Diverse Education for Diverse Economies: The relevance of Rural Training Centres in the Solomon Islands

<p>Education is considered the cornerstone of development, essential to achieving economic and social goals. Under the powerful global education agenda, the western model of formal education has been implemented hegemonically in developing countries. This model largely prepares young people for a role in the formal economy in an urban environment, overlooking fundamental questions of purpose and relevance for local context. In the Solomon Islands, where 85% of the population reside rurally, such opportunities often do not exist or reflect local livelihoods. Rural Training Centres (RTCs) are informal vocational institutions that sit outside of the dominant education paradigm by aiming to prepare young people for local livelihoods. Through informal and vocational learning, they offer an alternative to urbanisation, supporting self derived and locally based livelihoods. Paradoxically, for this very reasons they are often disregarded at the government and donor level. From a postdevelopment perspective, this thesis considers the roles and relevance of RTCs under a wider conceptualisation of economy and knowledge than is applied in mainstream development practice. Using qualitative and ethnographical methodologies, this research investigates local understandings of RTCs as an education alternative through the voices of young people, women and the wider community. The inter-related aspects: economy, education, and development, are considered in two case study communities, Gizo and Vatu, providing a semi-urban/rural comparison. Using a Diverse Economies Framework (Gibson-Graham, 2005), this thesis reveals a more realistic picture of the myriad of activities that support local livelihoods exists. The formal economy is found to play a secondary role to informal and direct economic practices. Similarly, under a pluralistic view of education that accepts the legitimacy of traditional, cultural and indigenous knowledge, the aspirations of young people are found to be deeply rooted ‘at home’. Yet, this research argues that they do not conform to a simplistic modern-traditional dichotomy. Rather they reflect cultural hybridity, a third space ‘in between’ where different knowledges are transformed and negotiated. Despite criticisms, RTCs were positively viewed at a community level. They were considered to fill a vital gap left by the formal education system, support local livelihoods and help stem the flow of urban migration. They also offer an opportunity to support women in existing gender roles, as well as expand existing cultural educational boundaries. However, RTCs are facing pressure to standardise and formalise in order to attract greater government and donor funding. This reflects wider tensions in development policy and practice that favour the universal and the global over the local, and brings to light the inherent power disparity in the aid relationship.</p>

Diverse Education for Diverse Economies: The relevance of Rural Training Centres in the Solomon Islands

<p>Education is considered the cornerstone of development, essential to achieving economic and social goals. Under the powerful global education agenda, the western model of formal education has been implemented hegemonically in developing countries. This model largely prepares young people for a role in the formal economy in an urban environment, overlooking fundamental questions of purpose and relevance for local context. In the Solomon Islands, where 85% of the population reside rurally, such opportunities often do not exist or reflect local livelihoods. Rural Training Centres (RTCs) are informal vocational institutions that sit outside of the dominant education paradigm by aiming to prepare young people for local livelihoods. Through informal and vocational learning, they offer an alternative to urbanisation, supporting self derived and locally based livelihoods. Paradoxically, for this very reasons they are often disregarded at the government and donor level. From a postdevelopment perspective, this thesis considers the roles and relevance of RTCs under a wider conceptualisation of economy and knowledge than is applied in mainstream development practice. Using qualitative and ethnographical methodologies, this research investigates local understandings of RTCs as an education alternative through the voices of young people, women and the wider community. The inter-related aspects: economy, education, and development, are considered in two case study communities, Gizo and Vatu, providing a semi-urban/rural comparison. Using a Diverse Economies Framework (Gibson-Graham, 2005), this thesis reveals a more realistic picture of the myriad of activities that support local livelihoods exists. The formal economy is found to play a secondary role to informal and direct economic practices. Similarly, under a pluralistic view of education that accepts the legitimacy of traditional, cultural and indigenous knowledge, the aspirations of young people are found to be deeply rooted ‘at home’. Yet, this research argues that they do not conform to a simplistic modern-traditional dichotomy. Rather they reflect cultural hybridity, a third space ‘in between’ where different knowledges are transformed and negotiated. Despite criticisms, RTCs were positively viewed at a community level. They were considered to fill a vital gap left by the formal education system, support local livelihoods and help stem the flow of urban migration. They also offer an opportunity to support women in existing gender roles, as well as expand existing cultural educational boundaries. However, RTCs are facing pressure to standardise and formalise in order to attract greater government and donor funding. This reflects wider tensions in development policy and practice that favour the universal and the global over the local, and brings to light the inherent power disparity in the aid relationship.</p>

Re-energizing Japan's teikei movement: Understanding intergenerational transitions of diverse economies

In the 1960s-70s, Japan’s teikei movement, also referred to as Japanese community supported agriculture (CSA), emerged as a response to a period marred with multiple food scandals and environmental injustices and resulted in direct partnerships between consumers and organic farmers. Although this movement peaked in the 1990s just as the concept of alternative food networks (AFNs) gained popularity in western countries, little is known about what has happened to teikei today. This paper analyzes how teikei exemplifies diverse economies and explores how the possibilities of noncapitalist economic practice currently exist compared to the founding movement principles. Through case studies of two teikei groups in the Kansai region of Japan that transitioned their leadership to younger generations, I assess how changes made by current generations allow teikei to adapt to challenges that have long plagued the movement, such as the decline of volunteer labor provided by housewives. Drawing on a diverse economies approach, I argue that, despite current members’ detachment from strong activist identities, they sustain their organizations through part-time work, community building, and institutionalizing volunteer labor. The successes and struggles of current teikei groups provide insight into how AFNs seeking to build alternative economies can overcome difficulties that emerge from actualizing diverse economies.

Framing Good Food: Communicating Value of Community Food Initiatives in the Midst of a Food Crisis

Community-embedded food initiatives exist in market economies, but make more-than-market contributions. They challenge the dominant, industrialized food system, while generating non-monetary benefits in their communities. Yet food policy, regulation, and public spending in much of the world is still framed by the values of market economy. Revenue, yield, and technological advancements remain key formal measurements of the wellbeing of food systems. Community-embedded food initiatives like small local businesses and non-profit organizations, are often committed to advancing social and environmental benefits of non-industrialized food, and they call for clearer recognition of their more-than-market contribution to community wellbeing. The Nourishing Communities network has worked with such initiatives for more than a decade, undertaking community-engaged research with practitioners across sectors. The network has found that these initiatives are impeded by a communication conundrum. On the one hand, they are expected (by funders, governments, and other institutions) to demonstrate their value using market-economy measurements and translating what they do into “social returns on investment.” On the other hand, many of those initiatives need non-market terminology to express the values that they espouse and generate. To balance these needs, Gibson-Graham’s framing of “diverse economies” can potentially offer a pathway to better communication and thus more accurate valuing of the work of such initiatives. Their notion of diverse economies offers endless opportunities to frame community food work as valuable in ways that go beyond market-economy measurements. As such, the diverse economies framing offers new possibilities for alternative food, and for more general discussions of social reform.