Sea Change – anchoring phase

Anchoring phase

In this first set of case studies, we explore approaches used during the ‘anchoring phase’ of the Sea Change project. The anchoring phase is devoted to relationship building and research, which helps to ensure that arts-based interventions are planned with an understanding of the location, and the needs and interests of local partners and communities. See our culture/SHIFT methodology for more information on the importance of the anchoring phase.

System mapping for research and engagement

What did we do?

In Buckie, Town Artist Gabby Morris used system mapping to understand what was already happening locally, and develop conversations with residents. The mapping drew on her background in design innovation, combining elements of relationship mapping, causal loop mapping and ecosystem mapping.

Gabby took the just transition themes from the Scottish Government report ‘Just Transition – A Fairer, Greener Scotland’ (adding the additional theme of ‘culture’) and presented these in accessible language like ‘how we work’ and ‘how we move’. These themes were mapped against people, organisations and activity in Buckie to investigate what relevant activity was already happening, where the gaps were and where opportunities to bring about change might lie. The map was printed in A1 size, with smaller copies, and a digital version was created using Kumo. Gabby conducted physical mapping by asking to move around a space and stand next to signs indicating themes, then used balls of yarn to explore how people and themes connected up.

Gabby used the map as a conversation tool by taking it to meetings and events and asking people to add ideas to it. For example, her ‘Future Buckie’ workshop used this mapping to explore how varied local stakeholders can play a shared role in developing a local just transition. Through activities like this, the map has continually been updated to reflect learning.

What worked?

Through mapping, Gabby drew up a rich picture of the local context that combined data with personal stories and experiences from the community. It helped to build understanding of what a just transition means, broadening conversations beyond a narrow focus on energy infrastructure. It was also an effective relationship-building method, helping the different organisations we are working with to understand each other’s perspectives and how their work connects.

What could we do differently?

With more time, it would have been useful to start discussions at an earlier stage and ask local people to define themes they thought were relevant to Buckie, rather than deciding these in advance. This would have helped the mapping to be even more tailored to the local context.

What do you need to make this work?

• A good list of local events and meetings to attend. This usually requires good local partners.
• Time for an artist or other practitioner to attend events and meetings. This element cannot be rushed.
• Software such as Kumo or Miro to produce maps.
• Printing to produce large-scale versions of mapping: the bigger scale worked well for sparking interest from people.
• Coloured pens for people to annotate mapping.
• Yarn or string to use for physical mapping workshops.

What if? Activities for big thinking

What did we do?

In Montrose, Town Artist Eve Mosher used creative activities to introduce the project, learn about what was going on and design the next phase. She ran simple activities working with stamps, drawing and gel printing, mainly as part of pre-existing events going on in the area. These provided a way to start conversations with people that could go beyond the surface level and think about deeper questions.

‘What If Montrose…’ cards, inspired by Rob Hopkins’ book From What Is to What If, invited people to think about what positive futures they would like to see for Montrose, drawing on their own personal interests. A fabric map of the town provided an inviting and tactile way to initiate conversations about what was going on, where problems existed and what could be different in the future.

The activities were designed to be simple enough for participants to engage with while simultaneously chatting to Eve. This helped people to get to know her and gave Eve an opportunity to encourage more imaginative and expansive conversations. These conversations naturally sparked suggestions for other relevant people and organisations to speak to, creating a snowball effect. Topics that were often brought up during these activities, such as ‘community’, travel’ and ‘nature’ became the themes for events that Eve held during the next phase.

What worked?

Crucially, most of these activities were not initially framed through the lens of climate change. This was partly to encourage participation from people who would not engage with climate change topics, but also to place the focus more strongly on the positive future people wanted to create rather than the negative context of climate change. Eve wanted to start by creating a buzz and galvanising people, rather than starting with the really difficult problems that climate change poses to the town, which could be paralysing.

What could we do differently?

There were some workshops specifically organised for the Sea Change project early on, but we found that attendees tended to be people who were already interested in the subject matter. Going out to existing groups and events was more effective for reaching a wider variety of people.

What do you need to make this work?

• A good list of local events and meetings to attend. This approach works less well in a situation where there are not many pre-existing local events.
• Time for an artist to attend events and meetings.
• Printed ‘What if?’ cards with creative materials for people to decorate them, such as stamps, inks, pens and pencils.
• It was useful to bring some examples of ‘What if?’ cards filled out already to help prompt people.
• A map of the area you are working in, cards and pens for people to annotate the map. Eve used a fabric map, which had a usefully enticing tactile quality, but a more traditional map could also work.
• Understanding of how to draw out people’s individual interests to talk about bigger questions. An experienced community artist should be well-placed to do this.

Hopes and dreams for collective planning

During early planning meetings with the initial steering group, and then partners in Montrose and Buckie, Project Manager Lewis Coenen-Rowe asked people to record their hopes and dreams for Sea Change. This exercise tried to capture what people thought success would look like for their organisation or location if the project went as well as realistically possible.

Lewis worked with Eve and Gabby to sort these hopes and dreams into categories, such as ‘environmental’, ‘community’ or ‘creative’. They then produced a set of cards which described what contributors had said, with headings informed by the categories, followed by anonymised quotes from the contributors.

These cards were used at an initial baselining workshop with representatives from local and national partners. Each person in turn took a card and introduced its theme, going round the table to slowly bring out all the different aspirations people had shared and see how they connected. Finally, we took an informal ‘vote’ for which hopes and dreams were most important for making the project a success. The ‘winning’ cards were:

1. Increase trust: between communities, local organisations and environmental decision-makers.
2. Build community: develop new connections, collaborations and ways for people to work together on climate change.
3. A buzz: get people excited about climate action and feeling like positive change is possible.
4. Have a say: improve people’s ability to participate in climate change decision-making for their area.
5. Change the future: leaving a concrete legacy from the project, with tangible changes to both towns that people can see.

What worked?

Sea Change involves a wide variety of partner organisations with different responsibilities and interests. The exercise helped develop consensus among the project partners about the right approach by visualising what everybody wanted to get out of it and what hopes and dreams were shared. Using the cards and quotes helped us ground the approach in people’s personal interests.

What could we do differently?

With so many different hopes and dreams shared, the voting process was complicated and people found that they couldn’t hold all the options in their head at the same time. With time, it would have been useful to have a two-stage process, identifying a smaller group of favoured cards to discuss in more detail before voting. As the first workshop was held in Montrose, there were fewer people from Buckie present, which meant we then needed to go back to people in that group to check if they agreed with the results.

What do you need to make this work?

• Meeting time to discuss and record hopes and dreams from partners. This only needs a few minutes: we did it at the end of a steering group meeting, using a combination of post-it notes and a Miro board, then copying everything into an online document.
• Time to look through hopes and dreams and categorise them.
• Design software to create cards: we used Canva.
• Multiple printed sets of cards with hopes and dreams.
• Time to discuss these together in person and vote: we devoted 90 minutes to doing this together. This required good facilitation to keep conversation moving so we recommend working with a trained or experienced facilitator.