你想用你的青春做什么

小媚@ARENA

2007年大陆热播的32集电视剧《奋斗》讲述的是一群刚刚大学毕业的年轻人“进入”社会“打滚”的故事。里面到处充斥着他们的迷茫和想象。这里仅选取第三集里的几个片段来为当代中国大陆年轻人对幸福的定义做个注脚:

男主角陆涛对女朋友保证:我要工作,我要努力赚钱,我要带你去吃日本饭,我要给你买奔驰车,我要带你去巴黎!

不情不愿地会了从未谋面、从美国来大陆投资的亲生父亲,在看到他在一大群西装革履的么么分公司总经理前的霸气之后,陆涛一脸崇拜地说:可以啊!你就是人家说的那种成功人士对不?然后又问:你有没有几十亿美金?父亲想了想,回答:“恐怕没有。”儿子撇嘴:“那算不上有钱啊。”

父亲教育儿子:做生意靠凶狠。这是我的,这也是我的!

但陆涛不是没有梦想。当父亲问,你觉得你能干什么?他踌躇满志的回答:我觉得,只要我愿意,什么都能干!

父:你想用你的青春做什么?

子:在北京建一个艺术家村(陆涛在大学学的是工程建筑)……各种思想、各类人都在此汇聚……艺术是对未来和完美的想象。我觉得中国需要这些。

父:很好的理想,很坏的现实。

子:我会找到工作的。

父亲沉思片刻,说:你知道什么是物质主义吗?就是,人们更愿意重复地把房间变大,把汽车的品牌变得更高级,把房间填满各种实用的东西。生活的目的不是情感,而是本能和欲望。要实现你的理想,你得幸运地碰上一个时代,那个时代的人生活单调乏味,他们对一般性的成功不太关心,而对自我发现感兴趣。那个时候人们的目光才会转向艺术。但现在不是时候。

作为旧思想代表的是继父。被陆涛视为“活在另一个时代”的书呆子一个。听说陆涛要去亲生父亲的房地产公司工作,打头第一个问题是:你喜欢吗?——然而现在有多少人会问这个问题?他们最关心的都是:一个月工资多少?有没有五险一金?

接着当他知道那个刚成立的房地产公司五证没全就开始运作,便激动起来:你们这么干是不行的!儿子反唇相讥:你知不知道人家管你们这种人叫什么?小鬼难缠!父亲坚决不帮他们过证件关,义正言辞地说:最后出问题倒霉的都是老百姓和业主!中国的老百姓,一辈子攒那么多钱容易么?我看了那么多你知道吗?!儿子也火了:我知道!我更知道咱们家十几年没变样!刘叔叔家新房你看了吗?新车你看了吗?!

生父说的是,“我可以使你的奋斗更有效率。”而继父说,“权利是国家的,良心是自己的。”

 

这样的桥段、这样的选择、这样的思维,并不仅仅是在小说或电视剧里进行;而在现实发生。在2010年的《广州女大学生价值观调查红皮书》里,有这么几个数据:

“38.4%女大学生认同“嫁碗”(嫁铁饭碗)行为并有兴趣尝试;55.1%表示理解,但不会去尝试,6%难以接受。

“对于富二代,59.2%的女大学生愿意嫁,理由是可少奋斗很多年,40.2%不愿意嫁。

“在哪些因素能改变人生的选项中,37.7%的女大学生选择人脉、其次是运气(25.7%)、婚姻(22.7%)、成绩(12.6%),排在最后的是容貌,仅为1.3%。[1]

全国最高学府北京大学,自2006年起就开设新生入学就业指导的服务,也就是说,新生刚踏进校门,就开始想着怎么出去,出去了怎么“混”社会。当我仍在南京大学读书时,即使是这所号称全国排名前五的高等学府,它的大门也挡不住横流的物欲。看一个专业好不好,不是看师资力量,不是看教育水准,或者学生的独立思考能力、批判能力;而是以毕业就业率来衡量。大学四年级才刚开始的时候,积极进取的学生们已经开始西装革履地出席各大面试场合及教授面试技巧的讲座;到了临近毕业时,四有好青年就应该工作有了着落并且开始庆祝毕业了。走在路上,碰见熟人的第一句话就是,“你是考研,出国,还是找工作?”好像人生只剩下了这几个选择。工作的优劣衡量标准是工资水平、薪金待遇,而非个人兴趣。至于人生意义,则成了一个笑话,是人生不可承受之轻。

我们是怎么了?从什么开始,我们把幸福等同于物质财富?又是为什么,我们在天下熙熙皆为利来,天下攘攘皆为利往的大军中盲目前行,而从不停下自己纷忙的脚步,问自己究竟在做些什么,追求些什么,为什么而奋斗?

为了尝试回答以上疑问,离不开对我们所处社会脉络的分析。

首先,1993至1994年的经济危机,迫使“政府在严重的财政赤字压力下大幅度从医疗和教育等公共事业领域退出”[2]。“改革之前中国的大多数公共服务都是由事业单位提供,它们是依附于各级政府的公立机构,包括学校、医院、农业技术推广站、文化中心等。……但随着财政赤字的增大,……政府应该承担的功能萎缩,甚至退出这些公共部门。……公共服务部门也竞相提供收费服务。于是,城乡社会开支和公共部门服务成本就越来越多地由市民和农民承担了。”[3]比如,“在‘人民教育人民办’的口号下,本应为公共品的基础教育,也因改革之名而由老百姓里埋单了。……1996年开始实施医疗保障体制改革,但结果是无论在城市还是乡村,医疗保险的覆盖面减少,个人支付医疗费用的比例上升。[4]

到了1998年,时任国家总理朱镕基宣布,“停止福利分房,住房分配一律改为商品化[5]”,目的是,“住房的建设将要成为中国经济新的增长点,……我们必须把现行的福利分房政策改为货币化、商品化的住房改革,让人民群众自己买房子[6]。”

这些改变意味着什么?意味着,从现在开始,不再靠集体,“一切要靠自己”。 “爱拼才会赢”,“弱肉强食”,“胜者为王,败者寇”的竞争逻辑开始扎根,竞争意识教育从娃娃开始抓起,利己主义、实用主义——最好我们不要把它冠以“主义”的帽子,否则显得太冠冕堂皇——遍地吃香。理想已死,被现实扼杀;梦已醒,被现实敲醒。鲁迅先生说的那一铁皮屋子里的人醒来了么?或者,不过是换到一个大点儿的钢筋水泥屋,仰头看着玻璃天花板外的花花世界,做着更大一点儿的白日梦?

 

接着,我们被告知,“中国的崛起离不开全球化;全球化也离不开中国”。“同期的对外经济贸易部文件正式提出‘走出去战略’[7]”,“中国政策界主流积极认同经济全球化,加快了加入全球贸易组织的谈判[8]”。

全球化意味着什么?它被等同于普世价值,是不可抵挡的潮流,是双赢局面;全球分工下的我们,利用所谓廉价劳动力的优势,扮演了其中的一个“不可或缺”的角色。然而出卖了身体,劳动人民们用血汗换来的不是丰衣足食,而是承担了被所谓发达国家、被既得利益集团转嫁来的成本。当富裕阶层在街头、在各式传媒耀武扬威地炫富时,处于社会底层的人民有理由采取仰望的姿态,以为是自己不够聪明、不够努力、不够漂亮才过不上好日子;必定要更加勤劳勤俭勤奋才能发家,而且终有一日能“像他们一样”。

这里说的“他们”,有本国的新贵,但更多的是西方“极乐”世界的模范富豪——或者说,“符号”,已然象征着一种美好的生活方式,一种“先进”的生活品味。我们向西方看齐,向西方中被认为是最先进的美利坚合众国看齐。“言必称美国”,我们沉浸在美剧、美国产品、美国中产价值、美国生活方式中乐不思蜀。

 

被商品化了的公共品和人

1988年的《中华人民共和国宪法》(修正案)规定‘土地的使用权可以依照法律的规定转让’,土地的商品属性由此确立。(温铁军等,2013:147)跨国粮农企业由此可以进入中国市场,把中国农民变成农业工人、现代农奴,把农民和他的土地割裂开来,我把它理解为发生在金融资本时代的农民异化。

本为公共品的住房也商品化了,成了“商品房”;有钱的炒房,没钱的成房奴。资本主义不仅剥削人的剩余价值,而是剥削人的生命。何以见得?举一个身边人为例,我的哥哥。大学毕业后在厦门工作已三四年,在一家通讯公司上班,和无数年轻人一样,在大城市买房无望,自己租房住。可是在领着女朋友回家见过父母后,父母开始催他在厦门找房子,开始“供”。理由是,反正你俩早晚都得买,现在用租房的钱来供以后终将属于自己的房子,不是比较划算吗?首期付不起,不要紧,父母可以帮你们先垫着。可是我哥哥总是搪塞而过,坚持租着那个“不划算”的屋子。后来他才告诉我原因。因为,哥哥说,买了一个房子,等于卖了自己的一辈子啊。意思就是说,我就得在这个地方住下去了,就得在这个所谓稳定的工作里做下去了;生活不可能再有其它的可能了。就为了每个月都必须缴上的那一笔房贷。

教育、医疗商品化,导致的是“医疗高收费、药品高回扣,教育乱收费、乱集资和加重学生负担[9]”,并“彻底腐蚀了相关知识分子群体[10]”。

被商品化的,不仅是以上提到的种种;我们的思想也被商品化了,我们成了商品化的人。我们把一切标上价格,我们就钱论事。我们论理不论人,论钱不论理。我们被告知生活由我们掌控,命运由我们创造。在这样的物欲横流、纸醉金迷的大环境里,为了过上如前所述的“美好”生活,我们要奋斗。为了幸福,我们要奋斗。可惜的是,幸福被等同于物质享受。我们必须重新定义幸福。这俩字不俗气,俗气的是我们,是我们把它搞得乌烟瘴气。我们要重新提幸福,重新提梦想,重新提未来。我们要看清自己所处的现实,看清自己所处的世界。同时回过头,看看我们曾经有过的梦。我们是年轻人,我们不轻易说,“好日子过去了,我们出生得太晚。”我们也不轻易说,“这是个琐碎的小时代;波涛汹涌激情澎湃的大时代已经过去了。”因为,我们身处资本主义的末世。生态、社会、人类的危机到处爆发,只不过是传媒的巧妙包装让我们训练有素、早已麻木。当你意识到自己不愿意成为这盘必输的棋局里的一枚棋子时,那就是时候跳出棋盘了。


[2] 温铁军等,《八次危机》,2013年,第140页

[3] 温铁军等,《八次危机》,2013年,第142页

[4] 温铁军等,《八次危机》,2013年,第143页

[5] 中国网,http://www.china.com.cn/news/txt/2008-12/11/content_16930712.htm

[6] 同上

[7] 温铁军等,《八次危机》,2013年,第137页

[8] 同上

[9] 温铁军等,《八次危机》,2013年,第142页

[10] 同上

The Permanent People’s Tribunal Session on Agrochemical Transnational Corporations

人民法庭與跨國公司的課責性

嘉辰@BIRDS

1984年12月3日,印度中部Bhopal發生農業化學藥劑工廠爆炸的事件,造成多重農藥外洩,汙染了當地居民、土地及生態,並直接造成近8000人死亡。然而真相調查或刑事審判始終闕如,受害者家屬與倖存者沒有獲得一個合理的交代;2001年美國法院宣判生產的Union Carbon India Limited 的七名前任員工有罪,然而Union Carbon公司(2001年遭Dow收購)卻擺脫和印度分公司的關係撇清責任。時至今日(2011/12/3-6),農藥行動網絡(Pesticide Action Network, PAN)邀請農藥跨國公司(Agrochemical Transnational Company)生產與使用的受害者與倖存者、關注長期農藥從研發到廢棄的各地環保團體、人權與監督組織、從事農藥相關研究的科學家與醫生、各國與在地農夫和律師等,召開針對農藥跨國公司的人民法庭(The Permanent People’s Tribunal Session on Agrochemical Transnational Corporations),訴求跨國公司的課責性以實踐對於受害者來說遲遲未到的正義。

剛到人民法庭會場時恨恍惚,雖然前次到班加羅爾跟著同屬BIRDS和CHETHANA網絡的Jacob參與當地籌辦單位的會議,但對於議題的認識還不深;所遇之對象不是來自菲律賓的維權律師、英國的養蜂人士、紐西蘭的科學家就是印度的運動者,他們真真切切地置身於農藥造成的公害與跨國公司的威脅中,而以證人或以網絡夥伴的身分在人民法庭占有一席之地;作為一個單純協助行政事務的旁觀者,除了聆聽來自四海五內的證詞並與BIRDS所在安德拉邦(Andhra Pradesh)的草根團體套近乎,更多的是從參與者身上思考跨國社會運動與運動者的意義。

許多是受害者的至親好友:一位巴拉圭的母親,家人一度食用遭鄰近Monsanto農藥[i]汙染的食物及再度吸入隨風偏移的農藥遭受毒害送醫,十一歲的Silvino Talavera不治死亡,她成為見證的倖存者;一位印度喀拉拉省的醫生,行醫之村落二十年來種植腰果並由直升機噴灑Bayer Endosulfan農藥,數千村民神經行為問題(Neurobehavioral problems)與生殖功能受影響(delayed sexual maturation in males),並新生兒先天性缺陷(birth defects)等等現象[ii],他是致力於解開謎題的受害者;一位巴西無地農民運動的農夫,與夥伴佔領Syngenta非法實驗基改作物的田地[iii],卻受到數十位保全開槍攻擊,數名夥伴受傷、一位當場死亡,他是堅持意志的運動者。

許多是從事相關研究的學者:一位美國柏克萊大學的教授,受Syngenta所託進行Atrazine農藥對青蛙的影響,事後因發現青蛙生育率下降甚至變性[iv],不願接受收買竄改數據或放棄研究發表,而持續遭受死亡威脅;一位塞內加爾的研究者,追溯過去各大農藥製造公司販賣及捐贈過量在其本國已遭禁之農藥至非洲,造成農藥過期、廢棄與堆積,至今估計仍有十萬噸遭禁的過期農藥散佈非洲未加處理或容器漸漸毀壞,不安全的儲藏環境使居民孩童健康遭受威脅。

許多是形形色色的當事人:一位安德拉邦的中學女孩,過去在農業化學藥劑跨國公司所有的棉花田工作,一天工作十二小時,日薪25盧比(台幣15元),從施肥拔草到噴灑農藥皆未給予任何防護工具;一位馬來西亞的女工,在棕梠油工廠工作超過二十五年,從開始負責噴灑農藥開始,皮膚遭受感染、眼睛模糊、掉指甲和流鼻血,長時間工作使沉重的護具過於炎熱,最後因全身皮膚感染而辭職;一位美國印第安納州的農夫,不肯採用Monsanto基改種子與簽署任何協議,而遭受汙名、禁止購買產品並活在作物遭受基改汙染的恐懼中,但也倖免於調查員隨時檢驗其田地的權利侵害;一位阿拉斯加的母親,透過影片告訴我們愛斯基摩的傳統飲食乃至於文化傳承與生活方式如何遭受尤洋流與風向帶來世界其他地方生產與使用的農藥污染而無以為繼被迫改變。

“TNCs should be accountable. They should not be above the law. ”她說, 不是就是這麼簡單嗎?

坐在現場,照理來說合該是字字血淚的故事,發表人往往卻是平鋪直敘—不需要情緒來添加已由研究和實際經驗佐證背書的論述。參與其中時時有些羞愧:出於無知—不清楚台灣農藥使用狀況與問題、不了解台灣在全球農藥生產與消費鏈上的角色、不知道任何處理農藥跨國公司人權侵害的組織團體,和其他參與者的交流往往聆聽多於分享,眼見其他年輕的運動者忙著影像紀錄、透過網路倡議、進行跨國串連運動積極和前輩討教經驗和智識,不禁覺得自己最初抱著單純與會心態未多加準備似乎有些浪費了。Jacob做為在地籌辦人把我介紹為他的實習生,但實際上無論是我所在的BIRDS或他所在的CHETHANA實際上都屬於草根性組織和PAN沒有直接往來;其他人聽我介紹自己入門非營利工作者的身分並將在印度待上十個月,紛紛給予過來人的意見:對Campaign有興趣要不要轉換組織阿? 何不讀法成為律師呢? 田野語言很重要吶,好好學泰盧固語吧;或相反地,找個可以用英語發揮所長的組織吧。不至於為此陷入自我懷疑,但這些意見卻實反映了我開展工作面臨的困境與反覆思考的問題。其一,目前參與的事務和台灣的關聯為何,與未來發展又如何可得;其二,專業技能對於國際社會運動/國際發展領域的必要/重要性;其三,面臨巨大的語言障礙,該是努力學習克服還是繞過尋找現有條件下的工作計畫;其四,所在組織運作與工作情況不如預期,該轉移目標或另求突破。

經由超過兩個月時間慢慢摸索,反覆嘗試、撞牆、退守和調整,我認為最大的考驗在於BIRDS屬於宗教性社會服務型的組織:提供地區基礎教育、健康、社會保險、農民培力與社區發展的服務,而其服務建構在現有資源,包括計畫資金、(學童)認養人和政府計畫,和人力條件之上。BIRDS眾人員慣於接待受訪者,如捐贈者、認養人和短期研究者,因此他們期待我如同過去的”拜訪者”有明確的工作進程,像進行義診與問卷研究,他們盡力滿足需求(殷情服務?)並(有些令人困擾地)預期我如同他們時不時自願地”略施小惠”予以回報。相對之下,我以為身為浩然夥伴和BIRDS之間是合作關係,經觀察認識了解其組織需求和(原先氣候變遷)計畫目標並設定可行工作方案。然由於內部疏於組織管理與溝通,我所希望反映或討論的礙於個別員工語言與工作文化,如同石沉大海。事後發現各人之間權責分明而我可能往往問題問錯了人,導致錯失潛在開展的機會。我至今的思考還在這盤旋,而其他的狀況,只能尋求契機各個突破、設定新的工作計畫或目標,並多諮詢前輩的意見了。

The Permanent People’s Tribunal Session on Agrochemical TNCs 25 minute video

[i] Glyphosate(Round-up Ready)被使用在Monsanto基因改造的RR soybeans

[ii] Final Report of The Investigation of Unusual Illnesses Allegedly Produced by Endosulfan Exposure in Padre Village

of Kasargod District (N.Kerala), National Institute of Occupational Health, 24th July 2002 http://endosulphanvictims.org/resources/NIOH-FinalReport.pdf

[iii] Brazilian land activist killed in dispute over experimental GM farm , The Independent, November 5, 2007

多采多姿的夏日工作

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

多采多姿的夏日工作

Ali @ LSx

自從Cleaner Air 4 Schools空氣汙染專案告一段落,六月起我參與了很多專案和活動,所負責的任務有大有小,這篇報告要來介紹這幾個月多采多姿(五花八門?)的工作內容:

1專案研究調查

如同其他LSx實習生,我的工作內容一大部分是搜尋專案有關的新聞、政策、數據、科技新知、可能的贊助來源。這些專案主題包含空氣汙染、水汙染、再生能源、永續交通等等。我們閱讀報告過濾資料,摘要重點交給專案負責人,作為她們撰寫投標報告或合作提案書的參考。

由於小學空氣汙染的專案將進一步擴展成為一個三年期的計畫,LSx積極洽尋有意願使用小學空氣污染操作手冊(toolkit)的行政區合作,我先發信接洽各行政區的空氣品質團隊Air Quality Team[1],確認相關負責人的名字和連繫資訊後,交給LSx行為變遷組的主管去洽談合作可行性,同時找尋可能的贊助單位。

七月初時,專案主管列出了大約十個有意願合作的行政區,要我和另一名工讀生進行更細緻的資料研究,例如該區的重要空汙點(air pollution hotspots)、近期空氣汙染數據(目前英國的五項空氣汙染物為:二氧化硫SO2、二氧化(NO2)、臭氧O3、懸浮微粒PM2.5及PM10,但最受重視的是與交通緊密相關的NO2與PM2.5/PM10)、空氣汙染監測站的位置、公部門的空氣品質改善行動計畫(Action Plan)、居民的交通使用情況(家戶擁有私家車的比率、使用大眾交通或開車的比例)等等。

 

2社區資訊建檔與製圖

永續排水處理系統Green Street @ Counters Creek專案中,LSx在西倫敦Counters Creek附近要挑選三個社區組織,一起合作培訓18名Champions。目前是初期洽談階段,我們經由網路搜尋和公部門引介,收集了當地30個以上的社區機構資料,建立檔案,包含項目有:組織類型(例如學校、企業、第三部門),成員人數、影響對象、關注的議題、連繫管道等等,並用Google Map或Power point中標示(mapping)各個機構,提供專案負責人評估適宜的合作對象,以及和有潛力的永續排水系統示範裝設點。

此外,另一個專案因應氣候變遷Opening Windows on Climate Change培訓計畫中,協力的社區組織散佈在六個不同的行政區,我們舉辦第一次活動時借用期中一個機構提供的免費活動空間,但是該地點比較偏遠,不好抵達,造成少數參與者找不到目的地遲到。活動結束後,我負責整理滿意度評估問卷和回饋意見,就有人建議改善活動地點,希望較靠近市中心,或是以分區域舉辦活動,後來我們決定把二十位參與者所隸屬的機構mapping製圖,以利後續舉辦活動的區位選擇。

 

3問卷資料輸入與校正

健康飲水Fit to Drink專案主要與東倫敦的穆斯林女性社區組織合作,以工作坊和有趣的活動,讓社區了解水資源的重要,鼓勵大家喝自來水tap water,避免使用瓶裝水bottled water造成的環境汙染。此專案已經接近尾聲,過去幾個月我並沒有實際參與執行工作。由於該組織不希望與男性工作人員互動,因此協助執行此專案的實習生都是女生。最近LSx大部分實習生剛好男生比較多,所以專案負責人多次派我去東倫敦的清真寺拿紙本問卷,回到辦公室後再與其他實習生把資料輸入電腦。資料輸入實在是無聊的差事,前前後後拿到三百多份問卷,必須要多人分攤工作量,才不會過於乏味或眼睛痠痛又打瞌睡。

由於這個專案歷時較長,不但換過專案負責人,參與活動執行和處理問卷的實習生也有好多位。初期基礎Baseline和後續追蹤follow-up的問卷設計皆有瑕疵,甚至網路問卷(LSx採用免費又容易操作的SurveyMonkey調查網站)和紙本問卷中有的問題內容不一致,除了一開始單純的資料輸入外,我還花了非常多的時間”收拾善後”,重整先前實習生輸入的資料,將200多份紙本編號,以便對應電腦裡的資料。我不得不說,雖然LSx非常強調成效評估Evaluation,但是從多次整理不同專案的問卷過程中,我發現不少問卷的設計和排版容易造成使用者誤讀,以及事後分析比較的困難,雖然大多數的數據仍是可靠的,但一定或多或少造成誤差,並且浪費了寶貴的人力和時間。

 

4 準備獎品、意外發現好資源

許多專案都需要參與者填寫問卷或評估表,LSx經常提供摸彩獎品作為誘因(incentive) 鼓勵他們填寫這些調查表。例如前陣子Cleaner Air 4 School,我們以問卷調查三個小學的家長們對空氣污染的認知以及他們的交通工具使用方式,獎品是一張倫敦交通卡Oyster Card含25英鎊儲值金,就是由我負責挑選幸運兒、購買獎品、寄給中獎者。最近我負責的Fit to Drink的問卷獎品則是著名景點倫敦眼London Eye摩天輪的門票四張(中獎人會得到二位成人與二位兒童票)。我原本覺得這是一項簡單輕鬆的小事,瀏覽London Eye官方網站票劵現種類很多,大多數都需要預先選定日期或時段場次,不符合LSx的需求(希望比較彈性地讓得獎人任意挑選日期場次使用)雖然有gift voucher,卻不能用網路訂購,必須透過電話,我打去語音分機轉來轉去,一直無法接到專人服務…

就當我苦惱不已時,忽然發現該網站Corporate Responsibility企業社會責任的項目中寫道:EDF London Eye每年提供上千張的門票給慈善機構,特別優先提供給靠近London Eye所在地的幾個行政區,包含LSx所在的Southwark 行政區!我抱著姑且一試的心態,在網路上填寫Charity Requests申請表,簡單介紹LSx工作內容並希望他們贊助彈性選日的四張門票作為社區的摸彩獎品。想不到五天後就收到EDF的慈善機構小組回覆,說他們樂意贊助且四張門票將於隔週寄達。我收到門票時真的很有成就感!雖然四張門票為LSx省下台幣三千元的開支,金額看似不高,但是將資訊分享給所有同事,未來其他專案也能多加善用此資源申請免費門票。

 

5綠化第三部門環境稽查

Greening the Third Sector綠化第三部門專案:繼去年底完成兩個環境稽查報告後,六月起我又參與了一項新的稽查工作。該機構是一個支援在地NGO培訓與發展的慈善團體,約有18名員工。第一步,我與同事前往機構所在地訪談環境稽查的承辦人員,了解他們目前在環境與永續發展的進展,以及未來想改善的方向。該機構在五年前已經成立綠色小組Green Team,提升員工對環境與永續的認知,並以實踐節能省碳的行動。該機構也在2012今年發布了環境政策Environmental Policy並修訂了機構交通政策Travel Policy,鼓勵員工要隨手關燈、節省用水用電避免浪費紙張、使用大眾交通工具。他們有意朝綠色採購Green Procurement方向努力,希望LSx進一步提供公平貿易或環境友善的產品,例如辦公室用量大的咖啡、茶、糖,以及清潔用品。兩次現場實際訪談與觀察外,該機構另提供相關報告與文件,例如綠色小組的開會議題、水電帳單,廢紙回收量的年度報告等等。

結至八月中尚有些重要數據還未拿到,因此稽查報告仍在初稿階段。我負責撰寫報告、找尋相關資料,也幫忙連繫協調,提醒承辦人員數據資料不足之處,以及請他釐清一些訪談中的疑惑。待初期報告完成後,我們將與該機構討論下一階段的行動方案Action Plan。

 

6. 行政支援與招募實習生

在LSx工作,除了協助專案執行,也固定支援辦公室的行政事務。包含每天分類郵件、整理洗碗機、每週檢查冰箱過期食品、照顧盆栽、處理廚餘和蚯蚓堆肥箱。最近這個月,我也幫忙整理舊檔案卷宗/舊照片、校正Maximizer客戶軟體系統資料。人事更迭的過程中,許多資訊經過數月或數年,已經變得混亂或過時不合用,需要修正、刪除、或重新建檔。這些整理工作並不困難,但非常繁瑣耗時,無法在短時間一次完成,也由於它們並非緊急或具時效性的專案,缺乏專人負責,以至於一拖再拖,延宕到後來變得難以收拾,整理起來加倍困難,讓人頭昏眼花。

六月底到七月間,有四位實習生陸續結束internship,或找到正職而提前離開LSx。七月初LSx開始招募實習生,但反應不如預期(通常報名踴躍,所以這情況頗讓人訝異,我們只能推測是年輕人都去看奧運或今年暑假倫敦活動特別多,所以他們暫時不想找工作!)近兩個月多來辦公室人力困窘,讓正職同事既忙碌又焦慮,大喊 We need more interns!八月初只剩下二位實習生,而他們一週只來2-3天。我負責在好幾個就業網站和大就業學布告欄註冊,張貼四名實習生的招募啟事:包含二位Projects intern支援專案研究和活動執行,一位Finance協助財務及一位communications管理通訊媒體(網站、電子報、刊物等等)。很幸運地,在八月中擴大宣傳後,人事助理收到許多申請表,並即刻安排面試,目前已經確認三名錄取者。主管們希望新的工讀生能盡快上任,以便我在返台參加浩然結訓以前,能夠將手邊的例行工作交接給他們。


[1] 倫敦的33個行政區(Borough)都有一個空氣品質團隊專責小組,他們通常隸屬於環境部門,或是廢棄物處理與汙染議題的單位。1997年起,英國法律規定,全國各行政區都必須監測區內的空氣品質,若有未達標準的區域,就要通報為空氣品質管理區(Air Quality Management Area, AQMA),其範圍可能是一條街、一個街廓、一個工業區,也可能大至涵括整個行政區(例近倫敦市中心的數個交通繁忙、空汙嚴重行政區,全區都是AQMA)。有AQMA的行政區,都要擬定行動計畫並持續監測空氣品質。詳細資訊參考環境食物與鄉村事務部門(Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affair, Defra)的AQMA網站http://aqma.defra.gov.uk/

Bubble Day – promoting sustainable travel to school

Bubble Day – promoting sustainable travel to school

Ali @ LSx

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Background

In January 2012, my colleague and I attended the “London Sustainable School Forum” (LSSF) and participated in the workshop group “Air Quality around school”. With other members from different NGOs and local authorities, our group generated the idea of “Bubble Day” which aimed to promote sustainable travel and improve air quality around schools.

Bubble Day was planned to be a long-term collaborative project; however, due to many reasons, it became more like a one-off small event, mainly carried out by few LSx staff and interns. This report will firstly explain the original plan of Bubble Day, and demonstrate the difficulties during the process. Finally the real implementation with achievement and evaluation will be illustrated.

 

The “big” original plan

Initial goal

Through a series of interesting activities, Bubble Day would empower the schools to raise awareness around air quality issues and furthermore to influence local environment and decision making

Initial plan

Originally the plan is to create a “Green corridor” linking four London Boroughs, from Croydon through Wandsworth to Westminster and Hackney. One school in each borough would be selected to participate in the plan. Pupils and staff would travel sustainably to schoolon Bubble Day and enjoy varies activities together.

The project would begin in January 2012 once one school from each borough of Wandsworth, Croydon, Westminster and Hackney has been identified. Schools will be given an information pack including an introductory assembly on monitoring air quality around their school over the next 6 months until June 2012, how air quality is linked to their mode of travel to school and why good quality air is important.

Meanwhile pupils need to work towards identifying a zone around their school – a clean air bubble that they want to be free of school traffic on Bubble day. Then they create a map marked a walking zone of 5, 10 and 15 minutes, a cycling zone of 1 kilometre and 2 kilometres and a “park and stride” Zone. The pupils have to send the information home to all parents explaining about bubble day. Pupils also need to engage the residents in the streets surrounding their school by explaining Bubble Day and what they hope to achieve and encourage these residents to leave their cars at home on this day.

On Bubble Day every child and their parent will be invited to travel sustainably to school to an event held in the playground – cycle skills, breakfast, goodies, celebration, air quality monitoring results etc. The street outside school will be closed for a street party to include residents as well as the school community.

Pupils will be capturing all of their progress through out by either filming or photographing key moments as they will be asked to present their findings at a celebration event at the GLA in July. There will also be an opportunity to link up on line with the other school participating in the project. To make the project sustainable it is hoped that the school will make a target to reduce pollution and particulates around their school for the following year and make this an annual event.

 

Be realistic: things changed

However, after few months, only two Boroughs were able to carry out the Bubble Day event: Corydon and Westminster. A team from Corydon visited LSx. They told us their thoughts about Bubble Day and we also shared our experiences of Cleaner Air 4 School project. However, it was more like information sharing instead of working together. The main reason of failing to implement the original collaborative project was the lack of funding and time[1].

During March, LSx have tried to apply for funds to implement the Bubble Day event but unfortunately we were not able to receive any funds. Due to the lack of financial support, we had to change the strategy and decided to carry out low-cost or non-cost activities. Since all LSx staff’s salary is project-based allocated, it means the staff would not be able to spend much time in Bubble Day. As I am not paid by LSx and I am familiar with the CA4S Project and Bubble Day initiative, I became the main organisor for the event with support from other LSx staff and interns: the programme director provided guidance, the coordinator of CA4S helped with the coordination with external partners, and three interns helped to design and carry out activities.

Finally, Bubble Day was held in Christ Church Bentinck Primary School (CCB) in Westminster on 15th June. CCB is one of the three schools which have been working with LSx for the “Cleaner Air 4 Schools” project in the past five months.

 

Prepare for the event

Discussion and marking bubble zone

We hold a small internal brainstorm to generate ideas and sought comments from the school. LSx and CCB both knew that the event must be interesting and interactive. Also we hope to integrate some pre-event and post-event activities into the courses.

Before the event, an intern and I visited the school to deliver a one hour “travel mode mapping” activity to Year 4 class. We also walked around the school to confirm our bubble zone which covered a 5, 10, 15 and 20 minute walking radius of the school.

Coordinating with external partners

LSx also invited other external partners to deliver short talks and activities. In May three organizations agree to attend. However, one week before the event two of them informed us that they were not able to participate. Therefore I revised the agenda and reduced three workshops to two.

However, we still got support from two partners: Sustrans hosted a Bike & Breakfast event in the morning and provided gifts for activity winners. OPAL were not able to attend but sent learning materials and stationery as gifts.

We tried to contact some people who have hand held air quality monitoring equipment that we hoped to use for Bubble Day. Unfortunately no equipment was available.

Designing Zero Hero homework and invitation

We designed several materials to help pupils to learn more about air quality and to engage parents:

  • Bubble Day invitation for parents: explains Bubble day and ask if parents could attend the event and help their kids with Zero Hero costumes.
  • Homework Zero Hero design & writing: pupils were asked to draw a Zero Hero who help sustainable lifestyle and to write a short article about the Hero.
  • Homework travel log: Pupils were asked to record their travel method and distance during the Jubilee holiday. Sustainable travel such as walking, cycling and scootering can win higher points. After returning to school, they will calculate the points.

Purchasing materials

It was the most time consuming part in the preparation. Although most activity resources were “free” from LSx office and school, we still need money to buy Ozone test badges (around 70GBP) and planting stuff including compost and seeds (around 30GBP)[2]. Due to the shortage of budget (both LSx and CCB), we had to give up Ozone test activity and three day before the event CCB confirmed that the school would pay the planting materials. Therefore we were able to purchase the seeds and organic compost in the last minute.

On Bubble Day

Participants

All school pupils were encouraged to travel to school by sustainable methods. However, only 66 participants attended the Bubble Day event including 55 pupils from Year 4 and Year 5, 6 staff and 5 parents.

Four LSx members (I and three interns) led all activities and we worked as a pair – two handled one workshop. Each workshop had 2-3 activities.

Workshop activities

In the beginning, all participants were given a short introduction about the Bubble Day and how the activities would be carried out. Then the participants were split into two groups and separately entered two workshop zones. After 1 hour, the two groups swapped and moved the other workshop zones.

Workshop A

  • Bubble Zone Walking Map: pupils and staff marked their home with different colour dots which indicated their travel mode.
  • Moth Pledge: pupils and staff made pledges on a moth, they will put a white dot on the black moth when an action completed.
  • Sticky tape analysis : a low-cost, effective method – using sticky tape to observe particulate matter on different surfaces.

Workshop B

  • Citizen science: showing the outcomes of CA4S project, and demonstrating diffusion tubes & ghost wipes. Champions who participated the monitoring activities also share their experience to other pupils.
  • Plants and air pollution: a shortly talk about plants and air quality. All pupils were give a small pot and grown air purifying plants for houses and school.

Certificate and rewards giving

Finally, all participants came to the play ground together for the certificate and rewards giving. Winners from each year were chosen and given goody bags, including longest walking distance, longest cycling distance, homework – Zero Hero design and writing “A day in the life of a Zero Hero”, Zero Hero Costume best costume.

Evaluation

Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) is always an important part in LSx projects. We have to record the numbers of direct beneficiaries and indirect beneficiaries– the former is the participants attending activities; the latter is the people who receive the messages of the project and potentially raise their awareness or/and change behaviours. According to the projects and participants, different quantitative and qualitative methods are chosen to deliver M&E. For the whole CA4S project, several common M&E techniques were utilized, including evaluation form, questionnaire survey, interview, focus group discussion, comparison of baseline and follow-up data… etc.

For Bubble Day, a one –off event, we evaluated the event through these ways: recording the numbers of participants, comparing their travel methods to analyse the behaviour change, observing the responses during participation and collecting the feedbacks after the event[3].

 

Achievement and feedbacks

Sustainable travel on Bubble Day

– Whole school around 200 pupils and staff surveyed)

– Cycling to school : 17 people. This is much more than the data in past surveys[4]

– Walking to school: 127 people. This is slightly more than the past surveys. However, the teacher said a few people who arrived later/through a different entrance may not be counted. So the real number should be more[5].

Bubble Day Event participants

66 Participants from Year 4 and Year 5, including 55 pupils, 6 staff and 5 parents.

l          Bubble Zone Mapping Results

Year 4 : On Bubble Day 21 pupils (75% ) walked to school. This is much higher than CCB’s average (55%). More than half of the pupils live within 0.5 miles to school which means it is only 10 mins walking distance[6]. The winner of “the longest walking distance” lives around 2 miles from school and he walks 40 mins from home to school every day!

Travel mode Number Percentage Walking distance Within  0.3 miles (5 mins) : 10.3-0.5   miles  (10 mins) : 150.5-0.7 miles (15 mins) : 4

More than 1 mile (20 mins) : 1

Cycling distance

0.5   mile : 1

Walk 21 75%
Cycle 1 4%
Bus 0 0%
Car 4 14%
Walk + Train 2 7%
Year   4 total 28 100%

 

Year 5 : On Bubble Day 4 pupils (15%) cycled to school. This is much higher than CCB’s average (2%). Pupils 14 pupils (54%) walked to school which is similar to the CCB’s average.

Travel mode Number Percentage Walking distance Within  0.3 miles (5 mins) : 50.3-0.5   miles  (10 mins) : 8More than 1 mile (20 mins): 1

Cycling distance

Within  0.3 miles: 2

0.5-0.7 miles: 1

More than 1 mile: 1

Walk 14 54%
Cycle 4 15%
Bus 3 12%
Car 3 12%
Car + Walk 1 4%
Train + Bus + Cycle 1 4%
Year   5 total 26 100%

Feedbacks from teachers

The positive feedbacks included: great interactive activities, well organized, children loved the prizes and were motivated, Zero Hero preparation worked very well.

The negative feedbacks includes: Needed more visuals and too much talking for children to be fully engaged, children don’t study percentages or pie charts until Y6 so it was difficult to follow, A3 sheets too small to see and language too technical.

Some quotes:

“ I have heard positive comments from the children and staff about the bubble day activities. We hope that you enjoyed it too” (head teacher)

“Thanks again for Friday, the children had a great time…was very happy with the day” (Year 4 teacher)

Our observation

Sustainable travel

A lot of children made a special effort to walk to school for the day, but from feedback it seems many pupils do not cycle due to the inherent safety issues. The bubble mapping did take longer than planned, as not all of the children knew exactly where they lived. Hopefully all pupils will keep walking to school after the event. The school is organizing a “walking bus” programme that will engage more pupils and parents walking to school.

Workshop activities

All of the children seemed to enjoy the day, particularly the hands-on activities: planting and sticky tape. We tried to prepare visual aids but it seemed not enough and we did not fully understand the level of pupils’ knowledge of math and history. It was difficult to explain details for the Peppered moth story, not many pupils knew about the industrial revolution and it relied purely on speaking.

Zero Hero competition

Some information was not spread thoroughly. The zero hero costumes were a really good idea, but less than 10 pupils wear the costumes. Year 5 submitted the Zero Hero design and writing but they did not know about the costumes. All Zero Hero design and writing had not been collected by teachers before we arrived at school. Therefore we did not have time to display all works and we could only select the winners hurriedly in a very short time.

Personal feeling

All colleagues were supportive and always encouraged me, but I had been very nervous and anxious. After all, it was my first time in charge of the whole event. I knew it has no budget and we had to carry out it effectively. However, because many unexpected changes from the school and external partners, and our shortage of budget to purchase materials, I spent a lot of time revising the agenda and costing the products which made me felt frustrated. I did learn a lot during the process and enjoyed the work, but when the even finished I really felt relieved!


[1] Like LSx, most organisations have their own project agenda. Even we agreed that Bubble Day should be integrated into our present projects as much as possible, it is still require extra time, labour and money. After all, Bubble Day was not a formal project with contract.

[2]Plus I and other colleagues totally contributed 60 mall pots.

[3] Due to the time limit, we were not able to deliver a short hands-up survey. The evaluation questions included:

l Did you find today’s activities are interesting? (count hands)

l Which activity is your favorite? Why? (quote the answers)

l Did you learn more about air quality and air pollution today? (count hands) What did you learn today? (quote the answers)

l Will you complete your pledge and help to improve air quality? (count hands)

l Will you spread the word and tell your friends and family to reduce air pollution? (count hands)

[4] Cycling to school: CS4A data December 2011: 3 cyclists/197 surveyed. April 2012: 6 cyclists/ 178 surveyed

[5] Walking to school: CS4A data December 2011: 103walk /197 surveyed.  April 2012: 94walk/ 178 surveyed

[6] A lot of information about walking to school campaign can be found here: http://www.livingstreets.org.uk/walk-with-us/walk-to-school

拆遷前的作文課

拆遷前的作文課

北京工友之家 張雅涵

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

這天是村委會動手的第二天,前一天村委會在校門口「修水管」,修著修著把水管給斷了。當天下午,學校老師與志願者們也立即在校門口貼上大字報公告學校新學期報名與夏令營活動照常,要大家進出校園小心門口的坑洞。

下午是作文課,阿敬老師也是前一天被校長找來上這堂作文課的,阿敬原本就是語文老師,這天上課他還身體有些不適,但還是抱病來上課了。夏令營不像一般上課時期,暑假時各個年級都有,但和一般上課狀況相同的是阿敬老師得先維持好秩序,「把你的腦袋抬起來,手放在大腿」,得到全班的注意力後阿敬才開始上課。
Continue reading

從微博看@同心實驗學校關停事件 (下)

從微博看@同心實驗學校關停事件 (下)

北京工友之家  張雅涵

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

微博代表的是個人,或者頂多一個團體,在同心學校關停事件中,第一時間微博扮演一個比較緩衝的角色,學校策略上第一步並不想把事件直接上達到媒體,讓鄉裡造成太大的壓力反而採取更直接強烈的手段關停學校,但學校也不能讓消息都不曝光,如此一來沒有任何的社會資源,並且民意的累積還是對基層政府有壓力的,所以微博在此倒是讓雙方有一個來回的空間。但也是因為此事涉及的並不是中央體系的敏感神經,所以整個事件在微博上倒也不見微博被刪除或封鎖。意識形態上學校爭取的學生受教權其實是很主流的,並不是甚麼體制外的事,讓每個孩子都有學上絕對是政府必須要向民眾承諾的事,只是在這個爭取的過程中碰觸到的界線會讓體制內所承諾的政策與價值被犧牲,這也是工友之家清楚懂得去拿捏的界線,微博是在關停事件裡發聲的平台,但過激的言論不會出現,情勢緊張後要懂得放緩腳步,在爭取權利過程中於收放攻守之間試探界線。
Continue reading

從微博看@同心實驗學校關停事件 (上)

從微博看@同心實驗學校關停事件 (上)

北京工友之家 張雅涵

學校收到鄉裡教育衛生科關停通知的第九天,新工人藝術團正前往廣州準備展開南方巡迴,南方巡迴似乎沒有受到關停事件的影響,這幾天以來學校關停消息透過孫恆與學校在微博上的發言發酵,引起許多長期支持學校、參與過學校與機構志願活動的志願者、社會各界關注,同時也引起了相當多記者的注意,這天在出發往廣州的火車上工友之家、同心學校負責人孫恆也接到好幾通記者想要採訪的電話,但都被孫恆禮貌得回絕了。在保衛同心一戰的第一步策略上還是避免媒體擴大效應造成負面影響,現在還不急著主動出擊。
Continue reading

城市裡的精神家園

 城市裡的精神家園

北京工友之家 張雅涵

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

四月底,天氣轉暖,雖然還是得穿著長袖與大衣,但大家都說著五一過後就能穿短袖了,很難想像在幾天之內一個季節就要過去了。這天傍晚在機構大院大家紛紛把新工人劇場的椅子給搬出來,原本晚上有個法國舞團要到社區劇場來表演,但一看劇場舞台太小了,趁著今天天氣好也就把舞台挪到大院來,皮村村民們從搬椅子開始慢慢聚集起來,許多有力村民都幫了忙。法國舞團透過法國文化中心與工友之家之前合作過的一個企業找到皮村。表演相當成功,皮村村民對這些跳著奇怪風格的舞蹈(街舞加芭蕾)有著外國面孔的舞者相當捧場,演出中頻頻叫好。 Continue reading

開春

開春

北京工友之家 張雅涵

過年後開始招募女工合作社新成員,原先兩位大姐在年前回老家就說了不一定在上北京來,另一位山東大姐雖然預繳了兩個小孩的書費,過年後開學卻不見他和小孩回到學校來,先是合作社裡唯一固定下來的大姐念著說每年都是這樣的,可能買不到車票晚回了,好不容易回家一趟沒那麼快回來,過了幾天,她也開始說著山東大姐可能不回來了吧。街上放年假的商店也都從老家回來開張了,街上恢復以往的嘈雜:九塊九商店的特價廣播、兩家斜對門的理髮店又開始開啟永遠爆音的喇吧撥放起流行音樂,半個月後山東大姐的先生才來退了小孩的書費,在過年前後的這個時刻才更深刻得體會到所謂的流動性,回不回老家、再來不來北京、小孩是待在老家上學還上北京,這樣的人生決定是這裡每個打工者幾個月或幾年就要決定一次的,在永遠變動的新中國中安土重遷變得難以想像,是走是留對於對於上億的打工家庭又是家庭組合的一次改變,當旁人問起的時候其實也就是給個簡單的說法,談論起這樣的決定都像是決定晚餐要去哪裡吃一樣。 Continue reading

好好學習

好好學習

北京工友之家  張雅涵

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

「好好學習,天天向上」,黑板上方用紅紙寫著毛主席的苦心訓示,這是幾乎每間教室必備布置,老實說比起老蔣的「創造宇宙繼起之生命」好懂許多。學校中的首要任務當然是學習,除了學校外,組織內部也不斷強調學習的重要性,在學習中自我成長、培養團隊默契。對於工友之家的組織者來說,電影討論、讀書會是內部學習的主要形式。女工合作社在招募人員的時候我也會跟大姐們強調合作社之所以和外面工廠不同是因為這裡不只是個生產合作社,有空的時候也會搞些學習、文化活動,有很多機會開闊視野、自我成長,在各項活動中連絡大家的情感形成互助的平台,也讓參與其中的工作人員對於組織更有認同感。但這些理念對於前來找份工作的大姐們來說其實不容易理解,一開始的動機就只是找份工作,所以一開始合作社內部的「學習」是比較隱性的,通常是在合作社工作時間中我以閒聊的方式跟大姐們說合作社的意義,再來就是工友之家有活動的時候就吆喝大家參加,以現有的活動組織大家,在活動參與中不需要話語就能讓大姐們直接體會到合作社和工廠的不同之處。 Continue reading

Reflections on “Blockupy Frankfurt”- a Transnational Call for Action

Reflections on “Blockupy Frankfurt”- a Transnational Call for Action

By: Jessie Lin

For four continuous days starting on Wednesday, May 16th, a transnational call of action has been called to “Blockupy” the city of Frankfurt, Germany, the home of the European Central Bank (ECB).  The city symbolizes the big financial power system in the Eurozone.  Amidst the call for austerity measures by many heads of European governments in this financial crisis, activists around the continent are gathering together to protest against the extremities of global capitalism.   The idea of this action roots from the Occupy Wallstreet movement that has snow-balled around the world into the many indignant movements around the globe, including recent protests in the cities of Madrid and Barcelona where tens of thousands of people took the streets to celebrate the one year anniversary of their indignant movement.
Continue reading

Indonesian Democratization

Indonesian Democratization

In May 9th, I went to a seminar which held by SogangUniversity for East Asia Studies. The topic of this seminar was “Democratization in Indonesia and underground movement of Utan Kayu community.” The speaker was an Indonesian activist Goenawan Mohamad. And he started the seminar from Indonesian modern history and his government resistance history.

Indonesia was independent from Netherland colonization in August 17th, 1945. Sukarno was the first president of Republic of Indonesia and he was honored as the founding father of Indonesia. After 20 years Sukarno regime, in 1965 September 30, there was a failed coup which was leaded by some military senior officers who so called G30S. The coup was carried out by some communist sympathizer military officers. Some of them were involved to Indonesian Communist Party, PKI. In the beginning of coup, they occupied the national radio station in Jakarta and assassinated 6 Indonesian Army generals and put President Sukarno under their “protection”. But in the end of the coup, General Suhato successfully suppressed G30S. During the same time while he was suppressing the coup, he conducted a “New Order” for his political reason. In this movement, General Suharto conducted a political
Continue reading