Dave commented

I think there could be two strands to this:

1) Local pragmatic ideas

2) Global economic systems

This group may focus on the local schemes and the Positive Alternatives group can look at the Global. 

Both could examine what the faith and belief perspective is on this.

Number one is the only one that feels worthwhile to me.  I believe the foundation of global anything-of-consequence is abundant, affordable ancient sunlight (fossil fuels), and I do not have faith in that foundation.  Even if it holds for twice the time projected by the most cautious analysts, it is wise to (be able to) rely on what is reliable.  Plus, people on the ground will together conclude one day that fouling their surroundings and sacrificing lives of some and health of many both to obtain the fuels and by using the fuels is intolerable.  Global will be recognized by all to be synonymous with entitlement, narrowly defined and selectively allowed, as it has been.

When we go local or perhaps bioregional, we can mimic ecosystems, all of which are place-based and gravity- and solar-powered, using both present income and that which beings paid forward (legacies; soils, most importantly).  When our systems better mimic ecosystems, we will rely on complementarity more than conformity, compliance, cooperation and even collaboration.  We will arrange our economies as forums for all voices (read productive, full expressions of whole people, not just articulated demands and opinions).  Because people are multidimensional and everything rises and falls, all out of sync, complexity will not be lacking.  These forums will be necessarily (naturally) dynamic manifestations of who/what is present and contributing.  In time, appropriate traditions of being-in-place will return to serve.

Voice in the limited sense simply cannot go as far.