Learning City

Learning city means lifelong learning opportunities for everyone either with formal or informal education. Similarly, either learning on applied science or skill learning. With the World getting more complex and demand from the people and community is escalating, the demand for knowledge is also higher especially in the field that might have not been covered under the existing formal education system. Some underprivileged people might also found that attending to formal education is too costly and beyond their affordability. Some might find that certain compulsory subjects are of their disliking. Some might think that they need extra curriculum fulfilling their own need pursuing knowledge. Thereby, a thriving city must be able to provide and cater for multiple learning needs of the people from diverse background. Learning through social media and internet have provided new paradigm to the meaning of learning. Learning can be done with a group of people sharing the same interest and hobby. Learning can be done on real time and with people from different physical community, but rather the cyber world. Learning can be fast with the availability of information over the web. Learning can be multi-discipline and do not necessary follow the sequence. Learning can be fun without the guidance of teachers. Learning can be experiential. For a learning city, the above are required pre-requisite. To make this happen I believe, good and affordable infrastructure especially the ICT, provision of a conducive environment and community for learning must be provided by the city government.

Thriving Neighbourhood

Thriving neighbourhood is visible and can be felt. You can describe a thriving neighbour the moment you step into it space, talking to the people, walking onto the streets, observing many on going and vibrant activities. This scenario cannot be faked and the negative feeling cannot be hide. Thriving neighbour can be built over the years with efforts from all walk of life. The Authority cannot keep telling the people and stakeholders what they intend to do, but to talk to the stakeholders what both can do together. Likewise the stakeholders cannot keep pointing finger on the atuhority for non-perfoming. It must be a mutual understanding and consensus of doing something together. This, of course require share value, vision and actions. Thriving neighbourhood must be a place for everyone, those who want to sleep there, those who want to study, those who want to work and those who want to spend leisure and free time there. Everyone will get to fulfill their need without jeopardising the need of others. All needs can be met and happened in harmony. Everyone will share the vision, value and actions of what they envision their neighbourhood to be in future. As the city is the sum of neighbourhoods, the moment the neighbourhoods doing well and thriving, there is no reason for a city of not performing well. Thereby, making a city thriving, we have no choice but to make sure that neighbourhood, as the basic unit in city ro start and do well.

Sustainability of City or Local People?

The best indicator of gauging the sustainability of a city is to ask the people whelther they are happy or not? This question was raised by me towards the speaker in the Seminar entitled Developing London: Up or Out last two day. Obviously, Londoners are facing a big dilemma now. While internationalisation has spurred the economic growth in London, the influx of foreigners has affected the affordability of local to own houses, the opportunity for economic activities and jobs. Planning and managing a city is about making people happy with their living environment. If the beneficiaries of the plan are not happy with what in store for them, then the planning is planning to fail. So, when we talk about sustainability, we should qualify by saying whelther we are talking about sustainability of the city or sustainability of the people. Nowasday we always talk about the competitiveness of the city and if a city loss her competitiveness, the sustainability of the city will be gone as well. This, perhaps refer to the economic growth dimension of sustainability. However, is there fair of saying that a sustainable city with high achievement on economic is also a sustainable city for the people. We see many local people who has been displaced by the externality. The high price of houses because of international investment for example made many local people cannot afford to own a house. Many young generation has no choice but move further out from the inner city. The displacement of local people and replaced by the outside has further diluted the spirit of neighbourhood area and also local social amenities and community development were affected. Community spirit cannot be inculcated over night and need a lot of time, mutual understanding, tolerence amongst different segment of people. However, the outsiders who come to a new area will not be able to integrate with the existing community, and at time social tension did arise due to differences in culture, religions and social status. More so, some dwelling units remain unoccupied due to investment purpose will further dilute the liveability of a neighbourhood area. If this is what happened, then sustainability is obviously did not take place and fail even though the economic sustainability is very high and vibrant. For planners, how to narrow this gap is becoming very critical, ensuing the competitiveness of city, liveability of local people and sustainability ecologically.

Safety

A jogger was killed last week. A pedestrian commuting to bus stop died after snatched. These incidents sound familiar as it appeared in every day news reporting. Is this not serious crime starting from a petty action? Shall this be stop? Obviously, everyone said YES but some parties might have different ideas of approaches and prioprities. Some said crime is about perception. If you feel safe walking on the street, then it is safe. If you are uneasy about a place, even though with bright lighting or within a busy street, you will still think it is unsafe. Some blamed this by saying that feeling about safety at time derived from own account and experience. Some people might felt threaten or not secure because of quiet environment or darkness even though the place is well covered with security features. We always get assurance from the security force that safety of our living environment has improved tremendously. However, many disputed about this statement because many can share their own experience or those stories from their next of kin or friends on accounts that threathen their safety, property or life. Getting both sides to share and agree with each others that safety has improved and the public is free to express, to walk on the street, to enjoy the beauty of parks and public places, to commute to neighbourhood shop and school by walking and cycling is a pleasant journey will require extra efforts and endorsement. In other words, how can we achieve a safe city? Safe City is not a program or slogan, it should be underlying principle inbuild in our neighbourhood that is sustainable and liveable. Residents must be able to live without fear and favour. They should not need to dip into their pocket for paying the private security force. They should not have to patrol their neighbourhood during night time. They should be able to patronise the neighbourhood park, community hall, shops and public places at anytime they wish to. Under the name of social integration, people should be allowed to move freely and mingle around without suspicious arose. I presume much need to be done and until then any action of taking down the gates and guards at neighbourhood area will not be accepted.

Corporate Social Responsibility

The 2 days 11th Asian Forum on Corporate Social Responsibility just concluded at Shangrila Hotel, Bangkok, Thailand. I have the opportunity to listen fo many great theories and ideologies as well as real case studies and best practices by others all over the World. It is amazing to note that CSR has been embedded into the corporate culture and core business value of many in private sector. However, it is also concern that many especially the SMEs have long way to go. The emerging economies like China, India and Indonesia witnessed the booming of responsible corporate citizen, either at the philanthrophy and infant stage or moving into aspects associated to moral, logical and economic reason. It is also note that no one model can fit all. Under different countries profile, demographic scenario, economic growth and even the culture will determine how CSR can excel in a locality. While we learnt and took note of the success, it is also important to modify and adjust a successful model with own local circumstances. For example, the CSR model of Philippines with much participation of NGOs simply cannot replicate in China presently due to the political and socio-economic differences. While businesses are pursuing CSR eagerly to gain competitive advantages and further the market share, it is also a danger of doing so without collaboration and taking into consideration the need of the needy or other stakeholders. Many resources wasted in the process of helping the underprivilleges without tailor make the assistance to their needs. For example, it is useless of supplying computer to rural people for bridging digital divide if the community is living without electricity supply. The businesses must learn to help the community first and in return helping themselves. For example, it is logical for an electrical appliances makers to install solar pv panel to a community in which the need for electricity goods will follow through later. Many have been talking about NGOs and corporates in which the role of government has not been highlighted much. Many reckoned that government can play a facilitating role in catalysing the collaboration and partnership. Many has sceptical about compounding corporates to do CSR through enactment of legislations and to them mere compiance of legislation cannot be constituted as CSR. For example, it is not right for a developer to claim that they build the overhead bridge for convenience of public if the construction is part of the condition for planning permission. Of course, it comes to the issue of ethical and value system. CSR is about process and value and NOT profit alone, i would said. In order to bring CSR to higher ground, social innovation in which shared value must be in place. It is a value shared by and concurred by all stakeholders, the businesses, the consumers, the community, the suppliers and of course the environment. Without one or ignorance of any one, for sure CSR is incomplete. It is also interesting to note that some corporates have listed environment as the stakeholder to work with. This especially during the stage of resource extraction and products end of life. It is important to see the carrying capacity of the Earth is not burdened by the economic activites. It is critical to convert the waste into precious resources while everyone thought the used products should be discarded in the land field. I learnt about the growth of social organisation into a social enterprise. For this entity, market and profit is not the ultimate aim but rather serving the neglect needy and field. It should be rightly so or else the businesses for sure will want to go to market that guarantee financial return. It is in danger of leaving entire issues and challenges to the businesses. We need people with social heart and passion to serve and to be inspired by them. The youth especially need role model to emulate. This group needs encouragement as well to be innovate, creative and bold in helping the needy. So, what is there for MBPJ as a local government? While many said that as a local government, all the services are social oriented and with people in mind. If this is the reasoning, then perhaps the issue of urban poverty, pollution, traffic congestion and etc would not come in place. I believe MBPJ has to start thinking about bigger role as a corporate and wider responsibilities beyond as service providers. We are also communicator, facilitator, developer, coach, legislator and of course the champion. We need first perhaps to set up the structure of governance, to take sotck of what current situation now, to draft a strategic plan and implementation. I believe since other major stakeholder groups are pursuing this, no reason for local government as major partner kn sustainable development not doing so...

Participatory Community Development

I have an interesting discussion with a RT chairman this morning. We spoke about participatory community development programmes at the ground level. It is commonly acknowledged that getting people to come out, let alone volunteer themselves to take part in the community programmes is a difficult task. More so asking them to take the driving role will never get a programme to start. For example, appealing to people to participate in the street patrolling will never work as their reason will always be this is the job of the policeman, and hence it is not necessary for them to be involved. Similarly, asking people to clean up their neighbourhood park based on self help programme is always being rejected simply because as tax payer they have entrusted the local authority to clean up and hence it is none of their business to help. To many, nothing wrong of sharing similar thought and I will concur if provided that we have widen our thinking for the community at large.

A safe community is what everyone envisioned for themselves, their family and place of living. We have the right of looking forward for a safe and peaceful community. However, right should come with full responsibility. While the security force is tasked with safeguarding the life and property as well as order of the society, other stakeholders such as residents, inesses and agencies share equal responsibilities. As house owners, we should reduce the opportunity for crime to be committed. We can walk on the street as a group and make it visible to the potential crime offenders. Businesses can provide logistic support to the community at large. For example, installing communal CCTV at strategic area or the passage from houses to the commercial centre, providing guarded service to the customers and of course know the neighbour well. As for agencies like local authority, crime prevention through environmental design can be incorporated into all facilities and infrastructure development. It is an action by all and for all. To me, the wisdom of none of my business is gone of the days.

If we have done a cause and effect analysis on any urban issues, be it security and safety, service delivery, development, pollution and etc, the root cause of the problem is always YOU AND ME, and not either you or me. Any consequences will have vicious circle of returning back to us the adverse effect, one day either soonest or later. For example, if we do not help out our neighbour next door who is in distress after robbery, for sure we might be the next target of crime because the robbers knew that no one in this neighbourhood is helping each others when the time is warrant. If the incidence of crime is so high, for sure the neighbourhood becomes black spot area and hence property value will be affected. For those who think that as long as i and my family are all right, never got injured due to criminal, the depreciation of property value will hit them as well. Nobody can hide from community development even though you are not part of the team emotionally.

Both of us agreed that perhaps to wake members of the community up is to create a crisis situation. However this might be construed as agencies are non performing. Another way of doing is creating a "kampung" setting with neighbourliness spirit and environment. People is knowing each others. People is willing to help each others. Caring towards each others and the public domain is not an issue. This, of course a tall order as many of the urban people especially in PJ hardly know each other, let alone mingle around. However, if you do not know other, how can you love him is the common saying and rightly so. The Local Authority perhaps has the responsibility of creating common safe and conducive space for greater interaction, top tip condition of the public facilities and facilitating or organising events suit to the need of the people. If all these have been put in place but no community initiative is forth coming, then i believe accusing local authority of not people friendly will lose it own cause naturally.

Engaging NGO

Our Prime Minister urged better engagement and collaboration between NGO and government agencies recently. While many have doubt about the implementation and plan of actions, this is truly a call for sustainable development and good governance. Chapter 27 Agenda 21 calls greater participation and partnership of NGO with government in sustainable development simply because of the independent stand, resourcefulness, capacity and expertise of the NGO. What happen if an NGO opposing the policy stand or a government sponsored programme, will the government listen to them? Will the so called greater collaboration be exercised?

When coming to identify the NGO to be engaged, what kind of criteria is used? Are we not inviting the human right group in discussing equity on economic development for indigenous people or we only talk to trade associations? Who are the stakeholders then? Identifying appropriate groups to engage might be another challenge. The current practice of government servants inviting who they know and comfortable with is obviously not sufficient. Scope of searching reputable groups, not because of it makes the most noice or pro establishment or have higher number of inactive members or even headed by an eminent personnel becomes the only criteria but rather the principles and causes the groups are advocating for.

Engaging NGO for constructive ideas is a long term process. Mechanism and process have to be transparent and sustain. Mutual respect on equal partnership is critical. The thinking of government providing the funding and as such you NGO has to listen to my call is definitely not what we envision as smart partnership. However, it is easy said than done as long as the bossy mind set of government servants remain.

1Malaysia

I think 1Malaysia spirit is truly practiced in Sabah or at least in Kota Kinabalu as I witnessed it. Here whereever you go, you will not fail to notice that people from all walk of life mingle around freely at any place and any time. You see people from different ethnic and religious background gathering in the coffee shop operated by the Chinese. You witness different ethnic groups communicating to each others with Sabahan Malaysia language. You patronise a shop that manage by people from all background. Basically, the line of separation amongst different ethnic group is very blur and cannot distinguish at all if you are not familiar with the mother tongue and slang of that person. While other parts of Malaysia is talking about managed programmes to create opportunities for greater interaction, the atmosphere has been incculcated in such long long time ago and did not changed "yet". Shall we learn from them, our brother state which might be physically not so develop compared to other states in Pennisular Malaysia? In this respect, I would said development and greater interaction might not co-related with each other, and at time conflicting each others. We have come to a state of sacrifying our harmony with the economy progress. We might have relook on the model of development we are envisioned now, I guess.

Community Leadership

As one of the judges for the PJ Sustainable Community Award, I discovered that vibrant, energetic communities with many happenings shared a common thing, that is the presence of strong leadership. The community is always led by a leader with calibre, charisma, resourceful, well connected, out spoken, engaging, able to mobilise the mass and some time is financially sound although it is not a necessity. You can see and sense the different when fronting with leaders with these qualities. You feel so much sense of belonging and caring listening to these leaders. For example, one of the leaders talked about kids in his community with length and passion as if they are his own kids. He kept referring to "our kids" in deliberating the social ills in his community. Another leader talked about how to help the single mothers overcoming their emotionally disturbed mind frame and also economically. He equated them the important component of their neighbourhood.

Leading by example is also critical. Many of the leaders do what they said and practice what they believed. They provide role model for others to learn and practice. They tried first before letting others experiencing the untested tasks, however let others enjoying the benefits first before his turn. I noticed that when community leaders have started doing that, others at least the very few will follow suit. I saw a female leader leading by example to be the first to go up an open topper lorry to go round the neighbourhood making public announcement. I witnessed the leader making arrangement for logistic while waiting for others to come for a function. Although many might have disagreed with leader doing thing with his hand, the reality on the ground is if you do not do that, you will never get thing done.

I saw the discontinue of programmes in the community due to the changing of leadership. When new leader take over, no question about setting his own priority and the need for changing some of the previous programmes. It is rightly so as this is the prerogative for new leader. However, abandoning a popular and sustainable initiative while still have the capacity is highly questionable. I saw a community lets go a recycling programme even those it is highly commendable by others because of the demise of the leader. I felt sad about a neighbourhood losing its stem in continuing the CCTV security scheme when its former leader left the neighbourhood. I am very particular about a neighbourhood of non participation in the activities of local authorities with the change of government although they have been very supportive previously. All these can be overcome if everyone of us especially the leaders understand fully and observe the true meaning of sustainable development, I presume.

Understanding vs Action on Sustainable Development

The judges for sustainable community award of Petaling Jaya have finished their assessment on ground last week. It is such an refreshing experience to learn that many of the community groups including the newcomers have done so many initiatives, either one off or long term programmes over the last one year. We reckoned that perhaps the blossom of the initiatives is mainly due to the able leadership of the organisations. We witnessed how enthutiasme of the chairs in deliberating the programmes they have done and very few have actually mentioned about the difficulty they have encountered along the process. To me, it showed that while meeting obstacles are common, the most important thing for them is the process and outcome. They did not surrender to the pressue but continue to seek for success. I salute almost all of them for the persistence.

Having said this, many improvement are still required. For example, doing the wrong thing for right purpose. One of them suggested to utilise the open space for relocating the hawkers and to build a connecting road between two blocks of flat over the open space. Even some have shown their innocience for allowing car wash operation over the drain without any filtering of waste water measure and covering the drain without any manhole. Some have built the toilet on buffer zone. All these although with good intention of solving their problems and trying to bring community activities on board, do not augur well for the environmental sustainability. I presume many have focusing on social sustainability. On this, promotion on Local Agenda 21 with 3 developmental dimensions, namely social, economy and environment is critical.

World Habitat Day 2011

First Monday of October every year is declared World Habitat Day. Today, 3rd of October is the Day. World Habitat Day is organised to raise awareness on the need of having quality, affordable and sustainable settlements and at the same time to celebrate achievements that enhancing the living environment for human being. It is a Day celebrated world wide especially in UN-Habitat at Nairobi, Africa.

While many have been achieved for improving the living environment and shelter for people, many have yet to be done simply because of the effectiveness of programmes and capacity of the organisers and beneficiaries. For example, eradicating the poverty is top agenda of the list, but the income disparity is getting wider now not only between the developed and undeveloped countries but also inter cities or even rural and urban area in a developed country. The job opportunity is shrinking in the developed nation because of shifting of industries based to other countries. The quality of living environment in the urban area is not at par with those in the rural area due to high cost of living expenses. The vircious circle of poverty amongst the agriculture society at rural area is repeating for the service oriented society in the urban area simply because the earning is never sufficient to cover the cost of living.

Definitely some structural change of the economic model, governance system and society norm or value need to be revisited. Perhaps it is time to refresh all these in this Day.

Happy World Habitat Day 2011.

Macau Guests

I welcomed two delegations from Macau for the past one week. They are social workers and volunteers involving in social work at all field of community development in Macau, ranging from children, elderly, disabled, under privilege and others. With the help of Government, they provide financial and kind assistance to these groups. These include shelter, food, transportation, leisure activities, spiritual and opportunity to interact with other segments of community. I was make to understand that they work tirelessly and with full love and cares.

I briefed them on the community development undertaken by MBPJ and other neighbourhood groups. Many of the programmes are done with partnership and collaboration between the local council and community members. It is the partnership spirit that keep activities going and effective at Petaling Jaya. Of course, with more resources, more actions can be taken.

It is a good interaction and exchange of ideas and views of how to bring humanitarian works to higher ground. And, it is a common goal for every human beings.

Measure vs Manage

Somebody says if you cannot measure something, then you would not be able to manage it. Is this true? Many involving in programmes planning and implementation will share the same sentiments. However, for those in the community development and voluntarisme movement especially for the action-oriented people, this requirement might be too demanding on them. I witnessed how community leaders plan and execute their projects without much details planning. I heard about them not too keen on submitting progress or outcome reports due to time constraint and bureaucratic requirement. Even some do not want to participate in the competition or nomination for awards because of the requirement to go through their records and to write paragraph of statement. So, for these people it is pointless of asking them to quantify what they have done.

Having said this, some will argue that without knowing the result achieved, how can we improve and move forward? I think this is major obstacle we are facing on the ground as many local community groups are short handed and obviously writing report and managing records are not their top priority. For them, showing result instantly is more critical. Thereby, capacity building and providing resources are important if we would like to see community development by the local groups blossom and sustain. The agencies and experts must help in strengthening the capacity of community groups in this aspect --- book keeping and quantification of result. I presume this explain why the calling for submission of PJ Sustainable Community Award met with cold shoulder so far. I was make to understand that only 10 nominations were received up now, a drop of half compared to last year.

Our Iceberg is Melting

I read the book entitled "Our Iceberg is Melting" with great interest recently. The story book telling about how penguin community overcoming the threat of iceberg melting that is affecting their home. The characters as portrayed by various penguins is a reflection of characters of human being that we are facing everyday. While we have leaders who are good in engaging people and leading the solution finding mission, we have also leaders who are dead wood do nothing but trying at every opportunity to discredit others. We also have young generation who care about the environment and to take the initiative to bring to attention of others, we also have youth do not care much and cocoon themselves within their own comfort zone. We also have the personalities that are good in bridging different generation of people, in researching based on scientific and rational approach, in articulating the issues and challenges well, in volunteering themselves for any pilot project and others numerous role plays. While individually everyone will have their own speciality and strength in which under some circumstances is of no use, collectively these strengths can be of great use if synergising is done.

The Book told us how individual penguin with own strength comes together as a team for stronger voice and actions. I presume we should identify such personalities and to bring them on board if community development is there to excel.

Definition of Urban Renewal

Recently I attended a briefing and workshop on the proposed urban renewal plan for Section 51, 51A, 52, Section 8, 7 and 14 of Petaling Jaya. About 200 people comprising representatives from the residents groups, individual, land owners, developers, agencies, MBPJ's councillors and staff attended the briefing done by appointed consultants by the State Government. The consultant supposed to present the preliminary findings about the study as well as letting people know the definition and meaning about urban renewal. It was told that urban renewal can be in the form of redevelopment and or rehabilitation and or regeneration. It is multiple approaches of reviving the life of a city or inner city which is experiencing the degradation of quality of services and life. It can be an industrial area which has been out lived its function or a residential area without proper infrastructure and facilities. It can be abandoned area with no economic activities forthcoming. It is not about redevelopment alone or to tear down the low rise building and to replace with the high density and high rise buildings. It is wrong interpretation and definitely not the intention of this exercise.

However, immediately after the briefing, the participants have voiced out their comments in which implied explicitly that they have misunderstood the planning is for redevelopment. They do not want to see their houses being acquired and do not like to have different landuses or activities within the vicinity of their neighbourhood. No matter how tireless the consultants trying to explain, they do not accept the explaination and insist on non further study. At the end, the session became a complaint dialogue and discussion.

I felt sorry about the level of understanding of residents towards planning. I also felt that MBPJ has not done much to educate the public on reading plan holistically. I think while planning is important, planning without the full support and constructive input from the residents and stakeholders will be a planning to failure. I reckon much need to be done. Perhaps focus group discussion, role play and even solving the daily services problem facing the residents will be of help.

Meaning of Development

I attended a round table discussion entitled Properties Prospect Year 2011 in the Greater Kuala Lumpur area. The speaker spoke about developmental trend and housing index in various part of Malaysia. Comparatively, property investment in Kuala Lumpur area has been given higher yield to the buyers over the last ten years. This is especially so for the residential sub-sector. It is also reckoned that area with good infrastructure and connectivity will be getting more attention now. It is no surprise that area within the vicinity, but not that close to the public transportation hub is in high demand. For example, commercial properties within walking distance of MRT Station is fine, but not those directly blocked by the structure of the station.

The speaker also talked about "pro-development" in which area within the transportation hub should be given higher plot ratio for development and for mixture type of development. It is a concept of getting people to live, play, study and work in a place while travelling is required, then with the public transportation. It is an ideal situation and dream for all city stakeholders. Everyone is striving towards this goal. However, some audience did not agree for having too high intensity of development in PJ fearing that the current traffic problem will be worsened if the proposed transportation improvement is not forthcoming. Their fear is understood as many of the infrastructure projects have not executed as planned within the time frame.

I presume many have spoken about development from the physical point of view. None have actually referred development as total and sustainable development in which apart from the physical component, social, economy and environment are equally important. The discourse about pro and anti development will go on until and unless we agree to the same fundamental meaning of development. If Bhutan people are the most happiest in the World, do you think we still consider the so-called development important? Similarly, if a developed city with all the necessary and state of the art amenities as well as opportunities for a lavish lifestyle that having so much social problems and fear of personal safety is what the development is all about?

I presume basically what people want is to have a basic, simple and down to the earth life that everything is co-habit in harmony state. We want our children to go to school for knowledge enhancement that is better than us without jeopardising their quality of life. We want to earn with dignity to support our family. We want to maintain good neighbourliness with all friends. It is indeed a tall order but achievable if we all have a common understand about the true meaning of development.

Book on PJ Sustainable Communities Initiatives

The Panel of Judges for Petaling Jaya Sustainable Community Award 2011 has a meeting on Monday evening to brainstorm the proposal to publish a book highlighting the achievements done by various community group over the last ten years. The publication is to commensurate the 10th Anniversary celebration of Local Agenda 21 Petaling Jaya implementation. It is worthwhile to celebrate.

Nobody has thought LA 21 PJ can progress to its present stage when the initiative was conceived in year 2000. Petaling Jaya City Council with 3 other local authorities were selected to implement the pilot project for a period of two years. The purpose then was to identify appropriate model for implementation given that the governance system, demographic profile of stakeholders and legal backing are not entirely similar to other countries who have successfully started off the programme. Everyone was so excited to see LA 21 as another platform for greater public participation towards sustainable development.

While the project initiation and involvement of NGO has provided the important impetus for LA 21 PJ to sustain, it is the commitment and dedication of the residents associations that made local sustainable development on going and prosper. Given the governance structure we have on the ground, it is critical to have the involvement of residents associations. Without them, I cannot imagine of filter down the ideas and concept of sustainable development to the grassroots and similarly the authority will have tough time to understand the problems and challenges on the ground. So, the book must be structured in such a way to pay tribute to the residents associations and to highlight their challenges and success for sharing and replication.

At the same time, the contribution of various partners is unforgettable. These include the NGO representatives, panel of judges who have been with this Award since year 2001, school teachers, agencies and staff of MBPJ. They are the hero behind the screen for facilitating the movement of LA 21 to greater height. They are partly responsible to introduce and market LA 21 PJ to other local authorities and stakeholders. Hence, It is of no surprise as some have nominated LA 21 PJ as the case study for next year Johannesburg's Rio + 20 Conference.

Group Discussion

I was invited to moderate group discussion on formulating the Local Agenda 21 Klang Action Plan last Saturday. It was a refreshing experience for me since last April after my new posting. I saw the enthusiasm of participants in drawing out their plan for implementation. At the initial stage, everyone started talking about what they felt important and critical issues for tackling. Many have related the issues to their own encountering and life experience. To me, it is fine as our active participation in the urban planning process is very much associated to how thing can be resolved and benefited us. However, if we have a strong character in the group for which his idea has been imposed on others by default, then it might become a problem for subsequent steps. For example, If my idea is not accepted not because it is no good but rather because I cannot put my message across due to my own weaknesses in communicating, then the method of discussion and consensus building must be changed.

Realising this worry, I started asking every individual to write down 2 major issues that they think are critical and worth for action taken. I told them to relate to their own daily encountering or the objectives of the organisation they represented or the experience and knowledge they have. From a total of 11 participants, 22 issues were put forth and out of that total, 7 shared the common issue on rubbish and 4 on the security concern. Based on the number, the group discussed again on the common issue for solution. They acknowledged that rubbish is the major issue in Klang and need urgent action. They also acknowledged that other 5 groups are most likely will take rubbish as the common issue and as such have selected security as the issue for action planning.

I guided them through for searching the real causes and effects of security. At first, their concern of security is very superficial and tend to be straight forward. For example, the crime rate is high in an area because the presence of workers and absence of enforcers. However, after running through with them the technique of Problem Trees for cause and effect analysis, they realised that they together with other stakeholders shared the same responsibilities, and of course blame for letting the security problem getting worse as perceived.

They have finally come to conclusion that they are talking about the Safe City Programme as they were told before but have no idea on how to be involved and implemented at the level of neighbourhood and city. At the end, I presume they started thinking and refreshed on how they can play an active role in ensuring a safe city and neighbourhood.

Group discussion for action planning process is worthwhile for consideration. For that to happen, every participants must be given a fair and equal chance to participate.

Happiness

Profesor Richard Layard of LES, the renowned researcher on Happiness Study pointed out that a happy society cannot be measured from the income level, GDP and economic growth alone, but more importantly under what circumstances of the family and society especially the youth and children in. The society will be leading to more violence and unrest if the society is filled with unhappy children and youth because as the forgotten load, they are being marginalised and deprived of the opportunities. The fundamental of a happy society is based on the cooperation and collaboration amongst stakeholders rather than pursuing success and wealth as the basis. In most of the society, the emerging of more millionaires is always equated to unhappiness amongst the people. This serves as a good learning experience for the developing countries or those who are searching for success factor on sustainability.

Chapter 25 of Agenda 21 entitled Youth and Children reminded us on the importance of incorporating these groups in the developmental planning and decision making process. As they are forming 30% of the total population, they have the right to be heard what they are aspiring for their future and society norm. The more the children happier in young age, I believe the chances for us to have created a happy society now or in future is brighter.

Moral Judgement

The Panel of Judges for PJ Sustainable Community Award has a lively discussion on moral judgement few days ago. We debated on the right or wrong about a residents organisation donating motorcycles to a public agency for carrying out their duties more efficiently. The argument is since that particular agency is entrusted by law to provide services and they should have done so diligently. Any shortcoming for them to carry out their duties such as lack of resources or manpower should have been the responsibility of that agency. It is not right for the residents organisation who is the beneficiary or end user that enjoying the service to provide resources to the agency with motive of getting better service. Some agreed that contribution of such good gesture under the concept of CSR is OK if the contribution has not in return created favourism, biasness and prejudice. For example, by donating a motorcycle, patrolling has been done more frequently in a particular neighbourhood compared to other neighbouring area is considered morally wrong although legally it is ok as the contribution is meant for public organisation and not an individual.

However, some panelist argued that it is morally wrong for a public agency accepting resources for the purpose of enhancing the efficiency of their jobs after all it is the sole responsibility of the Government to provide and mobilise sufficient resources for the agency to carry out their duties efficiently. It is worried that if an affluent society with generous gesture will create a wrong perception to general public that favourism has been given even though they might be receiving same treatment as others. So, the group argued that it is better to avoid possibility of public forming their perception, wrong one in which contributing resources is perhaps one of them.

Although under LA 21 PJ principles, we are asking community to create better rapport and interaction amongst different stakeholders. In some instances, CSR programmes were used for enhancing this kind of relationship. Perhaps a thin line between CSR and the above will have to determine first in order not create uneasiness amongst public.