Check out this recent piece by NASA Climate scientist James Hansen - it touches on (once again) the gap between what the scientists know, and what the public and policy-makers understand.
This gap lies at the heart of why we need to move away from reductionism, where we study and address everything in isolation in separate disciplines /departments /silos / sectors / drill holes, to a whole-system approach where policy makers and scientists, engineers and biologists, economists and consumers, businessmen and school teachers, can understand eachother because they have a shared, relevant view of the whole-system. This is the first step in taking a strategic appraoch to sustainability.
But I digress, Hansen's article offers 5 things we need to do, now, to address global warming. I think there are more inspiring ways we could go about addressing the challenge - and people are starting to do that, finding synergistic solutions through sustainable urban planning, green building, sustainable product design, permaculture, and the like - but these would certainly help, and are straight forward, necessary actions, regardless if they come about through transformational change of global society or through regulation:
1) Put a moratorium on building any more coal-fired power plants until we have the technology to capture and sequester the CO2
2) Put a price on emissions
3) Establish and enforce energy-efficiency standards (buildings & vehicles)
4) Study and report on ice-sheet stability (not sure how knowing more about the symptom helps us cure the root cause, but it's certainly important research, especially as we are forced to focus on adaptation as well as mitigation)
5) Reform of communication practices (so we can avoid the disasters of reductionism)
The full piece is brief, and available here: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070507/hansen
Stay going.
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Changing Fortune
Picked up the Fortune 'green issue' on the way to Atlanta last week for the SoL Sustainability Forum (more on that soon), and I highly recommend it. There is some good stuff in there & it represents another big (though still very preliminary) milestone for the movement toward sustainability - last year Vanity Fair this year Fortune....
The issue covers 10 companies and their sustainability initiatives, leaving out the already heavily covered GE and WMT stories they look at Honda, Continental, HP, Tesco, Suncor, Alcan, PG&E, S.C. Johnson, Goldman, & Swiss Re - for the most part usual suspects for people following the scene (with the exception of Continental, I didn't realize how much they've been doing) - but still a great rundown for the mainstream business types. Also focus pieces on the good, bad, & ugly at DuPont, the inspiring passion at
Check out the stories here: http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/goinggreen/2007/index.html
But one of the most intriguing pieces in the issue is not in the 'green section'. It is a one-pager called "Opening the Capitalist Mind" and it lays out a scenario for shifting the $500 billion per year health care burden from corporate America to government It would be financed with a carbon tax - thus relieving business of big burden without taxing them directly for it (all carbon consumers would share the burden), without increasing the deficit, and all the while sending a huge signal for a carbon-free economy and helping Americans realize the dream of universal healthcare. It has the potential to make both Republicans and Dems happy and apparently has the support of some of those conservative think-tank analysts. I think it has the potential to be another small but powerful example of how pursuing sustainability can bring disparate forces together for our common good and that of the biological systems upon which we all depend. Stay going…
Sunday, March 18, 2007
SoL Foundations for Leadership
The concepts of organizational learning are a core aspect of the MSLS program, and we worked with them a lot last year – they were essentially the backdrop for everything we did. Still, it was really helpful to spend three intensive days delving deep in the concepts with a new group of people and facilitated by the folks that developed and articulated the ideas.
What organizational learning is, exactly, can be difficult to put into words. Essentially it describes an ongoing process of profound change within an organization (business, school, NGO, government agency, etc.) Senge’s The Fifth Discipline is a central book in the field, exploring five disciplines of a learning organization: team learning, mental models, personal mastery, building shared vision, and systems thinking. These are interrelated concepts, each with a lot behind it. Most are to some extent self explanatory – mental models refer to the “deeply ingrained assumptions, generalizations, or even pictures or images that influence how we understand the world and take action.” Systems thinking I’ve talked a lot before – it is “the fifth discipline” and also the basis of the framework for strategic sustainable development (SSD).
One of the basic tools in the field of systems thinking and systems dynamics are causal loop diagrams (CLDs). The field also identifies some common patterns, or archetypes, that often play out in various ways in different systems. These archetypes are quite intuitive, as they are common patterns we have experience with, and the CLDs help clarify these patterns, bring them before us so we can get a better sense of what’s happening.
Here are two basic archetypes – Shifting the Burden and Limits to Success – as well as an example of each:
Another central theme in the field of organizational learning, which is also an integral part of the framework for SSD, is the concept of building a shared vision amongst a group of people, giving an honest analysis of the current reality. The gap between the vision and the current reality results in a creative tension. This is the basis of backcasting and enabling a strategic approach to sustainable development.
In the 5th Discipline, Senge points out that MLK Jr. once said: “Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind, so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths…so must we... create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism.” The same is true for creating a sustainable society, and navigating the enormous transformational change that is accompanying that creative effort.
The book and the program explore the two basic motivators for sparking change: aspiration and desperation. The latter is responsible for the phrase “no change without crisis” and in the context of sustainability it is a motivator we see a lot, when organizations hit the funnel walls. When Wal-Mart feels the pain of consumer boycotts, or when Greenpeace campaigns against PVCs, dumps old washing machines on Electrolux’s parking lot, companies are motivated to make some changes towards sustainability.
However, when the conditions that created the desperation are no longer there, when enough has been done to relieve the outside pressure, the change toward sustainability often subsides. This can lead to frustration within the organization and from outside groups, as well as to many books and papers on why sustainability efforts fizzle out.
When organizations are motivated by an aspiration, on the other hand, when they are pulled towards a compelling vision of a successful, healthy, sustainable future, they often have a better chance of sustaining their efforts, and making more dramatic progress towards eliminating their contributions to unsustainability. It’s usually only through a real aspiration to move towards sustainability can a company reap all of the benefits like greater employee attraction and retention, increased productivity, meaningful innovation, dramatic cost savings, etc.
Bob Willard’s concept of 5-stages of corporate development with regard to sustainability highlight this concept:
Put into the context of the funnel, this idea shows how as companies move up through the stages they can reduce risks associated with unsustainable behavior:
We’re getting excited to head down to Atlanta for the SoL Sustainability Forum, where we’ll keep the learning going as we meet with those pioneering the shift to a new way of doing business and using organizational learning concepts to move towards sustainability. Stay going.
Saturday, February 03, 2007
American College & University Presidents Climate Commitment
Working closely with Second Nature, the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE), and ecoAmerica,
To date 54 institutions have made the commitment and 34 have agreed to join the
Higher Education is a key leverage point in the move towards a sustainable society for many reasons. First, they are large institutions, and as such, like most organizations today, emit a lot of greenhouse gases, both directly and indirectly. Also, in the
More importantly, research institutions use this commitment to leverage new innovations, create new solutions, and put into practice many of the theoretical ideas that are already being explored.
But it is on the educational side that I think this initiative has the most potential. The problems around greenhouse gas emissions, and unsustainability more generally require transdiciplinary learning create solutions and move towards a sustainable society. By infusing these ideas into the curriculum at higher education institutions, where our best and brightest can dig into them, we give ourselves hope that the next generation of societal leaders will be able to carry on and improve upon the good work that has been done to date in the effort to create a sustainable society.
The framework for strategic sustainable development is designed to facilitate transdisciplinary learning and co-creation of solutions across sectors, industries and specializations. Hopefully, the PCC is another early step in the process of breaking through the thick walls of disciplinary compartmentalization, so we have a better chance of understanding one another and the root causes of unsustainability in an increasingly complex world.
Check out more about the Presidents Climate Commitment here: www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org.For more info on sustainability in education (mostly higher education), check out the expanded list of links and resources to the right under “Sustainabiilty Education”. Stay going.
Friday, February 02, 2007
IPCC 4
The 4th assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was released today, and the results are unsurprising. This is in part because the drafts of the report have been released, so there’s not much new in there. The major points are that the global scientific consensus can now unanimously agree that global warming is “very likely” (read: about 90% certain) caused by humans. And that global warming can be linked to stronger storms, like Katrina. There is also some controversy over sea-level rising, as many scientists say the amount the report predicts for rising sea levels is very low, especially in the face of new developments just within the last year concerning glacial and icecap melting (the cut off for data in the report was December 2005).
Here are a few articles on the report:
Guardian (“skeptics” paying for reports)
The science behind the basic mechanisms (the ‘trunk & branches) of global warming and climate change have been well understood for quite a while now. So, while these reports might be useful in sparking some meaningful policy – they really represent just a detailed analysis “in the leaves” of things we know already. In that way they are a bit of a distraction. A way to delay meaningful action until we “get more evidence.” It’s not the best use of our time, energy, money and intellect, particularly when there are so many profitable, inspiring, and equitable solutions out there. Remember that this is a consensus document among scientists, who are naturally skeptical and cautious – by their very method. Finding consensus amongst the leaves of detail is very difficult, and inevitably results in watered-down, cautious statements. So the fact that this report is so strong in its wording about the threats of global warming, further solidifies what is obvious to so many of us.
Stay going.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
State of the Union Preview
Bush is expected to talk about a new greenhouse gas mitigation plan tonight. He’s talked about ending the “oil addiction”, increasing efficiency and shifting to cleaner energy sources in just about every SoU, but with a focus on voluntary action and little follow through in the way of policy. It will be interesting to see what he comes up with tonight. Some things to keep in mind as he talks:
- the US Climate Action Partnership has released a report calling for mandatory regulation on GHG emissions – the group consists of Alcoa, BP America, Caterpillar, Duke Energy, DuPont, FPL Group, General Electric, Lehman Brothers, PG&E, and PNM Resources, along with 4 NGOs -- Environmental Defense, Natural Resources Defense Council, Pew Center, and World Resources Institute. They have said that they are doing this now, in part because they expect softer caps under Bush than they will get under the next administration
· there have been plenty of bills on GHG regulations put forward in Congress of late. PointCarbon
In the
Indeed, Senators Lieberman and McCain re-introduced their cap-and-trade proposal last Friday (see page 2), with a new co-sponsor – presidential hopeful Barak Obama. Yesterday former Senator Jeffords’ greenhouse gas cutting bill was reintroduced, and Senator Diane Feinstein’s office will release hers this week. Barbara Boxer, who heads the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, has indicated the climate change hearings she plans to hold will produce several proposals for regulating US emissions as well. Her first hearing on the issue will be held 30 January.
New faces in key positions on the state and regional level may accelerate progress toward carbon trading as well. Massachusetts’ new Governor Deval Patrick plans to bring his state, one of the biggest emitters in the northeastern US, back into the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)