Guest guest Posted January 10, 2002 Report Share Posted January 10, 2002 What I see here is basically the same as recommeded, permitted, Not allowed-just different names. 100% = recommended, 50%= permitted, 0% = Not Allowed For each: Environmental, Social, Economic there are these 3 categories. That is how we did the Standards. Then according to what describes these categories of measurement there is a description of waht that is. You said you wanted to have another shot at principles. These categories were already understood. What's the new news? GUIDELINES Enviromental Recommended Permitted Not Allowed Perhaps practices could appear like this: Environmental Recommended 1.Description 1 Practice 2.Description 2.Practice - markjon chatburn <protection_farms > Cow (Protection and related issues) <Cow (AT) pamho (DOT) net> Wednesday, January 09, 2002 6:28 PM VRDG, another shot at principles > Prabhus, > > I feel like trying another shot at principles, as > according to the structure we have we have now gone > from Why to What to How, presently examining Env, Soc, > and Econ in a sustainability plan for rural farm > communities. According to What we have "sustainable > land use principles and practices". So before we get > to practices, which are management tools set out to > achieve the principles, then we need guiding > principles. New ideas below. > > Environmental Principle : Land Fertility > > Developmental measuring scale : 0% = 1) extreme barren > land, 2) moderate @ 50%? = high forest thicket, 3) > moderate @ 50%? = no land, as food imported from > others not in the rural community cow protection > system; > 100% = optimised (in conjunction with social needs and > hectares needed) permacultural cornacopia, with grain > and pasture silvo-pastoral and -arable agroforests. > > Social Principle : Meeting human needs > > Developmental measuring scale : 0% = extreme 1) > absolute minimum (physical death from starvation, > sleep deprivation, no housing, no medicines, no body > maintaining education), extreme 2) absolute maximum > (physical death from glutony, excess sleep, too much > wealth (housing, sex, weaponary), bodily > self-gratificary education), moderate 3) @ 50%? = > eating, sleeping, mating and defending well, but > education forms atheistic ways and/or lives a type of > Star Treck exisance in metal society living of > hydroponic food!!; > 100% = optimised (in conjunction with on-land living > and land's needs) = eating, sleeping, mating, > defending and educating to spiritual satisfaction > (Krsna Consciousness) > > Economic Principle : Utility (is the principle) > Developmental measuring scale : 0% = All Export > Oriented production; 100% = optimised balance between > primarily Import Substitution Production (self > suficiency) and needed trade (Export Oriented > production) > > > With these principles, derived from Prabhupada, 0% > should always represent the hellish extremes, whether > lack of or excess of, 50%? a moderate satisfaction, > and 100% should represent the balanced whole of OM > Purnam, the best reflection of the spiritual worlds > that we can deliver on this planet. > > The beauty about establishing principles with > developmental scales is then that practices can be > devised which show progress. It may be that a > management practice will lower one principle and raise > another one, and that will be a management desicion > based on priorities laid out in Action Plans. > > For example, CSA is mostly export orientated but it > also increases self sufficiency, and is better than no > land, no production. > > Again, I present the above for discussion, I do not > say it is right. But for developmental guidlines there > needs to be a line, a scale, of development to show, > which should be based on clear principles, measurable, > coherent and comprehensive across the globe. The above > is very similar to what I presented before but with > the economic aspect changing (as I was not happy with > it due to lack of a development line) to EO or IS - > Export Oriented or Import Substituted, which are two > models of economics. > > Any responses? > > Mark > > > > Send FREE video emails in Mail! > http://promo./videomail/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2002 Report Share Posted January 10, 2002 Prabhus, > What I see here is basically the same as recommeded, > permitted, Not allowed-just different names. 100% = recommended, 50%= permitted, 0% = Not Allowed > For each: Environmental, Social, Economic there are > these 3 categories. That is how we did the Standards. Yes, that is the case as I see it too. But you have only 3 categories wheras 0 to 100% has 100 categories (101 to be precise), it is a sliding scale which can be measured and show progress. It is like having 3 thermometers with the mercury going from the cold chill of hellish life at 0% to the warmth of spirtual life at 100%. It may prove more complicated than the 3 categories but my idea was to have somesort of mathematical measurement to show progress by. Or one could go from 3 categories to 10, as in tenths, to show a greater radiation between fulfilling the three principles. > You said you wanted to have another shot at > principles. These categories > were already understood. What's the new news? The environmental and sociological stayed the same but had an easier way of measuring the scale. The new news was the change to economy principles so: Economic Principle : Utility (is the principle) Developmental measuring scale : 0% = All Export Oriented (market economy) production; 100% = optimised balance between primarily Import Substitution Production (self suficiency) and needed trade (market economics) > GUIDELINES > > Enviromental > Recommended > Permitted > Not Allowed > Perhaps practices could appear like this: > > Environmental > Recommended > 1.Description > 1 Practice > 2.Description > 2.Practice > I was thinking more like this: Economic Recommended Principle: 100% = optimised balance between primarily self suficiency and needed trade (market economics) Practice: 100% = (Description of exchanges within the system (self sufficiency) and without of the system (trade)). Permitted Principle: 50% = balance weighted in favour of market economy with some self suficiency Practice: (Description of exchanges within the system (self sufficiency) and without of the system (trade)). Eg CSA. Not Allowed Principle: 0% = All Export Oriented (market economy) production Practice: (Description of exchanges within the system (self sufficiency) and without of the system (trade)). Having just the 3 criteria of Recommended, Permitted and Not Allowed would limit how here the economic principle of utility can be measured according to the sliding scale of pure export orientation (market economy) to pure Import substitution (self sufficiency). Again, I am thinking it may be possible that a mathematic formula can be arrived at within the three categories of env, soc, econ so that each farm can measure themselves up to them and then see how management practices can raise their standards binging them up the scale. This is a common development format, though so is the way you propose. Mark > > Environmental Principle : Land Fertility > > > > Developmental measuring scale : 0% = 1) extreme > barren > > land, 2) moderate @ 50%? = high forest thicket, 3) > > moderate @ 50%? = no land, as food imported from > > others not in the rural community cow protection > > system; > > 100% = optimised (in conjunction with social needs > and > > hectares needed) permacultural cornacopia, with > grain > > and pasture silvo-pastoral and -arable > agroforests. > > > > Social Principle : Meeting human needs > > > > Developmental measuring scale : 0% = extreme 1) > > absolute minimum (physical death from starvation, > > sleep deprivation, no housing, no medicines, no > body > > maintaining education), extreme 2) absolute > maximum > > (physical death from glutony, excess sleep, too > much > > wealth (housing, sex, weaponary), bodily > > self-gratificary education), moderate 3) @ 50%? = > > eating, sleeping, mating and defending well, but > > education forms atheistic ways and/or lives a type > of > > Star Treck exisance in metal society living of > > hydroponic food!!; > > 100% = optimised (in conjunction with on-land > living > > and land's needs) = eating, sleeping, mating, > > defending and educating to spiritual satisfaction > > (Krsna Consciousness) > > > > Economic Principle : Utility (is the principle) > > Developmental measuring scale : 0% = All Export > > Oriented production; 100% = optimised balance > between > > primarily Import Substitution Production (self > > suficiency) and needed trade (Export Oriented > > production) > > > > > > With these principles, derived from Prabhupada, 0% > > should always represent the hellish extremes, > whether > > lack of or excess of, 50%? a moderate > satisfaction, > > and 100% should represent the balanced whole of OM > > Purnam, the best reflection of the spiritual > worlds > > that we can deliver on this planet. > > > > The beauty about establishing principles with > > developmental scales is then that practices can be > > devised which show progress. It may be that a > > management practice will lower one principle and > raise > > another one, and that will be a management > desicion > > based on priorities laid out in Action Plans. > > > > For example, CSA is mostly export orientated but > it > > also increases self sufficiency, and is better > than no > > land, no production. > > > > Again, I present the above for discussion, I do > not > > say it is right. But for developmental guidlines > there > > needs to be a line, a scale, of development to > show, > > which should be based on clear principles, > measurable, > > coherent and comprehensive across the globe. The > above > > is very similar to what I presented before but > with > > the economic aspect changing (as I was not happy > with > > it due to lack of a development line) to EO or IS > - > > Export Oriented or Import Substituted, which are > two > > models of economics. > > > > Any responses? > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > Send FREE video emails in Mail! > > http://promo./videomail/ > Send FREE video emails in Mail! http://promo./videomail/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2002 Report Share Posted January 11, 2002 > > > > I was thinking more like this: > > Economic > > Recommended > > Principle: 100% = optimised balance between primarily > self suficiency and needed trade (market economics) > > Practice: 100% = (Description of exchanges within the > system (self sufficiency) and without of the system > (trade)). > > Permitted > > Principle: 50% = balance weighted in favour of market > economy with some self suficiency > > Practice: (Description of exchanges within the system > (self sufficiency) and without of the system (trade)). > Eg CSA. > > Not Allowed > > Principle: 0% = All Export Oriented (market economy) > production > > Practice: (Description of exchanges within the system > (self sufficiency) and without of the system (trade)). > I like this. I think this could work. This would be understandable by most people. We want something practical and able to be understood by the average person. We see this as a plan for the PEOPLE not for a bunch of armchair philosophers who like to deal with erudite terms. > Having just the 3 criteria of Recommended, Permitted > and Not Allowed would limit how here the economic > principle of utility can be measured according to the > sliding scale of pure export orientation (market > economy) to pure Import substitution (self > sufficiency). I think it will give enough idea. Any other comments? 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.