. The idea is to inspire in > this case, this is not a > case of enforcing even if the assets were there to > do so. When this passes > as ISKCON Law a devotee can bring it to his/her > authorities and say I'd like > to do this please facilitate, it is ISKCON Law. > > > The first step then would be to create the > statistical > > framework and then for a generalised audit, based > on > > the framework, of present farms via the > participants > > on the conference. This would then give a > generalised > > picture of our starting point(s) - A (B,C). > > Please suggest something. The three criteria are environmental (specifically land use principles and practices of lifetime-protected cow-based agriculture), social (specifically supply-side production (the farmer) and demand-side consumption (the consumer)), and economic (specifically short-term and long-term viablity of both the system and in particular the workers to achieve lifestyle remuneration). During the last few months we have had a reasonable amount of information shared about these criteria on this conference. I am sure for the past N years you have had much more. We do not need to have a wide and detailed audit of all ISKCON farms, we should work with the devotees on this conference to audit there farms and therefore start the A,B,C scale to find best practices and benchmark criteria. This I don't feel will be problematic. The first step though, as I see it, is to get the framework agreed upon, which means finding specific qualities within the above env, soc, econ criteria, quantifying them and observing their interactions thus giving each criteria a different waiting. For example, shown below is a list of detailed criteria, but which are the most important criteria? Is it production per year, profit, workers employed, staff remuneration, amount of cows and oxen, amount of working cows and oxen, amount of milk produced, price of milk and ox-powered-derived crops, amount of production donated to the dieties, the percent of forest cover, the amount of land owned or rented, the amount of grant aid given by public or charitable purse, the amount of funds secured in the land trust? So many criteria, so many differences of importance. If we go down the development road that is being suggested then the above, finding the criteria to place in a weighted framework, will be much of our work. My suggestions, though highly incomplete and unstructured: Environmental: Land use principles and practices of lifetime-protected cow-based agriculture - initial work outlined in Standards. Major work to look at - increasing production and productivity in terms of land and cow/ox. Land - to use land in a sustainable form that will in the long term increase fertility and bio-diversity, whilst at the same time producing for the short and longterm needs of the participants. Key issues beyond the Standards - agroforestry, agro-ecology, permaculture (all basically the same thing), organic or biological farming, biodynamics, food quality, water resource management. Social: Supply-side production - the farmer. Means for the farmer to produce and manage land whilst earning a living. Key forms - working as self sufficient, CSA or in a stand-alone enterprise. Key issues - productivity per worker, skills, knowledge, ability, training, workers rights, remuneration, land security, health insurance, pensions, etc. Partnerships between CSAs, charities, public or enterprises - linking with existing organic farmers to form joint ventures. Demand-side consumption - linking the consumer to the producer via a market mechanism, either CSA or straight purchase. ISKCON should look at Temple and Restaurant Supported Agriculture (TSA & RSA), as that was most definately in Prabhupada's instructions, and also in the Standards. In fact the latter could lead CSA as it provides an 'incentive and subsidy' base for the intial experiments to be made in setting up a yearly cropping system. Economic - specifically short-term and long-term viablity of both the system and in particular the workers to achieve lifestyle remuneration. Assets, liabilities, cashflows, profits, losses, land trust endowments, pay structures, dividends, etc. Ratios between land (cows), labour and secured capital as backing. Complex formulae of present inputs and future returns - main example is breeding to mature herd (present gain, future liability) and forestry (present loss, future gain). Obviously, there is a lot of work to be done to create a simple audit framework to garner a sliding scale of development. Whilst many of us here may have real experience working the land, there may be few who have the development training to develop this system. I only have training with little experience of implimenting it. I am hoping Ananda Maya and others have what it takes. Otherwise and notwithstanding, I do not feel it a bad idea to seek funding to take our plan to a professional in Environmental Management Systems (ISO 14001) for analysis (I am hoping to start a masters in this in April). There are groups all over the place, who with lesser ambitions and plans seek and gain good funding for their work and pay well their employees. This should be the case here. Balahbadra Prabhu and others should never have to work as they do. We need to secure funding in the medium to long term and take this into the professional arena. Mark NEW from GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month. http://geocities./ps/info1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 9, 2001 Report Share Posted October 9, 2001 The word 'lifestyle' is, I also feel, a bit out of place. At some point we may need to reconsider. The words 'security of tenure' although rather legal and perhaps a bit old fashioned is clear. ys syam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 9, 2001 Report Share Posted October 9, 2001 I am ok with how we are going so far. syam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 12, 2001 Report Share Posted October 12, 2001 Haribol prabhus, pamho agtsp Before we even look at the difficulty of getting an audit done, we mustlook at the audit itself. What exactly is the information we need to know. It must be clear. So the social factors need to be clarified, is it merely a head count, is it a profiling or is it to forecast expected growth patterns. The economic has to be looked at from several different angles, present economic status of ISKCON the organisation, and ISKCON membership, then the general economic climate of regional concepts. Further you can have the overall economic climate locally, and then the global implications. So it's a very very broad subject matter. Sustainability is another issue. What is a sustainable level of development - needs discussion as too does the level of 'security' talked about. This again can be subjective. So maybe before we build in all these generalised terms, lets look at the reality and the practice history. Maybe what we need in place by the end of the year is an area profile to incorporate local/regional factors as agreed upon. If one person in each ISKCON owned property took responsibility it would still be hard, but the nearest to complete as we can get. Also this does not account for non ISKCON owned but ajoining and non ajoining properties of full time devotees, aspiring devotees etc. Therefore I repeat my warning that we should make this plan realistic for ISKCON first, taking what works from the externals, rejecting what doesn't or at least examining why it doesn't and then rejecting if necessary, and then adopting a plan for 'our community' in the widest possible sense. Then when we have something that right for us, we can use it, and hopefully use it as a model of practice for externals. My appologies to any who feel my language is non-inclusive, but I am merely trying to identify that some levels of boundaries exist, although there have been various suggestions from members on those boundaries. No offense intended. Area profiling at this stage would be more beneficial possibly leading to a full, adopted and approved audit for our needs. ys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.