Being Open: Reflections on Evergreen
The past five weeks have been a phenomenal learning experience (while being a very challenging commuting experience) as I have had the opportunity to hear from a variety of people from diverse backgrounds working in a dizzying array of fields. As a student who often feels insulated within the SPPG policy community being able to step outside and meet others who participate in this arena allowed for a more holistic perspective about the field I have chosen to build a career in. I think this expansion has been heartening ( especially given the OPS hiring freeze) because so much policy work exists in so many different places and can be done in so many different ways…the opportunities to contribute feel boundless, a very motivating realization for a young person starting out in their career. I think the course for me was grounded in rejecting boundaries or bounded-ness.
For example, our first guest speaker Zahra’s notion of challenging the orthodoxy was fundamentally about boundaries, challenging them both in the form of rigid processes or the almost mindless, repeated, monotonous churning of the status quo. This notion really resonated with me and eventually influenced the idea my team and I landed on for our final project: challenging the use of orthodox and punitive disciplinary policies in schools because things can always be different and can lead to significant outcomes. So it’s important to question why the status quo exists, whom it benefits or harms, and how it can be changed. Accepted realities need to be challenged and other voices and perspectives need to be heard.
That is why truly listening and understanding others is an extremely important part of our job not just to create effective change through policies but also to implement them successfully. An interesting case study on this matter was our experience speaking with different stakeholders involved in the development of Quayside. The language that Bianca Wiley, Waterfront Toronto, and Sidewalk Labs used to describe and envision the development was so radically different that at times it felt like we were speaking about completely different projects. Despite the fact that all sides had interacted with each other over an extensive period of time it felt as though they had never truly listened or understood one another. While the project itself challenged orthodoxies it has been mired in controversy.
The importance of doing so was reiterated by our guest speaker Brian Kelcey this past week. He recounted that his proudest moment was in a brokering an understanding between Loggers and Environmental Activists in B.C who had been fighting against each other by getting them to realize that they both wanted the same thing: sustainable forests. However, because both sides were so wrapped up in their cause, they only perceived each other as opponents and failed to truly listen and spot common ground. Yet, as an outsider, Brian was able to hear the similarities just after a day. And once these groups joined together they were more successful in getting desired policy changes than they could ever dream of when working against one another. They were unexpectedly effective allies.
So, if I could use one word to describe this course it would be “open” because throughout this course I learned that as policymakers we should be open to new ideas, perspectives, and people, open to new ways of learning and doing things, open to hearing and understanding different views, open to the idea that opponents and allies are fluid constructs, and open to envisioning policy in the endless ways that are possible.
