January 7, 2007
NEW HAVEN, CONNECTICUT—Conscious Lifestyle, a nonprofit organization concerned with socially responsible consumerism, is now accepting grant applications from high school and college students. Students who exhibit interest and commitment to social entrepreneurship and consumer responsibility in areas such as socially human rights, animal welfare, and environmentalism will receive up to $1,000, web space, and other pertinent resources to complete projects of their choosing. In the past, such projects have included:
• An environmental organization that converted school vehicles to run on biodiesel.
• A socially responsible product-design firm run by engineering students, which provides high-quality services for nonprofit organizations at affordable prices.
• A initiative committed to socially responsible investing on campus.
Students with similarly innovative ideas should download an application from www.consciouslifestyle.org/2008ventureapp and submit it by February 15, 2008. Winners will be chosen by an executive committee of Conscious Lifestyle staff members and announced April 1.
Today’s students are passionate about addressing societal problems, and they want to make sure their hard work will lead to long-lasting change. Fortunately for these students, Conscious Lifestyle has created a program to support their efforts.
Conscious Lifestyle is a non-profit organization that empowers students and schools to be more socially responsible. With a strong emphasis on social entrepreneurship, Conscious Lifestyle trains high school and university students to make lasting contributions to their schools and fellow students. For more information, please visit www.consciouslifestyle.org or call Mike Del Ponte, Executive Director of Conscious Lifestyle at 925-360-4149.
Contact: Michael Del Ponte
Phone: (925) 360-4149
Email: mike@consciouslifestyle.org
I too have as much concern for the exaggeration of our isolated focus as I do for my sense that humanity is a major instigator in the break-down of the earth’s eco-system. It reminds me of how humanity clings onto particular points rather than to perceive an ‘ecology’ of relationships. We then make decisions based on a mono-nucleic or single-pointed view, while somehow (unconsciously?) assuming that our choice has integrated all the problems within one neat little package. We are a society that reacts to the immediacy of singled-out emergencies that trigger a fear of our own death, rather than to be responsive to the very real intuitive callings within us, of which by the way actually emphasizes life rather than death. In the global warming case, humanity’s inner ‘call’ is signaling us to change the way we interact with the planet’s resources and life systems. Yet that calling has gotten pulled into an outdated learning methodology that encourages the selection of a certain part within the greater whole so that we can adjust it in order to ‘fix’ the whole, all while dropping the other parts in the process. Ironically, a relatively recent advancement of science through complexity theory; more specifically: the butterfly effect, suggests that we must take into effect sources of small changes too, as they are just as important as the big sources of system change. Thus, it’s the ecology of our science that seems to be lost or forgotten (or maybe still emerging?) right now. In part, I believe this is due to our (also outdated) economic model, which reinforces big payouts of fame and money going to those who come up with the best (so-called) right answer. This is a flaw in today’s human(e) management model and directly impacts scientific progress, even if science theory suggests otherwise. That is, the original science model is based in the separation of matter in order to see how it got put together and works. Although this process is important, I believe that it is valuable only when balanced with other scientific procedures that incorporate (w)holistic applications which seek to understand how a system works as a whole without separating it into parts.
All that said, can the global warming movement trigger an ecology of understanding that is sorely missing? In the name of generating deeper forms of innovation (rather than shallow), this is both my hope and my concern.
Vic
--------------
On 10/17/07 10:09 AM, From Dan J. who wrote:
Another point amongst the discourse on global climate change that leads me to ponder the (science+belief=action) model. So is Botkin one of the naysayer conspirators, of the believers but a concerned observer, or just misguided? What should we believe about the truth from this? He's reputable enough to get into the WSJ, but then that paper has a pro-business bias.
So having read this, what do you make of his factual points? What will you do with it within your social-intellectual construct of climate change?
Dan
--------------
Global Warming Delusions
10/17/2007 The Wall Street Journal
By Daniel B. Botkin
Mr. Botkin, president of the Center for the Study of the Environment and professor emeritus in the Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology at the University of California, Santa Barbara, is the author of ”Discordant Harmonies: A New Ecology for the Twenty-First Century” (Replica Books, 2001).
Global warming doesn't matter except to the extent that it will affect life -- ours and that of all living things on Earth. And contrary to the latest news, the evidence that global warming will have serious effects on life is thin. Most evidence suggests the contrary.
Case in point: This year's United Nations report on climate change and other documents say that 20%-30% of plant and animal species will be threatened with extinction in this century due to global warming -- a truly terrifying thought. Yet, during the past 2.5 million years, a period that scientists now know experienced climatic changes as rapid and as warm as modern climatological models suggest will happen to us, almost none of the millions of species on Earth went extinct. The exceptions were about 20 species of large mammals (the famous megafauna of the last ice age -- saber-tooth tigers, hairy mammoths and the like), which went extinct about 10,000 to 5,000 years ago at the end of the last ice age, and many dominant trees and shrubs of northwestern Europe. But elsewhere, including North America, few plant species went extinct, and few mammals.
]]> We're also warned that tropical diseases are going to spread, and that we can expect malaria and encephalitis epidemics. But scientific papers by Prof. Sarah Randolph of Oxford University show that temperature changes do not correlate well with changes in the distribution or frequency of these diseases; warming has not broadened their distribution and is highly unlikely to do so in the future, global warming or not.The key point here is that living things respond to many factors in addition to temperature and rainfall. In most cases, however, climate-modeling-based forecasts look primarily at temperature alone, or temperature and precipitation only. You might ask, ”Isn't this enough to forecast changes in the distribution of species?” Ask a mockingbird. The New York Times recently published an answer to a query about why mockingbirds were becoming common in Manhattan. The expert answer was: food -- an exotic plant species that mockingbirds like to eat had spread to New York City. It was this, not temperature or rainfall, the expert said, that caused the change in mockingbird geography.
You might think I must be one of those know-nothing naysayers who believes global warming is a liberal plot. On the contrary, I am a biologist and ecologist who has worked on global warming, and been concerned about its effects, since 1968. I've developed the computer model of forest growth that has been used widely to forecast possible effects of global warming on life -- I've used the model for that purpose myself, and to forecast likely effects on specific endangered species.
I'm not a naysayer. I'm a scientist who believes in the scientific method and in what facts tell us. I have worked for 40 years to try to improve our environment and improve human life as well. I believe we can do this only from a basis in reality, and that is not what I see happening now. Instead, like fashions that took hold in the past and are eloquently analyzed in the classic 19th century book ”Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds,” the popular imagination today appears to have been captured by beliefs that have little scientific basis.
Some colleagues who share some of my doubts argue that the only way to get our society to change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe, and that therefore it is all right and even necessary for scientists to exaggerate. They tell me that my belief in open and honest assessment is naive. ”Wolves deceive their prey, don't they?” one said to me recently. Therefore, biologically, he said, we are justified in exaggerating to get society to change.
The climate modelers who developed the computer programs that are being used to forecast climate change used to readily admit that the models were crude and not very realistic, but were the best that could be done with available computers and programming methods. They said our options were to either believe those crude models or believe the opinions of experienced, data-focused scientists. Having done a great deal of computer modeling myself, I appreciated their acknowledgment of the limits of their methods. But I hear no such statements today. Oddly, the forecasts of computer models have become our new reality, while facts such as the few extinctions of the past 2.5 million years are pushed aside, as if they were not our reality.
A recent article in the well-respected journal American Scientist explained why the glacier on Mt. Kilimanjaro could not be melting from global warming. Simply from an intellectual point of view it was fascinating -- especially the author's Sherlock Holmes approach to figuring out what was causing the glacier to melt. That it couldn't be global warming directly (i.e., the result of air around the glacier warming) was made clear by the fact that the air temperature at the altitude of the glacier is below freezing. This means that only direct radiant heat from sunlight could be warming and melting the glacier. The author also studied the shape of the glacier and deduced that its melting pattern was consistent with radiant heat but not air temperature. Although acknowledged by many scientists, the paper is scorned by the true believers in global warming. (DKJ: I would think snow deposition and cloud cover would be variables that link to climate - may be in the article but not mentioned here)
We are told that the melting of the arctic ice will be a disaster. But during the famous medieval warming period -- A.D. 750 to 1230 or so -- the Vikings found the warmer northern climate to their advantage. Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie addressed this in his book ”Times of Feast, Times of Famine: A History of Climate Since the Year 1000,” perhaps the greatest book about climate change before the onset of modern concerns with global warming. He wrote that Erik the Red ”took advantage of a sea relatively free of ice to sail due west from Iceland to reach Greenland. . . . Two and a half centuries later, at the height of the climatic and demographic fortunes of the northern settlers, a bishopric of Greenland was founded at Gardar in 1126.”
Ladurie pointed out that ”it is reasonable to think of the Vikings as unconsciously taking advantage of this [referring to the warming of the Middle Ages] to colonize the most northern and inclement of their conquests, Iceland and Greenland.” Good thing that Erik the Red didn't have Al Gore or his climatologists as his advisers. (DKJ: Author's personal dig at Gore?)
Should we therefore dismiss global warming? Of course not. But we should make a realistic assessment, as rationally as possible, about its cultural, economic and environmental effects. As Erik the Red might have told you, not everything due to a climatic warming is bad, nor is everything that is bad due to a climatic warming.
We should approach the problem the way we decide whether to buy insurance and take precautions against other catastrophes -- wildfires, hurricanes, earthquakes. And as I have written elsewhere, many of the actions we would take to reduce greenhouse-gas production and mitigate global-warming effects are beneficial anyway, most particularly a movement away from fossil fuels to alternative solar and wind energy.
My concern is that we may be moving away from an irrational lack of concern about climate change to an equally irrational panic about it.
Many of my colleagues ask, ”What's the problem? Hasn't it been a good thing to raise public concern?” The problem is that in this panic we are going to spend our money unwisely, we will take actions that are counterproductive, and we will fail to do many of those things that will benefit the environment and ourselves.
For example, right now the clearest threat to many species is habitat destruction. Take the orangutans, for instance, one of those charismatic species that people are often fascinated by and concerned about. They are endangered because of deforestation. In our fear of global warming, it would be sad if we fail to find funds to purchase those forests before they are destroyed, and thus let this species go extinct.
At the heart of the matter is how much faith we decide to put in science -- even how much faith scientists put in science. Our times have benefited from clear-thinking, science-based rationality. I hope this prevails as we try to deal with our changing climate.
---
From Webzine and the New York Academy of Sciences
A corporation's organizational framework must facilitate and encourage employee innovation and risk-taking. Frequently, integral decision making must occur at lower employee levels where people have the greatest information on products, markets, customer feedback and relationships. It is critical that innovation across employee levels is encouraged and supported, but how can a corporation ensure innovation and more importantly, sustainable innovation? How do companies internalize a culture and process to ensure consistent innovation?
GE's 'Ecomagination' initiative to double global revenue from environmental products by 2012 has radically shifted public attention from the company's reputation as an environmental laggard to a new role as an eco-innovator. Other companies such as Pfizer (green chemistry) and Toyota (hybrid technology) claim growing markets for their products among both consumers and businesses.
Arthur D. Little's recent report, The Innovation High Ground, finds that as many as 95% of companies believe that such 'sustainability-driven innovation' has the potential to deliver business value and almost 25% believe it definitely will. Where are sustainability-driven innovators headed and what can other companies learn from them?
]]>If you like to watch your money AND the planet grow green take a look below. Thank you Cliff for all of your years of persevering with GreenMoney Journal. You have helped make a once future idea (green investing) become a growing present day activity.
----
In GreenMoney Journal’s special 15th Anniversary issue (Summer 2007) they are looking ahead at the next fifteen years through the eyes of several visionary leaders who have shaped today’s green investing and business world.
GreenMoney forecasts offer a greener future, to be sure. Be prepared to see a “green print” for a more sustainable world in which both challenge and opportunity abound. If fact, the next 15 years will be more critical then the last as we shift our attention from global war to global warming.
How will we evolve? Petroleum wars will end as people more fully realize the human and environmental costs associated with the finite commodity. The evolution will continue as the clean green energy revolution builds momentum. Issues of political justices and socio-economic justice will become even more closely tied. Higher environmental standards, clear market incentives and the laws of supply and demand will drive the culture of sustainable innovation.
Patriotism will be demonstrated not by SUV bumper stickers, but by responsible ecological behavior. As New York Times columnist Tom Friedman says, “Green is the new Red, White, and Blue.”
But this rapidly approaching future for our country is also global. Internationally, corporate accountability will include Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) factors as corporate management come to the inescapable conclusion that any financial analysis that excludes these factors cannot safely predict a company’s long-term profitability. According to several of our writers, the next 15 years will see the full integration of ESG into financial analysis and corporate decisions to reflect a triple bottom line.
As more individuals understand that their shopping and investing choices have impacts, they will want to make those impacts positive and sustainable. How will that happen? GreenMoney will continue to provide the answers.
In the special Summer issue: Amy Domini of Domini Social Investments shows us how the “culture of capitalism” will be fundamentally transformed; Gary Hirshberg of Stonyfield Farm outlines a dynamic future from food to technology, examining the challenges and opportunities of climate change; our favorite futurist Hazel Henderson spells out future global trends and counter trends; Spencer Beebe of Ecotrust keeps it green with an environmental discussion on advantages of Bioregions; and Joe Keefe of Pax World Funds shows us the road from Socially Responsible Investing to ESG and sustainable investing.
And if you want to get the 32-page print version (with exclusive features like the socially responsible mutual fund performance chart) of the special 15th Anniversary Summer ‘Visionaries’ issue for the Special Anniversary Rate of just $15 ( discounted from $50 ), go to the GreenMoney Journal via our website at- www.greenmoney.com
You can also find an extensive set of 'exclusively online' articles on our web site by sustainability leaders, including Joan Bavaria of Trillium Asset Mgmt, Barbara Krumsiek of Calvert, Woody Tasch of Investors Circle, Allan Savory of Holistic Mgmt. Intl., Jean Pogge of ShoreBank, author and vegetarian chef Deborah Madison, as well as Tessa Tennant and many others.
SUBSCRIPTION Information
Online at- www.Greenmoney.com
US - $15 a year, Canada - $20 a year, International - $25 a year
Cliff Feigenbaum, Founder and Managing Editor,
GreenMoney Journal and greenmoney.com
Co-author, “Investing with Your Values” with Hal Brill and Jack Brill
Subscriptions - (800) 849-8751
Email - cliffgmj@gmail.com
I seek direction from you on how to incorporate ‘deep creative’ processes within inKNOWvate's emerging ‘sustainability reporting’ CoLaboratories.
The sustainability reporting phenomena is a rapidly growing trend within organizations world-wide and covers all sectors including business, NGO’s, communities/cities, education, and government. These reports help to clarify and monitor how well companies are improving their ecological, social, AND economic objectives (otherwise known as the triple bottom line); things such as material and energy usage efficiencies, as well as employment and customer satisfaction. These reports are also becoming powerful marketing tools for addressing the rapidly growing 'cultural creatives' marketplace by providing authentic and transparent responses for the consumers who are asking for more value and ‘greenness’ in their purchases.
Presently, these reports are inspiring - yes, but they are usually organized using self-determined indicators development, which help to monitor company direction. This is wonderful and important, yet the reports can be rather dry in terms of their creation, implementation, and delivery. Staff may step into their reporting process feeling overwhelmed by the additional responsibilities that are generated to deliver a good report; thus adding more weight to their already daunting work load.
That said, these reports can enable so much more. They actually become touch stones for organizational and global transformation. They are a place where organizations can get swept into new realms of design and innovation; a way to expand their understandings of how to architect richer forms of innovation.
Additionally, outcomes from entering the sustainability process are: improved human(e) communication, enhanced product design and development processes, and a renewed awareness of the company's impact on our Planet
Furthermore, the collaborative process that is necessary for creating these reports opens the door for deeper forms of creativity, thereby helping organizations realize unexpected forms of social and technical innovation, while also building a high sense of meaning among stakeholders and participants.
inKNOWvate coLabs provides delivery on this vision. Presently, I am in need of more tools that generate brain-shifting, playful, and creative processes for making the reporting process more engaging and satisfying, so that organizations can 'sustain' the process of annual reporting. I seek tools that can accommodate specific organizational needs, covering everything from designing amazing new forms of products and services (technical innovation) to changing the way companies greet each other and customers at their doorstep (social innovation).
Got ideas? Post them or email me.
Vic Desotelle
inKNOWvate Principal
Anyway, I have been spending time with a few experts in the consulting field of creativity. Yes, that nebulous subject that's tough to pin a buck onto. However, I believe that the issues these 'creativists' are mashing with are critical to what NEXT-GENERATION INNOVATION will look like (a favorite subject of mine). Thus, you'll be seeing more from me regarding THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CREATIVITY and INNOVATION. Thanks for the article John.
Readers, see if Mr. Gates creativity principles work for you.
Also, check out John's blog on picturing big. He's onto an interesting big solution for global warming.
-----------------------------------
Gates-ian ideas work in ad biz
Clear direction, time to think are elements of
winning system at Microsoft
By John Emmerling
Advertising Age
September 23, 1996
Back in 1990, while researching a book about creative ideas, I spent an hour chatting with Bill Gates at his home (the old small home, not the new huge one). Conducted across the dining room table, the interview boiled down to one question: "How do you inspire creativity at Microsoft?" Recently, I came across the cassette of our conversation and listened again to Bill's words. It was a bit of a surprise, because the six principles he talked about—the ones that inspire the software developers at Microsoft—would also work magic in any agency's creative department.
1. Hire the best people. In Bill's words the best hires should be "fairly smart, broad people who have interests in a lot of areas, and are willing to work intensely on our stuff." He looks hard for those people who—in addition to having superb skills in their special area of computer technology—are also interested in the market... and in the users. (LESSON: Look for stunningly talented art directors and writers who are familiar with both Wired and The Wall Street Journal.)
2. Crystal clear direction. At Microsoft, the eight-word company mission is "Put a world of information at everyone's fingertips." According to Bill, that means a customer can "sit down and get any information they want—it's very easy to see." (LESSON: Can you write your agency's creative philosophy on a matchbook cover?)
3. Give them time to think. "People must have time to think about things," said Bill. The architects of the company's buildings must have gotten the message—all offices are private and whiteboards are mounted on the walls, ready to receive scribbled notations, diagrams and concepts. (LESSON: The client called this morning and insists on seeing the new ad tomorrow? Beg, borrow and steal—but push the deadline till Friday.)
4. Shorten the feedback loop. Even back in the dark ages of 1990, Microsoft was aggressively pushing the creative use of e-mail. Developers were expected to send e-mail describing their ideas to the reigning software experts. The feedback responses would come zapping back in minutes. Instead of a couple of face-to-face meetings a day, there could easily be 20 electronic consultations. (LESSON: Don't use e-mail just to send memos. Toss a creative idea into your agency's electronic pot—and ask for comments and tweaks.)
5. Let people feel their impact. Gates wants people to feel important. If anyone starts to get the sense they are plowing old ground, doing something that's been done before, they are quickly given something else to do. Or they are given a clear understanding of how "we haven't yet achieved what we want to achieve." (LESSON: When is the last time you asked yourself if your creative people "feel important?" Ask it. Then act on it.)
6. Allow unicycles. Good people like to work with good people—and Bill helps set a tone that is "individualized and interesting." At Microsoft, ties are an oddity. It's OK to play Friday night golf in the hallways or mount your unicycle and hold a jousting match under the chairman's windows. Stay loose—the ideas flow faster. (LESSON: Allow unicycles.)
Bill Gates' creative stimulants must be working. Worth less than $4 billion back during that summer of 1990, he's now topped $16 billion. That means—even if he puts in 70-hour work weeks—he's been pulling down more than $500,000 an hour. So if you're reading this, Bill, thanks again for the half-million dollar interview.
-----------------------------------------------
Do the above Bill Gates principles work for you? In the scheme of sustainable innovation: What's impressive about them? What doesn't work for you?
-------------
From Guiding Principles of Sustainable Design
THE CONCEPT OF SUSTAINABILITY
The concept of sustainable design has come to the forefront in the last 20 years. It is a concept that recognizes that human civilization is an integral part of the natural world and that nature must be preserved and perpetuated if the human community itself is to survive. Sustainable design articulates this idea through developments that exemplify the principles of conservation and encourage the application of those principles in our daily lives.
A corollary concept, and one that supports sustainable design, is that of bioregionalism - the idea that all life is established and maintained on a functional community basis and that all of these distinctive communities (bioregions) have mutually supporting life systems that are generally self-sustaining. The concept of sustainable design holds that future technologies must function primarily within bioregional patterns and scales. They must maintain biological diversity and environmental integrity, contribute to the health of air, water, and soils, incorporate design and construction that reflect bioregional conditions, and reduce the impacts of human use.
Sustainable design, sustainable development, design with nature, environmentally sensitive design, holistic resource management - regardless of what it's called, "sustainability," the capability of natural and cultural systems being continued over time, is key.
THE PRINCIPLES OF SUSTAINABILITY
http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/chs/phg/intro.html
Sustainability does not require a loss in the quality of life, but does require a change in mind-set, a change in values toward less consumptive lifestyles. These changes must embrace global interdependence, environmental stewardship, social responsibility, and economic viability.
Sustainable design must use an alternative approach to traditional design that incorporates these changes in mind-set. The new design approach must recognize the impacts of every design choice on the natural and cultural resources of the local, regional, and global environments.
A model of the new design principles necessary for sustainability is exemplified by the "Hannover Principles" or "Bill of Rights for the Planet," developed by William McDonough
1. Insist on the right of humanity and nature to co-exist in a healthy, supportive, diverse, and sustainable condition.
2. Recognize Interdependence. The elements of human design interact with and depend on the natural world, with broad and diverse implications at every scale. Expand design considerations to recognizing even distant effects.
3. Respect relationships between spirit and matter. Consider all aspects of human settlement including community, dwelling, industry, and trade in terms of existing and evolving connections between spiritual and material consciousness.
4. Accept responsibility for the consequences of design decisions upon human well-being, the viability of natural systems, and their right to co-exist.
5. Create safe objects to long-term value. Do not burden future generations with requirements for maintenance or vigilant administration of potential danger due to the careless creations of products, processes, or standards.
6. Eliminate the concept of waste. Evaluate and optimize the full life-cycle of products and processes, to approach the state of natural systems in which there is no waste.
7. Rely on natural energy flows. Human designs should, like the living world, derive their creative forces from perpetual solar income. Incorporate this energy efficiently and safely for responsible use.
8. Understand the limitations of design. No human creation lasts forever and design does not solve all problems. Those who create and plan should practice humility in the face of nature. Treat nature as a model and mentor, not an inconvenience to be evaded or controlled.
9. Seek constant improvements by sharing knowledge. Encourage direct and open communication between colleagues, patrons, manufacturers, and users to link long-term sustainable considerations with ethical responsibility, and reestablish the integral relationship between natural processes and human activity.
Read on for other a list of other sustainability principles ...
Summary:
This article summarizes nine well-used conceptual frameworks for sustainable development.
Content:
Several groups of individuals of international stature have, over the past several decades, distilled their thinking about sustainability into principles, conditions, management models and guidelines for building a sustainable world. Nine well-used frameworks are summarized below, along with principles developed in 1996 by the Minnesota Sustainable Development Initiative of former Governor Arne Carlson.
Common themes run through all these frameworks, for example, a long-term perspective and attention to ecological carrying capacity. But each framework includes other differing principles reflecting the particular perspectives of their authors. A sentence of introduction to each framework provides a flavor of the differing perspectives.
The Hannover Principles
http://www.mcdonough.com/principles.pdf
The primary author behind the Hannover Principles (written in 1992 for the 2000 World's Fair) is William McDonough, a designer and architect. Six of the nine principles reflect the perspective that unsustainability is fundamentally a human design problem.
- Insist on rights of humanity and nature to co-exist.
- Recognize interdependence.
- Respect relationships between spirit and matter.
- Accept responsibility for the consequences of design decisions.
- Create safe objects of long-term value.
- Eliminate the concept of waste.
- Rely on natural energy flows.
- Understand the limitations of design.
- Seek constant improvement by the sharing of knowledge.
McDonough's later thinking is crystallized into his book "The Next Industrial Revolution" and a cradle-to-cradle philosophy (see
http://www.nextstep.state.mn.us/res_detail.cfm?id=421).
The Natural Step System Conditions
http://www.ortns.org/framework.htm
The oncologist Dr. Karl Henrik Robert, leader behind The Natural Step, studied the link between human health and environmental toxins. "System conditions" developed by him and 50 leading Swedish scientists in 1990 focus on absolute physio-chemical requirements for sustaining life on Earth, setting conditions for how we can develop our products, services, our individual lives, our economy and our society in a sustainable manner. The Natural Step asserts that, in a sustainable society:
* What we extract from the Earth (fossil & radioactive fuels, mined metals & minerals), and what we make synthetically (chemicals, pesticides, plastics, etc.), must not accumulate long-term in the environment as wastes. "Wastes" must ultimately be compostable or remain in closed-loop reuse cycles that don't contaminate compostables.
* Biodiversity and natural systems -- soils, forests, water, air, genetic material -- must not be irreversibly degraded by human activities.
* The bounty of the Earth -- food, raw materials, natural systems -- must be used equitably, fairly and efficiently so that the basic needs of all humans are met locally and globally.
The Conservation Economy
http://www.conservationeconomy.net
A framework based upon social, natural, and economic capital and 57 "patterns" (e.g., sustainable forestry) -- presented in one graphic whose elements can be clicked on to access extensive text background -- for an ecologically restorative, socially just, and reliably prosperous society. Developed by the non-profit assistance group Ecotrust during ten years of practical conservation work in the coastal temperate rainforests of the Pacific Northwest and based in the belief that a conservation economy inherently serves the self-interest of individuals and communities.
Healthy Communities
http://www.euro.who.int/healthy-cities
http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/chs/phg/intro.html
http://www.ncl.org/cs/services/healthycommunities.html
With roots in the 19th century public health movement, this framework puts individual health at the center of a holistic view where social and economic factors become indicators of how healthy a community and its members are. As stated by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 1986, "The fundamental conditions and resources for health are peace, shelter, education, food, income, a stable economy, sustainable resources, social justice and equity."
The healthy community / healthy cities approach is based upon two premises:
(1) The major determinants of personal health lie beyond biology and health care, in the environmental, social, economic, political and cultural conditions that determine the behaviors, the lifestyles and the health of individuals and communities.
(2) Individuals, community organizations and local governments can undertake actions that will alter these determinants and improve the health of the community.
Herman Daly's Sustainable Development Principles
http://www.rachel.org/bulletin (browse for back issue #624, November 12, 1998)
Herman Daly is an economist (formerly with the World Bank). In his book "Beyond Growth" (1996, p. 69), he defines sustainable development as "development without growth -- without growth in throughput beyond environmental regenerative and absorptive capacity." Two of his three conditions for sustainability focus on rates of resource use.
- Harvest renewable resources only at the speed at which they regenerate.
- Consume or irretrievably dispose of nonrenewable resources no faster than the rate at which renewable substitutes are developed and phased into use.
- Limit wastes to the assimilative capacity of local ecosystems.
Holistic Management Model
http://www.holisticmanagement.org/
Holistic management was developed over 40-years and most recently by the wildlife biologist Allan Savory in his work in land, agriculture and wildlife management.
- Define the "whole" to be managed (a farm, a business, a community), which includes the people (decision-makers), the built environment, the natural resource base (land, wildlife, etc.) and the wealth that can be generated from them.
- Set a holistic goal that includes the quality of life sought by the people in the whole, what they must produce to sustain that quality of life, and a description of the future resource base as it must be far into the future to sustain what is produced.
- Determine what tools, materials, and knowledge are needed to reach the holistic goal.
- Test all potential decisions against the goal, using seven specific testing guidelines.
- Monitor the results of decisions continually.
Permaculture
http://www.permacultureactivist.net/intro/PcIntro.htm
The word "permaculture" was popularized in the 1970's by Australian ecologist Dr. Bill Mollison, who spent decades in the rainforests and deserts of his country studying natural and human ecosystems. Permaculture is a contraction of "permanent" and "agriculture" and "permanent" and "culture."
Permaculture is a design system for harmoniously integrating the natural world and people. On one level, permaculture deals with plants, landscapes, animals, buildings, and human infrastructure (water, energy, communications, etc.). However, permaculture is more about planning for relationships among these elements than it is about the elements themselves.
The aim of permaculture is to create systems that are ecologically sound and economically viable, which provide for their own needs, do not exploit or pollute, and are therefore sustainable. Permaculture is based on the observation of natural systems, the wisdom contained in traditional farming systems, and modern scientific and technological knowledge.
The Bellagio Principles
http://www.iisd.org/measure/principles/progress/bellagio.asp
The Bellagio Principles were developed in 1996 by an international group of 24 measurement practitioners and researchers brought together by the International Institute for Sustainable Development. These ten principles are actually guidelines for the practical assessment of progress toward sustainable development. They address the articulation of a sustainable development vision, clear goals, holistic perspective, scope, effective communication, road participation, ongoing assessment and institutional capacity.
The Earth Charter
http://www.earthcharterusa.org/earth_charter.html
The Earth Charter has been in development since the early 1990s in connection with the United Nations. Efforts toward the adoption of this charter, by the UN, organizations and individuals, are being led by Mikhail Gorbachev, chair of Green Cross International and Maurice Strong, chair of the Earth Council.
Principles of the Earth Charter include:
- Respect Earth and life in all its diversity.
- Care for the community of life with understanding, compassion, and love.
- Build democratic societies that are just, participatory, sustainable, and peaceful.
- Secure Earth's bounty and beauty for present and future generations.
- Ecological Integrity - four principles addressing Earth's ecological systems and biological diversity, a preventive and precautionary approach as the best method of ecological protection, and compassionate treatment of all living beings
- Social and Economic Justice - five principles addressing patterns of consumption and production, human rights, community well-being, human development, poverty, spiritual well-being, and the dissemination of ecological knowledge.
- Democracy, Nonviolence and Peace - four principles addressing access to information, participatory decision making, accountability in governance, gender equality, cooperation, and formal education and lifelong learning.
Principles of Sustainable Development for Minnesota
http://server.admin.state.mn.us/resource.html?Id=1941 (see page 4)
These principles were developed in 1996 by a group of 30 business, environmental and community leaders brought together by former Governor Arne Carlson.
- Global Interdependence. Economic prosperity, ecosystem health, liberty and justice are linked, and our long-term well being depends on maintaining all four. Local decisions must be informed by their regional and global context.
- Stewardship. Stewardship requires the recognition that we are all caretakers of the environment and economy for the benefit of present and future generations. We must balance the impacts of today's decisions with the needs of future generations.
- Conservation. Minnesotans must maintain essential ecological processes, biological diversity and life-support systems of the environment; harvest renewable resources on a sustainable basis; and make wise and efficient use of our renewable and non-renewable resources.
- Indicators. Minnesotans need to have and use clear goals and measurable indicators based on reliable information to guide public policies and private actions toward long-term economic prosperity, community vitality, cultural diversity and healthy ecosystems.
- Shared Responsibility. All Minnesotans accept responsibility for sustaining the environment and economy, with each being accountable for his or her decisions and actions, in a spirit of partnership and open cooperation. No entity has the right to shift the costs of its behavior to other individuals, communities, states, nations or future generations. Full-cost accounting is essential for assuring shared responsibility.
Principles list above is from From NextStepMN
]]>Vic Desotelle
inKNOWvate
---------------
Transformation (deep innovation) occurs through a three phase evolution:
I've been thinking about the potential for progressing toward a global mind: My experiences with group emergence have noted that a majority of efforts collapse before the desire is sustained and self-propelled; a progression toward the vision that initiated the group in the first place. I propose the reason for this is that there is only a one or two level strategic plan in place made up of immediate context without the anticipation of collective content; a synthesis from which the incredible happens.
What if we instead provide a guiding framework that allows group migration into deeper forms of connection with each other? Eventually this connection moves into behaviorial forms of change and action. I believe this can be done using a 3-phase framework for processing together; thereby allowing a group to consciously see itself go through deep transformation. This would mean for each phase of processing together, there is a SYNTHESIS of its content - a summarizing of what has been done. This would occur as a part of all three phases; thereby generating a thread of synthesis that allows integration.
These three phases are as follows:
1- Establishing Group Intention:
This phase's nature is chaotic. It is expressed by conversations of desire and passion which drive an unfolding *PROCESS*. A focus on creating +PRINCIPLES+ based on diverse values, which opens of new level of awareness; thereby setting the stage for a loosening of existing physical *structure* and allowing change to occur. Vibrational activity is disonant (unconscious) and non-geometric.
2- Building a Value Network:
This phase's nature moves from chaotic to chaordic. It is expressed by individuals linking and clustering around collective ideas - a virtual *STRUCTURE* emerges. A focus on creating +PRACTICES+ sets the stage for individual changes in behavior and an early forming of group identity to occur. Vibrational activity is recognizable (awakening consciousness) but not stable.
3- Experiencing a Community of Practice:
This phase's nature moves from chaordic into order. It is expressed by the emergence of community (collective) identity PATTERNS to be realized and an acceptance of participatory-oriented activities are in place. A focus on creating +POLICY+ is empasized; thereby a change of governanace occurs.
Below is a sample of how need has created challenge markers that make innovation not only awe inspiring but also accountable. Guidelines like below are being placed before every organization on the planet as guidelines for their own success - as well as humanity's 'success'.
Take the test. How does your company compare?
-----------------------
From SustainAbility
The Global Compact Challenge (download pdf)
What is ‘The Global Compact Challenge’?
The Global Compact Challenge is a tool aimed at stimulating Global Compact participants to scrutinize their approach to corporate responsibility (CR). The focus of the tool is not on the UNGC principles themselves, but on the need for participant companies to mobilise wider improvements in performance across industry sectors, along value chains and through links with public policy. In this way, the challenge represents a companion piece to the UNGC publication Raising the Bar.
The original challenge is set out in the report Gearing Up, which was prepared by SustainAbility at the request of the Global Compact Office. This report concluded that while CR initiatives have the potential to bring about positive change, this will only be realised if such initiatives focus on achieving critical mass across all industry sectors, and are connected to wider public policy efforts that address the root causes of the problems. For more information on Gearing Up including free copies of the report please see www.sustainability.com/publications/gearing-up.1
The Corporate Responsibility Gearbox
To help companies review their approach to corporate responsibility generally, the report sets out a ‘CR Gearbox’ that describes the different approaches or ‘gears’ that companies can take to CR.
The report concludes that most companies should be operating in the higher gears.
1st Gear: Comply
2nd Gear: Volunteer
3rd Gear: Partner
4th Gear: Integrate
5th Gear: Re-engineer
Companies operating in first gear do not generally recognize any responsibility to stakeholders beyond making a profit. For companies at this stage:
PR and legal departments often play a major, defensive role.
Stakeholder engagement is seen primarily as philanthropy.
Relations with government are seen as primarily a compliance issue.
No business case is perceived for going beyond compliance.
Key drivers are NGOs, the media and government.
2nd Gear: Volunteer
In second gear, companies begin to move ‘beyond compliance’, but the CR emphasis is on:
Measuring and managing direct operational impacts – though primarily for PR benefit.
‘Communicating to’ rather than ‘engaging with’ stakeholders.
Participating in the development and trialling of voluntary industry standards.
Risk management and eco-efficiency as key elements of the business case.
Responding to peer pressure as a key driver.
3rd Gear: Partner
In third gear, CR is increasingly something that companies can only do well in partnership with other actors such as NGOs, suppliers, customers and industry peers.
1 SustainAbility is grateful for the financial support the project received from Novartis, Pfizer, SAP, DaimlerChrysler and Novo Nordisk.
In this gear:
CR experts take centre stage, with CEOs ‘wheeled out’ for major events.
Stakeholder engagement evolves into a two-way dialog with wider society.
There are close relationships with governments, for example through tri-sector or public-private partnerships.
The business case focuses on proactive risk management and reputation building.
Key drivers are NGOs, some parts of government and leading businesses, with much of the media (because there is less drama) beginning to lose interest.
4th Gear: Integrate
In fourth gear CR issues are seen as strategic, requiring integrated responses across companies and value chains, but prioritisation also becomes increasingly important.
Top management and boards are actively involved.
The company engages civil society and governments in ‘progressive alliances’ working towards common objectives.
The focus is on embedding CR goals in all business processes.
The business case is strategic as businesses begin to connect long-term corporate objectives with wider societal challenges.
The drivers are many and various, including from the financial sector, but companies pushing the envelope still often find that the drivers are inadequate in key areas.
5th Gear: Re-engineer
In fifth gear the focus shifts to systemic change, addressing future markets, market frameworks and business models.
New players come to the table, including ‘change agents’ like inventors, entrepreneurs, venture capitalists and investment bankers.
Progressive alliances target system change, focusing on governance and markets.
CR moves beyond products or services to re-examine business models.
The business case maybe negative with a ‘first mover disadvantage’ in the short term.
There are many drivers of change, including growing financial sector activity, but governments and governance systems once again must play a central role.
And Reverse…
Many companies, while operating primarily in forward gears, keep their public policy lobbying in ‘reverse’ – hampering progress on key social and environmental issues and preventing the development of the levels of trust necessary to develop genuinely shared solutions.
Take the Challenge
The following questions are intended to help companies assess whether their CR
programmes are likely to provide foundations for long-term business success and deliver solutions to pressing social and environmental problems.
Q1 Which gear are we in today?
− Who in our company is engaged in CR, and are top executives involved?
− How do outside actors influence our decision-making around CR?
− Are we working to drive improved performance across our industry?
− Are different parts of our organisation in different gears?
− If so, why, and with what potential implications?
Q2 Where do we want to be by the end of 2007?
− Which gear do we need/want to be in by 2007?
− Who will need to be involved internally and externally?
− What are the main barriers to change, and how can we overcome them?
− How can we help co-evolve wider governance frameworks to address key issues?
Q3 How can we achieve scale?
− Who in our organisation thinks in terms of ‘scalability’ and system-level change?
− What changes externally are needed to ensure real progress on our CR priorities?
− Are there ‘progressive alliances’ involving government and civil society to tap in to?
-----
For more information on building Corporate Responsibility into your organization, see SustainAbility's article on "Scaling up corporate responsibility to address global challenges"
]]>Case and point below, which is a reference to something that I have been waiting to come for a long time ... HA!; some may even call it the 'second' coming! The most powerful religious forces in the world - the Catholic Church - is announcing its position on 'green'. They are one of MANY religious systems that are stepping forward to announce there position on the Planet's wellbeing; in the name of their gGod. Do you think all this will change the way you innovate? You can bet your belief in your gGod that it certainly will. As John Luke would say, "make it so".
----------------
PROTECT GOD'S CREATION: VATICAN ISSUES NEW GREEN MESSAGE FOR WORLD'S CATHOLICS
By John Vidal and Tom Kington in Rome
The Guardian
April 27, 2007
The Vatican yesterday added its voice to a rising chorus of warnings from churches around the world that climate change and abuse of the environment is against God's will, and that the one billion-strong Catholic church must become far greener.
At a Vatican conference on climate change, Pope Benedict urged
bishops, scientists and politicians -- including UK environment
secretary David Miliband -- to "respect creation" while "focusing on
the needs of sustainable development".
The Pope's message follows a series of increasingly strong statements
about climate change and the environment, including a warning earlier
this year that "disregard for the environment always harms human
coexistence, and vice versa".
Observers said yesterday that the Catholic church is no longer split
between those who advocate development and those who say the
environment is the priority. Cardinal Renato Raffaele Martino, head of
the Pontifical Council of Justice and Peace, said: "For environment
. read Creation. The mastery of man over Creation must not be
despotic or senseless. Man must cultivate and safeguard God's Creation."
----------
From GRI (Global Reporting Initiative)
Sustainability reports are produced in so many different formats – hardcopy, web based, PDFs and others – that it is sometimes hard to immediately find the data you’re looking for. Common application of the XBRL taxonomy will change this and means information can quickly and effortlessly be exchanged.
Podcasts on XBRL and Sustainability
Sustainability Reporting Resources Below -
Registers:
Sustainability Reporting Management
CSR Reporting Register
Case Study Reviews:
Case Studies
Reporting Notices/Alerts:
CSR New Reports Alert
CSR conferences & events
GRI (global reporting initiative) enewsletter
Climate and resource dependencies:
California Climate Action Registry
Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative
Oxford Health Alliance
When is the last time you asked anyone under the age of 25 what innovation means to them? Michael DelPonte of Conscious Lifestyle is 'making it so'. Read up and tell the young ones in your life to check it out. Maybe they will become the next recognized "social innovator".
--------
By Michael Del Ponte of Conscious Lifestyle
Conscious consumerism is a growing trend that allows people like you to
vote for the environment and human rights every time you open your
wallet. But we need your help to spread the movement! That’s why
Conscious Lifestyle is offering up to $1,000 to high school and college
students with socially innovative ideas.
Conscious Lifestyle is a nonprofit organization that helps people become
socially conscious consumers. We educate people through our student
chapters and our website (consciouslifestyle.org). We are looking for
social innovators who will educate students about the importance of
conscious consumerism and make their schools more socially responsible
institutions. For example, you can:
• Start a film series and show movies like An Inconvenient Truth, Who
Killed the Electric Car?, The Future of Food, etc.
• Lead trips to local green businesses and organic farms to learn about
innovative practices in your community and conscious companies to support.
• Publish a buyer’s guide that students can carry with them when they go
shopping that includes the best stores patronize and products to buy.
• Organize an art exhibit that demonstrates how workers and the
environment can be uplifted or exploited in our globalized world.
• Lead a campaign to get organic food in your dining halls or
sweatschop-free clothing in your bookstore.
Every social innovator has his or her own idea on how to change the
world. We want to hear yours!
10 Social Innovators will be selected to lead Conscious Lifestyle
ventures and receive up to $1,000 in funding, a web page, t-shirts,
business cards, personalized support, and everything else you need to
make your venture a success.
Apply Now at http://www.consciouslifestyle.org/chapters/index.html.
Application deadline: May 11, 2007.
Contact: Michael Del Ponte
Email: mike@consciouslifestyle.org
Phone: 925-360-4149
------------------------------
Creativity & the Entrepreneurial Spirit
I doubt I've ever met an entrepreneur who wasn't also creative. Being able to envision a way out of the rat race alone requires creativity -- not to mention the creativity needed to manifest a new source of income.
But what is the relationship between the Creative Entrepreneur and the Cultural Creative Entrepreneur?
Qualities of an Entrepreneur
Robert T. Kiyosaki, author of Before You Quit Your Job, explores what qualities people need to successfully transition from employee to entrepreneur-- and from entrepreneur to business leader.
Kiyosaki's main ideas are:
1. A successful entrepreneur finds the right idea, the right people to act on the idea and the right money to leverage the project.
2. A successful entrepreneur operates from freedom and opportunity rather than security and resources.
3. The best time to answer the tough questions about starting a business is before starting the business. Some of these questions are:
a. How badly do I want my own business and why?
b. How much will I extend myself to succeed?
c. Am I afraid to fail? If so, how can I make this a strength?
d. Am I willing to educate myself on the essential components of a successful business?
An Entrepreneur Plus Cultural Creative Values = A Social Entrepreneur
Cultural Creative entrepreneurs, more often referred to as social entrepreneurs, are those entrepreneurs who focus on creating innovations and inventions that improve life for everyone.
Bill Drayton of Ashoka, an organization dedicated to supporting and promoting social entrepreneurship as well as transforming the face of social innovation, points out that social entrepreneurs "are not content just to give a fish...or to teach someone how to fish. [Social entrepreneurs] will not rest until they have revolutionized the fishing industry."
]]> We could easily say that the social entrepreneur has a bit more to chew than the average entrepreneur: the concern for people, planet and profit.And yet social entrepreneurs have taken a step in a new direction -- from the non-profit and charitable forms into the commercial sector. Now social entrepreneurs are realizing that it's okay -- nay, preferable to capitalize on their good works.
* Profit is one characteristic of a healthy organization because it is the result of
* Profit creates an obvious incentive to work and produce.
* The commercial sector has more flexibility and agility than the non-profit sector.
* Jerr Boschee notes that: "Living from year to year does not ensure the future, and that is the moment when [founders] begin migrating from innovation to entrepreneurship." (Batstone)
* Donald Trump believes that charity creates a culture of entitlement.
* Robert Harrington: "If you want to help poor people of the world, step one is to make sure you're not one of them."
* Molly Gordon: "When we keep our businesses on starvation diets, they present famished faces to the world."
So what's the problem with non-profit?
Paraphrasing Mathew Richter, non-profit creator:
* Because there are so many non-profits, there's far less money for individual nonprofits now than there was 30 years ago.
* The government requires quantified results vs. qualified results -- prioritizing performance over mission. And this means lots of paperwork.
* The nonprofit structure hampers nonprofits' ability to compete with for-profits in the commercial realm. A nonprofit has the same opportunity as a for-profit, but because a non-profit isn't allowed to capitalize, they have to grow the business through programs and fundraising. By the time this happens, the opportunity has passed.
Regina Herzlinger says that neither nonprofits nor government are to be trusted. She writes that "they lack the three basic accountability measures that ensure effective and efficient business operation: the self-interest of owners, competition, and [because of the "decision by committee" structure] the ultimate bottom-line measure of accountability." Everyone and no one is accountable
The 'tyranny' of a board of directors is at the crux of the problem of whether the nonprofit structure works for an organization," continues consultant Claudia Bach.
Share Your Wisdom
* How did you start your business?
* What internal resources , or qualities, made it possible for you to make it a reality?
* What advice would you give other budding Cultural Creative / social entrepreneurs?
* What legal status (for-profit or non-profit) is your business and why did you choose that status?
Subject Matter: business wisdom, small business, entrepreneurs, entrepreneur, big business, courage, starting a business, business startup, business start-up, micro business, book report, book review, book summary, book synopsis, book abstract, Robert T. Kiyosaki, Robert Kiyosaki, Rich Dad Poor Dad, Before You Quit Your Job
----------------
Take a look at Rebecca's Cultural Creatives website, sign up for the C.C. network, or contact her.