Discussing non-monetary avenues towards community and habitat partnered with ecological succession?

Does anyone know of ongoing discussions on this topic, or good talks, writings, etc. which provide real applicable avenues for people to travel towards community and habitat that is partnered with ecological succession, without the requirement of adapting their behavior to the current monetary system?

To me this seems like one of the biggest barriers to the growth of harmonious culture, though it isn't exclusively about money, that is a primary expression of the way that people must be able to align with the current paradigm in order to move towards any future.  
As it is right now, there are many people who either would not have the chance, or would not see it as worthwhile to do what is required, to move in that direction, because of financial and economic considerations. This seems unnecessary as many of the limitations to transition are arbitrary and not actually providing utility (such as absentee land "ownership" and accumulation of land access by investing firms, corporations, etc. and restriction of unused resources because of the potential for money to be extracted during the process of granting permission)

Some topics related to this that I think would be important to discuss :

- Land access based on respect of presence, privacy, and relational suitability.
- Networks of networks of direct relationships. Methods of arrangement and design of social networks.
- Voluntary shared networks of machinery and tools (those which are only needed sometimes and would make more sense to rent than buy in a conventional context).
- Widely accessible free learning opportunities driven by passionate volunteers.
- Possible exceptions that could be made and what kinds - such as funding to support volunteers who would run free learning programs, rather than relying on personal income streams, or to lessen the reliance on personal income streams.
- What narratives of relationships could replace transactional narratives?
- Is there a legal conception that would be appropriate for land hosting transitional projects that is distinct from ownership (i.e. a trust? is that actually distinct?), and if not, what could that look like?
- Could such a legal conception also apply to tools and other resources? If not, what might be an alternative?

Does anyone have other suggestions relevant to this topic?

Feel free to discuss as much as you want in this post too, hopefully this is an appropriate forum to post this in.

I can't comment on many of these topics, but tool sharing is definitely a thing.

First and foremost there is a growing space for tool libraries, either from maker-spaces, hacker spaces, or actual book libraries that loan out tools.

I also remember seeing something about communal tool sheds somewhere in Scandinavia, especially for things like chainsaws, plows, and other things that one person in a community is not likely to need to use every day for a long period of time. Unfortunately I can't recall the video.

I've been pondering formalizing some communal tool sharing in my own community, but I'm not there yet... too much other stuff going on.

Ah, also free learning is also huge in varying degrees of formal.

Udemy, Coursera have some free courses, MIT courseware and other universities also provide huge amounts of free university level learning, Khan academy is a superb platform for free learning. A lot of software has free learning courses, especially open source software.

PEP is free and quite formal, but it's not about learning as much, though it does encourage a lot of learning...

I have heard of some tool sharing examples before, though most of what I heard about seemed fairly small scale. Tool libraries seem like a really good idea, especially if they could operate out of abandoned buildings.

There are definitely a lot of learning resources available for free on the internet. I guess I was thinking more along the lines of in person opportunities specifically related to creating culture and habitat in harmony with ecosystems and the water cycle, though of course some things like this do exist also... just not enough for sure, and in my experience they tend to not be very accessible to the majority of the population, in terms of simply not knowing about them.
The type of accessibility I am thinking would be needed would even be accessible to those who are homeless and can't really access the internet often or reliably.

That said, land access is definitely still the biggest barrier to entry.

Alex Michaud wrote:
The type of accessibility I am thinking would be needed would even be accessible to those who are homeless and can't really access the internet often or reliably.

Here again I hope to support public libraries. Not all, but many provide a lot of educational resources to anyone. I used to work in a library and we would make sure that everyone had access to the materials regardless of their status in society or monetary situation. Even people who broke rules and vandalized library materials were frequently given second, third, or even fourth chances.

I also know that some libraries provide their bathrooms for people who do not have homes, or do not have access to running water, sometimes before opening hours or after closing hours to perform basic hygiene needs.

Furthermore most libraries are very receptive of programming input. Not programming as in software, but as in event programming. So for example, if you were to suggest the library hold a workshop on permaculture principles, assuming the hurdles weren't too high and a few people voiced interest, I'm willing to bet they would be happy to get a workshop together.

Every library I have seen in the USA has either public use computers or free wifi. My local library here in Japan finally started offering free wifi as well.

Also interlibrary loan is an amazing resource that lets you get access to physical learning resources almost anywhere. I'm a little cut off from the English speaking world here in Japan, but even here I have access to a remarkable selection of resources through libraries.

I'm a big fan of public libraries. I think they are a bastion of free learning and independent study.

edit: added discussion of the internet.

Allan Savory’s book “Holistic Management” deals largely with how to get communities to engage with each other to agree common core values. Those core values then are used to form mutually acceptable plans.

The book is widely known for it’s animal grazing systems, but the use of those systems grows out of the Holistic Managment in the earlier chapters. It might be a good place for you to start your reading.

I don't see how a community or even a town could survive without "monetary avenues".

Who pays for the land?

Who pays for expenditures that are necessary for life?

Anne Miller wrote:I don't see how a community or even a town could survive without "monetary avenues".

Who pays for the land?

Who pays for expenditures that are necessary for life?

Yep. Totally agree with these concerns. But at the same time, other factors get pushed aside when money is the only goal.

Savory’s work covers this quite well, by getting ALL stakeholders together to express common core values “I want my children to live in an environment with clean water” etc… expressing the shared values explicitly, helps everyone see where the common ground is, as well as identify and defuse points of conflict.

In his own work it has been instrumental in society level changes in how land is used (misused?).

Anne Miller wrote:I don't see how a community or even a town could survive without "monetary avenues".

Who pays for the land?

Who pays for expenditures that are necessary for life?

Suppose it depends how you mean. Survival in itself is obviously not tied to money - there are no basic necessities that are impossible to obtain in any other way than purchase. And as for survival within or alongside society as it is today, that's what this thread is about, right?

I assume, as things are today, that someone would have to originally pay for the land (unless we're talking squatting of unused spaces, and that might be raising the stakes higher than most people are comfortable with). As I understood it, the question was how such a community could be maintained non-monetarily, once the land buying was done with?

Anne Miller wrote:I don't see how a community or even a town could survive without "monetary avenues".

Who pays for the land?

Who pays for expenditures that are necessary for life?

I think for the foreseeable future, those with financial resources will need to be willing to share/exchange them for other kinds of support from the community. For instance in my own life, my 92 year old father has the greatest amount of financial resources, which he shares with us for an environment to live in. He gets to enjoy a comfortable home, loving family with him all day, and a quiet outdoor environment to take walks in. In town, my friend Ann has a large yard which she lets me garden in pretty much as I like. She pays me a small amount each month and provides a space for me to live in her garage, in exchange for an unusual, beautiful, and productive garden which she is physically unable to care for herself. I think in most communities at the present time there are individuals with financial and other  resources who may be willing to share them in exchange for resources they don’t have such as companionship,emotional support, and physical strength for doing things like gardening.  Once a community of support is established, the monetary avenues needed to continue it might be very small, limited to things like paying for property tax and some kinds of insurance perhaps. At least it seems like something that might be possible. Maybe people with resources can set up a trust to continue the community of support beyond their own lifetime.

Anne Miller wrote:I don't see how a community or even a town could survive without "monetary avenues".
Who pays for the land?
Who pays for expenditures that are necessary for life?

Perhaps a non-monetary community could be maintained if money was coming in from some outside source. For example, if the community was in Alaska, everyone over 18 would be getting $3284 from the permanent dividend fund [1]. Due to having low or no incomes, the people in the community would also receive ~$5376 per year in SNAP / food stamp benefits [2].