What do we mean by Social Dynamics?

Through the week youll have an opportunity to consider what social and social
dynamics means to you; how being involved in Urban Agriculture and Local Foods, for
whatever reason, has social dynamics benefits and also can contribute to a vibrant
family, community and city.
If youre already involved, the conversation may be a catalyst to expand your thinking
on how you could increase your benefits by expanding the social dynamics dimension
of your Urban Agriculture / Local Foods initiative.
To start the conversation on this theme, consider:
When you hear the term social dynamics, or when you hear people talk of social what are you thinking about? There are many facets to this concept.
This post uses the concept of facet as an analogy. Like
facets on a cut diamond or gem stone, these are different
ways to look at a whole - recognizing that none stands
alone, and every facet is influenced by the others in the
whole concept.

- here are some possible facets of the concept of social dynamics that you might
consider:
Is it about one particular aggregations of society - individual persons, families,
neighbourhoods, communities, cities and whole societies? For example, a Teacher
might focus on a classroom, or a school community - or on the school as one part of a
community, while Mayors might focus on the communities and neighbourhoods within
their city boundaries - and how their city relates to other centres as well as the whole
province. Youll see references in the videos to individuals benefits (their own or
others), to benefits for a group - associated with an agency for example, as well as to
overall community benefits,
Do you think mostly about agencies who deliver services,(and if so, does it relate
mostly to sorrow systems - family violence, bullying, poverty reduction, homelessness,
disease prevention or treatment, etc) - and to supporting vulnerable people? Some of
the videos describe how they provide food for agencies who support vulnerable
people. Or you might think mostly about the many sectors whose policies and
services are about people (including education, health, justice, culture, social
services etc) Dustin Bajers story focuses on the K-12 education for example, while
Annette Anderwalds videos focus on nutrition and personal / family wellbeing.
Or do you think mostly about advancing, growing social assets through learning and
developing skills and mindsets associated with resilience and long term sustainable
vitality by developing skills and knowledge to adapt to the challenges that life brings.
If the latter, this might bring an interest in strategies such as learning in different life
stages, health promotion, community development, quality of life development etc)?
Mark Holmgren, in the Bissell story, describes their interest in this latter approach.

Matthias Inc: Connecting for Innovation

November, 2013

Do you think theres benefit from using both approaches, or is one more compelling
than the other?
Do you focus exclusively on one of the age cohorts or stages in a life course (children,
youth, adults, seniors)? On one kind of community - boom communities, rural or
urban centres?
Is it about the whole, that encompasses physical, mental, relational and
meaning/identity, or mainly about one dimension? In our move to specialization, it
wont be surprising if your focus is mostly about one or another of the dimensions and
you dont have many ways to consider strategies for the whole.
Is it one of cost - of providing services to meet vulnerable peoples needs, of wealth
transfer, of charitable acts? Or is it about growing value - and recognizing that social
assets are part of a vibrant society?

Or you may incorporate two or three of those facets in the stories you tell about Urban
Agriculture or local foods. The videos describe some of the benefits people identify, and
suggest what they might be thinking of when asked about the social benefits of Urban
Agriculture.
You may consider yet other facets of Social Dynamics:
Is your habitual assumption about survival - getting by? Or is it about thriving, of being
healthy and vibrant, of achieving highest potential - of individuals, families and peer
support groups, or of neighbourhoods communities and cities? And if it is about
thriving, how do we construct agencies and services so they operate in alignment with
this intent? And how might choosing one or the other influence how we value social
assets?
Do you assume that health and social dimensions (or assets) are stagnant (or a fixed
standard to be achieved) at best, or a gradual deterioration (vicious spiral) at worst?
Or could we recognize that in a virtuous spiral of development that social assets can
grow and develop - perhaps even to flourish and achieve highest potential over time if
tended properly through developmental stages across the life course? Consider how
the stories and case studies describe these.
If we think about growing social assets, could we consider activities to grow and
improve those assets as investments? And if we focus more on the investment
potential - do we then look for ways that people, neighbourhoods and communities
grow and develop desirable characteristics - inclusive, safe, vibrant - and maintain
those characteristics in the face of changing demographics and new housing forms?
And does that help us consider the relative merits of different strategies not just from
the outcomes they create, but also their comparative return on the investment?
And if it is attractive to go in this direction, do we understand enough about the factors
and processes involved in growth and development to sustainable vitality - and how
do we count and value the various facets of social assets as well as this progress?

Matthias Inc: Connecting for Innovation

November, 2013

Our assumptions are that:

Social Dynamics is a multi-faceted concept, and different people will focus on
different facets.
Expanding the ways that we consider Social, and Social Dynamics in Urban
Agriculture and Local Foods can be translated into other activities, and can help to find
new ways to achieve our dreams for ourselves, our families and our communities.
Looking at how people can be involved in Urban Agriculture / Local Foods helps us
see strengths, even in the most vulnerable - and helps us see how individuals and
groups develop and deepen those strengths even more, growing their resilience, long
term sustainable vitality and quality of life in the process.
If we design Urban Agriculture and Local Foods initiatives purposefully for multiple
outcomes, we can maximize our impact - with social outcomes (or assets), as well as
knowledge, environmental and economic outcomes/assets.
Looking at Urban Agriculture and Local Foods for multiple outcomes helps us
understand better how to operationalize the aim of the Land Use Framework to
consider social, environmental and economic factors.
By creating multiple outcomes, that we will have more well-rounded, sustainable
initiatives, as well as welcome more people to be involved. We also need to count
social assets in new ways, together with other individual and societal assets to get a
well-rounded picture - a new kind of progress.

Matthias Inc: Connecting for Innovation

November, 2013