28 Aug 2012

Four archetypes of entrepreneurship and how they contribute to a better world.
For four decades I have worked with small business entrepreneurs, helping them grow their businesses by keeping stakeholder success and consciousness of how they do business in the forefront of their minds. I have seen how, by developing the characteristics of what I call The Responsible Entrepreneur, anyone helping to bring new business into the world can fulfill the promise of entrepreneurship and contribute to the creation of a better world.
Every Responsible Entrepreneur represents one of four archetypes, each with a unique role to play in the entrepreneurial system. Cultural anthropologists have identified all four in every healthy culture, and all four are needed to ensure the health of our own evolving social system. Each takes on change differently in search of different outcomes. All four approaches can also be found inside established organizations, among intrapreneurs who lead change.
Read Post | Comments ( 0 )
27 Jun 2012

It is, perhaps, the greatest failure of collective leadership since the first world war. The Earth’s living systems are collapsing, and the leaders of some of the most powerful nations – the United States, the UK, Germany, Russia – could not even be bothered to turn up and discuss it. Those who did attend the Earth summit in Rio last week solemnly agreed to keep stoking the destructive fires: sixteen times in their text they pledged to pursue “sustained growth“, the primary cause of the biosphere’s losses.
The efforts of governments are concentrated not on defending the living Earth from destruction, but on defending the machine that is destroying it. Whenever consumer capitalism becomes snarled up by its own contradictions, governments scramble to mend the machine, to ensure – though it consumes the conditions that sustain our lives – that it runs faster than ever before.
The thought that it might be the wrong machine, pursuing the wrong task, cannot even be voiced in mainstream politics. The machine greatly enriches the economic elite, while insulating the political elite from the mass movements it might otherwise confront. We have our bread; now we are wandering, in spellbound reverie, among the circuses.
We have used our unprecedented freedoms – secured at such cost by our forebears – not to agitate for justice, for redistribution, for the defence of our common interests, but to pursue the dopamine hits triggered by the purchase of products we do not need. The world’s most inventive minds are deployed not to improve the lot of humankind but to devise ever more effective means of stimulation, to counteract the diminishing satisfactions of consumption. The mutual dependencies of consumer capitalism ensure that we all unwittingly conspire in the trashing of what may be the only living planet. The failure at Rio de Janeiro belongs to us all.
It marks, more or less, the end of the multilateral effort to protect the biosphere. The only successful global instrument – the Montreal Protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer – was agreed and implemented years before the first Earth Summit in 1992. It was one of the last fruits of a different political era, in which intervention in the market for the sake of the greater good was not considered anathema, even by the Thatcher and Reagan governments. Everything of value discussed since then has led to weak, unenforceable agreements, or to no agreements at all.
Read Post | Comments ( 2 )
14 Jun 2012
At a peace summit in Vancouver, the Dalai Lama made an extraordinary statement when he said that the world will be saved by the western women. This proclamation created a tsunami of responses in cyberspace. Can you imagine? The Dalai Lama saying it will be women that will save the world? As remarkable as this was to many, it was “duh” moment for me. I thought, of course, it’ll be women. We purchase 85% of the consumer goods in the United States. We can do right now by what we buy – and don’t buy. That was my “ah-ha” moment. That’s when I decided to write and speak on this topic.
Let’s look at the numbers. It is estimated that American women spend about five trillion dollars annually. That’s over half of the US GDP. We purchase everything from autos to health care. Here are some quick stats on our purchases:
Read Post | Comments ( 14 )
10 May 2012

From Fast Company
More and more, students seem to be using environmental credentials as a key decision-making factor in deciding where to go college. Which schools are doing it best?
Aspiring higher eduction students have all sorts of reasons for picking a college: academic performance, cost of tuition, and alcohol availability among them. But, according to a new survey, one consideration is rising fast amid all the others: environmental performance.
According to the Princeton Review’s latest “Hopes and Worries” survey, which scans the views of 7,445 college-bound students, 68% now say commitment to sustainability impacts their college choice.
Read Post | Comments ( 0 )
2 May 2012

From Care2 petition site
Researchers at Beelogics, a leading bee research firm, identified pesticides as a leading contributor to declining bee populations. In late September of 2011, Monsanto, a major producer of genetically modified foods, bought the Beelogics firm for an undisclosed sum. It now seems likely that Monsanto’s funding will manipulate research to point the blame away from chemicals used in GMO food production.
The bee decline affects all U.S. citizens. Bees are responsible for pollinating 1/3 of U.S. crops and are essential to sustaining our ecological lifespan. It is vital that researchers can identify the true cause of the decline so that responsible citizens can learn how to help the bee population.
If the USDA uses Monsanto-funded research from Beelogics, it will essentially be sacrificing scientific integrity for corporate interests. Please support the truth of scientific research and tell the USDA not to use research funded by Monsanto.
Read Post | Comments ( 7 )
26 Apr 2012

From GreenBiz.com
Ray Anderson often asked a rhetorical question: does business exist to make a profit, or does business make a profit to exist? With this line of questioning, Ray called upon us to understand that while making a profit is the lifeblood of a company’s survival, it shouldn’t be the only reason for a company to exist.
With his talent for translating lofty vision into everyday reality, Ray would ask: what you would rather get out of bed to do each day: make carpet, or make history?
Making history by making carpet is a unifying sentiment for the people of Interface. How, exactly, are we making history? By proving the business model for sustainability, while taking on Ray’s challenge to eliminate our negative environmental footprint.
Ray believed there must be a better way for business to thrive on our planet, without the assumed ecological and social impacts that our current industrial take-make-waste system creates. With such ambitious goals, where do we look for inspiration in redesigning a system as pervasive and complex as business?
Read Post | Comments ( 1 )
9 Feb 2012

From Huffington Post via Women Of Green
WASHINGTON — Natural gas drillers would be required to disclose the chemicals they use in hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” on public lands, according to draft rules created by the Department of Interior. The proposed regulations would also force companies to report the amount of any given chemical injected during the fracking process.
The move for increased regulation comes after President Barack Obama touted his commitment to expanding natural gas production while ensuring the drilling is done responsibly. “My administration will take every possible action to safely develop this energy,” he said during his State of the Union address last month. Fracking, which involves the high-pressure injection of undisclosed chemicals into rocks containing oil or natural gas, has drawn increasing scrutiny from environmentalists who suggest the process contaminates groundwater and destroys ecosystems.
Under the proposed regulations, companies would be required to reveal the “complete chemical makeup of all materials used,” according to a copy of the rules obtained by The Huffington Post. But environmentalists have noted that, while the regulations offer some “good elements,” the rules still offer companies considerable protections for “trade secrets,” an exemption some worry could negate the rule.
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has said regulations will also cover well-bore integrity and regulation of flowback waters (the fluids that rise to the surface after hydraulic fracturing operations are complete). Further, reports detailing the ingredients used in the fracking fluids and a fluid treatment plan must be submitted 30 days before operations begin at any proposed well.
Interior spokesman Adam Fetcher elaborated in a statement.
Read Post | Comments ( 0 )
8 Feb 2012

From Environment News Service
ADDIS ABABA, Ethiopia, A panel of current and former heads of government, ministers and lawmakers Monday launched a plan for world leaders to propel an “ever-green” energy revolution that could wean the world off fossil fuels, when they meet in Brazil later this year.
The report of the High-level Panel on Global Sustainability links the United Nations’ goals of reducing poverty and inequality to promoting the use of wind, solar and other renewable energy sources to power the economies of rich and poor nations alike.
The report, “Resilient People, Resilient Planet: A Future Worth Choosing,” contains 56 recommendations to put sustainable development into practice quickly, moving it from a general concept to the core of mainstream economics.
Read Post | Comments ( 2 )
20 Jan 2012

From Natural News
Purveyors of conventional and genetically-modified (GM) crops — and the pesticides and herbicides that accompany them — are finally getting a taste of their own legal medicine. Minnesota’s Star Tribune has reported that the Minnesota Court of Appeals recently ruled that a large organic farm surrounded by chemical-laden conventional farms can seek damages for lost crops, as well as lost profits, caused by the illegal trespassing of pesticides and herbicides on its property.
Read Post | Comments ( 0 )
21 Oct 2011

By Senator Dianne Feinstein
Chalk up a win for moms around the country.
After years of battle, the chemical industry has reversed its longstanding position against restrictions on the controversial chemical bisphenol A, known as BPA, and asked the Food and Drug Administration to revise regulations on the use of the chemical in baby bottles and sippy cups.
It is ironic that the industry asking federal regulators to revise BPA standards is the very same industry that spent millions of dollars lobbying to block my legislation restricting the use of this dangerous chemical.
The American Chemistry Council must have realized that no matter how much money they spent, no parent, grandparent or concerned person would stand by while our children are used as guinea pigs with a chemical that could seriously harm their immediate and long-term health.
BPA is an endocrine disruptor, meaning that it can interfere with how hormones work in our bodies by changing their normal function. More than 200 studies link BPA exposure to breast and other cancers, reproductive disorders, cardiac disease, diabetes, early puberty and other problems.
Yet, the chemical industry stubbornly refused to listen to science and concerned consumers, and instead leaned on lawmakers.
Last year, the American Chemistry Council actually lobbied to prevent a vote in the Senate on the change it now seems to be advocating–a national ban on BPA in baby bottles and sippy cups.
Here’s why I think chemical industry lobbyists failed: Even though they successfully blocked a vote on BPA, consumers took matters into their own hands and voted against BPA with their wallets. Every time a BPA-free product was purchased, it marked a setback for the chemical industry.
For years the chemical lobby ignored the pleas of concerned parents, environmentalists and advocacy groups that called for a ban on BPA. Companies ignored the studies and continued to argue that there was no established link between BPA and many illnesses. There was simply no other alternative, the companies insisted—baby bottles and sippy cups could only be made with BPA.
Clearly they were wrong.
Read more at Senator Dianne Feinsten’s website
Read Post | Comments ( 0 )