Proposal #31: Village 2.0 - Building Local Friendship.

I propose the following changes to the Village program:

1. 23 days, 10 delegations
2. Up to 40% delegations from the hosting NA (up to 4 delegation upon total of 10), upon request of the host: each delegation will be "representing" a different group (ethnical/national/cultural).
3. 1 full leaders weekend, JCs comes 1 days earlier
4. No second family weekend
5. "Smaller/refurbished" national day/night activities/presentations
6. Less excursions: 1 or 2 in the whole camp
7. Closer contact with leader and participant before and after the program

Rationale

The proposal above comes with the idea of addressing all the following limits of the actual village program:

• High costs of hosting for the chapter (financially hard to support)
• High costs of traveling for the participants (exclusive on the econmolical level)
• Big effort for CISV administrators to overcome burocracy (laws on minors, laws on VISA, laws against terrorism, insurance requirements in foregners countries, etc.) with no success guarantees (exclusive towards some countries)
• Big effort for chapter to host 28 days villages in term of an extra week availability (the extra effort required might weaken a chapter rather than strengthen)
• Big effort for leaders and staff to be available for 28 days, maybe using all their vacation from work (exclusive to people which cannot spend all their vacation month from work at a camp)
• Big effort for kids and families to be apart for 28 days (exclusive to these families)
• Educational standards varies a lot between camps (lack of training of the adult group)
• A CISV Village is a "pink bubble" is completely apart and hidden from the real world (no co-operation with other parties of the real world including local society, nor direct effect on chapter strength)
• Villages have a start and an end (lack of continuity)
• Is not integrated with the other local programs/activies of CISV such as IPP and Mosaic

In fact this prosal aims to:

• Contain travel costs, including more people
• Have bigger impact on local community and therefore acquire more support (also economical) by institution
• Create networking with other parties and recruit more volounteer, therefore strengthen local chapter
• Ease the burocracy needed for the participant to attend and relieve the chapters of part the effort needed to host, to not to weaken chapters
• Create integrated strategies with other local programs/activities of CISV such as IPP and Mosaic Moreover using the possibilities offered by technology a longer and lasting experience can be created.

The impact of a SHORTER LOCAL Village on the aims of the village stated above is as follows:

• The impact on aim 1 and 2 is only determined by the word SHORTER, this will determine better trained volounteers, which still are needed in order to offer higher standardized educational standards.
• The impact on aim 3 is only determined by the word LOCAL, but considering nowadays multicultural society being more local doesn't mean to have the same cultures present.

Respectfully submitted, Teo (ITA)

Proposal #30: No National Nights.

I propose to remove the concept of the national/international nights/days and all other concepts based on nationality from the village program (and all other programs, for that matter).

Rationale

I think Nationality is a very exclusive concept based on a pretty much out-of-time way of thinking. I think, as participants in a CISV program, we are urged to identify with our country (bring the flag, sing a song, cook the food, teach the culture), and we look at others the same way (call them by delegations, associate Culture with Country). This way of thinking is very much encouraged by national presentations in camps.
In my opinion identifying with one's own country is always setting boundaries and excluding all those not belonging to it. It's a kind of Mine that is not shareable and therefore in my eyes not very constructive. It establishes distances rather than minimising them. And it excludes those who don't have a national identity and those who don't have the national identity they're supposed to represent.

Respectfully submitted, Eli (GER)

Proposal #29: A World of Chapters.

I propose that CISV takes away the National Assosiations as the basic organizing units in its international democratic and administrative routines. I further propose that it is representatives of the Chapters that i.e. vote at an AIM, and that any Chapter is free to join any cluster for cooperation, i.e. regional, virtual and/or by interest.

Rationale

CISV International consists of app. 60 NAs (National Assosiations) or app. 200 Local Chapters. Since national borders are made up by coincidents in history they have no relevance to anything but administrative and legal routines. Further, since CISV wants to break barriers and cross borders we should not organize ourselves along the same lines as we try to overcome.

Respectfully submitted, Adam (SWE)

{Main decisions of CISV international are taken at the Annual International Meeting (AIM), where the trustees (representatives of NAs) meet. Huge countries like the USA (20 chapters) vote with one voice similar to small chapters like Luxembourg (1 chapter). To be recognized as an official National Association, among other issues, a country must host ALL programmes and have an active junior branch. }