Search

By Hannah Corbett

The use of renewable and sustainable energy sources is growing worldwide. Subsequently, new technologies for sustainable energy are ever-emerging, and some are rather unusual. Outside of the more commonplace solar, tidal and wind energy sources, researchers have uncovered some uncommon ways of producing and harnessing renewable energy, and decreasing worldwide dependency on fossil fuels.

Anaerobic Digestion – Anaerobic digestion is slowly becoming a more ordinary method of energy production for both businesses and households alike. It involves harnessing the gasses that are produced as a result of biodegradation. Anaerobic digestion can be used on both large and small scales -- even for everyday household food waste, creating a useful form of waste management for homeowners.

Algae – Algae, yes the slimy green stuff you find at the bottom of a pond, contains cells which produce oil. Half of its body weight, in fact, is lipid oil. Lipid oil can be harvested and converted into fuel. The resulting biodiesel is more clean and efficient than petroleum, as well as more sustainable.

Although there are a few obstacles stopping algae fuel from being utilized on a huge scale, much research is being done to overcome these problems. The space that’s required to grow enough algae to produce a significant amount of oil, for example, is one obstacle. As is that fact that conditions, such as temperature, must be exact to enable optimum growth, and some of these conditions may be difficult to control.

Chocolate – There are a few different ways in which chocolate has been used to produce clean energy. The waste left over from a chocolate factory in the U.K. was fed to E. coli bacteria, which resulted in the production of hydrogen. Hydrogen is one of the cleanest fuels, it’s only by-product being water. Fat from chocolate was also converted into biofuel and used to power a racing car, which reached 130 miles per hour on the racetrack.

The shells of cocoa beans can also be converted into biofuel: A chocolate factory and power plant in New Hampshire recently joined forces to include cocoa bean shells, many of which are produced as waste from the chocolate factory, as an additional fuel source. Read more about it here.

Dance floors – The sustainable dance floor converts kinetic energy into electricity. Kinetic energy is generated by movement, such as people walking or dancing. The electricity is used to power the LED lights in the floor itself. Excess electricity can also be fed back the grid and sold, much in the same way excess energy from a solar panel might be, or it could be used to power other systems within the same building.

The technology used in the sustainable dance floor could potentially be applied to other situations and locations, such as a bus train station for example, to make the most of kinetic energy generated by movement.

Space-based solar power – Solar power has become increasingly popular in recent years, so much so that even some road signs are powered by the sun. But, solar power as we know it may take a big step in the future.

Space-based solar power has yet to happen, but the idea has been around for years. What it is, basically, is the concept of launching solar panels into space to harvest the sun’s energy, rather than doing so down here on Earth. This method would require no water or space on the Earth’s surface and would have zero carbon emission and produce no waste. One of the key factors stalling the launch of space-based solar is how the energy would be wirelessly transmitted back to Earth, and also how much the whole thing would cost.

Sound waves – Sounds can be converted in electricity through something called piezoelectricity. Piezoelectric materials generate energy when put under some form of mechanical stress, such as a sound wave. It is thought that piezoelectric materials can be utilised in electronics, such as mobile phones, to produce self-charging devices.

Zinc – In 2012, a New Jersey startup developed a type of zinc-air battery that it claimed could revolutionize renewable energy storage. Claimed by Eos Energy Storage to be twice as dense as a lithium-ion battery, the zinc-air battery could potentially replace natural gas 'peakers' (or plants that only turn on during peak demand), allowing for fully renewable power. The startup recently raised $15 million in Series B round funding to develop the technology, which also has potential for the electric vehicle industry.

Some of these sustainable energy technologies are still in development stages and not ready to be properly utilised, yet. However, there are a number of methods, such as the aforementioned wind, solar and tidal technologies, which are widely available to commercial and domestic environments. Even when renewable energy is not easily accessible, you can still play your part by supporting green energy suppliers and reducing your energy consumption as much as possible.

Image credit: caveman_92223, Flickr

Hannah Corbett is a writer specialising in all things green and renewable energy. Follow her on Twitter, or connect on Google+ to keep up to date with all the latest news in green technology.

By Nathan Edwards

The world of international development has been regularly challenged by growing social issues. The need has emerged for institutions other than the government to address many of these matters. Ashoka is one non-government organization that has taken the reins.

Ashoka houses a peer network of social entrepreneurs who work to create systematic change to global issues by means of public policy. The organization has brought together thought leaders from both the private and public sector who share a vision for a future where everyone has the ability to ignite change.

The international non-government organization was founded by Bill Drayton in 1980 in India. It has since expanded around the world with a network of 3,000 fellows present in 70 countries and a headquarters in Washington, D.C. I am privileged to be working as an intern in the Ashoka Brasil office located in São Paulo this summer.

When the Ashoka Brasil office was launched in 1986, it began its acquisition of what is now one of the largest networks of social entrepreneurs around the world. Through the years, the development of the social sectors within this nation has, to an extent, been largely affected by the innovative solutions of these social entrepreneurs.

I have quickly learned that this visionary engine is successfully altering our conception of what it means to be a world citizen. It works behind the scenes in the development and reformation of social values in areas of economics, health, human rights, civic participation, environment and education. Yet, rather than imposing change upon a population who may or may not desire it, Ashoka provides the tools necessary for both the social entrepreneur and the community to take their own action.

The means of enacting this change is entrusted to Ashoka’s network of fellows and their projects, 357 of which have been selected in Brasil alone. Candidates for fellowship undergo a comprehensive selection process that evaluates each individual based on the following criteria: their new innovative idea, social impact, entrepreneurship, creativity and ethical fiber. This evaluation lasts a minimum of six months and consists of a number of interviews from both local Ashoka fellows and global Ashoka staff.  Only a handful of fellows are selected each year.

Currently, 54.6 percent of Brasil’s fellows operate in the São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro areas, and 24 percent administer projects pertaining to human rights issues.

In 2008, the financial crisis that impacted the world also brought challenges to the social sector, including Ashoka. Upwards of 60 international offices, previously funded by the headquarters in Washington, D.C., were now asked to be self-sustainable. Maybe more than others, Brasil’s office was challenged by this request due to a culture of philanthropy in the nation that is not yet as developed as in Europe and the United States.

During this period, the office put its efforts into venture fellowship and developing networks of executive strategic partners.  This altered focus was in an effort to reach Ashoka’s next vision coined, “Everyone a Changemaker World."  They are working with mavens, businesses, philanthropists and fellows alike to disseminate what Ashoka believes are the necessary skills to becoming a change-maker.  These skills include empathy, collaborative leadership and interdisciplinary teamwork.  Ashoka Brasil is working hard to be a leading generator of entrepreneurial answers to the social issues of contemporary society.

Now the office is looking to focus its search and selection of fellows into the north and northeastern regions of Brazil. Although including 14 states of Brazil’s 26, the north and northeast regions only account for around 24 percent of Ashoka’s fellows. This area is notorious for its high levels of poverty and limited investment.

For the next panel of fellow selection, Ashoka Brasil is looking to present northeastern candidates focusing on issues of informal education and economic development. In order to do this, the office is creating a network of nominators attuned to the this region’s trends of development who can identify potential fellows .

Leading Ashoka Brasil’s efforts is current office director, Claudia Duran.  Duran began at Ashoka in August of 2012 as manager of Ashoka’s partnership with global management consulting firm McKinsey & Co. before acquiring her current title in September of 2013.

Duran has been working hard with her team to develop a local strategy aligned with the NGO's global mission: “At Ashoka Brasil we constantly search and support social innovators in all areas, working closely with social entrepreneurs from our network, companies and civil society.”

Duran admits that there are always challenges, “It has been difficult to do fundraising in Brasil, there is a very different culture for supporting social sector initiatives.” She believes that, “Ashoka still needs to be better positioned in the private sector and needs to find mavens that can disseminate and support our work.”

Yet, Duran is optimistic about the future of Ashoka in Brasil. "I would like to see the Fellow network much more active, interacting with Ashoka and amongst themselves,” Duran said, “I also would like to better position Ashoka Brasil in the market so to have more strategic partners in the private sector supporting Ashoka and Fellow initiatives.”  Simultaneously she wants to work, “collaboratively with these partners to help develop their corporate social responsibility strategies.”

Ashoka has been the world leader of social entrepreneurship since its establishment. Now, the organization is looking to encourage others to continue to support social entrepreneurs and their initiatives. The goal of the organization is to influence a world where everyone has awareness of the challenges that surround them and the capacity to ignite change.

 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 finds a means to illuminate the diverse perspectives. 

By Scot Case

Sustainable purchasing is an effort to buy greener, healthier, and more sustainable products from greener, more sustainable companies. It is based on the simple concept that every single purchase has hidden human health, environmental, and social impacts and that it is possible to reduce adverse impacts by buying better products.

The hidden impacts occur throughout a product’s supply chain: from the point raw materials are scraped out of or harvested from the earth, to the preparation of the raw materials, the manufacturing processes, the packaging, use and ultimate disposal of the product, including all of the transportation requirements throughout the lifecycle. The cumulative total of the impacts defines the product’s sustainability footprint.

Sustainable purchasing means buying products with improved sustainability footprints that also meet price, performance and quality requirements.

Consumer tools

At the consumer level, sustainable purchasing involves shopping for products with specific environmental or social benefits, particularly those products that have been certified to environmental leadership standards.
Some of the environmental attributes of most interest to consumers include recycled-content, energy efficiency, indoor air quality, biodegradability and safer materials.

Consumers rely on various environmental labels to help them identify the greener, healthier products, including:

• ECOLOGO: Certifies products meeting environmental leadership standards based on multiple environmental considerations and requires third-party auditing. It covers products such as cleaning chemicals, mobile phones, tissue and copy paper, paint, toys and more.

• Energy Star: Identifies the most energy efficient products as defined by the U.S. federal government and is now backed by independent third-party testing.

• EPEAT: Lists computers, printers, monitors, and televisions meeting consensus-based environmental standards. Some of the listed products have been independently certified as meeting the relevant standards by organizations like UL Environment.

• Fair Trade: Covers agricultural-based products like fruits and vegetables, cocoa, coffee, sugar, natural apparel and other products. The label indicates, as certified by Fair Trade auditors, that the farmers and other workers are paid a fair price and enjoy safe working conditions.

• Forest Stewardship Council (FSC): Recognizes forest products, including lumber, paper, and furniture made from wood that has been harvested in a more sustainable manner based on certification to the FSC standard.

• GREENGUARD: Certifies products based on independent laboratory tests that meet tough indoor air quality requirements to minimize indoor air pollution from chemical product emissions. It covers products like carpets, paints, baby cribs, mattresses, furniture, electronics and cleaning products.

Professional purchasing tools

Consumers are not the only ones interested in buying greener, healthier products. Many organizations including large and small companies, governments, colleges and universities and healthcare organizations are also looking to make more sustainable choices.

For many of these organizations, responsible purchasing is more than “doing the right thing.” Green purchasing priorities are frequently connected with specific business objectives like reducing operational costs by buying more energy or water efficient equipment, more fuel efficient vehicles, and reducing packaging waste from suppliers.

Responsible purchasing can also be connected with specific corporate environmental and social commitments such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions, increasing supplier diversity or buying from local businesses.

In addition to the environmental labels used by consumers, professional purchasers have additional tools to facilitate responsible purchasing. One important tool for many purchasers is the formal sustainability purchasing policies organizations use to publicly declare their intent.

A few examples of public sustainable purchasing commitments include:

• A series of Presidential Executive Orders, issued by every president since President George H.W. Bush first required the federal government to buy recycled content products in 1991, requires federal government purchasers to buy greener products. The most recent Executive Order signed by President Barack Obama requires 95 percent of government purchases meet environmental requirements.

• Numerous state and local governments have similar green purchasing policies.

• Private sector companies like McDonald’s have been making green purchasing commitments since its 1990 commitment to buy recycled content products. Its green purchasing commitments continue today with pledges to buy more sustainable beef, coffee, palm oil and fish.

• Other companies such as Patagonia, Starbucks and Walmart also have been working to reduce their sustainability footprints through better purchasing.

• Colleges and universities including American University, Arizona State University, Duke University, Harvard University and others are making similar commitments.

• A group of green purchasing leaders recently launched the Sustainable Purchasing Leadership Council, which includes numerous companies promoting greener purchasing. The group is developing tools and resources to make sustainable purchasing easier.

In addition to public commitments and environmental labels to facilitate their sustainable purchasing practices, professional purchasers also rely on environmental product declarations.

An environmental product declaration (EPD) is a standardized reporting format for validated sustainability data. It is a report analogous to the nutrition label on a box of cereal. It provides purchasers with key metrics such as the greenhouse gas emissions associated with a product or the water intensity of the manufacturing process. It can also include information on human health and social impacts.

While too complicated for the typical consumer, EPDs are being used by professional purchasers to help organizations measure and improve their sustainability footprints.

Caveat emptor viridis (Translation: Let the green buyer beware)

Greenwashing, making false or misleading environmental claims about a product, service or company, continues to be a challenge for people trying to buy greener products.

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which enforces U.S. truth-in-advertising law based on its recently revised Green Guides, continues to identify companies making misleading environmental claims.

Recent FTC cases include:

• A plastic lumber company that overstated the recycled-content percentage of its products.


• A plastics company making misleading and unsubstantiated claims about the biodegradability of its products.


• A diaper company deceiving consumers about the compostability, biodegradability, and other environmental features of its products.

Other FTC cases identified misleading environmental claims for mattresses, bamboo fabrics and energy efficient windows and shuttered a fake environmental label.

Anyone interested in buying greener, more sustainable products should look for independent, third-party proof from well-known and well-respected organizations for any environmental or human health claim.

Summary

A variety of tools exist to make sustainable purchasing easier for individual consumers and large organizations. They make it possible to leverage individual purchasing decisions into a powerful economic force that can build a better world.

And it is working.

Companies chasing profits from sustainability-minded customers are now competing to improve their own sustainability and to make more sustainable products. Buying greener, healthier, more sustainable products is one way we can all improve our own lives while contributing to the greater good.

Image courtesy of UL Environment

Scot Case has been researching and promoting effective green marketing and responsible purchasing since 1993 and was co-author of the original “Sins of Greenwashing” study and advisor to subsequent editions. He is the Market Development Director for UL Environment. Contact him via Twitter: @scotcase, email: scot.case@ul.com or in Reading, PA, at 610-781-1684. This article represents the views of the author only and do not necessarily reflect the views of UL Environment or its affiliates or subsidiaries. This article is for general information purposes only and is not meant to convey legal or other professional advice.

As part of Triple Pundit's sponsored series with International Paper, last week we had a chance to pick the brains of Jeff Shumaker, the company's Manager of Regulatory Affairs, and now we get to share some of his insights into waste management with you. IP has set a medium-term waste management goal, with the aim of reducing the amount of waste sent to landfills by 30 percent by 2020.

Modern papermaking faces a particular set of waste stream challenges, but given the waste management progress documented by other manufacturers the goal of 30 percent seems reasonable. However, Shumaker also articulated a pathway for his company -- and perhaps yours -- to achieve a much more ambitious goal of achieving zero manufacturing waste.

The road to zero waste: It's all about the fiber

The aggressive goal of zero waste came up at the end of our conversation, so let's backtrack a bit to the beginning.

Shumaker started off by emphasizing that in the modern papermaking business, it's all about the fiber, which in the case of IP is derived principally from the southern pine and hardwood species.

The ability to separate usable fibers from the rest of the tree with the greatest possible efficiency is clearly a bottom-line goal. For IP it is also a moving goal, as new technologies and new strategies arise to provide new opportunities for making the process more efficient.

Here's how Shumaker describes the "atmosphere of continuing improvement" that the company has adopted:

We've permeated our corporate culture with manufacturing excellence ...We are constantly re-evaluating individual processes and parts of processes to reduce the amount of fiber that is lost.

Manufacturing excellence

The use of the phrase "manufacturing excellence" is no accident, and it's worth emphasizing again that what Shumaker is talking about is an approach to manufacturing that involves more than simply switching on the machines in the morning and oiling them up every now and then.

In addition to ongoing R&D, manufacturing excellence refers to continual, systematic evaluation using analytic, interactive tools. That adds up to a significant, ongoing investment in process improvement.

The emphasis on analytic tools won't surprise those of you who are familiar with the Green Button initiative, a nationwide public-private partnership with utility companies and other stakeholders. Green Button is aimed at providing building owners and managers with standardized data-based tools for improving energy efficiency.

Managing out waste

As for the specifics, IP has several interlocking areas of focus for waste management.

Papermaking involves water, and one significant waste stream is the "sludge" of solids, including uncaptured fiber, left over from treating a mill's wastewater. The current practice is to dispose mill sludge in landfills. Since the cost of landfill disposal is high and growing, there is a direct incentive to find new ways to capture more usable fiber before it gets into the wastewater stream.

Another area is chip consistency, which is pretty much what it sounds like: achieving a uniform size at the initial stage of the process, when raw timber is milled into chips.

That might not seem like a particular area of concern, but keep in mind that separating fiber from wood is both a chemical and a mechanical process. Having chips of a uniform size helps to ensure a more efficient use of chemicals, energy and time. The end result is the ability to use more fiber in paper that otherwise goes back to the wastewater area.

Another area of focus is energy. This is where IP leverages the essential character of its business, which revolves around biomass.

The plus side is that the bark and lignin (the tough "glue" of wood cells that can't be used for paper) are reclaimed as biomass for fuel, which for IP produces much of the steam and electricity used at a mill.

The downside is that even the most efficient biomass-to-energy operation yields ash, which accounts for another major waste stream for IP.

On the other hand, the mineral-rich biomass ash also provides the company with a substantial opportunity for sustainable disposal, in the form of land application as described by Shumaker:

When it's properly managed and carefully considered, it's natural to get it back into a field, or use it to grow grass.

In that regard, it's worth noting that the land-based disposal opportunity will vary depending on regional agriculture. One ideal example cited by Jeff is Brazil, where IP sources its fiber mainly from eucalyptus plantations. Almost all of the waste from the company's two major mills in Brazil is reclaimed to enhance soil at those same plantations.

Shumaker also noted that waste stream ash also contains minerals that could make it useful as an additive in building materials including cement and bricks.

To integrate, or not to integrate

In our conversation, Jeff also raised an interesting issue for sustainability and the supply chain.

IP was historically a more vertically-integrated company, with substantial interests in the forestry end as well as in the paper manufacturing end.

By focusing more closely on its mills, IP has been able to achieve a sharper focus on its manufacturing process and its sustainability goals as a paper manufacturer foremost.

A parallel example would be Levi Strauss & Co., which has raised the benchmark for corporate social responsibility by focusing on clothing manufacturing, while taking steps to bring its supply chain into line with its goals.

Similarly, IP's aspirational goal of zero waste goal has enabled it to stake out a leadership position. That could prove to be a powerful motivation to leverage motivation by its supply chain, especially by providing a best practices model for the manufacturing excellence concept of continuous investment in process improvements.

[Image (cropped): Courtesy of International Paper]

Follow me on Twitter and Google+.

The concept of a national carbon tax is a hard sell for most people these days. According to a recent poll, only 34 percent of U.S. respondents said they would support taxing fossil fuels like oil, gas or natural gas.

But support for a carbon tax changes dramatically when it comes to scenarios in which the funds are either reimbursed to taxpayers or used to fund renewable energy projects. The 798 respondents were surveyed for each question according to their political affiliations in order to determine what resonated with each of three specific political groups (Republican, Independent and Democrat). The poll was conducted by the Muhlenberg College Institute of Public Opinion and the University of Michigan Center for Local, State and Urban Policy this year.

Sixty percent of those surveyed gave thumbs-up to the more creative form of a carbon tax where it is then used to fund renewable energy. Half (51 percent) of those who identified themselves as Republican said they would support a tax that was then reused for greener purposes. An estimated 54 percent of Independents and 70 percent of Democrats said they would support the idea as well.

Stats also showed that respondents weren’t really as worried about getting their money back as about seeing the funds go to a useful “green” purpose. A lower number (56 percent) overall of those questioned said they would support a carbon tax if the money were reimbursed to them. As to political leanings: 43 percent Republican-identified respondents said yea to this idea; 52 percent of Independents and 65 percent of Democrats said this was also a good way to approach carbon taxation.

Those numbers clashed dramatically with respondents’ feelings about a carbon tax in which the funds are then used to pay off the federal deficit. Only 38 percent overall said they would go along with that strategy. Interestingly, the response was about even between Republicans (34 percent), Independents (34) and Democrats (39).

“Conventional wisdom is that carbon tax is a political non-starter,” said University of Michigan professor Barry Rabe, who also serves as director for the Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy. “But there may be broader support for such a tax than is commonly believed, depending upon how revenues from that tax are used.”

While this research data may be helpful information for the Obama administration, which has said climate change and carbon emissions must be addressed, it’s unlikely to garner much excitement down under. Last week Australia became the first country in the world to abolish a carbon tax. The decision, which was part of Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s election platform, received dismay from environmentalists around the world.

It also prompted plenty of Twitter chatter, even from Australia’s own members of parliament. Labor Senate leader Penny Wong predicted: “Abbott to go down as one of most short sighted, opportunistic, selfish & small ppl ever to hold the office of PM.”

Australia Greens party leader Christine Milne added her foresight, “Australia will be relegated to a pariah and a backwater.”

In Canada, where Prime Minister Stephen Harper has resisted calls for a carbon tax as well, critics had some interesting insights as to just why heads of state are skittish about taxing a heavily-used resource like fossil fuels.

“In Australia, climate policy has been a death knell for politicians who failed to read the fickle public mood,” noted Margaret Wente, a columnist for the Toronto-based Globe and Mail. “When (former Australia Prime Minister) Julia Gillard took over as leader of the Labor Party in 2010, she solemnly swore not to impose a carbon tax.” She didn’t keep her promise, Wente points out, and the voters weighed in at the polls. “They threw the Labor Party out of office and elected Mr. Abbott, who promised to ‘axe the tax.’”

But as the U of M’s recent survey shows, a politician’s career doesn’t necessarily have to be in peril just because he or she has the guts to suggest a new kind of tax. They just have to use the right vernacular that resonates with voters.

The real reason that Prime Minister Abbott’s “axe the tax” platform worked is because he convinced voters from the middle of the supermarket meat isle that keeping the carbon tax meant weekly lamb dinners would be unaffordable for the average household once it took effect. That’s like telling Americans they will no longer be able to drive their cars to work.

Carbon tax support rests not in whether it’s a tax, but ultimately in what it means to the voter. And that can be better technology, a handy rebate check, or a sheep in wolf’s clothing in the form of perceived financial losses. When it comes to the carbon tax, voters say, it’s the results that count.

Carbon tax supporter: Takver

Greg Combet explaining proposed carbon tax to Australian voters: Toby Hudson

The land of sky blue waters - what beer, urban development and aquaponics have in common

I date myself by admitting that I reflexively think of beer when I hear the expression, "the land of sky blue waters." Originally translated from a traditional Omaha tribe love song, the phrase became the title of a popular song in 1909 and later adapted as the Hamm’s Brewery sales jingle in the 1960s.

For decades Hamm’s beer was made at a brewery in St. Paul, Minnesota. “Sky blue water” is a rough translation of the word “Minnesota” and harkens back to the good old days when Hamm’s was purportedly brewed with water from a Minnesotan artesian well.

Long since swallowed up by the Miller Brewing Co., Hamm’s left St. Paul and for 15 years the iconic brewery lay abandoned and in disrepair -- one of many crumbled, discarded buildings symbolizing the decline of the Rust Belt in America, as the once proud and powerful industrial base of the region faded, moved offshore or disappeared entirely.

That’s the bad news.

The good news is that what was once a battered, graffiti-ridden building in the center of a decaying "food desert ” -- where local communities have little access to affordable, nutritious food -- is now home to Urban Organics, an aquaponics startup that is a model for both global sustainable agriculture and the post-industrial revitalization of urban America.

Good food and urban renewal

For more than 20 years Urban Organics founder Fred Haberman’s passion has centered around supporting the good food movement -- a passion pursued in large measure through his agency; a mission, as described on the company website, of  "telling the stories of pioneers making a difference in the world." As it turns out, Haberman is one of the those pioneers, along with his small team of three employees (as of this writing):

“For many of those years it was really about advocating for organic food … as I learned more and more about food you begin to also understand that there’s a huge food access issue, in the world and in the United States.”

The USDA identifies 6000 locations in the U.S. as food deserts, which Haberman points out are also business and job deserts:

“After looking a this food desert phenomena, I realized - and I’m not the first one to realize this - that if you locate food production facilities in areas that need urban renewal a number of really good things begin to happen,” says Haberman. “Economic value and economic development begins to occur.”

The city of St. Paul was a key partner in the beginning, helping to identify the old Hamm’s building as a launching pad for Urban Organics and providing a STAR economic development grant. With that and some angel investors, Haberman and his team acquired the building about two years ago, with plans to initially build out one floor of the building as a commercial aquaponics facility providing fresh, local produce to the surrounding community.

Unlike the poorly-planned urban renewal started in post-war America that too often tore neighborhoods apart, Urban Organics is the keystone to urban transformation, revitalization and sustainable economic development. The implications are at once local and global.

“It’s really exciting to take this iconic location in the Twin Cities with a lot of history and be able to take a vacant, almost dilapidated building, and begin the process of transforming it into an asset,” says Haberman.

Since Urban Organics moved in, a brewery (not Hamm’s) has set up shop in the building next door, a distillery and a restaurant have located in the neighborhood, with another restaurant about to open its doors. “Already we’re beginning to see a nice turnaround of that neighborhood,” Haberman says.

Aquaponics, organic, business: Tying it all together

It’s one thing to set up an aquaponics farm. Hobbyists all over the world enjoy the fun of watching plants grow in water and growing some fresh produce for their dinner salad. It's another to build a thriving business growing organic food for a hungry (literally and figuratively) local market.

Like any aquaponics operation, Urban Organics grows produce using water with, as the Urban Organics website says it, “one special ingredient” -- fish. It’s a symbiotic relationship where fish waste fertilizes the plants and the plants help keep the water clean for the fish.

The technological implementation of aquaponics isn't Haberman's core strength, but it is for Urban Organics partner Dave Haider, whose combined experience with fishing and construction helped bring Haberman's vision to reality and keeps Urban Organics up and running. Haider has close ties to the old Hamm's brewery: His great-grandfather worked at the brewery for more than 40 years. It is this thread of connection to the community that informs a guiding principle for Urban Organics.

Haberman and Haider worked closely with Pentair Aquatic Eco-Systems to design the aquaponics farm. “We looked at a lot of systems and Pentair Aquatic Eco-Systems helped us design the system,” Haberman says, "and that was a big learning experience.”

The only "drawback" to the current design, says Haberman, "is the electricity bill. The need for cheaper, better, more efficient lighting systems for the plants."

"We haven't found one yet. But the good news is that [the lighting] helps heat the building, so we have a lower heating bill."

Haberman hopes that one day Urban Organics can convert to LED lighting, but at the moment depends on fluorescent lights for growing plants.

"The promise of LED lighting has still not been fulfilled," says Haberman. "But it's getting there - when it is there I'm sure we'll move over to it."

But perhaps the biggest and in some measure the most important challenge was getting certified as organic.  “Of course we wanted to be USDA organic,” says Haberman, “which we are."

Any so-called "downside" for Haberman, such as the lighting issue, is "far outweighed by the positives" of the overall concept. More than just an aquaponics farm, Urban Organics is a leader in a growing movement.

Sustainable agriculture for the 21st century

“We use 2 percent of the water versus conventional agriculture to grow this food,” says Haberman. Instead of shipping water-intensive produce from drought-ravaged California, Arizona or Mexico, Urban Organics can provide fresh, organic produce and fish locally. In a contained aquaponics environment, growing food isn't constrained by the vagaries of climate and the increasing occurrence of extreme weather events.

The first crops to come from Urban Orgnics are Italian parsley, green kale, red kale, green Swiss chard, red Swiss chard, cilantro and lacinato kale. Currently Urban Organics uses the common tilapia for its fish stock, which is also available in the local retail market. "We might go to striped bass on the next floor," Haberman says. "We hope to be operational on the second floor, hopefully by the end of the summer."

In the first few months of operation, Haberman is encouraged by the enthusiasm expressed by local retailers for his product. "There's a huge demand for it," he says.  "People are really excited for the product because it's so much fresher, it's local."

Act locally, think globally

Perhaps what excites Haberman most about Urban Organics goes back to his initial interest in the good food movement all those years ago. His hope is that Urban Organics can be a model for alleviating food deserts and urban blight all over the world, leveraging the synergy between local food production, urban revitalization and sustainable development.

Contemplating how a dilapidated relic of a building in a once almost abandoned industrial neighborhood in now transforming into an oasis of greenery and food production, Haberman told me that, "It feels like it's from the future, but the future is here."

"All these sites around the country and globe - you can imagine what you can do globally with this. If you take a hunger hotspot put a well in and you build a multi-hundred-thousand square foot facility and have your protein and nutrition right there for a village. The replication possibilities here are huge."

As with any good big idea such as a transformational solution to hunger and global access to nutritious, sustainably-grown food, the real test comes with scale.

"It's still very, very early in this industry, in the category. It's a cottage industry still. This is really one of the first - not the only one, but among the first - to see if you can commercially make this work."

Haberman is the first to admit that maybe it won't work. But that's hardly a reason not to try, given the potential benefits it could have for communities across the globe, from inner city, post-industrial America to tiny villages in the developing world.

A triple bottom line, one local, organic aquaponics farm at a time.

Images courtesy of Urban Organics

By Whitney Dailey

Americans celebrated our nation this month with flags, parades and fireworks, but companies are showing their American pride in a slightly different way. The business trend over the past 20 years may have been focused on globalization and our increasingly connected world, but some companies have decided to concentrate on efforts a little closer to home.

Americans, more than any other global citizens, want companies to prioritize economic development, over issues such as poverty and hunger or the environment, according to the 2013 Cone Communications Cone/Echo Global CSR Study. U.S. citizens are also more likely than the global average to want companies to address quality of life locally (43 percent versus 37 percent global average) and nationally (38 percent versus 35 percent global average) over global issues (20 percent versus 28 percent global average). This all adds up to a strong message to companies to reinvest in the U.S. – and a few major companies are heeding the call.

Creating a stronger economy through entrepreneurship and education

A strong economy often starts with the basics – education and small businesses. In fact, small businesses employ more than half of the private-sector workforce, and many argue that an educated workforce can create a stronger economy.

To make sure America’s small businesses continue to be job creators, a number of organizations have reinvested in the “little guy.” Boston Beer Co.’s founder Jim Koch went back to his roots to help out other entrepreneurs when the craft brewery started the “Brewing the American Dream” program. The initiative provides training to entrepreneurs and micro-loans through Accion. The program has created or saved 1,900 jobs since its founding in 2008. Starbucks, another longstanding supporter of job creation in the U.S., raised more than $15 million with its “Create Jobs for USA” program, doling out small business loans in partnership with the Opportunity Finance Network.

As the U.S. continues to trend toward a more service-based economy, with 4 out of every 5 jobs resulting from service industries (e.g., telecommunications, financial services, computer services), the right education and job training are crucial. That’s why a number of organizations have invested in equipping the next generation with the skills to succeed in this field. STEM, or the fields of science, technology, engineering and math, has been a major focus and natural fit for a number of organizations, only reinforcing President Barack Obama’s $3.1 billion investment in STEM-focused job training.

At the forefront is Time Warner Cable’s Connect-a-Million Minds* initiative. The five-year, $100 million commitment recently achieved its goal of connecting 1 million students to hands-on math and science activities through grants, volunteerism and custom curricula. SAP and IBM have also invested in education programs to fill the 430,000 tech-related jobs that will be created in the next four years.

Greasing assembly lines and igniting innovation hubs

Beyond education and small business loans, companies are looking to manufacturing and innovation as ways to kick-start commerce. Walmart, a company with revenue representing 3 percent of the U.S. GDP, is looking to reinvigorate America’s assembly lines through a $50 billion commitment to purchase American-made products over the next 10 years. This is in addition to a new five-year, $10 million fund to provide grants to innovators seeking to create new "processes, ideas and jobs that support America's growing manufacturing footprint." Starbucks has also made commitments to spur production on U.S. soil, opting to purchase ceramic mugs in Ohio instead of abroad and building its own factory in Atlanta, Ga., to produce its Via instant coffee line of products.

Aiming to build the economy through new ideas and concepts, Cisco is working to ensure cities have the adequate infrastructure to promote economic growth. The Cisco Smart + Connected Communities program works with city governments to “use intelligent networking capabilities” to create more livable and innovative cities. Kansas City is the latest community to take part in the program, working with Cisco to transform the city into a lab for entrepreneurial development. Patagonia followed the entrepreneurial trend with its own in-house venture fund, distributing capital to startups with similar social or environmental values through the “One Billion and Change” program.

Insights into action: What companies can do to reinvest

“Re-shoring” is the new business buzzword, with U.S. Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker stating, “There’s no better time to invest in the United States.” Economists have identified two driving factors for the move: proximity to demand and proximity to innovation. But there are other benefits to consider when investing in the U.S., including gaining crucial license to operate, as well as improving reputation and fostering trust among American consumers. Companies looking to zero-in on the U.S. economy can take a page from the first-mover playbook with these five tips:

• Focus for Impact: Economic development can be a big pill to swallow. Focus your company’s impact in a targeted area within the economic development umbrella – whether it’s STEM education, micro-loans, creating smarter cities or something brand new.


• Look in your Backyard: The easiest place to start making an impact might be in your company’s own community. For Boston Beer Company this meant targeting food, beverage and hospitality small business owners in the New England area; as the program gained traction, the company expanded to the entire U.S.


• Make it Mutual: Investing in the U.S. economy doesn’t have to be a charity act. Savvy companies are investing in the American workforce, while planting the seeds for the next generation of educated employees, such as how SAP and IBM invested in tech education to fill the future employee gaps.


• Consider Closer: Instead of defaulting to overseas options, consider comparable solutions in the U.S. during your vetting process. Beyond simply price, don’t forget to factor in other benefits for producing or sourcing locally, such as tax breaks, reductions in shipping costs and the ability to more closely oversee production standards. Understanding that business models and supply chains are complex, consider the value proposition of supporting local communities. It’s worth a second or third look.


• Frame Your Story: Economic development is a big umbrella under which many companies’ social or environmental initiatives can fall. Think about the CSR work your company is doing already – whether it’s focused on health and disease, education or otherwise – and how it can be framed as improving the economic viability of communities or the nation.

*Cone Communications client

Image credit: Tony Cyphert, Flickr

Whitney Dailey is a senior research associate at Cone Communications on its Research & Insights team, where she works on the development and distribution of industry-leading research studies, including the 2013 Cone Communications/Echo Global CSR Study. Her expertise in corporate social responsibility, sustainability and social media helps to guide thought leadership at the agency as well as the creation of a number of CSR-related tools. Whitney has a personal interest in sustainable food systems, urban gardening and sustainable sites. She holds an MBA in Environmental Management and Entrepreneurship from the University of Massachusetts, Boston and a BA from the George Washington University. She tweets at @WhitneyDailey.  

Activities across public lands managed by the Department of the Interior contributed $360 billion to the U.S. economy in 2013, supporting over 2 million jobs in communities across the country, according to the Interior Deptartment's fiscal year 2013 report.

More than 407 million recreational visits were made last year to U.S. national parks, wildlife refuges, monuments and other public lands managed by the department, according to the report. These alone generated $41 billion to the economy and supported some 355,000 jobs nationwide, the department highlights in a press release.

Federal budget sequestration is cutting into Interior Department and Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) budgets, compromising potential economic, social and ecological benefits and investment returns. President Barack Obama is urging Congress to fully and permanently fund the LWCF, something Congress has done only once in the legislation's 50-year history.

Interior's FY 2013 economic report

Spanning the entire U.S., Interior's public remit encompasses land and water management; energy and mineral development; encouraging tourism and outdoor recreation at national sites; wildlife conservation, hunting and fishing; support for American Indian tribal communities and Insular Areas; as well as scientific research and innovation.

Produced by the department's Office of Policy Analysis, the “U.S. Department of Interior Economic Report FY2013” estimates the economic contributions of Interior's activities across all these areas.

“This report,” Interior Secretary Sally Jewell explained, “illustrates to the American people that both conservation and development on public lands continue to support vibrant economic activities in communities across the country.

"It also demonstrates the economic benefit of thoughtful legislation, like the Land and Water Conservation Act of 1964, that took a small amount of revenue generated by oil and gas development offshore and reinvested it in local communities to support conservation and recreation opportunities for all Americans.”

The U.S. Land and Water Conservation Fund

Established in 1965, LWCF channels royalties from offshore oil and gas development to investments in conservation and recreational development projects across the nation.

The LWCF, Interior explains, ensures that present and future generations have access to outdoor recreation resources. It also provides funds that federal, state and local governments use to enhance land, water and wetlands that benefit all Americans. These encompass sports fields, community green space, public access to rivers, lakes and other bodies of water, as well as expanding access to, and interpretation of, historic and cultural sites and the conservation of landscapes for public outdoor recreational use, according to Interior.

LWCF will expire unless Congress takes action to keep the program going, Interior points out, noting that it has been fully funded by Congress at its authorized $900 million level only once in its fifty-year history. Royalties from offshore oil and gas leases on the Outer Continental Shelf are the primary source of LWCF funds.

The fight for LWCF funding

President Obama's latest budget calls for $900 million in discretionary and mandatory LWCF funding for fiscal year 2015 (FY 2015). It also proposes to permanently authorize $900 million in mandatory annual funding for the Interior Department and Land and Water Conservation Fund programs beginning in FY 2016.

“The president has called for full, mandatory funding, recognizing, as Congress did 50 years ago, that when we take something from the earth, we need to give something back,” Jewell said.

“It is time we fulfill the promise made to the American people to invest back into our land what we take out of it, enabling all Americans to enjoy the great outdoors through parks and recreation areas.”

The economic, social and ecological benefits of LWCF investments are substantial and clearly evident, Jewell added. Every $1 of LWCF funds invested in land acquisition generated $4 in nature-based goods and services, boosting local economies and supporting jobs in the recreation and tourism sectors, according to a recently released report from the Trust for Public Land.

Automatic spending cuts, the result of passage of the Budget Control Act of 2011, are biting into and scaling back Interior Department programs and their capabilities.

In total, $828 million of Interior's budget was sequestered in FY 2013. “The across-the-board cuts mandated by the sequester affected not only government agencies, but the people and communities who benefit from the activities of those agencies,” Jewell stated.

*Image credits: 1) Dept. of Interior; 2) U.S. Land and Water Conservation Fund

Editor's Note: This is the first post in a six-part series written by Donald J. Munro of the University of Michigan. You can follow the whole series here. 

By Donald J. Munro

The Supreme Court’s 2010 “Citizens United” decision affirms the legality of treating corporations as persons -- having a right to free speech, manifested in money contributions in elections. But, corporations should not be treated as people, because they do not act like people.

Why do people act the way they do? In part, because of the values we share with others. The focus of the following six posts in this series is to show how certain human moral values and some corporate behaviors are incompatible, using JPMorgan Chase as an example.

These specific moral values are derived from beliefs and attitudes linked to human biology, even though they find varying expressions between cultures. These values are fundamental aspects of human nature, and decisions based on them contribute to cooperation, a basic necessity for humans to survive and flourish.

What are moral values?

Morality answers the question: How should we live as individual humans, including with other people? Moral values, involving feelings and knowledge, flag what we consider right and wrong and serve as our standards, by which to weigh choices that lead to actions.

There are priorities among them. The values addressed in the posts in this series are found in most societies with various names and cultural adaptations

Something becomes a legitimate moral duty only if we can perform it. What we believe ought to be done should not put unreasonable demands on our ordinary motives and attitudes. The six values I cite in this series meet that standard because they are linked to our biology -- our bodies are predisposed to seek them.

Health and well-being of the body/mind

The neuroscientist Antonio Damasio wrote,“We happen to be biologically structured in a certain way — mandated to survive and to maximize pleasurable rather than painful survival…” Joy and sorrow are the signals of our organ and tissue functions, immune system, stress/tranquility, and certain drives such as for hunger and thirst. (See this review of "Looking for Spinoza.")

In part, health and well-being are objective, subject to medical measurements: reflexes, temperature, tissue repair, and the state of our neurotransmitters (serotonin) and hormones (cortisol). But other parts are more subjective, including special interests and goals unique to ourselves, that influence our choices and the resulting joy or sorrow, which are always subjective.

The quants and consequences

Corporations hired physicists and mathematicians --“quants” -- to make predictions about profit and loss. They could have attended to the consequences for human health and well being of policies about loans and mortgages, or human joy and suffering, but that was not their mission.

If we want to find out whether or not JPMorgan’s recent behavior has affected the health and well-being of people, where might we look? One place is foreclosures. A study of 798 people by the Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics found:

“Foreclosure is associated with high rates of major depression, hypertension, and heart disease. …The investigators found physical and mental health problems among those facing foreclosure that were significantly more severe than among similarly vulnerable individuals in the general populations. These results suggest that poor health may be either a cause or an effect of foreclosure.”

JPMorgan Chase’s record on foreclosures

GMIRatings gives ongoing ratings on corporations based on an evaluation of their meeting standards of corporate governance, social impact and environmental impact. It provides investors with risk factors for the corporations and lists the facts leading to the evaluations, such as legal charges against the company. It found:

1. February, 2012: JPMorgan Chase and four other firms agreed to a settlement with the Department of Justice, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and the State Attorneys General, relating to the servicing and origination of mortgages. The settlement requires the bank to (1) Make cash payments of about $1.1 billion (part of which will be set aside for payments to borrowers). (2) Provide about $500 million in refinancing relief to some underwater borrowers. And (3) give about $3.7 billion of additional relief to certain borrowers.


2. June 14, 2013: A federal judge ruled that JPMorgan Chase must face a lawsuit accusing the largest U.S. bank of illegally imposing marked-up or unnecessary fees on delinquent mortgage borrowers.


3. Sept. 5, 2013: JPMorgan Chase and a major insurer agreed to a $300 million settlement to resolve accusations that they forced homeowners into over-priced property insurance and entered into kickback arrangements that inflated the policies’ prices.

Are corporations people?

1 United States Code Chapter 1 defines corporations and companies, as well as individuals, as persons.

“In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise—the words ‘person’ and ‘whoever’ include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnership, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals.”

With the “Citizens United” decision, corporations, like individuals, have “free speech” to promote their interests and can contribute money to advocate for the election or defeat of candidates.

But the free speech of individuals usually reflects their human values. Corporations have so many different values and interest groups within the organization or without (those affected by "externalities") that they may either not represent the human values of the employees or violate them.

The CEOs or other officers usually determine who gets the money, and they do not consult shareholders. In contrast, union members can refuse to have their dues spent for political ends. How can a corporation be a person, when individual human values are often so different from those inside the corporate accounting office?

Next: Love, Compassion, Empathy and Altruism

Image credit: Flickr/michaelpremo

Donald J. Munro is professor emeritus of philosophy and Chinese at the University of Michigan. Munro connects venerable philosophical traditions to modern scientific discoveries, always with a concern for the ethics of human action. His books include The Concept of Man in Contemporary China, Images of Human Nature: A Song Portrait, and Individualism and Holism: Studies in Confucian and Taoist Values. In recent years he has been the Ch’ien Mu Lecturer in Chinese History and Culture (2006) and the Tang Junyi Visiting Professor (2009) at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. For many years he was a participant in faculty seminars in evolutionary psychology in the Psychology Department at Michigan. He is also a founding member of the Interfaith Partnership for Political Action (IPPA.US).

By Beth Sirull

Earlier this year, on this forum, I proclaimed that 2014 would be The Year of Impact Investing. Now that half the year is in the history books, it's fair to ask if 2014 is living up to that billing. Let's take a look at what the first six months of the year have produced:

Alongside initiatives by mainstream private investors to catalyze financial markets, there have been accelerated efforts to inform design of more effective policy to drive private capital for social impact. An important step towards this outcome here in the U.S. has been the work of the United States National Advisory Board (NAB) on impact investing.

The U.S. NAB consists of a group of 27 thought leaders including private investors, entrepreneurs, foundations, academics, intermediaries and nonprofits. The NAB released its final report, Private Capital, Public Good: How Smart Federal Policy Can Galvanize Impact Investing – and Why It’s Urgent, last month. As part of the report launch, the White House convened a Roundtable on Impact Investing, where more than 20 private corporations and foundations announced a total of over $1.5 billion in new impact investments. These include:

• Prudential Financial committed to building a $1 billion impact investing portfolio by 2020 to eliminate barriers to financial and social mobility.


• The McKnight Foundation and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund committed to allocating at least 10% of their endowments -- $200 million and $84 million respectively — to impact investments.


• The Omidyar Network committed $100 million in early-stage risk capital over the next three years to new impact investments that will benefit underserved communities around the globe, enhancing financial inclusion, improving education, and using internet and mobile technologies to create positive social change.


• The Ford Foundation committed $9 million to impact investments that will increase economic mobility and opportunity for low-income Americans.

Of course, $1.5 billion in impact investing commitments from 20 investors is a great start, but for impact investing to have long-term legs, we need more, both in the U.S. and abroad.

And more there is:

• In June this year, Rep. Todd Young (R-Ind.) and Rep. John Delaney (D-Md.) introduced H.R. 4885, the Social Impact Bond Act, which was followed by the introduction of another bipartisan legislation that uses the Pay for Success model for energy efficiency. When was the last time a bipartisan group agreed on anything? Social Impact Bonds (SIBs), also known as Pay for Success, are appealing across the political spectrum. SIBs harness the market, which attracts the ‘right,’ even as they address pressing social problems, which attracts the ‘left.’ In a nutshell, SIBs constitute a public-private partnership whereby private investors put up funds to enable a social service provider (think a program to reduce prisoner recidivism or reduce childhood obesity) to produce a measurable set of outcomes (e.g., a 10 percent reduction in recidivism for a set group of previously incarcerated individuals). If the outcomes are achieved as determined by a third-party evaluator, the government pays back the investors with a profit. This legislation would authorize federal government-funded SIBs.


• Recognizing the need for more cohesive policy activity, a group of organizations (including Pacific Community Ventures) are leading the Accelerating Impact Investing Initiative (AI3), to create a multi-stakeholder policy platform for the U.S., building on the history of community development in the U.S. and work of milestone efforts such as the U.S. NAB. Watch this space for developments on the AI3 in the coming months.

In the meantime, there’s still more activity on the global front around impact investing:

The U.S. NAB was formed under the auspices of the G8 Global Task Force on Social Impact Investment, which was established in 2013 to catalyze the impact investing market across the globe. Under the auspices of the Taskforce, the countries of the G8 established individual National Advisory Boards, such as the U.S. NAB, to work both independently and in concert with their colleagues from other countries on the Taskforce, to scope their unique policy, investor, capital markets and social challenges and to share learnings across the globe. The Global Taskforce will be issuing its final report in September 2014.

Along with the Global Taskforce, the G8 also established the Global Learning Exchange (GLE), an online platform to anchor a cross-sector community of practice to improve the networks and knowledge base critical to growing impact investing around the world. The GLE, jointly run by the Impact Investing Policy Collaborative (IIPC) and the World Economic Forum, is providing a resource for global peer-to-peer learning on social impact investment among public officials, investors, philanthropic and civil society organizations, international financial institutions, and business leaders with a nexus to policy. The GLE began its work in December 2013. Going by the first six months of its pilot phase, the GLE’s accomplishments are impressive:

• The GLE hosted five webinars on topics ranging from the role of the public sector in enabling social innovation to “reporting back” on landmark meetings of the G8 Taskforce; over 1,000 people, representing over 70 countries have registered to attend these virtual meetings. If web traffic is anything to go by, the appetite for the kinds of conversations the GLE website provides is growing. The GLE site has attracted over 16,600 page views from visitors in more than 120 countries.


• In addition to its online engagement, the GLE has also been in conversation with governments and organizations in different countries. For instance, the IIPC engaged with the Head of the Hong Kong government’s Efficiency Unit, work that ultimately resulted in the launch of a $500 million Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship Development Fund.


• Representatives of countries ranging from Sweden to Brazil are working with the GLE to inform Taskforces in their own countries, while organizations in Ghana, India and the U.K., among several others, are developing content and toolkits for local investors, entrepreneurs and policymakers in their home countries.

Finally, even His Holiness Pope Francis is joining the movement. The Vatican hosted a two-day symposium on impact investing in June, organized by Catholic Relief Services, the Mendoza College of Business at the University of Notre Dame, and the Pontifical Council of Justice and Peace. The Investing for the Poor conference was billed as “an opportunity to learn the core concepts of impact investing, discuss how it aligns with Church mission, and to discern how the Church might use or promote impact investing to serve the poor.” Surely, if the Pope has gotten on board, we are on to something.

Clearly, this is a lot of activity—with significant, measurable outcome s— for a six-month period. But is it the Year of Impact Investing? It doesn’t really matter. What matters is that impact investing — harnessing private capital to address pressing social issues, providing financial returns appropriate to the type of capital invested, and having measurable, positive social impact — is trending in the right direction.

Let’s keep it up.

Beth Sirull is President of Pacific Community Ventures, whose mission is to create economic opportunities in low income communities. PCV leverages impact capital, entrepreneurship and thought leadership to fulfil its mission. Tonusree Basu, Associate Director (Policy) at PCV, provided information for this blog post.