The Forum theatre script : understanding different concerns of degrowth

Degrowth sources – interactive presentation based on forum-theater technique.

PILOT Degrowth course – Can Decreix – Project GROWL 16-21 MAY 2014

Forum Theatre – Role play on the sources and dimensions

Sunday 18 10h-13h Can Decreix, Cerbère

COOKING CHICK PEAS

Can Decreix, Cerbère

A six person theatre play. Each character defends his concerns from the perspective of one source of degrowth and (playingly) explain some of the ideas for implementing degrowth in each of these. The fields to be tackled was: large scale infrastructures, money/currencies, natural resources exploitation, social comparison, advertising, working time, planned obsolescence & single use. We will use photos, video support, and recalling the walk of the previous day.

Presenters were expected to act strong (and emotionally) on their position.

The audience is expected to intervene at every single moment of the performance. It leads to a debate on each field between the different actors, possibly followed by a fish bowl

For example: Infrastructure degrowth was defended from an ecological economics perspective, from environmental conflicts perspective, from an anti-utilitarian perspective, from a democracy perspective and from a voluntary simplicity perspective etc.

This was followed by a debate on the relevance of the multi-source and multi-dimensionality of degrowth, and generally the implications of the reductionist approches.

----------------------------------------------

The objectives

Teaching degrowth: explanation of sources of degrowth (the main concerns around degrowth like justice, ecology, democracy, bioeconomy, buen vivir, conviviality etc.) and dimensions of degrowth (the main areas to deal with, related to limits to growth: time, availability of resources, money, social comparison, need to consume, productive capacity etc.) as well as their complementarity, Finally it is about an experimentation of teaching method based on forum theatre.

Needs

We needed to have

- good basic scenarios that link the different dimensions of degrowth: The chick pea scenario

- clear area for public and for the theatre to take place (the scene); At the Garage?

- actors for the basic scenario

- actors focalized on each source of degrowth

- good preparation by actors

The steps

0- Presentation of the different degrowth source fans (justice, ecology, democracy, bioeconomy, buen vivir, conviviality etc.) that come with their specific hat, this is the occasion to explain the background of each source and make the link with the authors presented the previous day (that are usually not linked to a single source). The actors, on the contrary to degrowth authors, are “mono-source” for our play (we exaggerate this character, they are some kind of maniacs).

1- Problematic 1 is played – Resources availability

The participants focus at first on the need to cook chick peas with gas as fundamental satisfier of their need for food.

Story line: “We want to cook chick peas and there is no more gas, we call Putin, he explains that there is no more gas; Gas is getting more and more expensive. More and more problems with the exploitation in Siberia (commodity frontier), gas is used for war…”

The different source actors react on the problematic 1

Justici could say we have to stop exploiting land of indigenous people in Siberia and stop importing gaz from there, a carbon allowance small and equal for all

Ecolog could say we have to respect ecosystems there they are more important than humans, and demand small scale renewables respecting nature

Bioeconomy could begin to design resource caps, we can certainly optimize the use of gaz to use it in low amounts

Democrat could be worried with carbon caps, and call for small scale decentralized energy sources, and a referendum for a moratorium on fossil fuels

Happy would say we do not need energy as we can eat raw germinated chick peas, feel the energy in the chick pea and ask for a meditation

Convivial could say that we can cook with wood that our neighbors give away, we give around wine and bread to all also

The public reacts on the problematic 1

Searching for integrated solution for resources availability

2- Playing of problematic 2 - Infrastructures of production

The players

“French people in response want to exploit shale gas to secure deliveries, and they are thinking of a new "gazoduc" (gas pipeline) passing by Can Decreix, gas consumption is booming...”

The different source actors react on the problematic 2

Justici could say that this is unfair

Ecolog could say this will destroy local ecosystems, especially there is a rare vitex…

Bioeconomy could say that we need small scale infrastructure

Democrat would say nobody asked us, this is not democratic, we need to debate what type of energy infrastructure we want

Happy would say that this will reduce the quality of life, what is important is not the infrastructure

Convivial could say that it will destroy the community

The public reacts on the problematic 2

Searching for integrated solution

3- Playing of problematic 3 - time to work

“The gazoduc and shale gas infrastructures development enable to develop Cerbère. The time aspect: some are stressed at work, others are unemployed, and people have no motivation for their work…”

The different source actors react on the problematic 3

Justici could say we need equal and small work hours

Ecolog that we need work coherent with the respect of ecosystems

Bioeconom would reduce working hours faster than material efficiency

Democrat could we need a referendum on working hours

Happy could say we need to work in something fulfilling, and very little in line with lafarge

Convivial could say that he would give his time to care others

The public reacts on the problematic 4

Searching for integrated solution

4 – “Following adverts for new kitchen, Can Decreix inhabitants can now cook chick peas in their all furnished kitchen. This makes South Catalans envious on the other side of the borders, also those that did not manage a job in the gazoduc. It develops anti-immigrant discourses; Can Decreix locks its doors

Last minute, things change, the infrastructure work is finished, shale gas is now exploited in Portbou; jobs and good earning s are now in Portbou. Cerberians have now to go to Portbou to cook chick peas...

The border gets definitely closed on the Belitre pass; some still pass by the tunnel...”

Same pattern

Justici could say if we are all equal no need to close borders, all on earth have the same rights

Ecolog that we need to define bioregions

Bioeconom would set models based on low material flow indicators

Democrat would call for democratic debates defend that we can have a strong variey of lifestyles

Happy could say that it is the frustration that makes us unhappy

Convivial would share his kitchen

5 - Monetary – “There were special deals to all these infrastructures got the state very indebted, also people have to reimburse their new kitchens. Land is destroyed and we have a financial crisis”

Same pattern

Justici could say that we all need the same access to money

Ecolog that we need to base currencies on trees

Bioeconom would reduce monetary capacity with 100% reserve banks

Democrat that all this shall be debated

Happy that money is not what is important for happiness

Convivial get rid of money and function on gift economy

6- Collective conclusion. Looking for multidimensional solutions, the goal is to get all the source actors to understand of the relevance of each concern in order to avoid having outrageous proposals related to reductionist thinking