Search

People, primarily skeptics, often want to know what is the business case for taking action on climate change. Typically, all they can see is the prospect of energy prices going up since, they imagine, energy companies will be forced to make expensive modifications or pay taxes or credits that will raise the price of everything else while providing nothing additional in return. My favorite answer to the question is this one: What is the business case for not taking action? But recently I discovered another set of numbers that justify taking action, which leads me to believe there are probably even more waiting to be discovered.

Consider this: A cost-benefit study conducted by a team of MIT researchers and published in the journal Nature Climate Change looked at three different climate intervention scenarios, taking into account the health care cost savings. What they saw was that in one scenario, the health care cost savings achieved were actually ten times greater than the cost of implementing the scenario. In fact, in two of the three scenarios, the savings achieved by reducing the need for health care, avoided hospital visits, and decreased incidence of pollution-related illnesses more than covered the cost of the program.

The three scenarios selected were a clean energy standard, a policy aimed specifically at emissions from transportation, and a cap and trade program. What the researchers found was the following:

Scenario	Cost	Health Care Savings
Clean Energy Standard	$208 billion	$247 billion
Transportation Emissions	~$1000 billion	$260 billion
Cap and Trade	$14 billion	$147 billion

What’s interesting about these results is that while the policies that were put forth in this study were developed to reduce CO2 emissions, it was several other emissions that co-exist with CO2 in fossil fuels exhaust streams, namely ground level ozone and fine particulates that yielded these health benefits when substantially reduced. Both of these pollutants can cause asthma as well as heart and lung disease.

These pollutants are quite common around the world. The US EPA’s standard for ozone was exceeded by 231 countries in 2011. Similarly, the standard for fine particulates was exceeded by 118 countries. Considering that the US, with relatively clean air achieves these benefits, imagine how effective these actions could be around the world.

By and large, this represents low-hanging fruit. The policies needed to substantially mitigate climate impacts would need to go further than this, to a point where health care savings would begin to see diminishing returns as air quality improves. But taking this level of action, considering that it already pays for itself, should be a no-brainer.

The other point worth noting is that if our health care costs weren’t so horrendously high, the savings achieved here would be less, though solving that problem doesn’t seem to be any easier than this one.

So here’s the problem. If you’re an oil company, you’re thinking that saving health care costs is a good thing, but not if I’m spending more to achieve it, and it’s not putting any more money in my pocket. This is where we need to change the system to one that recognizes that we are all in this together. The savings should be reflected back to those who took action, or made sacrifices to achieve them. That way nobody loses and everyone wins.

Image credit: Farangrakthai.com: Flickr Creative Commons

RP Siegel, PE, is an author, inventor and consultant. He has written for numerous publications ranging from Huffington Post to Mechanical Engineering. He and Roger Saillant co-wrote the successful eco-thriller Vapor Trails. RP, who is a regular contributor to Triple Pundit and Justmeans, sees it as his mission to help articulate and clarify the problems and challenges confronting our planet at this time, as well as the steadily emerging list of proposed solutions. His uniquely combined engineering and humanities background help to bring both global perspective and analytical detail to bear on the questions at hand.

Follow RP Siegel on Twitter.

Big changes are afoot in the California furniture market. A survey conducted by the Oakland-based Center for Environmental Health and design firm HDR Architecture shows that many furniture manufacturers have dropped, or are in the process of removing chemical flame retardants from their ingredients lists. Their manufacturing changes CEH says, are in response to the state’s recent updates to laws that govern how flammability standards are measured, and whether manufacturers can opt out of including chemical flame retardants in their products.

According to CEH, of 56 office furniture producers surveyed in a recent poll, 12 say they have already removed chemical flame retardants (CFR) from their furniture. This includes Arcadia and Global, which are largely known for their office and home retail products, and David Edward, which produces office and healthcare furniture. Three other companies, Haworth, Martin Battrud and Herman Miller, say they expect to be CFR-free by 2015. Eight others said they are planning to eliminate the chemicals but needed more time to respond to the survey.

In January Technical Bulletin 117-2013 went into effect, removing the requirements for manufacturing companies to include CFRs in their products. In turn, changes were made to the way that furniture is tested for flammability. A mandatory smolder test now determines whether the product is fire-safe, rather than whether it contains specified flame retardants. The smolder test also encourages manufacturers to seek out outer materials that tend to be more flame resistant, like wool, hemp or plastics, and to move away from those materials that aren’t as flame resistant. Materials with denser weaves and more impermeable surfaces tend to reduce the smolder capability, and reduce the risk of fire.

In an interview earlier this year, CEH Pollution Prevention Co-Director Judy Levin said the regulatory update made sense, since the real question is whether the furniture is liable to catch fire on the outside, not whether the foam inside the furniture will burn.

“The smolder test actually addresses the major cause of fires, which is smoldering sources like cigarettes on fabrics,” said Levin.

The willingness of furniture companies to drop chemical flame retardants from their product ingredients means companies recognize the value of the new standards, says CEH Executive Director Michael Green.

“It’s clear that the market for safer products made without these toxic chemicals is here. Smart companies know that by eliminating these harmful chemicals they can offer safer products that parents and businesses want for our homes and workplaces,” says Green.

Last week the California Senate passed a bill that would require manufacturers to advise consumers when CFRs are included in furniture. SB 1019, which is expected to become mandatory in January 2015 (when TB 117-2013 also becomes mandatory), requires manufactures to clearly label products when the furniture contains specific toxic substances.

Although TB 117 and SB 1019 only apply to furniture sold in California, they are likely to have some impact outside of the state, since many national brands that market in California may decide to simply label their products universally in order to save production costs.

CEH has announced that until TD 117 and SB 1019 are in mandatory effect, consumers that want to find out which companies are manufacturing furniture without chemical flame retardants can find updates on CEH's website.

Earlier this year, California healthcare NGO Kaiser Permanente announced that it would be transitioning to furniture that does not contain chemical flame retardants, signaling a further willingness by companies to endorse the state’s new methods for meeting flammability standards. Kaiser’s Sustainability Officer Kathy Gerwig said Kaiser was pleased with the legislative changes and has been working with its suppliers to drop chemical flame retardants from its furniture.

“We have terrific suppliers and they have been well aware of our desire to move to safer products for a very long time,” said Gerwig, who said she expected increased support of the new standards would eventually encourage others in healthcare and other marketplaces to do the same.

However, many chemical producers aren’t happy with California’s bold legislative changes. In January of this year, the chemical company Chemtura filed suit against the state saying that the new regulations didn’t conform to the state’s Home Furnishings Act. Last week Sacramento County’s Superior Court responded with a tentative ruling that rejected the plaintiff’s court challenge. Chemtura’s approach, the courts said, “certainly produce absurd and untenable results” for state regulators.

The case was scheduled to be heard on Friday, and the court’s final ruling will no doubt be of great interest to both California businesses and those across the nation.

Update: On Friday, Aug. 29 Sacramento County Superior Court made its decision final, rejecting Chemtura's suit against the State of California.

Image: credit: Jeremy Keith

TUI Travel plc, the leisure and travel company and owner of over 220 brands including Thomson and First Choice, has become the first company in the travel industry to be accepted into the Business Integrity Forum of Transparency International UK as a corporate member.

By joining Transparency International UK’s Business Integrity Forum, TUI Travel has become the latest member of a network of major international companies dedicated to ensuring their operations and business dealings are transparent and corruption-free. TUI Travel’s own integrity and anti-corruption compliance programme involves regular assessment against a global benchmark of gold standard practice.

Karis McLarty, director of group compliance, (legal & regulatory) commented: “To be accepted as a partner to the Business Integrity Forum is a great honour, and reflects the work that TUI Travel has done, and continues to do in this regard. To be the first in the travel industry is a fantastic achievement and underlines our commitment to transparency across the business. Leading responsibly within the business and our industry is one of our core values within TUI Travel and this partnership is a testament to that.”

Peter van Veen, director of the business integrity programme, Transparency International UK, added: “We value TUI Travel as a member of the Business Integrity Forum. They have made clear their commitment to ensuring their operations and business dealings are free of corruption in the UK and abroad.”

 

Picture credit: © Glasshoppah | Dreamstime Stock Photos

For 10 years the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) has been on a mission to convert 100 percent of the world’s palm oil into a more sustainable and responsible commodity. It has been a long road, in part because of the world’s rapidly-growing demand for food and businesses’ reluctance to add what they perceive to be additional costs to their supply chains. But RSPO is now making real and measurable progress. Last week the Zurich, Switzerland-based organization announced that the demand for sustainable palm oil is outpacing supply for the first time.

According to RSPO, sales of sustainable oil, based on what the organization traces through supply chains, spiked almost 65 percent during the first two quarters of 2014 compared to last year. That is a total of over 1.1 million metric tons so far this year. Meanwhile sales of RSPO’s certified GreenPalm certificates, which companies can purchase to offset their use of conventionally sourced palm oil, grew by almost 38 percent.

These results bode well for RSPO, which has gained traction in Europe (in part because of directives calling for increased production of biofuels) but has lagged in other parts of the world. Overall demand for palm oil keeps rising for several reasons, including hydrogenated fats being phased out by manufacturers due to health concerns. Palm oil lacks any noticeable scent, boasts a natural preservative effect allowing it to extend the shelf life of food products and produces high yields compared to similar plant-based oils.

But as a result, the demand for palm oil has wreaked environmental impact, especially in southeast Asia. Indonesia and Malaysia combined account for over 90 percent of global palm oil production, with the rest spread between Papua New Guinea, other southeast Asian nations, Latin America and Africa. A host of environmental and social problems have ensued, from land rights violations to deforestation—and the loss of orangutan habitat has caught the attention of many activists who now vigorously protest the production of palm oil.

RSPO now estimates the world’s annual production capacity of certified sustainable oil stands at 18 percent. That figure is impressive considering how difficult and slow it can be for a large company to enact major changes within a supply chain. The Wall Street Journal has noted the change underway in palm oil sourcing, and some of the world’s largest companies are making the shift to RSPO certified palm oil. Kellogg’s, Cargill, and ConAgra are among the recent firms that have committed to sourcing sustainable palm oil. Other companies, including Dr. Bronner’s, source from regions where the orangutan population is not threatened.

Now over half the world’s suppliers have committed to either producing or trading sustainable palm oil, but much work remains to be done: many companies home to some of the world’s most popular brands are still moving too slowly. With some estimates suggesting deforestation is accountable for 20 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, companies can no longer overlook climate change-related risks to their portfolios—and risks from infuriating their stakeholders and in due time, their stakeholders.

Image credit: RSPO

Leon Kaye has lived in Abu Dhabi for the past year and is currently spending some time in Uruguay. Follow him on Instagram and Twitter. Other thoughts of his are on his site, greengopost.com.

In far-flung places around the globe, there are endangered cultural sites in need of preservation, which spurs tourism and economic enrichment in nearby communities. Heritage conservation not only preserves historical record, but it can also open up a previously difficult-to-visit location to travelers and give them a whole new view of the region and its culture.

Tony Wheeler, founder of Lonely Planet and board member of Global Heritage Fund, has been to many "dangerous" sites on the planet, whether they are located in regions where there was a history of civil unrest or environmental hazards. But his aim, along with Vince Michael, executive director of Global Heritage Fund, is to encourage travelers (intrepid and armchair) to expand their horizons and explore these areas, many of which are heritage development sites that ultimately benefit local communities with tourism income.

Global tourism is responsible for 8.7 percent of the world's employment, making it one of the biggest global job creators, according to the 2012 report, The Comparative Economic Impact of Travel and Tourism, by the World Travel & Tourism Council. "At 9.1 percent of global GDP, Travel & Tourism generates more economic output than automotive manufacturing (7.9 percent), mining (8.0 percent) and chemicals manufacturing (9.0 percent)."

“Travel is a hugely important part of the world’s economy. It’s the way we meet other people and realize that other people are not just the tales we read in the newspaper and see on television screens, but they’re real human beings,” says Wheeler.

Recently, Wheeler and Michael shared their experiences visiting locations in Colombia, Turkey and Laos. Wheeler says that even destinations that are thought to be hazardous are navigable as long as travelers educate themselves and take precautions, “although the potential dangers are never as bad as people think they might be.”

In the 1970s and 1980s, Colombia had a negative reputation for drug trafficking which deterred many tourists from visiting. In the past 10 years, Michael explained, the drug trafficking has been rooted out and replaced with a growing tourist economy, boosted by native citizens acting as guides and providing lodging. Michael and Wheeler went on a three-day trek to Ciudad Perdida to view the stone platforms and stairways throughout the jungle.

“I never felt threatened by anything except the humidity and mud,” Michael laughed.

The accessibility of Ciudad Perdida is due to collaboration by the Global Heritage Fund, USAID (United States Agency for International Development) and the Colombian government.

Some locations were inaccessible in the past due to environmental concerns, like Plain of Jars, Laos, a 2,000-year-old heritage site containing thousands of ancient stone cylinders. For decades tourists were not able to visit due to abandoned land mines from the Vietnam War along the Ho Chi Minh Trail. Upon the removal of the land mines, tourists were better able to reach some of the Plain of Jars sites. Global Heritage Fund has also been instrumental in training locals on the importance of conservation and preservation.

"One of the things we do at Global Heritage Fund is identify these sites early on when they first become accessible and help build the local economy around the heritage site. It’s an opportunity when things start to change.

I always like to use the example that we talk about community economic development and we can say, well, let’s build a factory there, build some shops or offices, but those are things that you can move to another place that might give you a better deal or have cheaper land or something like that. A heritage site is of a place, it’s not going to move, so if you can make that heritage site active economically, it’s a sustainable form of economic development,” says Michael.

Wheeler adds that while the sites can be important academically, in order for them to be a long-term, sustainable economic tool, the local community must be involved. “You need the local community to feel that ‘this is something we own, it’s our local site, we’re the people that live here, we want to protect it.’ And part of the reason is that they are making an income from it. They are running the guesthouse, the café, their son is a guide and their children work at the site - they have a real involvement with this,” says Wheeler.

The Global Heritage Fund works with local government and other partners to restore a site, then hands it off to be maintained locally. While the organization remains involved in the conservation work that is ongoing, partners and the community are responsible for moving things forward.

"When we got there [Göbekli Tepe, Turkey, a site that is 5,000 years older than Stonehenge], they had started excavating maybe fifteen years earlier and there was no conservation going on, and moreover there wasn’t any basic infrastructure. There wasn’t a fence around the site, there wasn’t any cover to protect the stones from eroding in the weather. We did those things and now we’ve leveraged the European Union to come in at a very high funding level to build a permanent cover and the local community has built a museum. It’s a very good example of how we try to get in there before it’s recognized, do the important work and get the community involved," Michael says.

"Global Heritage Fund has a detailed project selection process methodology that is called Preservation By Design that combines conservation and planning with community development and partnerships," Michael explained, "so we judge our projects based on those criteria. We look for developing regions of the world, places that need the investment or economic spinoff, and we look at threatened sites, whether they’ve been newly uncovered or looted, we look at world heritage, then we look at what are the possibilities for bringing our expertise and conservation planning and community development and what partners are there."

Although the influx of tourism is usually a welcome economic boost, there are sometimes barriers, Michael says. Bureaucracy in the form of permits and red tape and regions with conflicts that are too dangerous to overcome can halt a project. Also, being a foreign NGO can be both an advantage and disadvantage. Local politics can cause the organization to be frozen out, but at other times a foreign NGO can serve as a neutral outside party and smooth over local conflicts.

In all their travels, do Michael and Wheeler have a favorite site? They both say they are intrigued by an emerging project in rural Romania. Wheeler says the villages are "just beautiful," but people are leaving them and moving to the cities, so they are in danger of being abandoned. Global Heritage Fund is hoping to breathe some life back into them, which brings up another concern, Michael says. "In some ways the biggest threat to heritage can be development." The organization will have to walk a fine line to preserve their charm while bringing people to the Transylvanian countryside.

There is no shortage of sites being considered for preservation projects, Michael says. As a board member and life-long traveler, Wheeler sees a huge potential for Global Heritage Fund to grow and bring attention, and travelers, to deserving sites all around the world.

Image credits: Ciudad Perdida - Stefaan Poortman. Plain of Jars - Dan Thompson. Photos used with permission from Global Heritage Fund.

The Heritage Foundation-backed National Center for Policy Analysis pumps out a steady stream of misinformation about climate change, continuously reinforcing the smokescreen behind which billions of dollars in fossil fuel profits continue to be made. Generally speaking, it’s best to ignore them, figuring that giving them attention only helps them do their job. But this latest item is so egregious, that someone needs to call them out on it.

Numerous international aid agencies, as well as ratings services like Standard & Poors, have stated that the areas of South Asia and Southeast Asia are among the most vulnerable to the impacts of global warming.

Yet this article, entitled “Calming Fears of Climate Change in South and Southeast Asia,” assures its readers that not only is there nothing to worry about, but things are going to get far better, since the increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is causing a boom in food production.

Their source is none other than Craig Idso, a former executive of Peabody Energy, the world’s largest private-sector coal company. Idso reports that South Asian food productivity has increased 7.5-fold in the past years, and attributes that, without evidence, to the increased presence of carbon dioxide in the air.

The increase in agricultural productivity is real enough. It is sometimes referred to as the Green Revolution. Most scholars attribute the Asian increase to four things: fertilizers, technology, labor and livestock. Irrigation has also played a major role in other regions. Indeed, just as in the period from 1980 to 2007, the utilization of fertilizers and tractors increased more than three-fold in places like Vietnam and Thailand recently, which is in line with the increase in productivity. None of them attribute it to the presence of increased CO2 in the air. Attempting to make this connection sounds a lot like what Idso has previously written about climate science, saying, “A weak short-term correlation between CO2 and temperature proves nothing about causation.” So where is the cause-and-effect linkage here?

Indeed, there have been some laboratory studies, which this brief fails to mention, showing increased plant growth -- under controlled conditions -- in a CO2-rich environment. The effect, which has been small, seems to favor arid conditions. But what happens when you take those conditions out to the field seems to be quite different. The enhancing effect of the extra carbon seems to preferentially affect indigenous, local species -- otherwise known as weeds.

But that’s okay. After all, there are folks who are happy to sell you more herbicides. But, unfortunately, there are other issues that come into play.

For one thing, increasing the amount of CO2 in the air also increases the plants’ need for water and fertilizer. Fossil records show that in earlier times, increased CO2 led to sharply increased insect predation of plants. For some reason, plants grown under these conditions attract more insects. Hmmm. This is starting to sound like an agricultural chemical company’s dream come true. But it’s not so good for the rest of us. Then, of course, there are the climate-related impacts: heat, drought, shifting growing seasons, migration of both defender and pest species.

The World Bank has also studied the issue, and they are extremely concerned about these vulnerable regions. In particular, they cite concerns over food security in sub-Saharan Africa, devastation of coastal areas in Southeast Asia, and food production impacts due to fluctuating rain patterns in South Asia.

Perhaps, instead of trying to sweep the issue under the rug and convince people to ignore any pangs of conscience about people starving overseas, it would be better to consider what can be done to avoid this. Initiatives like the U.N. FAO’s Climate Smart Agriculture program offer much in the way of helpful information for dealing with the challenges that are already being felt. Just ask any of the 870 million people in the world -- that’s 1 in 8 -- who are chronically undernourished.

Our world is in transition. Our agricultural system needs to respond to the three simultaneous challenges of ensuring food security for a growing population, while adapting to the changes resulting from an increasingly unstable climate, and, wherever possible, contributing whatever it can to climate change mitigation. That will require food systems to become more innovative, more efficient in their use of water and other inputs, and more resilient to whatever changes and surprises an unstable climate might send their way.

Image credit: sandy ford: Flickr Creative Commons

RP Siegel, PE, is an author, inventor and consultant. He has written for numerous publications ranging from Huffington Post to Mechanical Engineering. He and Roger Saillant co-wrote the successful eco-thriller Vapor Trails. RP, who is a regular contributor to Triple Pundit and Justmeans, sees it as his mission to help articulate and clarify the problems and challenges confronting our planet at this time, as well as the steadily emerging list of proposed solutions. His uniquely combined engineering and humanities background help to bring both global perspective and analytical detail to bear on the questions at hand.

Follow RP Siegel on Twitter.

By Nathan Edwards

Information and communication technology (ICT) first made an impact on the life of Fernando Botelho when he was in his late teens.  Then, Botelho was a recent high school graduate suffering from increasingly impaired vision.  Now, he is the founder of F123, a non-government organization developing low-cost open-source assistive technology for the blind.

“In high school I was ranked 11th in a class of 43,” Botelho recalls.  When he entered college he was given access to assistive technology and it instantly impacted his success, “instead of 11th I was fourth, and instead of a class of 43 it was a freshman class of 904.”  The qualitative impact that the right technology can have on someone’s education and life left a lasting impression on Botehlo, “same person, same brain, same level of education, but suddenly you are in the top percent”.

Although Botelho was granted the assistance of ICT’s in education, he does not represent the majority of disabled people. Eighty percent of people with disabilities around the world live in developing countries and even in wealthy economies such as the U.S., many  cannot afford the software.

While working for the United Nations Agency in Switzerland, Botelho realized he wanted to take what had created opportunities in his life and make it more financially accessible to others.  He addressed the issue of cost by developing an open-source version of this technology.

His organization, F123, has created a software that can be customized to any computer.  “We identify free and open-source technologies that are effective and we adapt them for use by the blind in the context of school and work,” explained Botelho.  The system includes common software applications, an electronic reader and screen magnifier, educational materials for teachers, and training instructions all costing 2 to 5 percent of the price of a standard e-reader.

Open-source software is technology produced and distributed including its source code. The source code acts as a recipe for the product allowing any person or entity to understand how the software operates and make improvements to it.  According to Botelho, “there are clearly monopolistic practices going on in the software world,” and rather than build his product on top of a monopoly, he wants it to be freely accessed.

F123 has had great success in producing a low-cost, trilingual software used by people all over the world.

However, the question remains: To what extent can ICT’s like F123 help create equal opportunities in education?

“Just technology on its own does not really level the playing field, but it is a very large piece of the puzzle," Botelho said. “Education does not need products; education needs strategy."  The products are just part of the strategy; “the rest of it is training for teachers and material that insures that the products and services are available to everyone."

Fernando Botelho has found a way to implement ICT’s in education for disabled persons, however they can be also be utilized in other areas of education.

For any innovative use of ICT to succeed, “it has to fit in the social context of where it is going to be used,” Botelho stated, “using it should not be a burden neither financially, culturally, nor technically.”  He believes the most common error with ICT initiatives is that people get too caught up in the hardware and software and don't understand how to implement the product.

F123 is headquartered in the developing nation of Brazil, a nation where ICT's are becoming increasingly popular in non-formal education.  International non-government organization, Ashoka has partnered with the Institituto Embratel Claro to learn more about how ICT’s can help bridge gaps in education caused by physical, social, or geographic barriers.  These two organizations have initiated a challenge called, Tecnologia é Ponte.

If you are interested in joining a dialog about the inclusion of ICT's or learning more about the competition you can visit the Ashoka Changemakers' website.

Image credit: 1) Ashoka - Innovators for the public 2) F123

Nathan Edwards is a sophomore Sociology and Anthropology major with a concentration in cross-cultural studies at Carleton College in Northfield, MN.  This summer, he is working as an intern with the international non-government organization, Ashoka, in its São Paulo, Brazil office while conducting anthropological research on the NGO sector. Nathan is interested in cross-cultural journalism and community development, specifically, in developing countries.  He would like to pursue a career where he studies the varying communities, cultures and social dynamics within a nation and then illuminates the diverse perspectives.

Nestle, the global food giant known for its Nestle Crunch Bars, announced its new animal welfare program that will eliminate some common but cruel practices from its global food supply chain. Those cruel practices include confining sows in gestation crates, calves in veal crates and egg-laying chickens in cages. Nestle’s new guidelines also require that veterinary practices be implemented for farm animals that reduce pain or avoid practices that cause pain. Dehorning cows is one example. (Cow horns are removed so they can’t injure other cows.)

The announcement came after Nestle signed a partnership agreement with World Animal Protection International, making it the first major food company to form an international partnership with an animal welfare organization. World Animal Protection has been working with Nestle to improve its Responsible Sourcing Guideline, which all suppliers must follow as part of the company’s supplier code.

The new policy means that the hundreds of thousands of farms within Nestle’s supply chain have to comply with more humane animal welfare standards. When Nestle identifies a violation, it will work with the supplier to improve the farm animals’ treatment. If a company will not comply or show improvement, it will not be a supplier any longer. Nestle states on its website that it will “gradually” implement these requirements across their extended global supply chain.

“Our decision to work with Nestlé is based upon their clear commitment to improving animal welfare and the lasting change this can have on millions of farm animals around the world,” said Mike Baker, chief executive of World Animal Protection.

The drivers behind the shift away from cruel farm animal practices

For the past few years, a number of companies have made announcements regarding phasing out cruel farm animal practices from its supply chains. Last year, I talked to Josh Balk, director of corporate policy for the Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS) Farm Animal Protection department. When I asked him what is driving companies to phase out practices like the use of gestation crates, he said, “In most cases, when presented with the facts about gestation crates, they work to eliminate them.” HSUS works with large food companies, sitting down with them and talking about certain farm practices. “That’s usually all it takes for companies to make great strides,” Balk said.

Balk cited three drivers for the shift away from confinement methods and other cruel practices: legislation, meat reduction efforts and consumer demand. A number of states have passed laws to protect farm animals. Many consumers are eating less meat. Meatless Monday is a good example. Some companies support Meatless Monday, including Burger King. Not only are consumers eating less meat, but they are also in favor of more humane practices. As Balk put it, the treatment of farm animals “causes a more visceral reaction.”

Image credit: Wikipedia

By Shannon Houde

If you are on the market for a new job, you will no doubt have noticed the recruitment revolution taking place online. The act of taking a red marker to ads in the classifieds section has long been replaced with scrolling, clicking, uploading, copying and pasting to the ubiquitous recruitment websites and jobs boards. The only thing that's stayed the same is the crossed fingers and anticipation with which each application is sent. But for the savvy sustainability jobseeker, even that is beginning to change.

These days, everyone from the largest multinationals to the smallest businesses can access an international talent pool without even posting an opening externally. This has turned the tables completely. Modern jobseekers are the ones doing the advertising, while hiring managers are the ones doing the seeking.

All this has made the process of finding and securing a job a much more targeted, strategic activity. If you want to stay ahead of the game and find the best roles, you need to know what recruiters are thinking, what they're looking for, and where. And you need to identify and communicate your niche.

A new global survey from Deloitte has found that 60 percent of companies have updated or are currently updating their talent-sourcing strategies and another 27 percent are considering changes. "Companies are looking for new ways to access and engage people," it says, "including through joint ventures, contracting, freelancers, and open source talent." And with good reason: many companies self-report underperformance in human resources and talent program capabilities.

With this in mind, don't you think it's time you updated your job seeking strategy too? Here are the top three new hiring trends and my tips on how to hack them for a dream job in sustainability.

1. Hiring from within

This is a big one that we're seeing more and more of in the industry. But how can you go for a job that hasn't even been posted? The trick is to get connected. Whether through face-to-face contact, informational interviews or LinkedIn relationships, an internal referral to an advertised role - or better, an internal posting that isn't advertised – increases your chances of getting to the top of the pile by 55%.

Many people think of networking as a dirty word (as I explored in my recent Triple Pundit article), particularly the face-to-face kind. It can feel intimidating, kinda risky. But think of it like an investment: the higher the risk, the greater the potential return. Getting out there and meeting people - whether at conferences or on campus - is a tried and tested route to recruitment success for both parties. The Deloitte report proves this, showing that companies "aggressively deploy referral marketing programs and send their key executives to universities and other critical sources of new talent around the world."

If the above is not practical for you however, look out for other ways to build relationships with key players in the companies you'd kill to work for. Social media is great for this whereas informational interviews are now a bit passé as people just don’t have time to honor them. Another idea that's gaining traction is the one-page job proposal - a proactive, compelling tool that can help you to create your own job.

2. Social tools

As the aforementioned Deloitte report points out, "as the battlefield for scarce talent continues to shift, talent acquisition is becoming more like marketing every day." Too true: 62% of executives saying that they rely on social tools for recruitment and staffing. Companies are using online platforms from LinkedIn to Facebook, Twitter to Glassdoor, Google to Yahoo, to find talent and market their companies to "passive job candidates".

With this in mind, you need to make sure that your online profiles are recruitment-ready, and LinkedIn is the obvious place to start. Reach out as well by engaging with relevant groups, forums and alumni networks in the sustainability space on platforms like Google Circles and LinkedIn groups.

3. Online talent communities

Another innovative tactic is companies' use
of online platforms and social media sites to build talent “communities”. These communities comprise full-time employees, retired workers, independent contractors, and everyone in between - including potential staff members like you.

AT&T’s talent community, for example, attracts potential team members by providing a forum to talk about mobile computing and telecommunications, while online retailer Zappos has established an inventive careers portal through which opens up a two-way communication with the company that could lead to a job. Look out for online talent communities or careers portals at the companies you want to work for and make sure you put your best foot forward when engaging with them - you never know where it might lead.

Good luck in your job search! For some bespoke advice on career change navigation and personal positioning, contact me for a free 15-minute coaching session.

Image credit: Fran Villena, via Flickr/ CC BY

Shannon Houde is founder of Walk of Life Consulting, the first international career coaching business focused solely on the environmental, sustainability and corporate responsibility fields.

Editor's Note: This post originally appeared on the Green Impact blog.

Sierra Club’s Annual Cool Schools rankings are out.  And the winner is … the University of California, Irvine. Congratulations, Anteaters!

After assessing the methodology and rankings of the top winners, compared to the others, I offer the following six tips for increasing your ranking as a green school:

1. Participate in STARS;


2. Tackle waste reduction, energy use, and water use;


3. Create a sustainability hub;


4. Craft and promote success stories;


5. Tackle sustainable food; and


6. Don’t shy away from SRI.

1. Participate in STARS

UCI, and the other top winners, are a participant in Sustainability Tracking, Assessment & Rating System (STARS), a transparent, self-reporting framework for colleges and universities to measure their sustainability performance. American University, ranked No. 2, is STARS Gold rated.  The Sierra Club rankings are based on a survey, officially called the Campus Sustainability Data Collector.  Schools did not need to be members of AASHE’s STARS program to use the collector, however, I am sure reporting of the data is much easier for campuses that have already gathered the appropriate data into the STARS system.  Click here to learn more about how the ratings were scored.

2. Tackle waste reduction, energy use and water use

Based on UCI’s scores, it is clear that they have done an exceptional job of tackling waste reduction and reducing energy and water use. These are three low-hanging fruit areas that other universities can easily tackle. Green Mountain College ranked

3. Create a sustainability hub

All of the top winners have a stand alone sustainability Website. UCI has a stand alone sustainability hub, making it easy for faculty, staff, and students, as well as the community, to assess sustainability-related information.  Its site is divided into the following sections:

4. Craft and promote success stories

American University’s sustainability Website includes a news section that highlights success stories.  It also makes great use of social media to help increase engagement and promote successes.Dickenson College’s Website also does a great job of promoting success stories.

5. Tackle sustainable food

All top ten winners captured at least 30 out of 50 points in the category of food.  Points are given for purchasing local food, offering vegan options, and composting. American University’s program includes a weekly farmers’ market, a community garden, community supported agriculture, and sustainable food purchasing.

6. Don’t shy away from socially responsible investment

The campuses that are bold enough to authentically tackle socially responsible investing (SRI) have the potential to earn 70 points. Only University of South Florida and Green Mountain College (GMC) earned the complete 70 points in this category. In response to student request, GMC has instituted a new SRI policy to guide its investments in a responsible manner and create new educational opportunities. The Socially Responsible Investment Advisory Committee (SRIAC) was formed in the Spring 2010 to increase transparency and stakeholder involvement. Learn more about GMC’s investment portfolio here.

Images courtesy of the Sierra Club and the University of California, Irvine