Archive for February, 2006

They say there is one, no make that 261, born every minute

Saturday, February 25th, 2006

Today the population of the planet reached 6.5 billion. That is 5 billion more people that there were 100 years ago.

What does this have to do with business? Everything. It raises immediate questions about resourses — specifically economic & environmental sustainability.
Mary Kent and Carl Haub, co-authors of a Population Reference Bureau report issued last month titled “Global Demographic Divide” claim that,Populations are growing most rapidly where such growth can be afforded the least.”

In 2004, The World Watch Institute had a thought provoking special issue of their magazine focused on population issues which offers additional insight on the issues our planet is facing with each new baby born. In it they have a nice assembly of articles addressing the question: What are the impacts of the population trends on economic, social, health, and environmental issues?

The question in my mind is: What is our planet’s carrying capacity? This question is particularly timely not only as we mark the historic population level today, but also as we here at Case await to hear from the Pulitzer Prize winner Jared Diamond, who is coming March 1 to campus to talk about his book: Collapse:How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed.

How can we prevent collapse? And what is business’ role in that prevention?

Population chart

A passport to a green planet

Saturday, February 18th, 2006

Having worked for the Center for B.A.W.B. for over three years now, I have spent many hours thinking about the role of business in society. I have often written about, discussed, and even argued about the responsibility that corporations have to help make the world a better place than they found it. Perhaps sometimes in my quest for large-scale change, I forget the daily impact that I can — and need to — have right here in my own daily life.

After an event we had at the Center last week, someone asked us where our recycling containers were for the office. This same question was echoed at our summit held last fall. In both instances, the sheepish reponse to the query was something like, “Well, they are in the building… ” or “We can not seem to get bins in here…” The simple question reminded us that not only do we as a Center need to be ‘walking the talk,’ but that I personally need to also pay better attention to my own consumer patterns of consumption and waste.

I am a consumer in a ‘throw away’ culture and I need to use my purshasing power to send a message everytime I break out my credit card. Will I buy the iced chai latte at Starbucks for $4.50 or will I order a fair trade coffee for 50 cents more? Will I buy the laundry detergent on sale or will I buy Seventh Generation’s biodegradable detergent for a dollar more? When I look for a place to vacation, will I lend my support to a hotel chain where I get the best AAA discount, or will I look for a place certified for promoting sustainable travel? When I am at the store or getting ready to make a purchase online, I often forget that there is a wide range of buying options I can pursue. While it takes time, educating myself about these options is critical, because the more I educate myself, the more I realize that there are a growing number of choices for me to buy according to my values.

For example, you can bet the next vacation I take I will explore supporting an ecotourism company. After all, “tourism is often described as the world’s “biggest industry” on the basis of its contribution to global GDP, the number of jobs it generates and the number of client it serves. The rate at which tourism continues to grow presents both opportunities and threats for biodiversity conservation.”
The International Ecotoursim Society defines ecotourism as “responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment and improves the well-being of local people.”

  • Minimize impact
  • Build environmental and cultural awareness and respect
  • Provide positive experiences for both visitors and hosts
  • Provide direct financial benefits for conservation
  • Provide financial benefits and empowerment for local people
  • Raise sensitivity to host countries’ political, environmental, and social climate
  • Support international human rights and labor agreements

I knew that my global footprint was being left all over the globe with each trip I took, however, I have not really thought about the range of choices I have each time I seek to get a new stamp in my passport…. or even enjoy a weekend get away. Now, I know that there are folks out there like Green Globe 21 (a worldwide benchmarking and certification program which facilitates sustainable travel and tourism for consumers, companies and communities) to who I can turn when I am planning that next retreat by the beach.

Each day, as I continue to engage in the grand dialogue of changing the world through changing business, I need to remember to embody the “think global, act local” motto, or nothing will ever change.

I invite others to share stories about how they have changed their buying behavior in accord with their values, or to suggest strategies and tips to think about when going to the store. In other words: How can consumers be agents of world benefit?


On a gloomy day

Tuesday, February 14th, 2006

By Nadya Zhexembayeva 

I had a fascinating conversation with Brook Horowitz of the Russia Partnership of the Prince of Wales International Business Leaders Forum today on the role of business in post-communist societies of the former USSR. So it got me thinking: outside of some sort of moral convictions, what are the reasons for post-USSR business to have any concern with the needs of society. Really?

Well, in the ‘developed’ world those reasons are growing. A company might cut its expenses due to reduction of waste and process re-designs; it might find a new set of consumers and increase its sales; it might prevent law suits and legal actions stemming from lack of regulatory compliance; it might avoid risks associated with consumer advocacy, media exposure, or efforts of the non-profit sector; it might even attract new investors via the works of ever growing socially responsible investment funds.

But none of these reasons are good for Russia. Or my native Kazakhstan. Or any of the countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States. Our laws are rudimentary or non-existent; and even when they are developed, a bribe to a presiding judge is a guaranteed and cheaper way to go when dealing with prosecution. Our customers are non-engaged and have little to no power to influence the producers. The non-profit sector is weak, and press can be easily silenced when necessary. It’s almost impossible to deliver significant savings from re-deigning business processes and eliminating waste due to wear and tear in infrastructure and other challenges.

Even more striking is the crash of fundamentals of the business-in-society efforts with the realities of the post-Soviet countries. The efforts advocating a more involved and powerful role of business in society, whether via the venues of corporate social responsibility, sustainable business development, business ethics, or corporate citizenship, are all embedded in a long-term perspective of sustainability, return, and collective good. However, the post-USSR business is operating in an extreme short-term perspective, as government has shown its ability to dismantle any company; so it is all about making as much as possible as fast as possible before your head is axed.

A gloomy picture we have here. Hm.

Fleecing the Earth

Friday, February 10th, 2006

By Nadya Zhexembayeva

In my years of leadership development work I used to tell my clients a story about a town with a bridge. The gist of the story is that there is a town, whose livelihood depends on a bridge that connects its parts over a river; and one day the bridge develops a crack. The town is very small, the resources are limited, and people still need to get over to the other side of the river, so they keep walking across at their own risk. After a while, the crack grows, and people start falling into the river, causing a rescue frenzy among the town’s few rescue workers. As the time progresses, more and more people fall into the water, and more and more resources are pulled to assure they are rescued safely. After all, it’s a tangible immediate need, isn’t it?

As I re-tell this story, the absurdity of its plot stares right into my face. Anybody would get it: the bridge needs repair – even if it is a long term solution to an immediate problems. And then I hear the NBC Nightly News story about the Alps glaciers melting due to global warming (well, I am not sure I can use this term, as apparently it is still not a proven scientific “fact”). The entire tourist industry built on skiing and other snow sports faces immediate jeopardy; and guess what is the top solution business is investing in? They are wrapping glaciers in fleece. Wrapping. Glaciers. Fleece. Sounds like the old bridge story, doesn’t it?

more on energy and green life

Monday, February 6th, 2006

By Nadya Zhexembayeva 

Just as I finished typing the last post, I got an e-mail submission to the upcoming online conference, presenting the “Sustainable Green Home” - an interactive learning tool that helps people like me “find ideas for simple everyday actions”. The Universe is actually reading the blog! It is the only one reader, most likely, but none the less…

Energy Strategy Revisited

Monday, February 6th, 2006

By Nadya Zhexembayeva

 

On February 1, 2006 President Bush delivered a new “State of the Union Address” (for all of us non-U.S. natives, it is a kind of long ‘talking to my people’ message many leaders of states do during holidays and such), where among many points, he spoke of the America’s addiction to oil. It must have been a big surprise to the media, as almost every newspaper and TV show reported it in their headlines; I, myself, found it to be a nice surprise, as well. After all, when was the last time George Bush actually pronounced the words “alternative energy sources”?

As others immediately responded to Bush’s invitation with big debates on what would that actually mean in practice, I, too, wondered about my own ‘Energy Star” strategy.

Well, there is none, really. I am driving a car, at a minimum, trying to walk where possible, and car pool where possible (thanks to 7 years in the rural US without a car, which taught me well about walking and car pooling). My tiny family is doing its best to conserve energy relevant to home heating. We bundle up instead of turning it up and have replaced all light bulbs with energy efficient models, although green roofing and solar paneling is well beyond our reach. We buy products with less packaging so that energy used on something we throw away is not thrown away; and we recycle religiously to conserve energy invested in the glass, paper, and plastics. We also have considered car sharing, a new service just being born in Cleveland, but between my husband, Vlad, and my 2-year-old, Lila, we have not reached a definitive conclusion about whether to participate. So what else is within reach? Hm…

 

Where are people talking about the relationship between business and society?

Wednesday, February 1st, 2006

By Lindsey Godwin

We are starting to compile a list of upcoming conferences which explore B-A-W-B related topics such as the issues of sustainable enterprise development, corporate social sesponsibility, and the general role of business in society.

We realize that our list is only the tip of the iceburg, however, and we invite you to share conference announcements and calls for papers that you know about as well!

The Cost of Coal

Wednesday, February 1st, 2006

By Lindsey Godwin

Coal Hands

What is the cost of coal? In January the dollar value for a short ton of coal ranged between $19.15 and $58.25. Recent events in the mountain state of West Virginina, however, have caused the region, and perhaps the nation, to re-examine how we measure the price of this combustible rock. With only 32 days elapsed in 2006, WV has already lost 16 miners — the equivalent to one every other day. As a native of the small town that unexpectedly ended up on the front pages in January after the first mining accident claimed 12 miner’s lives, I have become one of the many voices who is interested in examining the true cost of coal. Rather than re-state them here, I will invite you to read my ideas in the recent op-ed piece I wrote for our newsletter, “Freeing Mountaineers from the Coal Economy.”

The story continues today in the wake of two more fatalities, and it seems that WV’s Governor Manchin has decided that 16 lives is too high a price to pay for coal. He has asked that, “the industry cease production activities immediately and go into a mine safety stand down.

The new twist in this complicated story raises so many questions for me, including:

  • How many lives must be lost before we decide that an industry is unsafe?
  • In what industries would 1 life lost be too many?
  • When will we include the environmental costs of pollution and strip-mining in the price of coal?

This issue is not isolated to the hills of Appalachia, or even to the U.S. On the other side of the globe, over 200 Chineese coal miners lost their lives after an explosion earlier this week. China’s mines are actually the world’s deadliest, with over 6,300 deaths last year in mine floods, explosions and fires. Where do these losses figure into the price of coal? And how many lives lost would lead to mine closings there?
Personally though, as someone born and raised in the coal belt of the U.S., my emotions continue to swell with each new chapter of this drama, and my mind is swirling with various facts and opinions. Every day, my questions seem to be increasing and my certainty about answers diminshing. I invite reflections and comments from others as we all continue to explore the true cost of coal.