The Gordian (un)Knot: unravelling systemic issues though community-centred approaches
This past month, I've found myself crossing new thresholds. Most recently, I've taken up harmonica lessons and shifted to self-employment (not as a harmonicist, yet). These changes are, in part, an effort to slow down and focus my energies on my PhD.
At the heart of my doctoral research sits a long-time curiosity: What needs to change to better enable local people to make decisions about local futures?
We're at a crucial juncture. The challenges we face - from climate change to social inequality - demand new ways of thinking about, governing, and resourcing change.
Our modern Gordian Knot – a tangle of interconnected systems and issues - doesn't have a 'single stroke' solution. Instead, we need to patiently unravel this knot together, thread by thread.
As I join the many others exploring possibilities for deep, long-term systemic change in Australia, several themes and curiosities are emerging for me:
Context matters
I believe part of the reason for the challenges we're experiencing across Australia - indeed, globally - is that decisions are often disconnected (or ‘dis-located’) from context. Each community has its own history, culture, and local ecosystems. Top-down solutions often fail to align with local realities, leading to unsustainable outcomes. Community-centred approaches can harness local knowledge to create solutions deeply connected to place.
When decisions are made by those with a strong connection to a place, priorities shift. It's not just about short-term gains or the next election cycle, but about what we want for our children, and future generations. This longer time horizon naturally leads to more sustainable thinking. Imagine making decisions about land use not just for the next five years, but for the next fifty or hundred. It's this kind of fundamental shift that I believe could transform how we approach development and governance.
Relationships, responsibility, and accountability
In many Indigenous cultures, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures, there's a deep understanding of our interconnectedness - not just with other humans, but with the more-than-human world. This worldview nurtures a sense of responsibility and accountability that extends far beyond legal or financial obligations.
I'm particularly interested in how we can incorporate this relational thinking into modern governance structures. When we make decisions from this place of relationship, we're not just ticking boxes or meeting quarterly targets. We're honouring our connections and thinking holistically about the impacts of our choices. It's about recognising that we're part of a complex, interdependent ecosystem, and that our actions have far-reaching effects we might not immediately see.
A relational approach to governance challenges us to create structures that privilege community voice and decision-making, while balancing this with broader system needs. These structures must recognise that communities are neither homogeneous nor isolated; rather, they're part of a wider system including other actors like philanthropists, investors, and government entities.
Ultimately, this relational approach to governance aims to create a framework where all stakeholders can work together responsibly and accountably, recognising that our decisions today shape the world future generations will inherit.
Redefining wealth and success
Central to this reimagining of governance is a broader conception of wealth and success. For too long, we've been fixated on narrow financial metrics as the primary measure of progress. But what if we expanded our understanding of wealth to include social capital, cultural knowledge, ecological health, and community wellbeing? This isn't about dismissing financial considerations - they remain important. But it's about placing them within a larger context of what truly makes a community thrive.
There's an opportunity to shift from language that reinforces centralised decision-making and individual ownership towards concepts of shared responsibility, collective benefit, and long-term stewardship of community resources.
This perspective reframes community members as caretakers rather than owners, implying a duty to preserve and enhance resources. Community custodianship presents a model for long-term prosperity, beyond just immediate financial returns.
Living the questions
The further I progress, I find myself gathering more questions than answers. Channeling Rilke, I hope to live into the questions (I acknowledge there is a lost opportunity for an ‘action-learning’ pun here).
Some questions that I'm currently holding are:
How can we design governance models and financial structures that allow community members to meaningfully access, influence, and make decisions alongside other stakeholders? It's not about pitting communities against other actors, but encouraging true interdependence and shared decision-making.
What new language and framing can we use to better reflect ideas of community custodianship of capital, rather than ownership?
How can we develop local capability and expertise to understand and balance risks and opportunities, while effectively managing legal, financial, and fiduciary duties?
How do we balance the need to make decisions and move forward with the complexity of the issues at hand, without getting trapped in indecision?
What mechanisms can we put in place to ensure decision-making truly considers long-term, intergenerational impacts?
What do you think? What are you noticing, and what questions are coming up for you? I'd love to hear others' thoughts and experiences.
Learn more
I believe that the knowledge generated through my PhD research belongs to the commons. I’ve created this site to share my research interests and insights, and offer others the opportunity to engage with these ideas.
Please subscribe for updates, or reach out directly if you’re interested in learning more or potential involvement.
