SDCA

The End of Poverty - Jeffery Sachs

Yes Yes I know class has finished but I had a sneaky suspicion that you would come back for at least one more look at the collective thoughts and enlightened posts from your class mates, and by being the last post you are more likely to remember to read this book :)

The End of Poverty, how we can make it happen in our lifetime by Jeffery Sachs. I have to admit that I own a blackmarket copy, bought off a poor street vendor in Nepal, the title jumped out at me as I was picking my way though the panhandlers and mothers begging for milk money. My personal copy is filled with bookmarks, highlights and dogeared pages as I have gone back and re-read again and again the confronting challenges that we as a citizen of the world face. This book is a ' must read' for me and I would encourage you to make it one of yours.

Throughout the class one of the key issues we raised time and time again was that the fate of the world and hence the adoption of sustainable development strategies is the responsibility of all of us, it is not a localised issue. The same can be said for the substantial human capital which is ailing under the oppression of poverty.

When looking at Maslow's hierarchy of needs it is easy to see that when people are struggling to eat, drinking putrid water, razing forests for firewood for warmth, or breathing toxic fumes while they dismantle e-waste, they do not have the capacity to see past their (and their families) short-terms needs for survival to participate in the global sustainable challenge.

So much has been done on a theoretical level to resolve the worlds chronic poverty but so little has been done in reality. As a world we (rich countries) promised in 2002 at the Monterrey Financing for Development Conference “to make concrete efforts towards the target of 0.7%" (of their national income in international aid) in reality that what has been delivered (2005) is less than half of that. For a more comprehensive breakdown on a country level delivery on this promise go here

The challenge is not about bringing these countries up to the standard of the rich nations, but to help them get out of the poverty cycle and on to the first rung of the global economic market. To do this they need not only the sustainance but also the education so that they can start their own economic recovery.

Adam Smith a political economist and moral philosopher from the 17th century stated that the whole of society is at risk when any segment of society is poorly educated.

The analogy of “Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish; and you have fed him for a lifetime" (author unknown) is only relevant when there are adequate fish stocks available. Most poverty nations have depleted fish stocks (food), the soil is barren and the water polluted. It will be the challenge of the rich nations to help these countries get their natural resources back in balance, and this will mean changes to our own resource consumption.

One of the key messages is that Jeffery insists that this world crisis is resolveable but it is only through the collective action of the rich that it can be solved.

Jeffery Sachs is world renown for his tenacity and dedication to the global poverty challenge, there are endless articles and references to his work and I would encourage you to read further on him, the UN Milennium Project and the Earth Institute.

Interview with Jeffery Sachs for MotherJones an independent not for profit online news feed here

PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT BY COMMAND-AND-CONTROL – AN IRISH EXAMPLE

The Rural Environmental Protection Scheme (REPS) was introduced in Ireland as a result of an EU directive to encourage farmers to farm in an environmentally friendly way and to try to reverse the emphasis on intensive farming practices encouraged by the Common Agricultural Policy. The scheme compensates farmers for carrying out environmentally friendly farming activities and according to Hynes and Murphy, 2002, is designed to reduce negative externalities, such as water pollution, and enhance positive externalities, such as maintaining the visual aspect of the rural landscape. The impact of the scheme has been disappointing; uptake is predominantly by the smaller extensive farmers because it offers them the greatest reward and there has only been a marginal reduction in the national use of fertilizers and pesticides.

Where has the scheme gone wrong? Why has this command-and-control mechanism not worked? The REPS scheme was implemented on a voluntary basis and assumes that the whole country is homogenous. Intensive farming is still the most profitable but is also the most polluting and is concentrated in specific areas which were not targeted by the scheme. Because payments were capped at 40ha there was no incentive for large intensive farmers to join the scheme as the environmental obligations applied to all their hectares even though they were only compensated for 40ha.

The scheme, now in its fourth five year cycle, has been revised and made more attractive. But, this scheme cannot last forever and according to Hynes and Murphy, 2002, REPS farmers have no greater awareness of the environment than non-reps farmers. So, the question is has this scheme promoted sustainable development? Will farmers continue to farm environmentally when the scheme ends and they are no longer receiving payments?

Base of the Pyramid: Sustainable Business from the Bottom up

In his article “Base of the Pyramid: Sustainable Business from the Bottom up” Robert S. Katz discusses the emerging concept of social entrepreneurship. The idea behind this concept is to build profitable businesses that can fulfill essential requirements, while generating incomes in much-needed regions. Two such entrepreneurs, Martin Fisher and Upendra Bhatt, have succeeded in developing viable businesses that sustain poor communities. One of these businesses, Kickstart, based in Kenya, is focused on providing local entrepreneurs with technologies that are key to their success in their regions, such as oilseed presses and irrigation pumps. These technologies have led to the creation of thousands of much needed jobs in Kenya. While these technologies are not the type of equipment that one would commonly seek out or value in the developed world, their worth in underdeveloped countries is invaluable. The work of these social entrepreneurs is providing these communities not only with a viable hope for an escape from poverty, but is also contributing to the fulfillment of more than just their essential needs as they are benefiting greatly from the sense of accomplishment and fulfillments that comes with being able to provide for yourself and your family.

Katz describes the practice of social entrepreneurship as the base or bottom of the economic pyramid phenomenon because it is focused on reducing poverty while generating profits, thus creating a balance between the powerful corporate world and the poverty-stricken villages.

Social entrepreneurship of this kind is in my opinion just what our world needs: a mix of business skills and social compassion being put to good use while still being profitable and sustainable.

For more on social entrepreneurship and to read Katz's article please see: http://www.greenbiz.com/news/news_third.cfm?NewsID=30405&CFID=11434638&CFTOKEN=39083007

Governments as Leaders

Over the last week I have definately become increasingly supportive of direct governmnet intervention as a means of improving the level of sustainable developments across industry sectors and society. The Irish government has already demonstrated how real change can be encouraged through the use of education, awareness campaigns and financial incentives. I believe that Ireland will soon witness another change in attitude when EU Directive 2002/91/EC is implemented by the government in January 2007.

This directive concerns energy efficiency in all buildings. As part of the directive all houses will be issued with a Building Energy Rating (BER) and Advisory Report on how to improve the efficiency of the building. These reports must be provided to all purchasers, tenants and users.

Its difficult to describe just how important the housing market has become not only to the Irish Economy but to Irish people themselves. Latest figures show that on average house prices are increasing at 1% per month with a national house price average of just under €300,000. The housing market represents 62% of the construction industry, which is currently one of the key drivers of the economy and employs over 15% of the workforce. However, with the new BER system in place some believe that many houses will see a decrease in their value as people will now be made aware of their energy efficiency before purchase, lease or use. Energy prices are already soaring in Ireland, people are definately becoming more concerned. Alongside this new system, Sustainable Energy Ireland now offers government grants to new home owners for the purchase of wood chip burners (to replace oil and gas burners) and solar panels. These grants can cover the entire cost of solar panels and 2/3 of the cost of the burners.

As the property boom continues, and energy prices soar, I believe that those who have ignored the importance of energy efficiency and sustainable development will suffer financially. Construction companies that are continuing to ignore this could find themselves in a position where they will have to change their practices very quickly while companies that identified the importance of energy efficiency years ago will benefit from increased demand throughout the country. In a very short period of time I believe the Irish people themselves will increase the importance they place on this issue.

While a shift in the Irish's attitude may have developed eventually, we have seen this week that action must be taken now. Education and awareness will continue throughout the country. However I fully support the EU in their decision to issue this Directive and force all countries to comply. Leadership requires vision, commitment and the ability to make the tough decisions. Our governments must all act as leaders, while we work together to change our own attitudes and consider how we can help others to continue to develop their nations through sustainable means.

Determinants of an Environmentally Responsive Firm - an empirical appraoch

Henriques, I. & Sadorsky, P. (1996) “Determinants of an Environmentally Responsive Firm – An empirical appraoch” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 30, 381-395 (1996) Article No. 0026

This article I think has alot of relevance with this course as it was an extensive empirical study done on how and what will help to change the corporate mindset into implementing environmental measures. Henriques and Sadorsky’s findings were that a firms formulation of an environmental plan is positively influenced by the following:
• Customer Pressure
• Shareholder Pressure
• Government Regulatory Pressure
• Neighbourhood / Community Pressure
The authors carried out a survey of 750 Canadian companies of which 400 filled out the questionnaire. The survey results clearly indicated that, when firms were asked to specify the most important pressure source for creating an environmental plan, government regulations eqaulled almot 50% of the pressure and customers only 17%. This result I think is visible considering the fact that there is yet not sufficient pressure I would argue coming from the consumer. In contrast, the authors found that firms formulation of an environemntal plan is negatively influenced by the following:
• Other lobby group pressure sources
• Firms sales-to-assest ratio
An interesting finding was that firms in the natural resource sector are far more likely to formulate enivronmental plans, while firms in the service sector are less likely to have any plans. In todays society, the authors state that a firms decision making process is greatly influenced by environemntal regulations. They cite two main reasons as to why these regulations are necessary:
• Externalities – when the production of a good / service results in costs, such as pollution damage, which in the absence of regulation are unlikely to be born by the producer.
• Imperfect Information – whereby workers and consumers may be only partially aware of the health hazards associated with various occupations, consumer products or food stuffs.

A firm deciding to implement an environmetal plan must consider such benefits as the acquisition and/or maintanence of market share, efficiency gains and, importantly, increased positive reputation. Costs are inccured, such as: the cost of implementing the environmental plan, regulatory compliance costs and the associated opportunity costs forgone. To read more follow this link....

Henriques and Sadorsky highlighted five factors which, they argue, influence the likelihood that a corporation will draw up an enviromental plan:
• Environemntal Pressure – internal and external
• Financial Position of the company
• Attitude in relation to the environment
• Firm Size
• Industry Regulation

In defining an environemtally responsvie firm, the authors carried out an estimation sample of 331 firms, in which only 57 companies had plans which satisfied the following characterisitics:
1. Had a formal document describing the environmental plan
2. Had presented the plan to shareholders
3. Had presented the plan to employees
4. Had an environmental EHS unit
5. Had a board or management committee dedicated to dealing with environmental issues.

136 companies met at least one of these criteria, while the remaining firms in the study had no environmental plans.

In conclusion, I found the findings to be unsurprising but beneficial in their aim to educate and highlight the issues. The investigation and methodoly carried out by the authors was also both impressive and thorough and it highlights the fact that there is abundance of room left for further analysis regarding environmental issues and firms accountability.

In If the GDP is Up, Why is America Down?, the authors identify “shifting functions from the traditional realm of household and community to the realm of the monetized economy" as a bogus contribution to GDP growth. They then give some numbers from the US as examples, such as how much day care adds to GDP ($4B, by the way, according to the article). Day care is presented as yet one more thing that’s wrong with the world today, and at first glance it sounded like it should be a pretty straight-forward example...

The more I thought about it though, the more I think it illustrates how much further there is to go before arriving at an accurate alternative measurement framework. Assuming $4B is the appropriate cost to apply, how do you separate out how much of that $4B is actually bad? When the family has no choice and would rather not leave their children in day care, when the children have a bad experience and dread going every day, it’s fairly easy to call the expense “bad” and insist that the money spent should be recognized as a cost in measurements like the GPI. When day care serves a community building function, when parents believe their children are benefitting from the experience and the children look forward to a couple hours in a social setting every day, does it count as positive? A luxury good, even? How can you determine whether there is genuine value added, without incurring prohibitive cost gathering the information? And at that point, does the cost of gathering the information to compile the GPI get backed out of the GPI too??

It’s amazing how many things start to look grey once you start really thinking about them. For instance, if you go on to become a fantastic motivational speaker based on your experience as a cancer survivor, and inspire thousands of people, would the illness itself still be considered “bad”?

Does SD really create a competitive advantage

During one of the class discussions, a popular opinion emerged that suggests consumers are not overly concerned as to whether or not we make Green Choices. Unfortunately, I agree with this sentiment; creating a demand for green products or practices is not as simple as slapping on an eco-label and writing out a sustainable development vision on company websites.

Reports have shown that there is a desire to support sustainable development. However, Joel Makower’s article “WC Retro: Green Marketing –Lesson From the Leader” , discusses how our choices seem to contradict our ethical values. As the article explains, Phillips had a light bulb that was energy saving and longer lasting, but was only popular in Europe and not in the U.S. The difference is that the bulb addressed the needs of the European consumer due to high energy costs. They were willing to pay a higher price for the product because it met a need. The US consumers, on the other hand, were not as willing to pay the higher price despite the efficiency because it did not meet their immediate needs.

Therefore, businesses still have to focus marketing efforts on the direct benefits to the consumer and add the tagline of “environmentally friendly” to allow the consumer to feel good about their product purchase.

The very popular Toyota Hybrid avoided the eco-friendly marketing campaign during product launch because they believed consumers would not have taken the product seriously. Instead, they focused on gas savings, a direct benefit to the consumer.

It seems that we still have a long way to go before consumers automatically make green choices. Perhaps industry should be looking at creative marketing instead of the government to help us find a solution.

Catherine Yarker

Sustainable Development - Do we care?

The other day in class, Fawad shared a story of some (seemingly happy) children playing with a FIFA-approved football while on a break from working at the local football production factory. For many engaged in a discussion on this topic (myself included), a clear stance would be taken on the issue and a call to end child labour would be declared. But since so few of us could actually put an immediate end to child labour based merely on our own moral convictions, the next logical alternative would be to have an intention to personally boycott the company in question; hoping that if others follow suit, the company would get the message in the form of a lower bottom line and decide to change its business practices.

Of course, that is assuming that the original boycott plan is followed through by some, or even one.

See, as a group we seemingly accepted the story as OK because an explanation was given that these boys were grateful for the opportunity to be working in the factory; for having a chance to be off the streets; for being able to provide for their family; for giving their younger siblings the chance to attend school and obtain an education. So maybe - just maybe - child labour isn't that bad after all ... And if we still feel uncomfortable about the situation, we change the subject of the conversation or we hope that ... someone else ... will do something about it.

If you watched the movie Darwin's Nightmare that Jacques referred to in his blog, you'll see a group of European trade commissioners who were talking to the media and applauding the great opportunity that lies ahead for the nation of Tanzania - that by exporting the 50 tonnes of nile perch (type of fish) per day from its Lake Victoria, that the people of Tanzania will prosper. But did the commissioners not see the locals starving throughout the entire country - that the locals were given only the bug-infested rotting skin and carcasses of the fish remains to eat - but not for free of course, they had to pay. Did they not realize that the local Tanzanians are outlawed from going near the lake to fish for themselves, let alone afford to buy the flesh of the fish from their own backyard? Did they not consider the impact on the ecological system of the lake when the nile perch was introduced into Lake Victoria - rendering almost every other species in the lake dead as a result of this human-intervention to the ecosystem in the 1960s? Or did these European Commissioners simply not care? Maybe they went to Tanzania to simply ink a lucrative financial deal and didn't really give two hoots for the long term impacts or the sustainability of the ecosystem or the society there?

This leads me to wonder whether or not sustainable development is really an issue about which people care. Or is it merely a notion for the academics to consider - and not even a concern for the average lay person?

Consider this: "Eighty per cent of Americans got their information from television."

I came across a summary of the Commission on Sustainable Development's special panel discussion on "The Media and Sustainable Development"

A few quotes of interest:

"Jim Laurie, Vice-President of News and Current Affairs for Star TV, Hong Kong, China .... hardly ever uttered the words "sustainable development", which had little meaning for ordinary people. Out of 60 magazine reports broadcast since January 2001, only about 10 per cent dealing with sustainable development were aired."

"Snuki Zikalala, Executive Editor of News, South African Broadcasting Corporation, South Africa ... most of the time, development issues were not headliners. It was difficult to put sustainable development issues onto commercial television stations."

And my personal favourite ...

"Barbara Pyle, former Corporate Vice-President of Environmental Policy for Turner Broadcasting in the United States, and CNN's former Environmental Editor .... [delivering the message of sustainable development] would be a tough sell in a difficult environment due to what was going on with Afghanistan"

So, sustainable development - do we really care?

Nike’s Path to Corporate Social Respondsibility: The Bad became the Good!

"JUST DO IT" is an inspirational tagline to millions of Nike's athletic gear customers. But in terms of corporate social responsibility (CSR), the company hasn't always followed its own advice. Recall to what our classmate has presented 2 days ago or click here to see an example of how activists launched an all-out campaign against it because of worker conditions in its supply chain in 1990s.

By now, Nike has ended up in a much better place for its troubles, climbed up to No.13 position in 100 Best Corporate Citizens for 2006 Business Ethics Magazine, Spring 2006, Vol. 20 #1.

How Nike Just Did It?
It’s clear that Nike had made some extraordinary errors at the beginning with defensive reaction and ignoring the responsibility. But Nike has come to view the issue as an integral part in its core business strategy and practices and as a major source of learning. In 1996, Nike created its first department specifically responsible for managing its supply chain partners’s compliance with labor standards. And in 1998, Nike established a CSR department. The company to adopt codes of labor conduct, forge alliances with labor and civil society organizations, develop nonfinancial metrics for compliance that are linked to the company's management and its broader governance, and engage in the international debate about the role of business in society and in public policy. You can find further details here.

Nike is a for-profit-business, and as such is accountable to its shareholders. But the company has taken significant steps in evolving a strategy and practice that shifts it from being an object of civil activism to a key participant in civil society initiatives and processes. The path to CSR that Nike has gone through might be helpful to other companies traverse this same ground. The often mentioned business benefits of CSR are hard to achieve and making business logic out of a deeper sense of CSR requires courageous leadership, insightful learning, and a grounded process for organizational innovation. But the results are remarkable, aren't they?

“Do what I say, but not what I do”: the behavior of the French administration towards sustainable development.

Although Jacques Chirac has made of Sustainable Development one of his International political priorities since the 2002 Johannesburg summit, it seems as if France’s administration finds it difficult to adapt to the goals it has set for the French society in overall in terms of Sustainable Development. This clearly underlines a regrettable contrast between the political action undertaken and the behavior of the French State.
On one hand, the French government has indeed been politically proactive since 2002 in order to encourage sustainable development, being the first ever country to introduce this notion in its constitution. It also recently adopted a series of legal measures compelling all French listed company to introduce sustainable development information in their annual reports; moreover, more than a hundred measures have been voted by the parliament for the 2003-2008 period concerning emission quotas, fiscal encouragement for the use of renewable energies, biodiversity, the recycling of computer, vehicles and house equipment …and the list is not exhaustive.
But on the other hand, on an interview given to French economic news paper LES ECHOS on the 31st of May 2006, French government delegate for Sustainable Development Christian Brodhag made a clear statement of how far was the country’s administration had gone concerning SD. According to him, “there is still a lot to do as far as the mentalities are concerned”; therefore, he has launched a program named “state exemplarity for sustainable development”, and has placed a person especially in charge of SD in each Ministry; Help guides have been released for all the staff in charge of dealing with suppliers in order to inform them on the benefits of energy-saver, long durable goods , but he acknowledges that “the cheaper the better” solution is still too often chosen. People in charge namely forecast they supplies within tight annual budgetary lines, and not on the long term. That is why most of the local administrations have hardly bought any electrical vehicles, but are regarding towards traditional low petrol/diesel consumption ones, which are cheaper to use on a daily basis (no further infrastructures needed to recharge the batteries for example) whereas the administration had promised to switch to all electrical vehicles by the first decade of the century.
Christian Brodharg has now been given full support from Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin to implement these measures as soon as possible, but it will only concern the national administration, bearing in mind France is functioning more and more on a politically decentralized base concerning local decisions; Mr Brodharg aim is to follow the Dutch way in terms of state behavior towards sustainable development; indeed, the Dutch government has recently compelled its administration to have a “100% responsible buy” politic, and this as soon as possible.

It clearly looks as if there is still a long way to go for the French Administration before reaching the sustainable development excellence that its President is aiming at…

if you want to read the all article , please go to http://www.lesechos.fr/info/rew_energie/200076940.htm

Will desalination be the answer to hydro stress?

Because of the aridity, fresh water can be an extremely scarce resource. The maximum level of hydro stress is reached in the Middle East and North Africa. In some more clement areas a potential shortage can be balanced by water transfer projects, from one rainy region to one other dry (southern Spain, turkey, California...) but in the Arabic peninsula, there whole region is a desert and the only potential resource is the non renewable aquifers that have already been largely exploited. Desalination is fast becoming the major option for water supply.

The main issue remains the price of the operation, above all the cost of energy. The main producers of desalinised water (Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Kuwait) are in the same time rich in oil and gas. The new process of reverse osmosis (membrane filtration) has halved the price of desalination (distillation). In the longer term, when energy resources become scarce, the cost of desalination becomes more daunting, and realistic attempts must be made to recover the costs from consumers. For the moment, that’s not the case in the gulf, where water is almost free. The high cost of the process is seem to increase the awareness of the need of water, but we can notice that a country like the United Arab Emirates is in the same time the most exposed to hydro stress, and the biggest user of water in the world per capita.

http://www.suez-env.com/dessallement/intro.html

Even if the Middle East represents around 60 % of the global market, local research into desalination techniques is quite non existent. Even if it’s a main third world Issue, the most affected industrial countries (Israel, California, and Australia) can boost the perspectives of that industry by investing more in R&D. To reduce the costs, the Chinese have developed a desalination technology combined with nuclear plants (cheaper energy). But if we are can produce significant quantities of renewable energies (wind, solar…), it’s possible to imagine desalination plants that produce unlimited quantities of fresh water for an extremely limited price.

By focusing on high value added products (industrial, agricultural), an expensive desalinated water can allow the best manufacturing practices and a technical qualitative jump (drop by drop for farms). Saudi Arabia has thus created some of the most productive milk factories in the middle of the desert. Because of its high fecundity, Saudi Arabia will have 50 Millions inhabitants in 2030. But the soil can only feed 4 Millions. What will happen when the oil reserves will droop? The good news is that the cost of desalinisation is falling. The bad news is that the price is never likely to be low enough to cost-effectively supply agricultural needs.
May be, some arid areas like the Arabian Desert are ecologically not made to welcome tens millions inhabitants. The wars of the XXI may certainly be caused by geopolitical tension concerning the water supply. In one way or another, the way of life in water stressed regions has to be changed and become more respectful of the highly limited resources.

Adel Ouardani

The Future is in Ethanol

There has been a considerable amount of debate on whether the production of ethanol is a net contributor of energy. Researchers in the past claimed that the production of ethanol required more energy than it producers. Researchers at the University of California, Berkley claim that producing ethanol from corn uses much less petroleum than producing gasoline. However, the greenhouse gas emissions, and other environmental impacts are unknown at this time. As a technological optimist, I believe that the scientific community will find ways to optimize the production of ethanol in order to maximize the yield and minimize greenhouse gas emissions.

The use of small amounts of ethanol in gasoline can be done without modifications to vehicles. There are other products such as E85 (15% gasoline and 85% ethanol) and E100 (pure ethanol). The use of these types of ethanol requires modifications to car engines. Drastic changes to car engines can not be imposed. The use of ethanol-gasoline blends would be a more feasible strategy.

Developing an ethanol is only part of the solution. Governments must play an active role by introducing policies to increase the ethanol content of gasoline. The Canadian federal government, with the approval of the provincial governments have recently announced an initiative to increase the ethanol content of gasoline to 10% by 2010. Oil companies must be part of the solution and not considered part of the problem as they will play a crucial role in the distribution of various types of fuels. This initiative will require collaboration with farmers, ethanol producers and oil companies.

When it comes to the use of ethanol, the rest of the world can learn from Brazil. Brazil has been using ethanol for over 30 years. Approximately, 26% of the fuel consumed in Brazil is in the form of ethanol. Not only does the Brazilian strategy address the issue of cleaner fuel, it also provides an additional market for farmers.

Ron Bosc

$100 laptop “Sustainable education project”

The “100 $ Laptop” is an educational program that aims to manufacture relatively cheap Laptops in order to allow the children of the developed countries to have access to modern education and technology. This project was initiated by OLPC (One Laptop per Child), a non-profit organization formed by faculty members of the MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

My initial impression about this project is very positive. It appears that such initiative has the ability to reduce the widening educational gap between developed and developing countries. But lets us not fall easily to our hopes and let us closely analyze this project.

The project clearly differentiates itself from other projects which try to recycle part of the 100 millions desktops. The project offers brand new laptops with a combination of modest and cutting edges capabilities. Instead of hard drives, the laptop will have a .5GB flash memory. It will have a wireless connection for peer-to-peer networks in ad-hoc manner as well as couple USB ports and a low cost display. A Linux based operating system will run a 500 MHz processor with 128 MB RAM.

The main goal of the project is to have students experience computers, play with it, write and even learn basic programming. The project hopes that governments will buy these laptops to its citizens.

Aiming to be objectively critical, there are a lot of negative and unconsidered aspects that can hinder the goal of sustainable education. First, many people believe that this project fits only the American and European lifestyles, where the children go to there already computerized school and return to their fully equipped houses, unlike the situation in Africa where children have other worries concerning their basic physical needs such as “seeking clean water and food”. Second, just providing laptops does not ensure that children will actually benefits from them. There is a need of skilled people who can direct the students in their initial explorations, a task usually done by school teachers and family members in the developed countries. Without proper guidance or sufficient learning resources, few will ever benefit and worse, laptops might be discarded due to the slightest software malfunction. Another issue is the fear that corrupted governments might abuse this project and use it to achieve some political ends. By restricting its gift to regional or ethnic or religious groups within the concerned developing country, political mafias destroys thus the concept behind the project, i.e. resulting in a total demolition of its child supportive spirit.

After considering the previous points, my positive impression was deeply shaken. Sure it is much better to light a candle than curse the dark, but in places where the words famine, starvation, child labor, discrimination, water scarcity are daily issues, the winds are still strong enough to shut off this candle.

Facilitating the Paradigm Shift: the Critical Role of our Export Credit Agencies

Export Credit Agencies (ECA), such as Export Development Canada (EDC – http://www.edc.ca) have been established by in large to facilitate international trade between nations. They are at the forefront of facilitating globalization by providing domestic / foreign buyer financing and risk management services to their respective exporters (i.e. political risk insurance, bonding needs and/or account receivable insurance). As international change agents guided by OECD guidelines, these agencies have the opportunity to further influence various private and public companies when it comes to corporate social responsibility matters.

The impetus for implementing a sound and evolving CSR framework may vary between ECAs and their clients (private / public firms). It could be argued that ECA’s CSR frameworks are driven by both OECD regulations (i.e. Common Approaches on environmental review processes) and country specific acts (i.e. the Export Development Act in Canada) whereas corporations, on the other hand, implement said CSR frameworks in order to attain a sustainable competitive advantage to increase shareholder value.

In other words, ECAs establish CSR frameworks from a public mandate perspective whereas firms do so from perhaps from a more commercial perspective. This being said, ECAs have a significant collective degree of influence over a myriad of global players by virtue of their support for large international development projects. By performing additional due diligence at origination in areas such as anti-corruption, environmental impact assessments, human rights and counterparty commercial morality risk analyses, ECAs will continue to reinforce sound CSR principles and pave the way for global sustainable development progress. The ECA’s ability to incorporate certain contractual obligations as well as reps and warranties into the various financing and/or risk mitigation agreements will facilitate the paradigm shift in the corporate world.

Export Development Canada, has in my opinion, fully embraced the notions of sustainable development. Their CRS Annual Report delineates sound commercial operating principles and illustrates the level of commitment received by the Board of Directors (see link : http://www.edc.ca/english/docs/csr_annualreport_2005_e.pdf). Additional links substantiating my assertion are available for reference at the following locations:

http://www.edc.ca/advisory_council

http://www.edc.ca/compliance

http://www.edc.ca/ethics

http://www.edc.ca/conduct

Socially Responsible Investment

As I am currently following a financial training, and because I’m also really interested in Shares Portfolio Management, I wanted to focus on the Socially Responsible Investment (SRI).

As you may know, ethic and social responsibility are newly popular trends and have recently reached the investment process. On one hand, you have the people’s will to invest in firms recognized as responsible that is very personal, morality and ethic being subjective notions.
On the other hand, as an investor, the first element you will take into account should be the yield and profitability of the chosen share. However there is actually no guarantee regarding the performance of socially responsible companies.

ISR funds are means for individuals to invest in social responsible firms and banks have created them to respond to the demand. At the beginning, it was to enable people to invest in firms that had no link with the armaments industry during the Vietnam War. Now the movement has evolved and a company has to meet several criteria in order to be categorized as ethical.

Surely, several studies shown that socially responsible companies usually do not under-perform; but no link can be established between their behaviour and their financial results.

As you may know, consumer’s loyalty to this type of investment is also surprising as they accept lower return on investment. In order to protect their investment, we must then ensure that these companies will not take advantage of this. To address this challenge, extra-financial rating agencies were created to control this market. I think this is a way to provide feedback about the measures adopted by a firm in term of social responsibility, however we can not assess the relevance of the tool (e.g.: to analyse the sustainability) and information used to analyse, as well as criteria or values considered are not always available. How investors can be sure of the respect of their own values when they subscribe to one of these funds?

Ethic and Morality are personally defined. It can not be classified or measured, and therefore you can not ask someone to assess the effectiveness or the social responsibility of a company. Moreover, fewer information is available from the banks about such funds, which can not enable a potential consumer to make an enlightened choice (How can the investors know what is really included inside?).

To conclude, I am a little sceptical regarding the socially responsible funds and also afraid of the possible hypocrisy of some firms. However, accordingly to my own set of values, if I were to choose between two firms with similar financial results, I would choose the more socially responsible company.

No Logo - The book by Naomi Klein

Have you ever heard about Naomi Klein and her book No Logo?

This book assesses the lack of ability of the corporations around the world to fulfill their commitment as corporate citizens. Companies such as Nike, Reebok and also Wal-Mart are targeted as corporations interested only by the financial “Bottom Line”.

No Logo also gives an overview of the way the western corporations use poor country’s industrial facilities to produce at a minimal cost all kinds of goods that will end up in our stores at a much more expensive price. Companies such as Gap, Liz Claiborne and others claim to be ethical while applying work method that would not be permitted in such called “Western countries”: usage of chemical without protection, age segregation, no-paid overtime, miserable wages and extended work hours. As an example, Wal-Mart as been pointed out for paying its employees 13 cents per hour in China when a minimum salary has been defined by the world bank at around 30 cents per hour.

Personally, I think that as customers and citizens, it is our responsibility, as long as we can financially afford it, to make sustainable choice when purchasing a product or service. I truly believe that companies are not willing to take any step to encourage sustainable development as long as this can hit their margin. Therefore, I hope that the WTO will make it mandatory for the companies to devote a part of their benefits or gross sales to sustainable development.

Another option would be for the governments to finance, throughout different channels, the development of sustainable technologies that can benefit to all of us.

If you want to know more about the book and the author, please click here.

Marketing for or through SD?

Along with the growing alertness for the environment, sustainable development (SD) has become a popular term in the business world, so popular that it even exists in the form of mutual funds. One might think it is actually a good thing as you can get two birds with one stone (prospect earnings along with good consciousness).

However, an article in The Globe and Mail, “Sustainable development for sale”, is questioning the integrity of the companies promoted by those SD mutual funds. Some of the corporations that have been included in the funds seem doubtful when it comes to social responsibility. According to the article, the SD term appears to have been overexploited as a marketing tool through corporate communication which has, according to the author, “cheapening its value”. The article also states that the term is not well defined as it has sometimes been referred to the sustainability of the firm rather than the actual resources. Furthermore, SD is virtually inconsistent with the vocation of some industries such as oil companies and petroleum is a limited resource.

Personally, I agree with the article. While taking advantage of the ecological movement, some companies might have use the term SD for their own benefits rather then with good will. A comparison can be made with the food industry. With the increasing popularity of healthy nutrition, the food industry has been using various health-related labels to promote their products. However, we all know that “low fat” does not necessarily mean good for health. This being said, I still think that despise the abuse of the SD term, there is at least a growing awareness surrounding the actual concept and this awareness is in my opinion, already a good step forward.

The article can be found at http://www.sustreport.org/news/comm_1_reg.html

Innovation, creative destruction and sustainability: look to the base of the pyramid for customers previously ignored--then look for new ways to meet those needs.

We learned a lot from the class about the sustainable development and 3 Ps-- people, planet, and profit-- concept. This article proposed one way to facilitate the trippleP bottom line from , possibly, blue ocean strategy.

The author, Hart, Stuart L., presented the sustainability in terms of Shareholder’s value Matrix with the activities’ payoff today/tomorrow time and internal/external stakeholders involvement.

The purpose of this journal is to support the innovation by using the technology to get the revolutionary process, beyonding improving the existing technologies, in order to be sustainable and achieve the customer’s need, which aligning at the bottom of the pramid as a new market. Eco-effectiveness, biomimicry, leapfrog technology, etc., all drive firms to what the economist Joseph Schumpeter called "creative destruction." To achieve these goals requires new skill sets and new capabilities through activities such as internal development, joint partnerships, and acquisitions.

Not only do the companies increase the shareholder’s value, but they must also maintain corporate legitimacy and build positive reputations, especially after the recent events at such companies as Enron and WorldCom.

One way to sustain for tomorrow is, from shifting the paradigm, using the disruptive technologies , such as the clean technology and eco-effectiveness, as an opprtunity for companies to access the new market, which can be developed into the mainstream market, and lower cost with the example of computer and power generation.

However, as described by Christensen about Innovator’s dilemma , it would be that disrupters drooped to the bottom of the top of the pyramid, found these niche markets, and then moved upward to the mainstream market, creating entirely new industries in the process and ultimately driving out old technologies.

In sum, by considering stakeholder’s engagement, sustainability through creative destruction and innovation, and capabilities, the aspiring poor present a prodigious opportunity for the world’s wealthiest companies, but it will require a radical new approach to business strategy.

If you would like to read more, please click this link

There's still a long road ahead for sustainable development

In her article “There's still a long road ahead for sustainable development”, the journalist Laure Belot notices that more and more companies, including BP, Heineken or Ikea, are going on the road of sustainable development nowadays. They not only want to ease their consciences acting so, but also want to restore the very poor image of their brand. But is it really appropriate that oil or mining companies support NGO’s and associations fighting against crabs, or that chemical or tobacco companies financially help hospitals? Are the discrepancies between the donors and the final recipient not too far away?
According to the United Nations Security Council and to the UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, such policies can become concrete and effective if only the companies are not lone riders. That’s why governments, international institutions and public partners will have to manage such socially responsible policies all together. “Solutions can be provided by public-private partnerships." If companies stand alone on the implementation of sustainable policies, they won’t be able to back up their growth, their profit, and to develop efficiently sustainable initiatives. They’ll have to choose between both of them, and the mankind wellness would probably become their last worry, since the financial markets make the law and that investors will be quite reluctant to invest in a policy that probably won’t make money…

Although the public-private partnership seems to be a way to make the corporate sustainable development improve, is it a realistic solution?

Read the article on http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianweekly/outlook/story/0,,1240851,00.html#article_continue

Green and Competitive: Ending the Stalemate

In the paper “Green and Competitive: Ending the Stalemate”, Harvard-based academic Michael Porter’s argument focuses on the influx of environmental policies and guidelines and their large bearing on a firm’s ability to compete in the market.
He clearly identifies his belief of a Paradigm Shift from the notion of environmental controls damaging the bottom line to the concept of innovation based on greater productivity, and also states that to gain the edge in today’s competitive world, whoever can develop and improve all aspects of their operations on a constant basis will be the most competitive.

Porter’s main body of his work conveys that properly crafted innovation can serve at least 6 purposes:
1. Regulation identifies resource inefficiencies
2. Regulation raises corporate awareness
3. Regulation reduces uncertainty through investment in the area
4. Regulation creates pressures that innovation and progress
5. Regulation levels the playing field for all organisations
6. Regulation will improve environmental quality

Thus, he explains, innovation offsets occur as companies get smarter about how to deal with negative externalities resulting in reduced compliance costs, and also as products are directly improved and more industry competitive.

To finish, it is clear that throughout his research, the author formulates a ‘Porter Hypothesis’, believing that protecting the natural environment and business performance are not incompatible and that government environmental regulation can act as a trigger to innovation (Porter and the Conventionalists, Eiadat, Y et al, University College Dublin, Ireland).

Further info on Porter and his works:
http://www.fastcompany.com/online/44/porter.html
http://www.isc.hbs.edu/

Family and Sustainable Development and the Example of China

While poverty reduces family cohesion and values, equally prosperity may itself accentuate work-life tensions, for instance the stress of career parents in taking care of children all highlight the complexity of the links between sustainable development and families

Key Note Statement at the World Family Summit by Mr. Khalid Malik, UNDP Resident Representative/UN Resident Coordinator

We can consider family as the nucleus institution of our society today and will have to ensure its viability and sustenance moving forward. In the west, this fundamental structure is under threat with increased divorce rates and strained family financials. As more and more families try to make ends meet interestingly our living standards have also increased by many folds. We have actually imposed on ourselves tougher standards to measure up against and have not realized the consequences until very recently. Our current life style is a product of our "perceived" prosperity. There are many examples in this to be learned from for developing nations.

There is a clear link between sustainable development and family; without access to jobs and a clean environment, families are not able to prosper. Also, without conditions that nurture and safeguard family rights, families cannot thrive and this in turn holds back economic and social progress. Functioning families are crucial to social cohesion and stability.

In the case of China, rapid growth and economic welfare has brought about more opportunities for a better life. However Chinese families are facing many new challenges as a result of economic growth.

As Mr. Malik states them:

1. Despite persistent economic development at a high speed, pockets of poverty is still a reality for a large number of populations and poverty incidence continues to be high.

2. China’s transition from a socialist system to a market economy has created new social security challenges to families.

3. The movement of migrants inside China is unforeseen in global history and this has huge implications to families affected.

4. The threat of HIV/AIDS. Be it rich or poor, urban or rural, HIV/AIDS does not choose which door to enter.

5. Environmental and ecological degradation have affected families in many ways.

Families can be considered as the essence of social capital. This means that they are affected by development good or bad. Keeping in mind the already set examples, there are many questions that can be asked:

- Has double income families brought “happiness” to the core of our society? Will we be able sustain this life style for generations to come and still provide for our families’ non-capitalistic needs?

- How will our children be protected from the increased exposure to drugs, social violence, and epidemics? This determine the livelihood of our generations to come.

- Do public institutions recognize the importance of families? As there is care for individuals not families per see a more holistic approach is needed to tackle epidemics like HIV, since it a more family based matter.

Source:
Family and Sustainable Development

http://www.undp.org.cn/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&catid=13&topic=4&sid=217&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

The Economics of Sustainability

Dr. Jeffrey Sachs is a renowned Macroeconomist currently at Columbia University and considered by many a great authority on issues relating to sustainable development.

Any serious person interested in the economics of sustainability should listen to his speech at . His basic argument is that the poorest people in the world are not going to be able to enjoy the benefits of sustainable development without significant, large and continuing net resource transfers from the richest countries.

Many of my reasons for being such a big fan of his views stem from his realistic assesment of many problems as opposed to idealistic theories put forward by many economists. His idea of poor people being poor because they live in poor regions is one of the clearest identifications of the “why”. It leads on to explaining why we cannot impose western expectations on developing nations and that benefits cannot be realised through better governance or structural adjustments will not stand up.

Sach’s views are opposed by number who see his proposals as being naïve (including a prominent lawyer at University of Ottawa - for the Canadians!), pointing towards developing nations who did not need large scale foreign aid. I also personally feel that while he has the right economic idea, further issues need to be factored in. This includes resource scarcity and geo-political implications. Nonetheless, the speech gives great views on the economics of sustainability and his book “The end of Poverty” (2005) gives further realistic solutions to poverty reduction. All comments welcome, I'm open to discussion!

Who's job is it anyway

With the aviation industry set to double in size by 2020, concerns have been raised about it’s environmental impact. At present, aviation is responsible for approx. 3% of emissions, compared to 10% by private motorists. However as the industry grows, so will pollution, noise and harmful emissions. A contentious issue has been the immunity from tax on fuel enjoyed by the industry to date. The immunity is currently being challenged and many airlines are acknowledging that it is only a matter of time before the industry will be held responsible for its contribution to environmental degradation. As a result many of the major UK airlines, airports and aircraft manufacturers eg BA, Virgin Atlantic, Heathrow, Airbus, have begun to collaborate on a strategy for sustainable aviation. www.sustainableaviation.co.uk. As part of this, many of these airlines favour an emissions trading scheme over fuel tax. It is argued by Micheal O Leary, Ryanair’s chief executive, that the emissions scheme is punitive to growing airlines. Thus Ryanair has refused to join the sustainable development bandwagon and claims that the main contribution of the sustainable aviation group will be the reduction in emissions, as a result of the bankruptcy of these airlines. http://travel.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,7445,1511906,00.html?gusrc=rss Ryanair has grown substantially despite economic conditions during the last few years, the primary reason for this is it’s low cost strategy. The argument I would like to present is that the incentive for airlines to adopt sustainable development policies is counteracted by consumers voting with their wallets. Airlines, and businesses in general, will face an uphill battle to move towards sustainable development unless we as consumers undertake responsibility for our environment and the choices we make.

EU-Eco-label

Have you heard about Eco-label? If you are not from Europe you probably haven’t. I’ll let you know what I think of this way of encouraging business to market greener products. This concept was first introduced in the European Union but it is spreading across the world because its suitability to free market economy. Its main goal are: promote products which have a reduced environmental impact provide consumers with information and guidance on products Products which meet certain environmental requirements and specific eco-label criteria are 'eco-labeled'. It sells better with the little 'daisy' logo and it also means that those goods are of very high quality and mostly European. The use of the label is subject to the payment of an annual fee by the user but there are funds which support these manufacturers, importers, service providers, traders or retailers. This system works best if it is combined with tradable permits which the companies can buy and sell rights to pollute. So, if somebody is interested in this type of regulation, visit this website: http://europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/s15000.htm

Transform world's waste into oil

With a future increase in the world population, one thing is for sure, we will be producing more waste products in various forms, whether it be tyres, plastic bottles, human waste, old computers, municipal garbage, cornstalks, infectious medical waste, oil-refinery residues etc. A company in Philadelphia has built a pilot plant to transform this waste in order to supplement supplies of oil.
So in terms of issues of sustainability facing the global environment, this concept could help deal with world’s dwindling supplies of oil, slow down global warming and help with waste management
The process is called the Thermal Depolymerization Process (TDP) and involves using almost any waste product imaginable, subjecting it to the TDP process and subsequently the end product is either high-quality oil, clean-burning gas, and purified minerals that can be used as fuels, fertilizers, or specialty chemicals for manufacturing.If the concept works as planned, it is anticipated the world's agricultural, industrial, and municipal waste could be put to good use.
As an example of how useful this techonology could be, the article here suggests that,
“Just converting all the U.S. agricultural waste into oil and gas would yield the energy equivalent of 4 billion barrels of oil annually”.
So… there’s hope for the increasing amounts of waste our growing population will produce. Maybe a good company to follow and for all you Venture Capitalists out there .. go for it!!

The power of dreams

Do you know a company that believes in sustainable development, has a strong commitment to the environment with a detailed policy to back it up and is known to be one of the most innovative all around the world? I know one. It’s Honda Motor Corporation. You have probably heard of this company; some of you for its motorcycles, some of you more for its car or maybe for its generators, marine engines or other power equipment. Honda is now a lot more than that. They are very active in the aeronautics and the robotics industries. In the following lines, I will tell you why I think companies around the world should follow Honda Motor Co. model for sustainable environment.

Honda is mainly known for its high quality products but it also has a wonderful history of innovations that has changed trends in different industries that has benefited the environment. Honda has always been dedicated to the environment. The have open the road in many domains. For examples, in July 2002, the zero emission Honda FCX became the first fuel cell (hydrogen) electric vehicle in the world to obtain the required certifications to be sold in the U.S. Honda as always been the leader in manufacturing engines with cleaner exhaust gas, improved fuel economy and use of alternate energy source.

The commitment the environment and to sustainable development doesn’t stop at the product development for Honda Motor Co. The have a full Environment / Sustainable development set of rules for production, purchasing, transportation, sales, disposable and recycling.

I hope I have awakened your curiosity about this wonderful company. I strongly encourage you to visit their corporate web site dedicated to the environment at http://www.world.honda.com/environment/ . You will discover what the power of dreams can do. I put you to the challenge to find a company that does more than Honda Motor Co. does.

To know more about the company products, you can follow the links bellow.

For more information contact: Jean-Claude Lemonde
E-mail:	jclemond@hotmail.com
Phone:	(613) 562-5800 x1531

Creating a demand could solve environment issues!

The debate about what should be done is a silly one! Let’s agree right from the get-go that we need to act on the environment issues (individually and together) and let’s make a plan. The difficulty for the government is finding the right balance between the different options such as, just to name a few, command-and-control, policy for property rights, tradable rights, top-down laws, green taxes, comprehensive reforms. What are the common goals we would like to establish per country and world wide taking into account the different level of development of each country?

Once we have a balance with the government and different options we now need to face the individual dilemma. How can we make all individuals act (or react)? Could we create a demand sooner than later? I am not convinced that we can invent our way out of problems such as with water, air, and extinctions of animals...

While trying to solve these enigmas there are different aspects to take into account: efficiency, cost benefits, effectiveness, bureaucratic (or not), private vs public, market affects, what about the poor and who has the property rights over the commons?

Methods are often incompatible but at least we are seeing market forces slowly beginning to make inroads into environment policy changes. How can we be more pro-active and keep working toward that goal! Should we add more green taxes individually and together? What would be the right balance?

To get more understanding of different options for environment issues good readings are the following: Economic man, cleaner planet and Environmental Economics .

By Daniele St Jean

China and Sustainable development

Colleagues,

In the past few years, the progress of the Chinese economy has been peaking my curiosity. As a result, I have been reading literature about the rise of China. Recently, I read an article named “China’s Agriculture causing environmental degradation” from the Xinhua News Agency. The article discusses the challenge that Chinese farmers have overcome. At the detriment of the environment, they were able to feed 22% of the world’s population with less than 10 per cent of Arable land. The statistics of pollution communicated in the article are astonishing. For example, China uses on average 400 Kg of fertilizer per hectare of land, almost double the recommended limit of 225 Kg. The director of the Chinese ecology institute discusses China’s need to reduce its polluting practices. In addition, the article communicates that China has taken positive action on the sustainable development front by attending a conference signing the Sino-Italian cooperation program with Italy for environmental protection available at http://www.sinoitaenvironment.org/indexe02.asp .

However, the definition of sustainable development provided by the Bruntland commission stipulates the requirement to address the needs of the poor. The article seems to be a little biased as it strictly focused on the positive steps of sustainable development taken by China. Although China has succeeded in feeding the majority of its population, it may be able to increase efforts to improve the quality of Work Life of its workers. For example, Toy workers in China are paid 30 cents per hour, live in dormitories occupied by 15 employees per room and are exposed to toxic minerals all day. In addition, most of these employees are women between the ages of 17-23. http://www.tibet.ca/en/wtnarchive/2002/12/24_4.html

This agreement appears to focus strictly on environmental protection. What is troubling is the perceived tolerance of these working conditions. Legislation may be in place but Chinese literature indicates inadequate enforcement. China has a large population and Chinese firms seem to operate in a cowboy economy with respect to their workers. This cowboy philosophy towards human life is troubling. Directing fifteen people to sleep in the same room increases their likelihood of sleep deprivation. Sleep is a critical human need that may be denied to many workers in China. In addition, their poor wages prevent them from accumulating any financial reserves, which, according to Maslow, is a safety need for human beings. http://www.netmba.com/mgmt/ob/motivation/maslow/

The United States, Canada and other western nations have expressed concern about human rights in China. On the other hand, Western Countries may be contributing to the problem by developing business relationships with Chinese industries such as the toy industry knowing that Chinese workers seem to be overexploited.

04 July 2006
Xinhua News Agency
English
(c) Copyright 2006 Xinhua News Agency
BEIJING, July 4 (Xinhua) -- China is being warned that it faces further environmental degradation from the overuse of chemical fertilizers, a bitter fruit its people are literally being forced to swallow, says a leading Chinese expert on the ecology.

It's the result of the country's long-boasted miracle of being able to feed 22 percent of the world's population with only seven percent of the world's arable land, said Gao Jixi, director of the Ecology Institute with the Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences.

"It costs us dearly. Intensive use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides have led to severe soil, water and air pollution," he said.

Gao offered a grim list of agricultural side effects at a forum being sponsored by "Sino-Italian Green Week". "More greenhouse gases are being produced. Accumulating heavy metals are hardening the soil and reducing its fertility. Surface water is over-enriched with nutrients and groundwater is polluted by nitrates," he said.

Chinese farmers use 41.24 million tons of chemical fertilizers every year, for an average of more than 400 kg per hectare of farmland, far above the safe limit of 225 kg per hectare in developed countries, said Gao.

"Only 40 percent of nitrogen fertilizers, a heavily used chemical fertilizer in China, is being applied efficiently. Almost half of it evaporates or runs off before being absorbed by crops, causing water, soil and air pollution," Gao said.

Statistics show that from 1985 to 2000, China saw 141 million tons, or nine million tons per year, of nitrogen fertilizers washed away and turned into pollutants.

About 75 percent of the country's lakes and 50 percent of groundwater are polluted.

China is also suffering serious side-effects of chemical pesticides, which has been deemed as the most effective means combating plant diseases and pests in decades.

"Overuse of pesticides has destroyed the ecological balance and biodiversity in cropland. Pesticide residue deposited in farm plants may poison humans and livestock," Gao said.

"Many farm produce are blocked or returned in foreign trade for failing to meet standards in pesticide use, resulting in millions of yuan of economic losses," Gao said.

China reported an annual use of more than 1.2 million tons of pesticides, which has contaminated 7 percent of its arable land.

Plastic films have been widely applied in farming in China. But Gao noted that most of the films are undegradable and may hinder roots to absorb water and prevent groundwater from oozing.

Even degradable mulch remnants will generate new toxicants during their decomposition, he added. China produces 1 million mulch films every year, about 10 percent of which are left in soil after use.

Gao also pointed out that 90 percent of China's livestock breeding farms haven't undergone any environmental impact assessment and 60 percent are short of necessary pollution prevention and control facilities.

China should realize sustainable development of agriculture by reducing use of fertilizers, employing integrated pest prevention and management system and using biodegradable mulch films, he said.

"We should take the entire farm ecosystem into consideration and make the best use of natural factors against plant diseases and pests." Gao said.

"Sino-Italian Green Week", co-held by Chinese and Italian governments, will put on show a series of activities, such as environmental forums and exhibitions of Italian architecture and design, from July 3 to July 6.

Should the governments instill regulations that prescriptively require organizations to have CSR programs?

In light of recent high-profile corporate abuse there is strong public pressure for governments to intervene to protect public interests. This response includes; holding corporate leaders accountable for the organization’s affairs, providing protection for the environment, preserving resources, and encouraging sustainable industries. Governments need to assess their options to facilitate the necessary mitigation strategy. One of these initiatives is to instill regulations that prescriptively require organizations to have Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) programs.

In the 2002 throne speech 1, the Governor General of Canada announced high-level government initiatives requiring: smart regulations, and policy development emphasizing the protection the environment and long-term sustainability of resources. This framework entrenched fundamental core values for future generations of Canadians. Although the government has developed new agencies, such the Environment Protection Agency (EPA), the government is still confronted on how to best influence its philosophy on organizations.

Traditionally, when governments are faced with a dilemma they prescriptively respond with regulations that directly respond to the threat. The advantage of this reactive approach is two fold. First, regulators are perceived as being responsive to the public needs. Second, organizations are provided with benchmarks for due diligence.

In his book, Organizational Human Factors, 2 Dr. James Reason argues that prescriptive regulatory measures tend to be ineffective in cultural reform. He indicates organizations are better off if they develop their own programs to respond to their operations. This is also consistent with the government’s smart regulations policy, where regulatory reform has to “make sense” and be “doable”. Additionally, government regulations are perceived as being: 1) Slow and cumbersome 2) Corrupt, and 3) Fragmented
Finally, Professor David Henderson indicated that governments can “distort market forces and increase firms cost”. 3
I feel that governments should avoid prescriptive legislation and seek softer, consultative solutions. Governments should be responsible for a global map and leave it up to organization to decide the path they will take.
References 1) 2002 Throne speech, @ here Language=E&Page=InformationResources&sub=sftddt&doc=sftddt2002_e.htcm
2) Organizational Human Factors, Dr. James Reason, 2002
3) Sustainable Development and Competitive Advantage, Course notes, Professor Jeremy Williams, Course SP4B, Reims France, 2006

The latest news about Wal-Mart?

July 5,2006

The largest retailer in the world wants to lead in business sustainability. The company has committed to prioritize the area of climate and renewable energy, waste reduction, recycling and the development of sustainable products. The goal is to have 100% renewable energy and produces zero waste. They are hoping to decrease the gas emissions by 20 percent over the next seven years, double the fuel efficiency of its truck fleet within 10 years and reduce solid waste by 25 percent in the next three years.
This is great news but I think Wal-Mart has a very bad reputation in the way of doing their business. I am tempted to say that they are doing the “Cowboy economy”. The cowboy economy is about exploitation and having cheap products at lower cost and not renewable products. It seems to me that they are only looking at profitability and exploitation of human resources. For example in Canada we had one Wal-Mart store who voted to have union at their work place. They believed the salary and working condition were not acceptable. So the response from Wal-Mart was to close the store.
Is Wal-Mart doing the cowboy economy or trying to look good by having a development sustainable strategy? I think they are doing both by trying to change their image. They want to follow the trend by having a clean business profile. This company seems to have one way of doing business and it is” my way or the high way”.
On the other hand if Wal-Mart is very serious of doing sustainable development the impact should be significant. The leader retailer can impose to business industries.
At the moment, Wal-Mart has a lot to prove to the world that they can change their business practice. We need to see them in action.
Francois Lemaire

DARWIN’S NIGHTMARE

Darwin’s Nightmare by writer-director Hubert Saupert is a documentary exposing the sad tale of “survival of the fittest” along the shores of Lake Victoria, the African lake ironically considered the cradle of humankind's origin. Darwin’s central principles on natural selection, extinction and divergence are vividly unraveled through the intertwined real stories of hardened local fishermen and soldiers, starving and drug-addicted homeless children, business-savvy entrepreneurs, smooth-talking politicians, street-smart prostitutes, and bitter Russian pilots - all trapped in the turbulent and often violent whirlwinds of globalization.

The Nil Perch was artificially introduced in Lake Victoria in the 60s and has since then virtually destroyed the eco-system leaving the surrounding villages in a pseudo-economy where the delectable fish filet is abundantly exported to industrialized countries and only the heads and bones are left behind to feed the local population. Large Russian cargo planes fly over Lake Victoria everyday packed with fish filet...but those planes did not come to Africa empty...they brought with them weapons and ammunitions fostering local wars which further decay the social fabric of Africa.

This documentary starts sadly and as the individual stories slowly unveil one of the worst example of globalization, one is left with a deep and unbearable sense of uneasiness and repugnance. It exposes a not quite “quid pro quo” exchange whereby Africa’s natural resources are purloined by the hands of hypocritical capitalism. Indeed, not only Lake Victoria is becoming sterile but its socio-economical structure is left in a state of plunging consternation. This movie is as raw as they come and will invariably affect your views on globalization and sustainable development when (mis)managed far beyond the bounds of corporate social responsibility.

I leav