Funding and Facilitation: implications of changing government policy for the future of voluntary Landcare groups in Western Australia

Landcare groups in Australia work to increase biodiversity, eliminate invasive species and promote sustainable land-use practices. With the implementation of the Rudd government's ‘Caring for our Country’ policy during 2008–09, financial and organisational resources available to these groups diminished. This paper examines whether the National Landcare Program's initial intentions—that agency support could be provided to ‘kick-start’ the community groups into action with the Landcare groups quickly becoming independent bodies—are ultimately realistic. The results show that the majority of Landcare groups continue to be reliant on government-sourced funding and Landcare facilitators, and that those groups which do not have access to support have reduced their activity levels accordingly. Landcare groups were suffering from a reduced volunteer base, with static or decreasing numbers of participants, an inability to set regular meetings and a lack of volunteers to take up leadership positions. The reliance of Landcare groups on government support suggests that Landcare was an unsuccessful form of state-sponsored community participation, making Landcare groups similar to other volunteer organisations in terms of their functional characteristics and reliance on externally sourced funds.     

Worldwide Opportunities on Organic Farms (WWOOF) as part of the existing care economy in Canada

This review paper discusses the program called Worldwide Opportunities on Organic Farms (WWOOF), in North America, as an example of a subset of the care economy in which volunteers contribute to farm care. Human care is partly direct (some childcare, kitchen duties and other housework), but mostly indirect, in that farm families get time off. This review expands on previous work that considered farms in Ontario, Canada as spaces of care and farmwomen as the carers. It critiques other research that claims WWOOFers do not replace local labor and that WWOOF represents an idealistic and ethical space potentially corrupted by tourists.     

Geographies of generosity: Beyond the ‘moral turn’

This paper questions Geographers debates about ‘caring at a distance’ and the ‘geographies of responsibility’, focussing on the treatment of the theme of partiality in ethics and justice. Debates in Geography often present partial commitments as morally or politically problematic on the grounds that they prioritize self-interest, exclusionary, and geographically restricted ways of relating to others. We outline how debates about caring at a distance and the geographies of responsibility frame partiality as a problem to be overcome. We argue that Geography’s engagements with moral philosophy are premised on faulty assumptions about the sorts of influences people are liable to act upon (one’s that privilege causal knowledge as the primary motivating force), and also flawed assumptions about the sorts of problems that academic reasoning about normative issues is meant to address (the assumption that people are too egoistical and not altruistic enough). We use the theme of generosity as an entry point to argue that partiality and finitude might be the conditions for any ethical–political project that de-centres the motivation of practical action away from the sovereign self towards responsive and attentive relations of encounter with the needs of others. Understanding generosity as a modality of power suggests a revised programme for geographical investigations of the intersection between ethics, morality and politics: one which looks at how opportunities to address normative demands in multiple registers are organized and transformed; at the ways in which dispositions to respond and to be receptive to others are worked up; and how opportunities for acting responsively on these dispositions are organized.