Summit Workshop Innovation: "C.21st Rag & Bone"
From Future of Local Services to the Public
Summit Workshop Afternoon Sessions:
Contents |
Syndicate Innovation brainstorming session for the "Dragon's Den"
Emergent opportunity cluster: "Green Systems"
Innovation concept: C.21st Rag & Bone or "Steptoe Change"
Defining
DF – what is the system? Natural system…minerals…soil, earth, energy…raw materials…taking from earth and making…can take too much away without returning…
Where it impacts people’s lives? – physical thing that happens as a negative impact
Flooding…
TA: a lot of current vogue around ecosystems…DEFRA, chief scientist led couple of days…not just natural system…human systems…transport systems trying to plan for…one of the examples was Ebbsfleet, talking about a new town...there is an expectation that we need to restrict to certain consumption of water a day…need to consider the sewage system e.g….flooding thing is the same…when the floods hit local authorities and councils responded brilliantly but they’re not very good at understanding how to come together to collaborate…Tewkesbury…many other towns were affected…
BM: WHERE WE NEED INNOVATION? – what we actually need…big issue is taking an existing area and how to make it sustainable…less work done on that…how do you make that a sustainable place to live…how to get people from where they are to where they need to be…
DF – take flooding – there are lots of companies starting up to provide an anti flooding system…but I think that these make you feel less safe and are a questionable innovation…are there other innovations that are more socially responsible?
[ CP: the implication here was that anti-flooding systems are a prevention rather than a cure for the problem of flooding…and probably a prevention that wouldn’t be particularly effective and undermine more collaborative, community based responses.]
CC – we can’t leave waste out of the equation…micro-generation is a potentially important issue…
DF - feed in tariffs – people are generating energy in their own areas – but current legislation means that you can’t actually do that – local housing estates could have an estate generator, for example, but it might be too expensive.
BM – an estate generator could be self-financing from the rent of the particular estate – that money could then be reinvested for a more sustainable approach
BB – mentioned waste – what would be a solution to the probs we see coming??
BM – one of our goals is to get the recycling rates up 20% from a very low level…the real challenge is how to get it to 70% - at the moment it’s a very macro model…we need to go back to micro model – could you have a model for locally incentivised collection for example including micro industries on the estate that recycled waste or were part of the process – local govt would help the process with finance and backing – the next question is how that links in to the macro processes –
BB – rag and bone men…a modern day rag and bone man operating as a small business involved in recycling or at least re-use…of waste…
DF – bring back the rag and bone men…
JS - If micro generation is going to be a viable project there needs to be an investor …using the need and opportunity to educate – what about a local package against packaging…you would have to explain the drawback of the particular waste related issue e.g. packaging and then set up a campaign that inspired self-motivation with a broader education campaign…
DF- people want the streets to be clean and tidy but they want the waste to be useful…people can see when waste is around – waste has a very local angle so dealing with waste could be really fantastic opportunity.
Barriers
We need to consider the barriers to particular options / innovations.
Recycling is very expensive, for example.
JS – it’s about trying to stop waste going into the waste chain…the reuse of things like packaging could be much bigger…there needs to be an idea of recreating an ethos that not everything should be thrown…
BM- little schemes are the answer, starting at the micro level – there are already schemes out there that do this like lets [ CP: I don’t know what this is but assume it’s similar to Freecycle] and Freecycle – but at the moment there’s nothing done with enough intensity and sustainability…we need a suitable economic model to sustain a particular initiative.
CC – we need to consider what needs recycling on the estate…
BM – seen it happen in Sweden…[ talked about Swedish recycling schemes in Malmo]
TA – we’re seeing an increase in the value of certain recycled materials – value of plastic bottles e.g. – all of a sudden there’s a value on plastic…there’s a direct link between that and creating an economically sustainable model.
AB – where’s the biggest problem?
JS – have to change lifestyles in a forty year period…
TA – a lot of councils have signed up to demanding targets to improve their waste facilities…
DF – what about food waste – methane is another by product – I don’t know whether it’s included in the carbon reduction cycle…would it be possible to buy back the product? Doesn’t rely on creating waste…take out further up the chain…
BB – the question to answer is what is the issue that the public see as the most valuable?
BM – assumes them and us…challenge is to involve the public to a point where that doesn’t matter – need a different relationship…we need to identify the real problems for a particular area…
BB – which is the biggest local problem?
TA – if the solution is going to have to be flexible then maybe we need a package of measures about what particular councils can do in the green agenda…looking at solutions with neighbours…
BM – cost is interesting – we follow the government’s targets and do things like re-do the plumbing but all the things the tenants want us to do we don’t do…we need to attend better to local issues
[ CP: this is a point that comes up again and again – the government should be providing an idea or set of ideas but should not give detailed instructions of mandatory targets about how to apply particular schemes because local people have a better idea of the problems they want dealt with.]
CC – resident participation is the key we need things in the scheme where they can make their own choice about how to do it…maybe some kind of experiment with water consumption…recycling water for example…
TA – working with communities is important…DEFRA workshop…we need a broker of an idea, someone who can articulate it to a community…making the community part of the solution…which is the package would you select…
The solution needs to be flexible and bespoke to a particular area…maybe its reuse of waste and then consider the availability of energy and human systems involved e.g. financial systems and how to tie in private sector, major actors like Tescos, for example.
CC – waste collecting companies should be involved…
DF – utilities company…
JS – reuse centre vs a recycling centre…
TA – package…
CC: the geographical community is of paramount importance – it’s vital to get at the right community of interest…this is NOT JUST URBAN AREAS…
All : what is the focus of our idea or innovation?
All : waste - packaging – food and compost – rag and bone…or Micro-generation
JS – what about considering a campaign against packaging…
DF – councils are the major employers…if they’re the majority, they’re producing most of the waste…
Packaging recycling…
Scale
BM – all you have to do it put recycling into boxes…someone else you don’t know collects it from you…first stage is to break it and say the community will fund the collection…we won’t pay people to come to the door…set up a small organisation…small company to set up to get rid of the waste – no longer will the lorry come along and collect the recycling…we want you to take responsibility to take that step…
Performance would be measured in terms of volume and amount of recycling…the Council runs it (at the moment the council decides colours of boxes and bins and everything…to change behaviour you have to get into people’s heads…)
DF – ‘dolphin friendly’ is an example of that [ CP - i.e. a successful behaviour change campaign]– can be a step change in behaviour…need a badge of authenticity…would need to know it was what they wanted and what they needed to do about it…
CC – water or microgeneration…local collection points – would start weighing people’s bins..?
BM – it should be totally self organised…community would sort out the waste?...voluntary ethic...people can come up with innovative solutions…
JS – I’d be in favour of incentivising within a local scheme where the local community has to do it…
TA – what you want are local economic models for recycling and local use…the package is something that creates those economic models…let the community develop the ideas…modern rag and bone…
JS – Stuttgart heats its own buildings by recycling waste – biowaste – longer payback but good scheme…in terms of balancing the economy and efficiency and sustainability
BB – where are the areas that can generate income?
DF – where are the feed in tariffs – need to create the pressures to come to that…
Core Idea/Innovation: Steptoe change
- Reuse of materials in local areas
- Increase of recycling schemes locally
- Local microgeneration
- Water recycling
- (Local package vs packaging )
- Actually about reducing local resource consumption…
- Reducing your reliance on other people’s resources…
What are the visible signs of change?
Waste taken off the streets…
Local incentivisation schemes…
What’s the incentive package?
CC – competition – villages or estates
BM – more you collect, the more you get back in money for your neighbourhood…
AB – local economic currency? Building in long term value…customer could turn it back into cash…
BM – devolving budgets to local communities…always the little things that they want fixed…amazing how little to give back…
BM – feeling engaged in the local economy…
TA – what BM described earlier – better version of combined heat and power…over a period of time…better idea of how to use energy – energy resilience – lower fuel bills…
DF - private companies required by law to make steps to encourage energy efficiency…Need to tie in the private sector to this…
TA – the idea of estate generation is economically more viable than individual generators…
JS – for five years – can’t guarantee on how this is self-generating…
JS – development of a UK private market
CC – success factor is whether communities can come up with good schemes for reducing C02 – not going to change the world immediately…the council have to invest in advice and resource…
Risk – proves not to be economically viable because economic conditions…
DF- the ability to ride the economic downturn…
CC – ability to persuade the private sector and utility suppliers to participate…can the LA persuade these other partners and suppliers to participate…
Supermarkets…utility companies…
BM - Risk is that it’s not their job to do it anyway…damaging reputation…not necessarily good at long term projects…
CC – risk that communities might fall out about this…fights between families because of the different levels of rubbish selected…
Target groups?
BM – need a council estate and villages – economically active people in finite areas…
BB - can’t target the economically active by physical space…
BM – should target the non- economically active…
TA – need to test this in a variety of settings…multiple,small scale experiments…
DF – those doing it will have to be business minded, interested people with a volunteer ethic…
JS – put schools into this also…schools could be a partner in this scheme…
TA – need to tier it and hook up with other partners…sustainable industrial estates…
Investment:
CC – council will have to hire experts –
BM – needs real research into what can be done with waste/water, -
JS – that can be done with a central research resource…
TA – needs investors…
BB – could be the micro-generation producers
TA – like an investor save approach – one source might be the obligation on energy companies to redirect resources for lightbulbs…
AB – local authority mortgages…payback in x years time (maybe 10)
TA – you would put a proposition to govt – councils raise money to fund their own schemes…
BM – could have a business case now…
JS – need to make it self sufficient initially but need initial injection at the beginning..
DF – need staffing resource to begin with…
BM – there’s a lot about getting into people’s heads to make them take responsibility…it’s about changing that mindset…
TA – it’s important that we’re not saying that ‘this is your problem, get on with it’…it’s about shared responsibility…if you approach communities properly then they will start to own the problem – the JRF stuff tells us how to work with communities…
e.g. rural area – lots of woodland that’s not used…no one commercially farms the woodland…
TA: the proposition should not be defined at this stage…haven’t touched on wider issues yet…this is designed as a kick start problem…
BM – now encouraged to think 10 years but there are very few such models – we only think 10 years max…
Success in matching criteria:
BM – coproduction - this is a co-production project…
AB – what is happening here that is different / innovative? I’m concerned that this is not particularly or sufficiently new…
TA – combined heat and power principle should inform other innovative projects…moving towards a shared endeavour…
TA – it goes back to having the right economic model…greenwich millennium village, for example, it was supposed to provide cheaper electric but didn’t because no link back to the national grid…the company in charge was not held to account by the local community and didn’t perform very well…
BM – multi service user company – small scale failures because gets squeezed out of the development deal…
TA – if you want microgeneration in the community you need infrastructure in place to allow it to happen…
BM – Local authority uses planning power to sell energy back to the grid…have their own power generation…
JS – City of Work – Stadtwerke in Munich is an interesting example of a good model…letting farmland only for organic farming and then creating organic markets in the city for people to buy the produce…creates a holistic and virtuous cycle…
Dragon's Den pitch and response
Abstract – whole systems approach…what does that mean
Reduce and reuse ugly waste to see on the street…generate energy locally to make it supply resilient…also want to make sure that everyone has water in the future and more connected with water supply
Back to the future
Steptoe and Son – step change/toe in the water/carbon footprint
Target audience – those already running businesses in local communities
Take waste out of hedgerows etc – turn waste into something more useful
Scheme co produced
Housing estates – likely to recycle but least opp to do so…
Ipsos MORI poll – people think Britain is getting worse so this is a highly visible campaign…could be sponsored by supermarkets….
Little way to go to make this economically viable…energy suppliers have obligations…
Can start to influence policy – feed in tariffs – germany and spain – in this country can only go so far with these opps – national scheme that is flexible enough for any area…
If the local issue is about water then attend to that or waste or compost…
National brand – sponsored by national supermarket and looking for LA’s to invest in local areas…scheme of this size needs a substantial investment…
CRITIQUE
Q – huge amount of money…
A – in our pre-pilot looked at rate of landfill tax and how they might increase – rising energy bills – small companies already with these schemes…existing picture of people running these things for profit…
Q – LA’s have the burden of coughing up … people running these companies are – local people directly engaging with LA’s – local entrepreneurs and LA’s relationship…
Q –
don’t quite understand how this differs from current schemes…
Why not use the money to insulate homes better e.g.?
Criteria- does this matter to people?
A- the big difference is that the person running the business is a member of the community…not someone paid by the council…
B- if flexi scheme more appropriate – can choose the flexibility scheme…
Q – what’s the million paying for?
A – need to make high profile…need to make demonstrative the effects of selling back energy into the grid…have to show that this can work…recognition that this might fail…need to keep testing and refining this…
MONEY?
It falls between social enterprise and green infrastructure that would invest in anyway…
There is something valuable about locally tailored enterprises that is worthwhile…
