Form to input new cases

en-english

#1

As @livvy and @admin work on this, usability is really important right from the start. People need to be able to understand how to put a case study together and also feel like they can input lots of different types of stories from all over the renewable energy economy.

@sergio.oceransky and I were discussing this earlier and thinking whether we could have a tree of questions which are asked based on responses to earlier questions (as raw material resource extraction, manufacturing, design and implementation, for example, are all going to need different responses). Here we need to think about what’s useful to hold, but also what’s easy to implement for our tech developers. @jazmin @ivet @hal - it would be very useful to have your thoughts (edit this as it’s a wiki post!)

Form Fields/Database Model
[Select language from dropdown]
Needs to accept and store the following data:
a. Project name [freetext]
b. Part of supply chain [dropdown]
c. Type of generation associated with (solar, wind etc.) [dropdown]
d. Companies associated [freetext]
e. Financiers [freetext]
Important lenders [dropdown]
f. Continent [dropdown]
g. Country [dropdown]
h. Does it affect indigenous people?
If yes: Indigenous people(s) [freetext]
i. Proposed start date? [year dropdown]
j. Proposed completion date? [year dropdown]
k. Description/narrative [freetext]
l. Link to Forum [button] only if there is a forum topic which is directly about this project
m. Upload image(s) (.png, .jpg)
n. Upload video if available (automatically generate Vimeo upload or something using our login? Or can get admins to put it up) (…)
o. Upload document(s) (.pdf, .odt, .docx)
p. References
q. Commodity/ies
r. Would you like to engage the developer/company?
s. Would you like to engage investors?


#2

This also brings up a further question: when someone wants to edit the entry as it appears in the map, do they:
a) edit it in the Discourse Wiki?
b) edit the form after it’s already gone through the approval process? (preferred)


#3

Thanks for this Tom! Useful to discuss how it will be put together and how users will interact. At first glance, this looks sensible and comprehensive. I’ll go over it again and let you know if I have any comments.

Question: For those of us already in process of sourcing case studies, are the questions/categories in this list those we need to be collecting information in relation to in this first case study-gathering phase prior to Ojuso’s launch? If so, I’ll pass on these questions/categories to those I’m in contact with so they can make a start with my support.


#4

Hi @Hal,

The form currently starts with a location map where you can drag a point marker to place the location of the case study.

Then:




I think this form is integral to how you, @jazmin and @ivet - and indeed other users - interact with the platform and make it a success.

Please add to the post above to feed back on where we’re going with the form and how we can improve it. You can also make general feedback in this topic about platform development and feedback.

I think having document upload (pdf, docs, odt) will be useful for us.
I’m not sure how many people would use the video upload. What do you think? If we wanted to go ahead with this we’d need to see how (a) an automatic Vimeo or YouTube upload could be done or (b) we could hold the video and serve it.


#5

Hi Tom,

Thanks to you and all who are developing this- the form looks good so far and I will set aside time next week to give detailed feedback. On a train with wobbly internet now!

A quick note from my side to say that we should 100% have a video upload facility. This is often the medium that offers the most visceral and realistic insights into communities’ experiences of imposed projects. It’s critical for accountability. Also, it can often enable people who otherwise wouldn’t be heard (because of lack of ability/confidence in reading or writing) to have a direct voice that whoever is helping put together the case study (likely to be us or groups/orgs or ‘bridge people’ supporting local communities) can represent through the case study, without hindrance, because video is such a character-rich, info-dense medium.

So, a yes to video from me. Definitely a Youtube/Vimeo uplink. Is it possible to do the same with links from vids uploaded directly to Twitter/Facebook? Increasingly people just put things straight up there and not on Youtube/Vimeo. Good to have the option of uploading a video directly, too, though my instinct tells me the connectivity required to upload directly to Ojuso may not be that readily available to many and automatic uploads of already-published video content would be better.

I assume directly taking previously un-published video content would also add to editorial burden and could open Ojuso up to new legal risks as a first-hand ‘publisher’ of the content… something to consider.


#6

Hi you all, @jazmin and I worked on the initial tree of questions. Here it is our proposal. It will certainly need some further work. We already think it may change again along the development of the study cases we will present but wanted to share these initial thoughts already. Cheers!

GENERAL TAB
a. Project name [freetext]
b. Part of supply chain [dropdown] c. Type of generation associated with (solar, wind etc.) [dropdown]
Ecosystem:
If wind farm [in land / on shore /off shore]
If solar [free text]
f. Continent [dropdown] g. Country [dropdown]
Area [number of hectares]
i. Proposed start date? [year dropdown] j. Proposed completion date? [year dropdown]
m. Upload image(s) (.png, .jpg) n. Upload video if available (automatically generate Vimeo upload or something using our login? Or can get admins to put it up) (…)
Synopsis // k. Description/narrative [freetext]

FINANCIAL TAB d. Companies associated [freetext] e. Financiers [freetext]
Important lenders [dropdown]
q. Commodity/ies r. Would you like to engage the developer/company? s. Would you like to engage investors?
SOCIAL TAB
What municipalities [free text] and towns [free text] are affected?
What sorts of populations [free text] and land-use tenure systems [free text] are affected? [free text]
h. Does it affect indigenous people? If yes: Indigenous people(s) [freetext]
Are there human rights violations?
If yes: [freetext]
Are there any interest conflicts in the project? If yes: [freetext]
The project has official social Assessments. [yes/ no/in evaluation process]
The project has social impact authorization? [yes/ no/in evaluation process]
Biocultural risks and impacts [freetext]
Have there been any public health issues [freetext]
Social movements around the project [freetext]
TECHNICAL TAB
Total Capability
Principal Equipment [Wind turbine / Solar panels // Transmission lines*)
If wind turbine or solar panels [Maker, Model, Capability per unit]
If Transmission lines [length, from-to, voltage, substations]
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS TAB
Ecosystem [freetext]
Soil type [freetext]
Are there other projects in the region? [yes/no]
If yes, what projects [free text]
Are environmental assessments available [yes/no]
If yes, what sort of access: [free text]
Upload: links, documents
If not, what sort of impediments exist [free text]
The project has environmental authorization? [yes/ no/in evaluation process]
Is the project close to important ecological zones? [yes-which/ no]
Official Environmental Impact Assessments [yes/ no]
Environmental risks and impacts [freetext]
Reported environmental problems [freetext/pictures/video]
Controversies /Omitted Studies
Independent Experts Assessments [yes/ no/ summary]
LEGAL TAB
Legal Authorizations
Public tender [Yes-Number / no]
Environmental [Yes-Number / no]
Social Assessment [Yes-Number /no]
Local construction [Yes-Number /no]
Are these authorizations publicly available [yes/no]
If yes, what sort of access: [free text]
Upload: links, documents
If not, what sort of impediments exist [free text]
Are there any open judicial proceedings o complains?
MEDIA COVERAGE TAB
Links to media reports
Independent grassroots reports
l. Link to Forum [button] only if there is a forum topic which is directly about this project o. Upload document(s) (.pdf, .odt, .docx) p. References


#7

Hey!

This is a far more complex idea for data entry which I think we should discuss. It’s really good that it includes so many good examples of information data providers might have and remember whilst using the form.

I do have some concerns, particularly in terms of usability (speed), implementation, ease of display and any analyses which might be done on the dataset after there are a number of them up.

Wondering whether today is good for people?

Tom


#8

Hi Tom!
You are right, we went a bit too far including many more sorts of questions/information. No worries, we will refine and reduce this list as we develop the study cases from Yucatan. Hopefully we can send a new proposal soon. Cheers!


#9

Hi there,

Here is my proposal for the form fields. I mark compulsory fields with and asterisk (*) – sometimes what I propose to be compulsory is a sub-field rather than a field. The numeration is just for guidance, is not meant to be included as suggested in the form. I guess that the database automatically identifies each field and assigns them values, so the complex numbering system is probably not necessary.

I think that we should write a brief text explaining what is required in each field, let’s do this later when we have agreed the form fields and structure.

I haven’t finished it, I send what I have so far and some notes for the rest.

Hal, it would be great if you could add more to section 2.3, I only started it but I’m not an expert on this.

Cheers!

  1. FIRST SCREEN

1.1. Entry name *
[Free text]

1.2. Sector of the renewable energy economy *
[Dropdown options:
1.2.1. Renewable energy generation
1.2.2. Power grids or energy storage related to the transition to renewable energy
1.2.3. Supply of minerals / resources for power generation or storage]

1.3. Is this a positive or negative case? *
[Dropdown options:
1.3.1. Positive
1.3.2. Negative]

1.4. Region *
[Dropdown options:
1.4.1. Africa
1.4.2. Asia and the Pacific
1.4.3. Europe
1.4.4. Latin America and the Caribbean
1.4.5. North America (Canada and US)]

1.5. Country *
[Different dropdown options, depending on choice of region - question D]

1.6. Is it existing or projected? *
[Dropdown options:
1.6.1. Existing
1.6.2. Projected]

1.7. [If 1.6.1, i.e. existing:] Start year // [If 1.6.2, i.e. projected:] Projected start year *
[year dropdown going backward for existing and going forward for projected cases, in both cases include the current year, include also option “Unknown”]

1.8. Projected completion year *
[year dropdown going forward, include the current year, include also option “Unknown / Undetermined”]

1.9. Synopsis *
[Free text, maximum 80 words]

1.10. Full description *
[Free text, no maximum number of words. We should warn people not to go too technical in this section, which is more meant as a narrative in journalistic style, and save technical details for field 2.1.5.]

1.11. Company / companies that own the project or facilities *
[several fields of free text, at least one must be completed]

1.12. Shareholders of the company/companies that own the project or facilities
[several fields of free text, at least one must be completed]

1.13. Banks or other entities that have extended loans or guarantees to the project, or that are considering to do so
1.13.1. Dropdown including most important development banks and international commercial banks, with multiple choice activated, and including also the “Unknown” option *
1.13.2. Optional free text field, to add any lenders that are not part of the dropdown

1.14. Image(s):
1.14.1. Upload image field [see what we can use for this, it would be great if there could be several options, including the classic file upload as well as a drag and drop option]
1.14.2. Caption explaining the image [free text, I would suggest making this a compulsory field for each picture if anything has been inputed in 1.14.1]
[I think that we should have at least space for 10 images per case, even more if it does not pose a technical or storage problem. In this case, there would be several 1.14.1 and 1.14.2 fields. I don’t know how this would be organized but I guess it can be done by assigning values such as 1.14.1.1, 1.14.1.2, 1.14.1.3 and 1.14.2.1, 1.14.2.2, 1.14.2.3, etc, or something similar]

1.15. Video(s)
1.15.1. Upload video field [Options: type url of existing source (Vimeo, Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, etc); upload file (going automatically into Vimeo or something similar); if possible, drag and drop]
1.15.2. Caption explaining the video [free text, I would suggest making this a compulsory field for each video if anything has been inputed in 1.15.1]
[Same thing here - I think that we should have at least space for 10 videos per case, even more if it does not pose a technical or storage problem]

1.16. Media coverage
1.16.1. Links to media reports [url and pdf upload options]
1.16.2. Independent grassroots reports [url and pdf upload options]

ONCE ALL THE COMPULSORY FIELDS ARE COMPLETED, THE “NEXT PAGE” OPTION AT THE BOTTOM OF THE FIELD WOULD BECOME ACTIVE (until then, if clicked, it would send back to the compulsory field(s) that is/are not yet completed)

  1. SECOND SCREEN – Technical and economic analysis
    Only one of the following three options will show, depending on the choice made in question 1.2

VERSION 2.1 – IF 1.2.1 SELECTED (i.e. if it’s a “Renewable energy generation” entry)

2.1.1. Generation technology *
[Dropdown options:
2.1.1.1. Wind energy
2.1.1.2. Solar photovoltaic
2.1.1.3. Solar thermal
2.1.1.4. Small hydro (less than 1 MW)
2.1.1.5. Medium hydro (between 1 MW and 20 MW)
2.1.1.6. Large hydro (more than 20 MW, often not considered to be renewable)
2.1.1.7. Geothermal
2.1.1.8. Biogas
2.1.1.9. Other forms of biomass including biofuels
2.1.1.10. Others (tidal, wave, etc.)
If 2.1.1.9. (“Other forms of biomass including biofuels” is chosen, display additional field 2.1.1.11. Description of the feedstock [free text, explain meaninig of feedstock next to question]
If 2.1.1.10. (“others” is chosen, display additional field 2.1.1.12. Description [free text]]

2.1.2. Total generation capacity *
[numeric value, option to add value as either kW or MW, include also “Unknown” option, either one of the two numeric fields must be filled or the “unknown” option chosen]

2.1.3. Generation equipment supplier
[free text]

2.1.4. Approximate total investment
[numeric value and dropdown of currencies. It would be good to have an automatic currency converter plug-in so that the value is displayed as originally entered and also in brackets an automatic conversion to US$)

2.1.5. Additional technical or economic details
[Free text]

VERSION 2.2 – IF 1.2.2 SELECTED (i.e. if it’s a “Power grids or energy storage related to the transition to renewable energy” entry)

2.2.1. Technology *
[Dropdown options:
2.2.1.1. Power transmission (grid lines, substations, etc.)
2.2.1.2. Energy storage (pumped storage, compressed air, battery systems, etc.)
2.2.1.3. Others
If 2.2.1.3. (“others” is chosen, display additional field 2.2.1.4. Description [free text]]

2.2.2. Capacity
[either free text, or numeric value with the option to add value in different formats (we need to look into format options here, I don’t know for instance how energy storage systems are measured). Include also and “Unknown” option. In contrast with generation projects, I suggest not to make this a compulsory field]

2.2.3. Contractor and/or supplier of technology
[free text]

2.2.4. Approximate total investment
[numeric value and dropdown of currencies. It would be good to have an automatic currency converter plug-in so that the value is displayed as originally entered and also in brackets an automatic conversion to US$)

2.2.5. Additional technical or economic details
[Free text, including details such as length, from-to, voltage, substations, etc]

VERSION 2.3 – IF 1.2.3 SELECTED (i.e. if it’s a “Supply of minerals / resources for power generation or storage” entry)

2.3.1. Commodity / commodities *
[Free text, or maybe drop down with main comodities (iron ore, coque coal, copper, rare earth elements, lithium, etc.]

2.3.2. Use in the renewable energy economy *
[Free text, or maybe drop down with multiple choice option including all the major applications:
2.3.2.1. Wind turbine manufacturing
2.3.2.2. Solar panel manufacturing
2.3.2.3. Solar thermal system manufacturing
2.3.2.4. Hydropower generator manufacturing
2.3.2.5. Geothermal generator manufacturing
2.3.2.6. Transmission lines and substations
2.3.2.7. Energy storage including battery systems
2.3.2.8. Others (if this is chosen, additional free text field 2.3.2.9 Description]

I CAN THINK OF OTHER QUESTIONS HERE (TYPE OF MINING, TECHNOLOGY USED, INVESTMENT, ETC) BUT I’M NOT AN EXPERT – HAL, CAN YOU ADD MORE TO THIS SECTION?

  1. THIRD SCREEN – Socio-environmental analysis
    Only one of the following two options will show, depending on the choice made in question 1.3

I HAVE NOT REALLY WORKED ON SCREENS 3 OR 4 YET, I JUST COPIED THE PARTS OF TOM’S AND IVET’S FORMS THAT ARE RELEVANT FOR THIS, BUT I THINK THAT THIS NEEDS TO BE REORGANIZED – MORE ON THIS TOMORROW

VERSION 3.1 – IF 1.3.1 SELECTED (i.e. if it’s a “positive” entry)

Ecosystem:
If wind farm [in land / on shore /off shore]
If solar [free text]
Area [number of hectares]

VERSION 3.2 – IF 1.3.2 SELECTED (i.e. if it’s a “negative” entry)

Ecosystem:
If wind farm [in land / on shore /off shore]
If solar [free text]
Area [number of hectares]

Ecosystem [freetext]
Soil type [freetext]

What municipalities [free text] and towns [free text] are affected?
What sorts of populations [free text] and land-use tenure systems [free text] are affected? [free text]
h. Does it affect indigenous people? If yes: Indigenous people(s) [freetext]
Are there human rights violations?
If yes: [freetext]
Are there any interest conflicts in the project? If yes: [freetext]
The project has official social Assessments. [yes/ no/in evaluation process]
The project has social impact authorization? [yes/ no/in evaluation process]
Biocultural risks and impacts [freetext]
Have there been any public health issues [freetext]
Social movements around the project [freetext]

Are there other projects in the region? [yes/no]
If yes, what projects [free text]
Are environmental assessments available [yes/no]
If yes, what sort of access: [free text]
Upload: links, documents
If not, what sort of impediments exist [free text]
The project has environmental authorization? [yes/ no/in evaluation process]
Is the project close to important ecological zones? [yes-which/ no]
Official Environmental Impact Assessments [yes/ no]
Environmental risks and impacts [freetext]
Reported environmental problems [freetext/pictures/video]
Controversies /Omitted Studies
Independent Experts Assessments [yes/ no/ summary]
LEGAL TAB
Legal Authorizations
Public tender [Yes-Number / no]
Environmental [Yes-Number / no]
Social Assessment [Yes-Number /no]
Local construction [Yes-Number /no]
Are these authorizations publicly available [yes/no]
If yes, what sort of access: [free text]
Upload: links, documents
If not, what sort of impediments exist [free text]
Are there any open judicial proceedings o complains?

  1. FOURTH SCREEN - Final questions

p. References
Offical project documents (EIAs, social impact assessements, company powerpoints,

r. Would you like to engage the developer/company?
s. Would you like to engage investors?

l. Link to Forum [button] only if there is a forum topic which is directly about this project o. Upload document(s) (.pdf, .odt, .docx)


#10

Hello again, here are my suggestions for the third and fourth screens of the data enter form.

THIRD SCREEN – Socio-environmental analysis
Only one of the following two options will show, depending on the choice made in question 1.3

VERSION 3.1 – IF 1.3.1 SELECTED (i.e. if it’s a “positive” entry)

3.1.1. What kind of positive case is this entry about? *
[Dropdown options:
3.1.1.1. A community renewable energy project
[Next to this option there should be a definition of what “community renewable energy project” means, in order to have clear communication if we reject portraying the entry as a positive case. I suggest that we use, for now, the definition of the World Wind Energy Association, which is that a community project is one where at least two of the following three criteria is met: 1. Local stakeholders own the majority or all of a project, 2. Voting control rests with the community-based organization, 3. The majority of social and economic benefits are distributed locally.]
3.1.1.2. An “energy as commons” project
[Next to this option there should be a definition of what “energy as commons” means, in order to have a more clear communication if we reject portraying the entry as a positive case. I suggest that we involve the European Commons Assembly in creating a shared definition – I see their approach as primarily focused on the consumer / demand side, we should certainly include the supply side, with a strong Global South / indigenous commons perspective.]
3.1.1.3. A case of responsible sourcing / supply chain / lifecycle management in manufacturing related to the transition to renewable energy
[Next to this option there should be a definition of what we consider to be responsible sourcing / supply chain / lifecycle management, in order to have a more clear communication if we reject portraying the entry as a positive case. Hal, do you want to suggest language for this definition?]

3.1.2. Socio-environmental benefits *
[Free text. We should ask to provide more detail here than in section 1.10, and explain that we expect benefits to go beyond emmission savings, paying rent for land, or complying with environmental or social legislation.]

3.1.3. Key actors involved *
[Free text]

3.1.4. Current status of the project *
[Free text]

3.1.5. Obstacles or hindrances experienced in the course of the project
[Free text]

3.1.6. Are you are looking for partnerships or have any clearly identified need? If so, please describe it here
[Free text]

3.1.7. Contact details
[Free text, or maybe classic contact fields (email address, phone, website, etc)]

VERSION 3.2 – IF 1.3.2 SELECTED (i.e. if it’s a “negative” entry)

3.2.1. What are the main reasons for this to be a negative case? (multiple answers possible) *
[Dropdown options:
3.2.1.1. Violation of land rights
3.2.1.2. Violation of indigenous rights and/or other collective rights
3.2.1.3. Disproportionate environmental impacts
3.2.1.4. Negative cultural impacts (erosion/destruction of biocultural heritage, impacts on sacred land, etc.)
3.2.1.5. Aggression / threats to community members opposed to the project, collaboration with organized crime
3.2.1.6. Abusive labour practices
3.2.1.7. Corruption and/or irregular permitting or contracting, conflicts of interest
3.2.1.8. Other reasons
[If 3.2.1.8. Other reasons is selected, there should be a free text field to enter the reasons]
[Maybe we should include in this section a note saying that we want to focus on projects with substantive negative impacts on vulnerable groups. This is a way to say (without saying it explicitly) that we will reject entries that are based on things such as impacts on the landscape or lower real estate value.]

3.2.2. Detailed description of the negative socio-environmental impacts *
[Free text. We should ask to provide more detail here than in section 1.10, and include all relevant details, such as type of ecosystem and presence of any existing reserve in the area (for projects with disproportionate environmental impact), specific communities affected by the project, total geographic footprint of the project, land tenure system affected in case of land grabs, kind of permits that were irregularly issued if this is the case, ]

3.2.3. Is this an isolated project or are there similar projects in the same geographic area? If there are more, can you describe them? Are the any significant cummulative effects?
[Free text]

3.2.4. Description of local organizing efforts and/or legal action in relation to the project *
[Free text]
[We should include a warning not to include sensitive information that might put anyone in danger]

3.2.5. Key actors involved (including government, companies, banks and community members) *
[Free text]
[Same warning not to include sensitive information that might put anyone in danger]

3.2.6. Are you are looking for partnerships or have any clearly identified need? If so, please describe it here
[Free text]

3.2.7. Would you like to engage the developer/company and/or the investors? Would you like to have a conversation with Ojuso team about this? *
[Yes/No]

3.2.8. Contact details
[Free text, or maybe classic contact fields (email address, phone, website, etc)]

FOURTH SCREEN - Final questions

4.1. Offical project documents (official description, website, EIAs, social impact assessements, company powerpoints, etc)
[Different upload options]

4.2. References
[Free text]

4.3. Link to Forum
[button, only if there is a forum topic which is directly about this project – IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE ASK IN THE FORM OR IS IT SOMETHING WE PROVIDE ONCE THE CASE HAS BEEN APPROVED?]


#11

Hi All,

Some great progress here. I am going to work from your latest suggested ‘tree’, Sergio, and will make some general comments, then more specific comments based on a) my thoughts on the tree’s fields, and b) where you have asked for my input.

Here goes:

General Comments

Accessibility
I agree with Tom’s comments that this form is a) quite long, and b) asks for quite a lot of detailed information. For me this poses a problem if we hope that community representatives will directly add their own cases to the platform, which of course we want them to. I think having the option to select ‘unknown’, as suggested by Sergio, is a good one. However, I feel that, in its current form, this form is still a barrier to participation for some- to put this much time into completing a form whilst already involved in daily struggles, one would have to already be very convinced of its usefulness to said struggle, add to that difficulties of internet connectivity and possible language/literacy barriers, and we risk bypassing much of our target participants.
Possible solutions: When we are satisfied that we have covered all the areas we want to in terms of questions, I suggest we have a focus-group review to come up with creative solutions for making this more universally accessible. Either that, or perhaps our strategy for encouraging participation needs to become more realistic and focus on ‘bridge people’ who are both engaged in grassroots struggles, and also other things e.g. law, academia.

Currency
These cases, positive and negative, are in a fluid state… How can we reflect this in the information we receive and display so that we avoid a) giving the false impression of fixity in any of these struggles/successes, b) keep cases up-to-date, c) retain contact with those who write and submit them?
Possible solutions: Could we set up a ‘newsfeed’ related to each case submitted? This could either be automated, scraping stories from news outlets and/or social media, or be overseen and fed into by those who make submissions, offering them an easy way to keep updating/engaging with their case.

Specific Comments

1. Section 2.3- Supply of minerals / resources for power generation or storage
(Company, investors etc already dealt with in 1.11 etc, so focus on project details)

Suggested sections:

2.3.1 Commodity/Commodities
[Free text OR comprehensive multiple choice of renewable-applicable materials]

2.3.2 Potential use in renewable energy economy (may require a {?} link to a page linking minerals listed in 2.3.1 to renewable energy applications listed from 2.3.2.1 onwards)
[Drop down with multiple choice option including all the major applications]
2.3.2.1. Wind turbine manufacturing
2.3.2.2. Solar panel manufacturing
2.3.2.3. Solar thermal system manufacturing
2.3.2.4. Hydropower generator manufacturing
2.3.2.5. Geothermal generator manufacturing
2.3.2.6. Transmission lines and substations
2.3.2.7. Energy storage including battery systems
2.3.2.8. Others (if this is chosen, additional free text field 2.3.2.9 Description]

2.3.3 Project scale
2.3.3.1 Project life span
(Free text e.g. 12 years of production, 15 years overall)
2.3.3.2 Size of concession(s) granted to company(ies)
(Free text e.g. one concession encompassing 2,300 hectares)
2.3.3.3 Projected production of key commodity(ies) per annum and overall
(Free text e.g. 40 million tonnes iron ore p/a, 240 million tonnes over 5 year life of mine)

2.3.4 Type of extraction
(Free text or multiple choice, including the below)
2.3.4.1 (surface) open pit/open cas/open cut mining
2.3.4.2 (sub surface) underground mining
2.3.4.3 seabed mining
2.3.4.4 brine extraction

2.3.5 Associated infrastructure in the locality
(Free text, but include guiding suggestions e.g. tailings dams/mine waste storage and treatment facilities; ore processing facilities; smelting facilities; hydroelectric dams/energy infrastructure; transport infrastructure e.g. roads or rail.)

2. Suggestions/questions for section 3

3.1.1.3
QUESTION- Do we want this to relate just to mining/extraction? The current framing is broader, trying to bring in lifecycle management…
IF this is related specifically to mining, as you say, we need to be sensitive in the phrasing of our definition. We could include this as a drop down or a {?} outlink page. Here is some draft text for us to work on and figure out how we frame this:

“The extraction of non-renewable resources, such as iron, copper, Rare Earth Elements or other minerals and metals used in renewable technologies, directly from the Earth is by definition an unsustainable practice. Despite this, the extraction of such elements this way for use in the renewable energy transition is, to an extent, a necessary evil in the immediate-term. Bearing this in mind, a case involving extraction may be considered ‘positive’ if it helps to reduce, overall, the need for more extraction; if it drastically reduces ecological harms often caused by mining and does not infringe on areas of high biodiversity; and if it meets outstanding social and human rights standards that are enjoyed and affirmed by host communities and other stakeholders. Such social standards include: ensuring communities, and especially indigenous peoples, enjoy their right to Free Prior and Informed Consent, which includes the right to reject projects; abiding by the UN’s guiding principles on Business and Human Rights; full collaboration with the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, assuring excellence in the transparency of project financing, tax affairs and other transactions; the highest labour standards; equitable distribution of any benefits accruing from mining; respect for the rule of law and the constitutional rights of citizens in host countries…” for further discussion…

3.2.1
COMMENT: Who defines what constitutes ‘disproportionate environmental impacts’? Perhaps just simplify this to ‘environmental impacts’, to be expanded on in 3.2.2?
COMMENT: Add ‘Violation of fundamental human rights’ alongside indigenous rights.

3.2.4
COMMENT: May want to structure this question with sub-sections, e.g.

  • When did local organising efforts begin? (Before project started? during project implementation? after project implementation?)
  • Which communities, groups, organisations have been involved?
  • What tactics have been used? (e.g. direct action, local referendums, legal cases, letters and petitions etc)

Phew. I think that’s all for now. Lots to discuss, and thanks again Sergio, Ivet, Jazmin and Tom for bringing it this far. Editing down and refining is always easier than editing ‘up’.

Hal


#12

Thank you @ivet, @sergio.oceransky and @hal for feedback regarding the case study model and form. Although I understand it’s fairly important to plan what data end-users can and must submit with their case study, I believe there to be a critical portion of this discussion missing. That is, how all of this data will be visualized on the map and or displayed on a page.

I feel like the addition of so many form fields adds a huge amount of complexity to the project at an early stage - especially considering there are many conditional aspects where certain fields should be displayed depending on the selected value.

The sensible approach here I believe would be to keep this discussion going but to not immediately implement all of the suggested fields into the model. Remember that it’s perfectly possible to add extra fields and data at a later stage and allow people to fill in missing data. This experience can also be reflected in the UI to give hints to users on how to add supplementary data.

I’ll make more notes regarding the fields and try to gauge what data is absolutely critical and which data is optional. Users could simply only be prompted for the required data during the submissions process. Then they can add optional data as ongoing edits. This experience can be combined with the “news feed” or “updates” aspect for each case study. It may be helpful to create a few mock-ups of the UI.

In short, in order to progress with the platform at a swift rate, we should try to get this public ASAP and then make small incremental changes over time. I’m quite happy to spend a few hours a week to achieve this either pro-bono or on a v.low rate.

// Livvy

PS: If it helps to engage in the development process, there is a GitHub repository that you can find over at https://github.com/livmackintosh/ojuso-map - you will need a GitHub account and an invitation to the project but it will allow people to see any open technical issues and to engage very closely with the state of the code and the project. And, if you’re technically inclined, you can even view the code - but it is more than intuitive enough to use without being technical.


#13

Thanks @ximena.montano @livvy @sergio.oceransky @ivet @jazmin @hal for a great conversation. Here are the notes: https://docs.google.com/a/yansa.org/document/d/17NbqZ-5XZcczAD7w7arWYqbusHB2PNMnYs8VhGcVD2U/edit?usp=sharing

@ximena.montano - I forgot what Sergio said you and Marina were talking about yesterday?!


#14

Hi Tom, we mentioned that it would be good to have a field for the voices of community members, i.e. testimonies or quotes from people on the ground. I guess this could be one more field in the first page, after pictures, videos and mass media reports.


#15

Hello!

I’ve added that in as 1.17 Community voices (please see GDoc for subfields). I’ve also added in a bit of extra information about the shapefile upload in 4.3.

PDF of the notes:

I’ve made it so anyone with the link can comment for definite: https://docs.google.com/document/d/17NbqZ-5XZcczAD7w7arWYqbusHB2PNMnYs8VhGcVD2U/edit?usp=sharing

@admin and @rosa.marina - here are the notes!


#16

Electricity or energy at point of use?

I have some further question which are mainly connected to the solar thermal definition (concentrated solar power), but also connects with biomass/biofuel/biogas and geothermal.

At the moment we seem to be talking about the renewable electricity economy… but I´m not sure whether that’s what we’re intending. In order to understand the future renewable energy economy, we need to understand the systemic issues presented by issues related to the use of energy more generally. We are moving towards for example:

  • electrical transport - vehicles using energy stored in batteries to produce electricity at point of use or other chemical form and converted to electricity through fuel cells such as hydrogen or methanol (types of PEMFC) being stored in many ways before being used to generate electricity at the point of use or connected to electrical power lines.
  • electrical heating and cooling - electricity from the grid or solar PV or other being used for heating or cooling work. Also combined solar PV and solar thermal rooftop systems (PV-T).

But there are a plethora of options available for heating and cooling, and also, in the steam turbine and other thermal electricity generators for example, there are opportunities for combined heat and power (CHP) which is useful in cold places where people could use the waste heat from the electricity generation process. There are also opportunities for cooling in hot climates through the use of solar air conditioning and geothermal air conditioning. The International Energy Agency (IEA) have produced a Technology Roadmap for Solar Heating & Cooling. Geothermal electricity production (geothermal power usually called) as we usually think refers to geothermal hot spots being used to heat up steam and drive turbines in a geothermal power plant, see here and here. There are a huge amount of energy storage technologies and options.

I don’t necessarily know where I’m going with this, but I guess what I’m trying to say is: should we restrict the scope of the platform to reduce our discussion of heating and cooling demand, which I think are very important questions, or do we stick to the supply chain which results in electricity production in power stations which are producing electricity for the grid? Or something else. Obviously we will be covering some areas better than others based on communities’ experiences of technological applications, mining, manufacturing etc.

I think it goes back to the point which we are trying to make on renewable electricity supply side which is basically it’s about how technologies and processes are implemented, managed and owned, how decisions are made, how factors beyond profit are taken into consideration throughout that supply chain.

Maybe this part of the conversation would link well with the topic called Educating ourselves and others about the renewable energy economy - I’m going to basically ask that the topic I’m linking to be a link dump where anyone who finds technologies which we’ll be planning on factoring in can paste links to reports or articles about them so we accumulate knowledge through the process.


#17

Going to keep an eye on this type of discussion but not necessarily contribute myself as I don’t really know enough about the various sectors and so forth but it could be useful during the platform development.


#18

Hi all,

Would be really good to let me know when we have a final on the forms. If there are any questions, please let me know.

// Livvy


#19

Hi everyone.

Further notes from the meeting today:


"Testing and feedback:
Testing with contacts in Costa Rica (Sergio contact), Mexico and Chile
AP Tom talk to Makimbo and Abdikadir about testing (Sergio needs to introduce ideally)
Testing contacts in Asia - AP Tom talk to Hal (about feedback and also definition of exact case studies)
AP Jazmin and Ivet translation to Spanish ready?
AP Tom split up the Simple and Comprehensive form into two Google Docs.

Questions we need to ask in feedback:
General thoughts
Specific wording
Feedback on the whole ojuso approach
AP ojuso brochure (folleto) in Spanish! 8 pages in total. Divide this up. AP Jazmin, Ximena, Ivet, Marina.

  1. Expanding ojuso
    Jen (Swift) has been doing a lot of outreach to organisations
    Payal (Earthworks) has had a conversation with Sergio. Gaia and Earthworks seem to have a good relationship through Y2LN2M. Sergio send email to Payal to formally invite Earthworks.
    Sergio busy tomorrow. Maybe he is available at 6UK 12Mex. Hal, Sergio, (maybe Ximena, Jazmin, Ivet) and Tom call about Earthworks.
    AP Tom - make Structure (organogram etc.). In call tomorrow we talk about the specific ask for ojuso Alliance etc. What does it mean to be in the Advisory Board (more involved than Alliance) - specific skills and outlooks.

  2. Next steps
    Gantt chart for strategic pieces of work (when, who and over how long): https://docs.google.com/a/yansa.org/spreadsheets/d/1Fn76-26y0opxmpg0BtklDFIygbflOGVDqEueFE0X9Vk/edit?usp=sharing
    See (4) of the Gantt chart and try to add them here: AP Jazmin, Ivet, Hal, Marina etc. need (form numbers) 1.1 to 1.6 and if possible 1.9 of form for each case study they are planning on entering.
    AP Tom make a Category for individual case studies, then make topics for each individual case studies. Make a document/template that people can be used to show which case studies they will be doing.

Next call Friday 7th July at 11am (Mex) / 5pm (UK)"

I am putting the simple and complex forms in here, and also the case study identification (please say which case studies you will be able to do and complete 1.1-1.6 and 1.9 of the form as soon as possible

I will complete this later this evening (hopefully it’ll be ready by 5pm Mexico time). I’ve got dinner with my family now and I’ve decided to format it into a spreadsheet with multiple tabs so it will be easier for @admin @livvy to put into the form (is that actually the case or am I assuming?).

Tom :slight_smile: / :confused:


#20

Hi Tom,

Thank you for the notes and the charts. Having some difficulty with the Gantt chart. The headers just show up as multi-coloured question marks… not sure what all that is about!

In terms of case studies, I am a little confused about how, where and what you want us to enter re case studies. Should we simply enter which case studies we are pursuing in the Gantt chart under header 4?

Regarding the form in which we should enter case study data for each case, I am guessing you want us to produce a single form per-case study, rather than add them all into the form provided, which seems to be for clarifying translations?

Sorry if I’m a bit confused- clarification would be appreciated!

In the meantime I’ll continue with outreach and info gathering.

Cheers!

Hal