Julie Wright's Blog

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sIiT7Oqp4K4LyzfaQtQVr_gcxnkwmqPB8bwzNl2yLl0/edit?usp=sharing

Students: Cate Adams, Emma Clopton, Isabelle Spirk, Julie Wright

Below is a link to the Southside Permaculture Park’s updated conceptual framework presentation on slide #4.

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/12PpiSbNSkrDF3GAymxGw653CdBuVi8NAJ3Nzlg-jQp8/edit?usp=sharing

Conceptual Framework Slides: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/12PpiSbNSkrDF3GAymxGw653CdBuVi8NAJ3Nzlg-jQp8/edit?usp=sharing

Students: Cate Adams, Emma Clopton, Isabelle Spirk, Julie Wright 

Fall Midterm Presentation Reflection

• Overall, we feel as though the presentation went fairly well. We were much more confident in our work and had a lot to offer content wise.
• Our questions were much more in-depth than prior presentations. In past presentations, a lot of the questions were asking for clarification of what the permaculture philosophy truly is and about growing food, but this time we had a lot more in depth questions asking how we will be able to truly immerse ourselves into the community and make an impact. 
• Given that our overarching philosophy may now be better understood, we can spend more time to quickly lay down our concrete accomplishments and vision for how this project is scalable and can carry into the future. Breaking our project down into actionable tasks we have accomplished helps better communicate our progress.
• We did receive repetitive questions asking how we can expand our project land space wise, which we always remind people that we are dealing with the current challenges of even gaining permission to have non-Lehigh members use the space. Overall, it feels like the referees and students seem to have a better grasp of the project as we have made significant strides in solidifying our project goals. 
• Now that we have a much stronger understanding of community engagement and a stronger presence in the community, if we allow for community member access we can explore more specific ways that we can tailor this project to community needs beyond open-access greenspace. Looking further into different demographics rather than just the very large-scale environmental health benefits is a good next step for this project. 
• For the next presentation, we definitely need to reduce the amount of content we have, since we unfortunately blew through time and were unable to cover several important points.

Students: Cate Adams, Emma Clopton, Isabelle Spirk, Julie Wright

Describe at least 5 partnerships with individuals and/or organizations that have been formed, or could be formed, to advance your venture

Community Action Development Bethlehem:

1. What constituted the partnership?

Another professor connected us with CADB and we started attending their Public + Green Space Committee meetings as well as a series of community town halls they held in the Spring. 

1. How did the partner help you? How did you help them?

Our partnership with CADB helped connect us with community members who could provide insight on community needs, and we were able to demonstrate Lehigh’s willingness to participate in community projects and be a listening ear to the community. 

3. Was this a symbiotic relationship? Why or why not?

This is a symbiotic relationship but we could offer more to CADB as they have provided us with several resources and opportunities. However, we do know that they value our presence on behalf of the Lehigh community. 

4. What would help strengthen this partnership and make it more equitable?

What would make this partnership more equitable is being able to offer more concrete action items to CADB. While one of our fellows interns for them, the permaculture park itself mostly provides community support rather than specific events or initiatives. 

Natural Builders’ Guild

1. What constituted the partnership?

The 2022 team connected with Mark Southard from Artisanal Structures to assist with their toolshed project. Mark also is involved in the Natural Builders’ Guild, which is a volunteer group that helps to build structures for the local community out of natural materials. 

1. How did the partner help you? How did you help them?

The NBG helped us to build our toolshed and is currently helping us with our archway and signage. In exchange, we provide promo for the NBG and genuine projects for them to take part in.  

1. Was this a symbiotic relationship? Why or why not?

This is a symbiotic relationship, however, we could provide more for the NBG promotion wise. They do sincerely appreciate the work we provide for them, our project mission, and to be able to take part in a project that benefits a larger community. 

1. What would help strengthen this partnership and make it more equitable?

What would help to make this partnership more equitable is be able to help the NBG more often potentially on other projects that are for the community. Ever since COVID, they have had a rough time keeping the organization together and finding projects to do. Also, we could direct them to contacts we are aware of that are in need of assistance from an organization like the NBG.

 

Lehigh Health and Wellness Center

1. What constituted the partnership?

Two students from Sophomore pLUnge developed a project that helps students gain free access to locally grown produce. This is meant to combat the issue of limited healthy foods on campus. They reached out asking if we would be willing to provide food for the new fridge in the HWC.

1. How did the partner help you? How did you help them?

The partnership helps us by giving us an outlet to give away our produce to the Lehigh community. We help them by providing the resources they need for students on a bi-weekly basis

1. Was this a symbiotic relationship? Why or why not?

Yes, this is a symbiotic relationship because they assist us in getting our produce out, and help us achieve our goal of providing nourishing food for the local community.

1. What would help strengthen this partnership and make it more equitable?

For them to provide assistance to our project by giving us more promo to get more students to know about our work.  They could also support our project by providing resources to get seeds/plants to grow more food for the fridge. On our end, we could provide more produce for the HWC fridge, however we are fairly limited at this time.  

 

Community Growers

1. What constituted the partnership?

Community Growers is also a student organization at Lehigh invested in environmental initiatives at Lehigh, who we work with to table at the Bethlehem Farmers’ Market and to coordinate student events.

1. How did the partner help you? How did you help them?

• Community Growers helps us because they have large numbers and pull from Lehigh Students. Hosting events in conjunction with CG allows us to have productive work days with lots of students that helps us to get work done that otherwise would have taken much longer. 
• We help CG because we provide a space for students interested in growing/planting food that they otherwise would not have.

1. Was this a symbiotic relationship? Why or why not?

This is a symbiotic relationship because we are able to help provide Community Growers with activities and learning opportunities, and connect them to other community-based organizations, and they are able to offer us physical support and student interest, helping to build our credibility. 

1. What would help strengthen this partnership and make it more equitable?

We could make this partnership more equitable by offering opportunities for feedback so that we can better understand the needs of Community Growers and how their members feel about the events we do with them, rather than just planning them with the executive board of their club. 

 

Bethlehem Farmers’ Market

1. What constituted the partnership?

Previous teams of the permaculture park began the partnership with Bethlehem Farmers’ Market and regularly tabled at the market with the goal of educating about permaculture ethics and principles and community building.  Our team has continued to do so this past summer and into the fall.  

1. How did the partner help you? How did you help them?

This partner helped us by providing us with a space to promote our project and talk with Bethlehem residents. 

1. Was this a symbiotic relationship? Why or why not?

This is less of a symbiotic relationship as they are providing us with the physical space to promote our project and we are just using it, but we could potentially draw more people to the Farmers’ Market as we do promote it beforehand when we have a presence. 

1. What would help strengthen this partnership and make it more equitable?

What would help to strengthen this partnership is to potentially ask the staff or Farmers’ Market attendees about what they think of our presence so that we can further tailor it to the interests of the market and its attendees, so that we are contributing more to the overall scheme of the market and not just taking up space. 

Part 2: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1wyvd3-e_3hEapVh1JNxURmf45bpEJICI988hLarwRxo/edit?usp=sharing

Students: Julie Wright, Cate Adams, Ava DeLauro, Y Lam, Emily Tsao, Zelalem Ayalew

 

Part 1

 

Step 1: Determine the facts in the situation – obtain all of the unbiased facts possible. Clearly state the ethical issue.

• Ugochi founded SYE-T (Soccer for Youth Empowerment Tournament)
• This tournament is for vulnerable children from cities around the US
• Over 30,000 youth benefit each year from pre-selection training & program engagement
• Ugochi gained support from over 50 in-kind sponsors that provided the kids with priceless experiences and connections that can help them shape a better future
• Spikey, a shoe manufacturing company, sponsored SYE-T for $2 million which allowed Ugochi to expand the number of participating cities from 5 to 15.
• However, Spikey uses 3 manufacturers in Cambodia that employ children under the age of 12 in their facilities
• The children work up to 60 hours a week with no education benefits
• Ugochi is concerned about the labor practices of Spikey
• The problem is that Ugochi is trying to support the well-being of children in the U.S. while being complicit in perpetuating a similar problem abroad. She doesn’t know if it is ethical to stay in partnership with Spikey because they are investing $2 million in the program and the money has helped her create an effective program 
• Youths participate in SYE-T from more than 20 cities

 

Step 2: Define the Stakeholders – those with a vested interest in the outcome

• Ugochi 
• Children/participants 
• Other donors
• Spikey
• Cambodian Youth 
• First contractor 
• Other two contractors 
• Local churches, schools, universities, businesses 

 

Step 3: Assess the motivations of the Stakeholders

• Ugochi – To create a sustainable social venture that empowers youth to address high crime rates and the consequences of crime 
• Children/participants – Build personal, professional, and social skills while playing sports 
• Other donors – Support SYE-T professionally 
• First contractor – Support Spikey and provide education as well as shorter work weeks for students 
• Cambodian Youth – Support their families and obtain an education 
• Other two contractors – Support Spikey 
• Spikey – Build a socially progressive brand and wants to increase the number of stakeholders for better profit
• Local churches, schools, universities, businesses – Contribute to the community while also further establishing their own entity 

 

Step 4: Formulate (at least three) alternative solutions – based on information available, using

fundamental ethical core values as guide

 

Approach 1

• Potential solution – Turn a blind eye. Continue working with Spikey and the three contractors. 
• Ethical Principle or code
• Pros – We have good relationships with Spikey and have some ground internationally. 
• This may hurt the credibility of the SYE-T given that they are hurting youth across the globe, raises ethical concerns about working with unethical constructs

 

Approach 2

• Potential solution – Do not work with Spikey anymore 
• Ethical Principle or code- Virtue-based thinking: Working with Spikey does not align with
  Ugochi’s values
• Pros – May open space to forge new partnerships, stop working with a company that has labor practices that are not ethical
• Cons – The program will initially have to shrink, and halt progress, and students may drop from the program entirely 

 

Approach 3 

• Reconnect with old partnerships 
• Ethical Principle or code
• Pros – Strengthening old relationships and rekindling trust, can create more sustainable partnerships that align with Ugochi and the children’s goals 
• Cons – May not be guaranteed to work with old partnerships again 

 

Step 5: Seek additional assistance, as appropriate – engineering codes of ethics, previous cases, peers, reliance on personal experience, inner reflection

• Contact other youth community engagement programs to see how they approached sponsorships and contractors, talk to community engagement officials and business managers within Spikey about community relations and company ethics.  
• Consider public opinion with the community 

 

Step 6: Select the best course of action – that which satisfies the highest core ethical values.

Explain reasoning and justify. Discuss your stance vis-a-vis other approaches discussed in the class.

 

The best course of action is to attempt to reconnect with old partnerships. These partnerships align the best with Ugochi’s vision for the program and may be able to help the organization continue sustainably while continuing its growth. This also gives room for SYE-T to stop working with Spikey and find other supporters by having more credibility, as working with Spikey hurts the venture given that their contractors have contradictory values with SYE-T. 

 

Step 7: (If applicable) What are the implications of your solution on the venture. Explain the

impact of your solution

 

The venture doesn’t need Spikey anymore to be successful because it is already well-known and established. Reconnecting with old partnerships may be a more efficient and ethical choice. This way, SYE-T will be associated with partners that better align with its values and can better aid the children in creating a brighter future for themselves. As a result, SYE-T will grow in a more sustainable way and continue fulfilling its mission.

 

Part 2

 

Grassroots Diplomacy Strategy Development Methodology

 

Step 1: Determine the facts in the situation – obtain all of the unbiased facts possible

• Ugochi has a meeting with Mr. Mikey, the head of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) for Spikey
• Mr. Mikey insists that there was nothing to be concerned about in Cambodia
• He wants to shift the focus away from the vulnerable youth
• He wants the competition to only be for men over 18 years old. 
• He wants to exclude women and suggests that they be cheerleaders for the event instead
• Mikey threatens to stop sponsoring the event
• Losing Spikey as a sponsor would cause Ugochi to lose 80% of her funding; leaving her with only 20% of the funding
• Ugochi would have to downsize the program and restrict participants

 

Step 2: Define the problem and the stakeholders – those with a vested interest in the outcome

 

The problem is the conflict of interests between SYE-T and Spikey, and how Spikey is threatening to pull out funding. 

 

Ugochi 

The children 

Mr. Mikey 

 

Step 3: Determine and distinguish between the personal and professional motivations of the

stakeholders.

 

Ugochi 

• Personal: Help children build their social and professional skills through an athletic program 
• Professional: Manage organization with ethical partnerships that do not discriminate and empower people equitably 

The children 

• Personal: Build social and professional skills, play soccer–have fun!
• Professional: Participate in a meaningful organization and force partnerships with different cities 

Mr. Mikey 

• Personal: Alter SYT-E so that only certain types of people are able to participate in soccer
• Professional: Maintain the image of Spikey by driving SYT-E towards Spikey’s branding 

Step 4: Formulate (at least three) alternative solutions – based on information available, to have a win-win situation for your relationship and your venture.

 

Approach 1

• Potential Solution – Surrender to Mr. Mikey 
• How does it solve the problem?
  • Pros – We continue relationships with Spikey and have their support from their sponsorships
  • Cons – We lose face as an organization as we process with Mr. Mikey’s sexist takes. We also reduce the population on whom we intend to help with our mission. Our purpose becomes blurred. 
• How does it save face of those involved?
  • It doesn’t … maybe only Spikey because they still maintain their reputation and look charitable by funding SYE-T
• Implications on relationships
  • Short-term – SYE-T and Spikey continue being partners 
  • Long-term – SYE-T’s image becomes harmed 
• Implications on the venture
  • Short-term – Ugochi won’t have to scale down her operations and will continue getting funding from Spikey
  • Long-term – Hurts other people’s willingness to partner with SYT-E, diminishes the overall mission of the program 

Approach 2

• Potential Solution – Negotiate with Spikey and let women and youth participate in the games (Potentially fire/expose Mr. Mikey)
• How does it solve the problem?
  • Pros – Mikey may understand Ugochi’s perspective and agree 
  • Cons- this negotiation may cause SYE-T to lose the funds provided by Spikey
• How does it save the face of those involved?

• Spikey will benefit from the youths and can expand its network and make it publicity to attract more stakeholders
• SYE-T will continue providing support for the youths and can reach many other youths in different parts of the country 

• Implications on relationships
  • Short-term – May strain relationship between Spikey and SYT-E as a whole 
  • Long-term – Changes dynamics between stakeholders and may permanently shift who has decision-making power 
• Implications for the venture
  • Short-term – Halts program progress as new developments have to be figured out 
  • Long-term – Allows women to participate, but gives Spikey decision-making power and may lead to permanent shifts in what the program prioritizes 

Approach 3

• Potential Solution – Cut all ties with Spikey and Mr. Mikey
• How does it solve the problem?
  • Pros – SYE-T won’t be associated with Spikey and their shady manufacturers in Cambodia, and the program won’t be changed from the original mission
  • Cons – Losing 80% of funding and having to significantly downsize the SYE-T operation and the number of kids they can help; it will also be harder to operate and sustain its programs with less funding
• How does it save the face of those involved?
  • Allows SYE-T to continue to work towards their original mission with a clear conscience. Actions speak louder than words and cutting Spikey off shows they are truly committed to bettering the lives of youth around the world
  • It protects SYE-T’s reputation and credibility by distancing itself from the unethical practices of Spikey
• Implications on relationships
  • Short-term – no more business relationship with Spikey
  • Long-term – SYE-T will have to build and maintain new partnerships for support; SYE-T will have to rebuild trust with donors and stakeholders after severing ties with Spikey because it will cause the program to change
• Implications on the venture
  • Short-term – cutting ties with Spikey could cause some financial instability for the venture; it will disrupt SYE-T operations because it will need to find other sources of funding and might have to make sacrifices to stay afloat
  • Long-term – Without funding from Spikey, SYE-T will have to adapt its program and downsize

 

Step 5: Seek additional assistance, as appropriate – previous cases, peers, reliance on personal

experience, inner reflection

• Consult other head managers in Spikey to talk about Mr. Mikey’s behaviors and comments. See if there could be mediation. Also, discuss the plans again with Spikey to reconsider both stakeholders’ images and intentions.
• Talk to the youth about their feelings and experiences in the program. Use this data to bring in discussions with Spikey.
• Seek additional assistance from other executives within Spikey as to how to proceed with dealing with Mr. Mikey, and reach out to trusted peers in the social entrepreneurship sphere to seek advice on how to negotiate with partners and other funding sources.

 

Step 6: Select the best course of action – that solves the problem, saves face, and has the best short-term and long-term implications for your relationship and venture. Explain reasoning and discuss your solution vis-a-vis other approaches discussed in class.

 

The best solution is to cut ties with Spikey because this allows for better development of SYE-T. Cutting ties with Spikey would have the program temporarily shrink, but this does not mean that they cannot bounce back from this. It’s best to stay true to the mission of SYT-E so that the development of the program is put to good use. 

 

Step 7: List the sequence of actions you will take to implement your solution.

1. Explain to Mr. Mikey why SYE-T is splitting from Spikey 
2. Inform all of SYT-E and explain what areas of the programs have to shrink
3. Meet with the SYT-E team to discuss the next steps and how to rebuild the organization 
4. Carry out plan 
   1. Identify alternative funding sources
   2. Revise the budget that will make up for the Spikey funding losses, create a new expansion plan for the future
   3. Reach out to original local organizations and explain to them what happened and suggest plans to reconnect and reestablish their programs for SYE-T
   4. Be transparent with the public about Spikey and why the split is occurring

Julie Wright 

Step 1: Determine the facts in the situation – obtain all of the unbiased facts possible

• Jack was an American student living at a youth center in Kenya 
• Four children did not receive gifts sent by an international organization
• Jack was asked to hand out the gifts 
• The children thought the gifts were from Jack 
• Jack did not want to tell the kids the gifts were from them 
• There were a few black hats that Jack gave out to the kids who didn’t get gifts 
• The four kids were not happy because they were not celebrated as much as the kids who got gifts 
• Jack talked to the staff about the incident
• Staff were not receptive to the incident and told him to not be a “childrens’ rights activist” 

Step 2: Define the problem and the stakeholders – those with a vested interest in the outcome

The problem is that four kids were upset by this incident and the organization does not care. 

Stakeholders 

• Jack 
• The four children 
• The youth center staff
• The other children 
• The international organization 

Step 3: Determine and distinguish between the personal and professional motivations of the

Stakeholders.

Jack’s personal motivations are to repair the harm that was created because of this organization, but his professional motivations are to ensure equity and fair treatment of the children takes place in the organization. The childrens’ motivations are to feel celebrated and be treated fairly. The youth center staffs’ personal and professional motivations are to keep any matters from getting out of hand and keep the organization running smoothly.

Step 4: Formulate (at least three) alternative solutions – based on information available, to have a win-win situation for your relationship and your venture.

Solution 1: Have Jack buy new gifts for the four children and hand them out in a similar manner 

This would solve the problem by making the four children feel celebrated and by showing them that their feelings were listened to and that Jack made an effort to address the situation.

Pros – This helps the children feel better. 

Cons – This does not address whatever caused the problem in the first place and the fact that the staff does not appear to see this as an issue. 

This saves face of the organization by reducing the conflict to Jack’s wrongdoing, even though that is not the case, as something he can easily address, allowing him to rebuild the relationship with the children. 

• Implications on relationships

o Short: This repairs the harm done to the four children. 

o Long-term: No real long-term impacts besides potential stronger relationships with the four children. 

• Implications on the venture

o Short-term: May annoy the youth center staff 

o Long-term: May create distrust by handling conflicts in a way that the staff do not agree with or understand 

 

Solution 2: Contact the organization that sent the gifts, alert them of the issue and have them send more. 

This solves the problem by letting the international organization know something happened so that it can be prevented in the future, and may repair the harm done to the children by giving them more gifts. 

o Pros – This is likely to prevent a similar situation from happening again.

o Cons – The kids specifically were upset with Jack about how the gifts were handed out, so this does not necessarily ensure that the kids will feel entirely better depending on how the gifts are given out. This may also build distrust between the international organization and the youth center. 

This saves face of the organization by not embarrassing the youth center staff to the children.

• Implications on relationships

o Short-term: Provides new presents for the four children 

o Long-term: May prevent situations like this from happening again and lead to a more sustainable system for sending gifts 

• Implications on the venture

o Short-term: May annoy the youth center staff

o Long-term: Could build distrust between the international organization and the youth center, as well as the youth center and Jack 

 

Solution 3: Have Jack host a series of meetings with the youth center staff and the kids to try and work out a system in the youth center where the children feel more respected and the staff listen to their concerns. 

This would solve the problem by shifting the dynamics within the youth center to create a framework for handling situations like these if they were to happen again. 

o Pros – Discovers the root causes of why the staff were not receptive to Jack’s concerns and has potential to build a stronger framework for the youth center. 

o Cons – May not be effective and can be an inefficient route to addressing the problem, also incredibly time-consuming and risks damage to all the stakeholders if done incorrectly. 

This saves face of the youth center by containing the issue inside the youth center–it could potentially lead to interpersonal conflicts within the youth center, however. 

• Implications on relationships

o Short-term: Increases communication between Jack, children, and youth center staff.

o Long-term: May build distrust by clashing communication styles and harm the ability for Jack and other people he is associated with to work with the youth center. 

• Implications on the venture

o Short-term: Creates new activity in the youth center, changes course of action 

o Long-term: Can affect long-term relationships and partnerships with various stakeholders 

 

Step 5: Seek additional assistance, as appropriate – previous cases, peers, reliance on personal

experience, inner reflection

Jack should seek assistance from other youth centers in the area to gauge why the youth center staff responded the way they did. This helps gauge if this has something to do with cultural norms or genuine issues within the staff and their ability to provide for the children. Jack could also consult other people that he is close with about different communication and conflict resolution styles to ensure that he can approach this in a way where everyone is listened to.

 

Step 6: Select the best course of action – that solves the problem, saves face and has the best short term and long-term implications for your relationship and venture. 

The best solution is solution 2 because this solution informs another stakeholder that may have caused this problem, potentially preventing it from happening in the first place. Solution 1 is mostly a short-term solution, and solution 3 is unlikely to be successful and would require lots of heavy planning and risks creating a lot of community harm if done incorrectly. Solution 2 provides a short-term solution to help the kids feel better, and also touches on the greater issues at play without being too invasive–solution 2 can be modified and expanded as new information arises, whereas solution 3 assumes too much about communication and the issues itself too quickly. 

 

Step 7: List the sequence of actions you will take to implement your solution.

• Inform the youth center of the issue and the youth center response 
• Obtain new presents for the children 
• Talk to the children about how they felt and currently feel 
• Ask both youth center and international organization if they would be willing to discuss how to prevent this issue from happening again

Students: Cate Adams, Emma Clopton, Isabelle Spirk, Julie Wright

Step 1: Determine the facts in the situation 

• We have identified three different means of buying shirts 
• We are the Executive Director of Sustainable Lehigh 2030, which is a program aimed at transforming Lehigh U’s low-carbon circular economy. 
• Triple bottom line sustainability is a core value 
• Under our umbrella, we have ten different student groups focused on effecting sustainable behavior change amongst all campus stakeholders. 
• We have a $5,000 grant from a diehard alumnus to purchase t-shirts to support the various programs
• A follow-up gift is an option if the pilot phase is successful 

Step 2: Define the Stakeholders 

• Diehard alumnus 
• Lehigh U 
• Lehigh alumni network 
• Students involved in Sustainable Lehigh 2030
• Stakeholders of respective projects 
• Campus community 
• T-shirt company

Step 3: Assess the motivations of the Stakeholders

• Diehard alumnus
  • To support the sustainable Lehigh 2030 program and student projects to better the campus community 
• Lehigh U 
  • Supporting a sustainability program that will improve the campus’s health and appearance. 
• Lehigh alumni network
  • Alums always look to support big initiatives to better the university and student life. 
• Students involved in Sustainable Lehigh 2030
  • Students who are actively involved in the program want it to be successful and have the proper funding to have this achieve it’s long-term goals. 
• Campus community 
  • Students, faculty, and staff are always interested in investments that will better the community, academics, and life at Lehigh. 

Step 4: Formulate three alternative solutions 

1. Seek alternative funds for t-shirts in order to ensure enough sustainable shirts can be secured for the program
2. Try to exchange a good or service in return for the t-shirt or try to negotiate a better price 
3. Look into another product such as water bottles or stickers 

Step 5: Seek additional assistance as appropriate 

1. Talk to the Lehigh Valley company about their values and if there is a way we could form a lasting relationship and get a better price 
2. Seek out information on the fast fashion industry and if it aligns with the values of Sustainable Lehigh 2030 

Step 6: Select the best course of action 

Seek alternative funds for t-shirts in order to ensure enough sustainable shirts can be secured for the program. By finding more funding, this will help the sustainable program to invest in the local Lehigh Valley economy, reducing carbon footprint compared to if they were purchased elsewhere. Also, by investing in organic t-shirts, this means that the material sourced for the shirt was decided much more environmentally consciously.  

Step 7: What are the implications of your solution on the venture

-May be hard to find enough funding for the organic, local t-shirts

-Could be too much or too little stock 

-May disappoint the alumnus if the amount of products is not sufficient 

-Asking for a lot of money for just t-shirts, may be more intriguing to have other types of merch

-Shirts will eventually end up in a landfill some day

Students: Cate Adams, Emma Clopton, Isabelle Spirk, Julie Wright

PROMPT #1:

• Identify the three specific stakeholder groups most impacted by your project. For each one, go through the five elements of framework #2 and identify different answers for each group. In other words, if you’re telling your story to stakeholder group #1 (let’s say, middle school students), what is the context that would be most meaningful to that group? What is the catalyst most meaningful to that group? And so on.

Stakeholders: 

• Southside Bethlehem Community 
  • Environmental health has been a concern voiced by residents in Southside Bethlehem, and the Southside Permaculture Park is ready to serve the community by providing a greenspace and place to learn about ecosystem health, play, and relax. Our team understands that the relationship between Lehigh U and Southside Bethlehem is strained, though we envision that through extending our hands to the community and meeting community needs with our space, we can repair some of this relationship. However, similarly to many other greenspaces in Bethlehem, our land comes with its many challenges. For one, our park is on a slope, therefore we experience a lot of issues with urban runoff. Every day brings something new, whether it’s a piece of trash or shards of glass and broken pipe that is buried several inches into the ground. This has gravely impacted the health of our soil, causing us to really focus on composting and doing as much general maintenance as possible to keep this space clean and flourishing. Using permaculture as a design experimentally, we are figuring out how we can properly serve the community and serve as a model for other gardens. We have lots of work to do, but we are excited to see what will become of the space when it is finished. 
• Lehigh U students
  • With Lehigh U being planted in a crowded urban pocket, there is a need for greenspaces riddled throughout the South Bethlehem area. Cities face a phenomenon called “urban heat islanding” that leads to poor air quality and a myriad of long-term complications for community and environmental health.  Additionally, students often do not have an outlet to give back to the local community and local environment. The City of Bethlehem has been transitioning to become a much greener city, investing in community gardens, the Greenway Beltline, etc. So, how do we fit in? The Southside Permaculture Park is dedicated to strengthening ecosystem health and cultivating relationships to empower the Southside Bethlehem community and Lehigh students. Currently, we are working to build up the aesthetics of our space so that we truly have a community resource. This also means involving Lehigh students as part of building relationships with the community, so we are currently hosting work days with students and spreading the philosophy of permaculture and sustainability. We are working with organizations such as Community Growers and the Eco Reps program to build sustainable habits and conscientious mindsets within the student body, and use our park as a means for engaging students to live sustainably and connect with their environment. Our project will open students to a world of sustainability, environmental and community health, and understanding of the importance of giving back to your community. 
• Lehigh U administration 
  • Lehigh and Southside Bethlehem have had a strained relationship, though Lehigh University aims to be more ingrained into the community. This is mostly due to the gentrification and expansion of Lehigh’s campus, pushing the Bethlehem community away. Those who still are amongst the Bethlehem community now have a lot of mistrust in the university, as it has made them feel alienated and entirely unwelcome. However, through initiatives like the Strategic Plan, the CSO, and classes in community-based participatory research, Lehigh is making some effort to extend its hand to South Bethlehem. These plans are still not fully active yet, therefore the Southside Permaculture Park is facing barriers with allowing community members to use the space at its full capacity. By using the space we have and by extending our hands to other environmental and community projects, we are gauging the needs of the community and how the park plays a role in bridging the gap between the community and Southside Bethlehem. 

 

PROMPT #2:

• From the two story frameworks, CHOOSE ONE of them. Doesn’t matter which – choose the one that speaks you to more, or choose randomly. Once you’ve chosen one framework, ignore the other one for this prompt.
• As a team, write the story of your project (as it exists today), using the five story elements in the order in which they are given, #1 through #5. Each element’s section should consist of at least 2-3 carefully constructed sentences. 
• The result should be a coherent, beginning-middle-end story about your project which someone of reasonable intelligence who is unfamiliar with your project can follow and understand, and more importantly, be inspired by. The blog entry should be written as a text-based story, not a bulleted list. You should write it as a first-person plural story – in other words, the character is “we,” the project team.
• Talk it through as a team. Does it make sense? Does it say everything you want and need it to say? If this were the essential structure of your Fall presentations (stretched out to 7 minutes), would it be successful and would the referees know what you were talking about and why? 

Framework #2: 

1.Context – bring us into the world. Defines what is happening and what needs to happen.

2.Catalyst – what changes? What is changing?

3.Complication – what is the obstacle to change?

4.Change – what is the transformation that occurs?

5.Consequence – what is the resolution and where are we now?

 

There is an increasing call to action for investing in urban greenspaces. Urban areas are major polluters, hurting both people and the planet. Cities face a phenomenon called “urban heat islanding” that leads to poor air quality and a myriad of long-term complications for community and environmental health. The City of Bethlehem has been transitioning to become a much greener city, investing in community gardens, the Greenway Beltline, etc. This has been and will continue to be transformative for the Bethlehem community. So, how do we fit in? 

 

The Southside Permaculture Park is a ¼ acre plot of land that is a food-yielding greenspace and serves to cultivate relationships within the South Bethlehem community. We are nestled within the residential regions of the Southside, and serve as a sustainable oasis within an urban pocket. At the park, we implement the novel “permaculture philosophy” which is a holistic design philosophy that mimics natural relationships within the environment and leverages Indigenous knowledge to create self-regulating systems. The park is a space for the community to learn, grow, play, and indulge from. 

 

We are playing a part in the role of improving the health of the Southside. Our project emphasizes the importance of greenspace for community health. You are not able to obtain a healthy community if you do not have a healthy surrounding environment. At the park, our work focuses on replenishing the soil health of our small land, planting native perennials that will feed humans and the pollinators, and creating a beautiful space that also contributes to bettering the health of Bethlehem’s air.

 

None of this work comes without barriers. Being in an urban hub comes with its many challenges. For one, our park is on a slope, therefore we experience a lot of issues with urban runoff. Every day brings something new, whether it’s a piece of trash or shards of glass and broken pipe that is buried several inches into the ground. This has gravely impacted the health of our soil, causing us to really focus on composting and doing as much general maintenance as possible to keep this space clean and flourishing. Additionally, being a Lehigh U operated project, we are unable to maximize our full potential to help the Bethlehem community. This is majorly due to the idea that any non-affiliated person that steps on to Lehigh property is considered a liability. The team has been working on figuring out the best way to navigate this issue and truly utilize our space and project to its full potential. 

 

The 2023 team has made major strides in advancing and reshaping the project and park space. We have shifted the project’s focus from being a food security project to a community health based project, reeling in the importance of environmental health and investing in regenerative practices to create healthy communities. Green space is vital for communities to be resilient, safer, and more beautiful. We have removed the years of neglected waste abandoned on our land and are working on aesthetics to truly make this a safe, accessible, and enchanting environment for everyone to enjoy. 

 

Looking forward, we envision that the Southside Permaculture Park will be a flourishing green space that provides for both the Southside and Lehigh communities. Teams will continue to practice permaculture, but also recognize the barriers and consequences that come with the philosophy. We will be a sustainable project that encourages people, cities, communities, institutions, etc. to invest in their local environments and transform the health of these areas to better the health of both people and the Earth. These little sustainable oases will assist in reversing the effects of climate change and make places much more beautiful and resilient. The Southside Permaculture Park will be an influencer and change agent for years to come within and out of the Lehigh Valley.