Search

Food waste has long been a problem in developed and developing nations alike. In the European Union, annual food waste amounts to approximately 90 million tons—and that figure does not include agricultural waste and fish discards. Now the European Union is aggressively moving to reduce food waste by addressing the “Best Before” labeling that creates much confusion and is a large factor behind this appalling waste of food within the region.

The challenge of food waste is an important one because on both sides of the Atlantic, as much as 40 percent food is wasted. Emerging markets around the world, from the Middle East to Asia, do not perform much better when it comes to food that ends up in landfill instead of on plates. One organization estimates as much as half of the world’s food supply ends up uneaten. And despite the constant fretting over how the planet will feed 9 billion people by 2050, the stubborn fact persists that hunger and famine are not a problem of supply meeting demand—rather, the issue is one of efficient distribution. But while developing countries witness most of their waste after harvests and during food processing, wealthier nations in Europe and North America see such waste during and after food hits retail shelves. So how will the EU take action?

An open “discussion letter” ahead of an EU agricultural minister’s meeting today, calls date-labeling a large contributor to the continent’s food waste problem. Many retail employees, and consumers, often confuse “best before” and “use by” labels commonly seen on packages. But the problem with the “best before” terminology is many foods, from pasta to chocolate to vegetable oils, are still perfectly fit for consumption after that pesky “best by date” (same with many foods with the “use by” moniker, though full disclosure: This author is frugal and has an iron stomach). In contrast, the “use by” label is more pertinent for perishables such as fresh fish and dairy products ... but the reality is many consumers assume both labels have the same meaning.

For now, the EU (and common sense) advises if a food package is still intact, and the product still smells good, then do not throw the package away—but follow instructions such as “use within three days of opening.”

High-agricultural ministerial meetings aside, the upshot is manufacturers and retailers must undertake a massive education program if we as a society are going to reduce our absurd rate of food waste. Of course this is an economic problem--retailers are losing money on products that end up in the trash. And once that food is disposed, it creates environmental problems, from consuming landfill space to such greenhouse gasses as methane.

But this is also a moral problem: Too many people are still going hungry when plenty of perfectly food of fine quality ends up in dumpsters. Some food retailers are already taking action, and even sports teams have taken a creative approach beyond simply throwing food away. In the end, however, this is a problem that will require companies to look beyond their financial bottom lines and look at a bigger picture. Governments also need to rethink how they write regulations because after all, businesses are hypersensitive about preserving their brand and in the U.S., not getting sued over the consumption of spoilt food. All stakeholders must be involved, because in a world with the curious trends of rising obesity rates and food waste rates, the current system of food labeling makes little sense.

Image credit: Wikipedia (Muu-karhu)

Leon Kaye currently lives in the United Arab Emirates, where he works for the Abu Dhabi office of APCO, a communications consultancy.

From consumers through processors, distributors and fishing fleets, actors and agents spanning the entire seafood industry value chain have a long-term vested interest in making sustainable use of the ocean's bounty. Taking up that challenge and responsibility, sustainable seafood initiatives are on the rise, and they are beginning to show positive results.

The number of seafood products that earned Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) certification rose five-fold in four years and increased by 21 percent through September 2013, according to data MSC presented at its Global Commercial Network meeting during the Seafood Expo Global 2014 in Brussels.

MSC membership is broadening and deepening. The 221 certified fisheries in the MSC program and another 106 that are under assessment represent 10.5 percent of the worldwide total, according to the sustainable seafood certification pioneer. Furthermore, the MSC program is extending into new seafood markets and segments, such as sustainably sourced fish oil supplements.

Sustainable seafood: Growing awareness, growing demand

The annual net wholesale value of MSC-certified seafood products reached $4.5 billion through September of last year, with a retail value an additional 40 percent higher. Commenting on the success, Nicolas Guichoux, MSC's global commercial director, stated:

"This growth would not be possible without the participation of our partners throughout the value chain who deliver environmental choice to the consumer. MSC certified fisheries are now part of a global elite of sustainable and well-managed fisheries."

MSC-Certified Seafood: Key Figures

• Together, fisheries already certified or in full assessment record annual catches of around 10 million metric tons of seafood. This represents over 10 percent of the annual global harvest of wild capture fisheries.


• The fisheries already certified catch over 7 million metric tons of seafood. This is over 8 percent of the total wild capture harvest.


• Worldwide, more than 22, 000 seafood products, which can be traced back to the certified sustainable fisheries, bear the blue MSC ecolabel. Use MSC's sustainable seafood product finder to see what's available in stores in your country.

MSC enumerated and elaborated on the economic and environmental benefits its sustainable seafood certification program is having at its latest annual Global Commercial Network meeting.

For example, environmental gains in South Africa's hake fishery – in which some 8,300 people are employed – include quota reductions, ring-fencing of fishing grounds, by-catch management and a 90-percent reduction in seabird mortality -- the result of deploying streamer lines. Sixty-percent of South Africa's hake catch is exported, bringing in “$180 million in annual revenue and indirectly supporting a network of logistics companies, secondary processors and exporters,” MSC notes.

Overall, more than 450 fisheries' improvements have been recorded to date, details of which are due to be published this year in a second MSC Global impacts report.

"We will record more evidence of improvements for the next 10 years -- it won't be the last time you'll hear the MSC talking about the environmental impact that our partners make,” Guichoux added.

Streamlining the MSC certification process

Moving forward, MSC is finalizing a quintennial Fisheries Standard Review. It has also launched a review of its Chain of Custody, whereby MSC-certified seafood is traced from fishery to market.

Looking to simplify, streamline and reduce the costs of MSC certification, the organization is also undertaking “a speed and cost review.” As MSC Chief Executive Rupert Howes stated:

"The improvements that we're looking to put to the board could potentially reduce the costs of engagement by fishery clients by up to 50 percent. There are costs, but there are also benefits and they have to be looked at together."

Gaining credibility for MSC's science-based approach

MSC's inclusive, science-driven approach to certification, and its ability to communicate that effectively to gain credibility and trust among participants across the seafood industry value chain, have been keys to MSC's success to date, Howes highlighted.

"MSC 's standard for environmentally responsible and sustainable fishing is science-based. Part of the success of the program and the momentum behind it is that people have confidence in that standard - it has to be a high bar to underpin the sustainability."

Added Jari Latvanen, chief executive officer of Findus Nordic: "The food business is all about building trust with consumers and consumer awareness of sustainability is increasing. It's all about making more sustainable choices. From that perspective, MSC is a great tool to make the choice when buying or shopping for fish. "But we have to put more effort into the brand. Yes, we need the MSC's third-party verification that we are sourcing sustainably, but then the brand needs to do the talking and build the relationship with the consumers. In order to get the message across we need to be really single-minded."

Expanding MSC: Asia and tuna

With consumer awareness and preference for sustainable seafood high in Europe and North America, the MSC program is beginning to gain traction in Asia, where MSC sees its greatest growth potential.

"In Japan, there's already engagement, and an increasing demand for MSC labelled products," Howes said. "We're even seeing the start of that in China -- it's very early stages, but the prevailing view is that in most major markets in the world, people are demanding sustainably sourced product. It has grown so fast in the past five years and we'll see it accelerate in Asia in the next few years.

When it comes to the most popular and widely caught wild fish in the world, tuna is No. 1. That makes tuna a marked species for fishing fleets the world over.

Growing concerns about over-exploitation of tuna fisheries, particularly in the Western Pacific, has been high up on the minds of those involved in negotiating international fisheries agreements. Hans Brus, managing director at Pacifical, sees great potential for MSC-certifed tuna to help forge a resolution.

However, when it comes to tuna, “you don’t see big numbers of MSC certification,” Bruns stated.

“It’s worrisome. The MSC certification that I’m working with in PNA countries have fisheries worth more than 400,000 metric tons of MSC-eligible fish, which comes down to more or less 5 percent of the volume of MSC-eligible catches in the world.”

Spanning a vast area of the western Pacific Ocean, the eight PNA island nations account for 25 percent of the global tuna catch. As Bruns continued:

"There is a massive demand in the world for this sustainable tuna. But none of that is coming to the market. We’ve been certified with a 'Chain of Custody' certification for almost one and a half years and we’ve only been able to reach 0.2 percent of the volume. Retailers in the US and Europe are asking for this tuna to come to the market and not even 0.5 percent reaches the market.”

3p has been covering trends and developments in sustainable seafood extensively of late. For more, check out our Sustainable Seafood sponsored series.

Image credit: Pexels

By John Paluszek

“So, we’re not talking about ‘philanthropy’?" -- Interviewer.

“Absolutely no. I am not talking about ‘philanthropy’ at all.” -- Sir Mark Moody-Stuart.

Moody-Stuart was talking -- authoritatively and convincingly – about the business case for the fast-growing number of private sector commitments in international development. And especially about those commitments now being implemented by many companies active in the United Nations Global Compact’s new Business for Peace (B4P) platform.

During the interview, recorded for the "Business In Society" television program produced in keeping with the May 15 Oslo Business For Peace Summit & Award Ceremony, Moody-Stuart shared the insights of his long and distinguished career at the highest levels of international business and society. He now serves as Vice Chair of the U.N. Global Compact Board as well as Chair of the Business for Peace Steering Committee. Many more of those insights are presented in his newly-published book, “Responsible Leadership: Lessons from the Front Line of Sustainability and Ethics.”

The news inherent in the eight-month-old Global Compact Business For Peace program is that it brings substantial “heft” and a new degree of coordination to private sector initiatives in international development. The program will bring new resources to such development’s fundamental objective: addressing the basic needs and desires of people for a higher standard of living and a better quality of life -- leading to more stable, secure societies wherein conflict is less likely.

As described during the program by Ms. Melissa Powell, U.N. Global Compact head of Business For Peace, the Global Compact is fast energizing its 100 multi-sector networks around the world in applying partnering principles to the Business For Peace development mission. Some 17 Global Compact Local Networks and 100 companies spanning 29 countries are already engaging in robust programs to address many root causes of conflict.

From Asia to South America

Recent reports from these networks are indicative of the ambitious but grounded-in-reality work in which companies are often coordinating with civil society organizations and governments. Here are excerpts from two of many reports:

In Indonesia, the Business for Peace network’s mission is “to facilitate interfaith dialogues, to conduct training and best practice sharing and to encourage the multi-stakeholders collaborative actions.” In addition to reporting on its wide-ranging water management initiative, the network has described its seminal effort in building interfaith understanding and cooperation: “The interfaith dialogue is very important in a pluralistic society like Indonesia… [It] is needed to create inclusive community and reduce social prejudice on both sides… It should be followed by concrete actions. A business can play important roles to address these challenges.”

The Indonesia network manifests a related sentiment offered by Ali Nasr, Dean of the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies: “…There is a vital unseen rising force in the Islamic world – a new business-minded middle class that is building a vibrant new Muslim economy … their distinct blending of Islam and capitalism is the key to bringing lasting reform and to defeating fundamentalism. They are people the West can and must do business with.”

In Colombia, according to Ms. Powell: “One of the exciting things that has happened recently has been in our Colombia network where they have identified the reintegration of ex-combatants as a critical issue. The stigma of ex-combatants in society has been a real problem, so they have engaged the business community in helping to re-integrate them into the workforce to make it less likely that they’re incentivized to go back to fighting … And so they’ve realized that some of the skills and techniques that the private sector uses in its workforce, just the things they do as part of being a good business, are the skills that can translate into building better relations between communities.”

The three “must haves”

Business for Peace represents a potential “societal win-win on steroids." However, its success is based on three common-sense pre-requisites:

• Readiness to partner: Moody-Stuart: “…The key to the U.N. Global Compact [and “B4P”] is the founding principles that it wasn’t just business; it would be civil society and labor unions and so on, to bring them to sit down with…sometimes severe critics. And get them in the same room, talking and realizing that its back to the common objective…You may have one way, I may have one way and then we sit down to discuss whose way is better.”


• Transparency: Companies know of the current public expectations for increased transparency. In international development, special demands are now being placed on extractive industries in developing countries with authoritarian regimes. Again, Moody-Stuart: “Those of us who have operated in global businesses know that many countries we work in don’t have perfect governance structures. Sometimes there are high levels of corruption… The bigger challenge is what happens to payments whether properly spent or in the worst case stolen… The payments should be monitored on both sides and audited independently. Those countries have to agree to establish an independent body with civil society and business … with guaranteed ability to criticize the government.”


• Patience and perseverance: B4P participants -- and all international development leaders -- are, of course, not naïve. They understand that accomplishing fundamental societal change can be daunting. The decades, and in some cases the centuries, of causes of conflicts based on ethnic, racial and ideological confrontations; territorial disputes; and other human vagaries do not bend easily to, as Harvard professor Steven Pinker has put it, “The Better Angels of Our Nature.” Nevertheless, the formidable development resources of the international private sector are now being increasingly marshalled to the task -- with a powerful business case integrated with a renewed awareness of corporate social responsibility.

Inevitably, there will be skeptics proclaiming: “The sheer complexity, frequency and history of human conflict”; and “the traditional primacy of corporate shareholder financial interests." To these we offer profound voices of hope:

Steven Pinker: “Believe it or not … violence has declined over long stretches of time and today we may be living in the most peaceable era in our species’ existence.”

The late socialist Michael Harrington: “Capitalism’s most daunting characteristic is its ability to co-opt the reforms, even the radical changes, of the opponents of the system.”

John Paluszek is executive producer of Business in Society @BiZ_In_Society, BusinessInSociety.net and senior counsel at Ketchum in New York City. He is the author of seminal books on corporate social responsibility/sustainable development: “Organizing For Corporate Social Responsibility” and “Will The Corporation Survive?”.

Ed Note: This post was originally published on the Erb Perspective blog, a publication of the Frederick A. and Barbara M. Erb Institute at the University of Michigan. 

By Ethan Schoolman

For many people who like to buy local food, and for the farmers who prefer to sell their product directly to consumers or institutions, a big part of the attraction is the opportunity for human interaction. But as local food continues to grow in popularity, the very thing that’s driving its rise may also be what’s holding it back.

And some of the biggest business opportunities in local food, and food entrepreneurship in general, may involve finding ways to keep a sense of “smallness” even as local food “scales up.” Most grocery stores give little sense of where food comes from, or who grows it; it’s just there on the shelves, or, as in the case of leafy greens, getting spritzed from on high. And farmers who don’t sell directly to consumers have little sense of where what they grow and produce is going, or who is going to buy or eat it; an Iowa potato or California tomato could end up in New York or New Mexico—there’s just no way for the farmer to know.

The “local food movement”—the drive to shorten the distance between where food is grown or produced and where it gets eaten, through all kinds of state-based policy solutions and efforts by nonprofits, business organizations and entrepreneurs—has been changing all that.

Visit a farmers market, and you meet someone who may have planted your lettuce or picked it that morning. Join a CSA, and you become part of a club of people who keep a small farm in business, and who become intimately familiar with its workings on a week-to-week basis. Ask a waiter where where a hamburger advertised as “local” comes from and—as memorably lampooned in the most famous “Portlandia” skit—you might get a story about where those green fields are located (if not what the name of the cow actually was).

But how many people can make visiting a farmers market part of their daily routine? How many people are ready to deal with the unpredictability of a CSA? And how many of our meals do we eat at restaurants?

If local food systems are going to continue to grow in size, strength, and reach, it may be that food produced at nearby farms will have to become more accessible in places where most people do most of their shopping, most of the time: full-service grocery stores and even big-box stores with grocery and produce sections. Not just a farmers market, but also Kroger. Not just a CSA, but also Meijer. It may seem impossible, but a lot of people believe that it’s the necessary next step, and are working to make it happen.

That’s the idea behind food hubs and some of the newest regional farmers cooperatives. Food hubs are brick-and-mortar centers for the centralized collection and distribution of fresh food produced by local farmers. If a Kroger, Meijer or Busch’s store wants to buy food from local farmers, any disruption in supply can be a big problem. Food hubs aggregate local food from all over, so supply stays steady, even if individual farms are having problems. Farmers cooperatives operate on much the same idea.

But if a carrot or beet is produced ten miles from a Meijer store, or a thousand, there’s still no farmer waiting to drop your produce in your bag and say thank you when you visit his or her stall. Local food at Meijer looks like non-local food (well, maybe it’s a little less wilted!), except for the sign that says “made someplace near you.”

So in the eyes of consumers, of the people who have to decide that there’s something about local food that makes it special (and worth paying more for)—what’s special about it? What’s personal about it? Where’s the one-on-one connection, the personal interaction, of the farmers market? And if that’s getting lost, can it be re-found, while retaining the advantages of “scaling-up” institutions like food hubs, which may really be where efforts to strengthen local food systems are heading?

It’s those questions that need to be answered. It’s the “killer app” for local food”—who’s going to get there first?
For many people who like to buy local food, and for the farmers who prefer to sell their product directly to consumers or institutions, a big part of the attraction is the opportunity for human interaction. But as local food continues to grow in popularity, the very thing that’s driving its rise may also be what’s holding it back.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5z9SF0N06QY

Learn more about the environmental and social impacts of buying locally grown food in this interview with Ethan Schoolman.

Image credit: Flickr/Patrick Feller

Ethan Schoolman is a Post-Doctoral Research Fellow at the Erb Institute for Global Sustainable Enterprise and the School of Natural Resources and Environment at the University of Michigan. As a researcher and teacher, he work at the intersection of environmental, political, and cultural sociology. Current projects focus on the environmental and social implications of local food systems, inequalities in access to fresh and healthy food, localization as a social movement, and challenges to developing a culture of sustainability at institutions of higher education. Follow Ethan on Twitter @ethanschoolman.

Fast-food workers in more than 140 U.S. cities joined ranks with international labor organizations last week to send a message to global leaders: raise and enforce pay standards for the world’s lowest paid workers.

In an unprecedented effort to put pressure on companies that pay their employees less than what is considered a living wage, workers from 33 different countries staged walkouts for better pay and working conditions. Legislation concerning the right to strike is being considered in several countries including Iceland and the U.K. Nevertheless, workers stepped out in force on six continents to lobby for better pay and working conditions.

In Australia, workers staged a teach-in at McDonald’s headquarters in Auckland, while in the Philippines, a flash mob strike turned into a dance to attract attention to workers’ rights. Workers in Italy opted to hold their strike action on Friday, May 16, possibly to coincide with government efforts to prevent the loss of 1,200 jobs at Electrolux facilities.

Here in the U.S., the strikes focused primarily on fast food chains that have historically based their wage structure on the minimum wage. McDonald’s, Burger King, KFC and other restaurants saw protests outside their doors. None of the corporations reported any closures as a result, although workers in St. Louis said that a McDonald’s store was briefly forced to shut down. Attendance ranged from a few dozen to a couple of hundred in most of the 150 cities.

The International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers Associations (IUF) acknowledged in a statement on Thursday that the global strike action is part of an effort to highlight the need for a change in the pay structure for fast-food workers.

“These unprecedented international protests are just the start of a worldwide campaign to change the highly-profitable, global fast-food industry,” said IUF General Secretary Ron Oswald in a press release. “We’re putting the companies on notice: Make changes now, or this fight is only going to spread further and grow stronger.”

IUF representative Massimo Frattini said that the global strikes were planned in concert with strike actions organized by the Swiss union UNIA.

“At global level common demands are: Raising wages, better working conditions, full time employment; stable employment, [and] freedom of forming or joining a union without retaliation,” said Frattini in an email to me last Thursday. “So far we are receiving good reports from all over the world in terms of participants.”

Other events included:

• Some states and local municipalities have considered implementing their own increases to the minimum wage. The city of Seattle is considering upping the minimum wage to $15, a proposal that has galvanized worker groups like 15 Now, and led to a petition drive. City Councilmember Kshama Sawant stepped up to sign the organization’s petition, citing her support for immediate changes to minimum pay laws. “These workers can’t wait till 2025. The Mayor’s proposal is a step forward but it falls short of what workers need by adding unnecessary delays of three, five or even 10 years before getting up to an inflation adjusted $15,” said Sawant. If the council should oppose the raise, she said it would be up to the voters to decide in November.


• Lutheran Minister Martin Rafanan in St. Louis has also called for changes to the minimum wage. Rafanan is part of a greater coalition of local community groups that are supporting workers with actions like walk-backs to job sites. Workers who participated in the strike were accompanied back to the workplace by a group of community members so they would not have to return to work alone. “We go into a restaurant with the workers, we return them from their strike, we tell management they cannot in any way retaliate against the worker … We’ve done that numerous times in restaurants across the city, where we have had workers terminated and had gone back and gotten workers re-hired,” Rafanan told Forbes in an interview yesterday.


• Workers in Italy celebrated on Friday after the government signed an agreement with Electrolux Italia to keep one of its factories from being moved to Poland. The nine-month-long negotiations resulted in Electrolux agreeing to invest $250 million in its plants and cancel layoffs in exchange for tax breaks for four plants in Italy. The news came on the heel of workers strikes on Friday.


• Strike actions have been growing in several areas of the world where cutbacks have been a concern. The editor of LivingInGreece.gr notes that protests are a common occurrence in Greece, not just Athens. He offers a help page of 10 insightful tips for visitors, noting that in Greece, "We know how to navigate around strikes."


• Not all workers' rights actions were a success in Geneva this week: The Swiss voted overwhelmingly to reject a minimum wage increase to $25 an hour. Had it passed, it would have been the world's highest minimum wage.

According to Frattini, the IUF’s executive committee met last week to assess the outcome of the strikes and decide on future strategies. “Starting from today [Thursday, May 15] members and the IUF will discuss how to continue the fight,” said Frattini. No actions have been planned as of yet, but with minimum wage increases stalled in Congress, and similar concerns in other countries, it's a fair bet that fast-food corporations will see more picketers outside their doors as summer business and temps heat up.

Image of Richmond, Va. strike courtesy of Bernard Pollack/AFL CIO

Images of Geneva and Karachi strikes courtesy of IUF

Ed Note:  This is a sponsored post on behalf of the National Forest Foundation.

Can the principles of the free market solve some of the most pressing challenges facing our national forests? The National Forest Foundation (NFF) hopes so, announcing it has just extended the deadline for its Barrett Foundation Business Concept Challenge which offers $100,000 in prize money for market-based solutions to the forests’ current issues.

The purpose of the competition is threefold, according to Bill Possiel, president of the NFF, an independent nonprofit created by Congress that works with the U.S. Forest Service.

“First, we’re looking to find creative solutions to the challenges [facing national forests]. Second, we want to engage intellectual capital in thinking about this significant natural resource challenge. And third, we want to think about how we can responsibly manage public resources to both achieve our ecological objectives, as well as our economic and social objectives,” Possiel said.

The idea to seek strategies from the business community came from Craig Barrett, former chairman and CEO of Intel and current vice chairman of the NFF’s Board of Directors.

“In four decades as a business leader, I’ve seen a lot of innovative ideas, but not enough of them have been directed at the challenges facing our national forests,” Barrett said in a statement. “As a board member of NFF, I saw an opportunity to channel this intellectual energy towards solving our nation’s critical natural resource challenges.”

The foundation unveiled the Business Concept Challenge in January, but after finding that the applications didn’t adequately meet the competition’s goals, decided to push back the deadline for proposals to June 16 and expand the challenge’s eligibility pool. Originally accepting applications from business students only, the competition is now open to nonprofits and businesses, as well as faculty and staff from colleges and universities. Local, state and federal governments cannot apply, nor can employees of government agencies acting in an official capacity.

“We want to generate as many creative solutions as we can,” Possiel said. “What we were trying to do was involve the next generation of conservation and business leaders, but our challenges are so severe right now that wherever the best ideas come from, we ought to be exploring those. That’s the thinking behind the evaluation committee in opening up the prize to entrepreneurs, universities or anyone who has a really creative idea that deals with a natural resource challenge at scale but also has an economic benefit.”

The NFF will award a $75,000 cash prize to the winning proposal, as well as $25,000 to the first runner-up in the final stage of the competition.

Just what are the natural resource challenges the NFF hopes this competition will address?

The U.S. Forest Service estimates between 60 million and 80 million acres of the 193-acre national forest system are in need of some restorative action, including post-fire treatment, pre-fire treatment to reduce the severity of future fires, watershed restoration or road reclamation. In addition, fire seasons are stretching longer and longer, and fires in the national forests are more severe – due to climate change, drought and historical forest management practices.

“We’ve seen an increase in mega-fires since 2000, as well as drought conditions in the last few years,” Possiel said. “Natural systems at high risk – not just for fires, but for pests and diseases like the pine bark beetle in the West and the hemlock woolly adelgid in the East. These natural systems are at risk because of some climatic changes, and even the Forest Service would admit some mistakes have been made in managing natural resources in the past.”

Past Business Concept Challenge winners

The competition is not simply an intellectual exercise; the NFF aims to implement the top proposals -- working with the teams that submitted them.

The winning project from the first Barrett Foundation Business Concept Challenge, held in 2012, was to develop a collaborative conservation fund for the Deschutes National Forest in Oregon. Proposed by a team of graduate students from Yale University, the fund would levy fees on resources and services from the forest: charging cities that draw water from the national forest and creating a property tax for private construction on forest lands, for example. Because the students went their separate ways after graduation, this project was not implemented. And while the proposal explored funding mechanisms to finance restoration programs, it didn’t directly solve any of the forests’ natural resource challenges – an objective the competition’s selection committee is really looking for, Possiel said.

“We want to choose projects that really have an economic benefit because we want to attract private capital in the marketplace [to invest in the projects],” Possiel said.

On the other hand, the NFF is currently exploring the implementation of the runner-up from 2012’s competition: a carbon sequestration methodology that calculates how much carbon could be kept from going into the atmosphere from a severe fire in the ponderosa pine forests of Northern Arizona. Instead of waiting until the forests burn, the Forest Service would give them pre-fire treatment – cutting undergrowth and trimming the forest – to reduce the severity of future fires and, thus, preventing a larger amount of carbon from being released.

While the U.S. Forest Service currently offers credits for the carbon absorbed by trees planted in a forest after a fire, this is the first time the organization would provide carbon offsets for the prevention of carbon emissions. The NFF, consultants and the team who came up with idea for the project are working to develop the calculation methodology, which will need to be third-party reviewed and verified before these carbon credits can be sold in the offset marketplace.

How to apply

Think you have a creative idea that can both tackle one of the national forests’ problems and reap a profit? Check out the Barrett Foundation Business Concept Challenge’s list of frequently asked questions here. You’ll need to submit an electronic pre-screening questionnaire and submission form, providing a basic summary of your proposal and the natural resource problem it seeks to address, by 8 a.m. MDT on June 16.

Image credit: National Forest Foundation

Passionate about both writing and sustainability, Alexis Petru is freelance journalist based in the San Francisco Bay Area whose work has appeared on Earth911, Huffington Post and Patch.com. Prior to working as a writer, she coordinated environmental programs for Bay Area cities and counties. Connect with Alexis on Twitter at @alexispetru

By Raheen Khan

The value of apparel in its current context has been simply reduced to personal cost and appearance. Although, the cost-- that is the price that the consumers pay--and the appearance, which is a representation of personal style is crucial, the industry is much more complex.

It has recently come under immense scrutiny due to its unethical working conditions, lack of waste management, increase in pollution due to mass production and exhaustion of resources. The absence of workers safety and low environmental regulations has enabled the corporations to externalize the cost of fast fashion. Amidst this chaos, a new movement has sprung-a sustainable approach towards fashion.

In fashion terms, is green the new black?

For my Master’s degree capstone project, I decided to study the story of our clothes. The research focuses on identifying the key components of sustainable apparel. The emphasis is on “slow fashion” or “sustainable fashion," a portal which is distinct in practice and performance from the existing fast fashion business models. The methodology consisted of multi-method research design. The participants were selectively chosen from the industry under the categories of designers, retailers and industry experts. As a parallel component to the research, randomly selected students were sent an online survey.

The combination of the survey data and the informational interviews resulted in a comprehensive understanding of the missing pieces in the rising eco-conscious fashion movement. For instance, only 27 percent of the respondents were aware of the term 'sustainable fashion.' In the survey, respondents were asked about the most concerning aspect of the industry, and the two groups (aware and unaware of sustainable apparel) were widest on the topics of: use of water, textiles in landfills and waste reduction. This is the junction where the industry needs to up its efforts in educating the consumers and create transparency in its supply chain and production.

A key finding of the study indicated a need for producers to encourage consumers to establish a connection with their purchase by providing the origins of the product and education about disposal of post-consumer textile waste, in other terms completing the lifecycle loop.

Production of cotton

Cotton is the most basic raw material in apparel production. Cotton production has devastating effects on the ecosystem--from irrigation to causing serious health problems to workers in the field due to toxic pesticides. If change in the apparel industry is necessary, then the root of it lies in the transformation of cotton production. Overall, the transparency of apparel production is a vital component in educating the consumers.

Awareness amongst consumers to associate organic cotton with sustainability was tested based on the survey data. The use of organic materials was rated higher at 71.4 percent by the respondents who were aware of sustainable apparel. It is assumed that the awareness of sustainability issues in the apparel sector is extended to knowledge of raw materials sourcing. The correlation between local manufacturing and the understanding the term 'sustainable apparel' is also explored. Half of the respondents who were aware of sustainable apparel consider local manufacturing as an integral definition, whereas, only 32.1 percent of unaware respondents feel that way.

The revival of local manufacturing in conjunction with the principle of recycling is at the root of sustainable apparel. Recycling in this context is not limited to the end of life: 89.3 percent of respondents who were aware of sustainable apparel considered that recycled content is the closest definition, and 80.8 percent of respondents who were not aware selected the same. (See Fig 1).

In both groups, the principle of recycling gained most priority. Testing the importance of recycled content in a garment displayed a different facet. Respondents who were aware showed a higher stand on recycled content at 57.1 percent, whereas only 32.1 percent of the unaware respondents felt it was important to have recycled content in their garments (See Fig 2).

The dynamics of consumer behavior is often hard to predict. On one hand the industry needs to cooperate with the social and environmental indicators, and on the other hand it needs to please its consumer base. In the survey, the influencing factors stated by the consumers show a sense of ethical and social standing. The aware and unaware groups stand close on the concept of “support for local business” as one of the influencing factors to buy local sustainable apparel (See Fig 3). In addition, price and selection are tied as the second most concerning factor from the consumer’s perspective. (See Fig 4).

During independent interviews with designers and fashion retailers, the inspiration to adopt a sustainable apparel business model emerged from a profound passion to eliminate the hidden costs of the industry--the social and the environmental equity.

Word from the industry

Tara St James is the owner and head designer for the New York-based clothing label Study, an ethical contemporary brand entirely produced in New York City using sustainable materials. “There is a bit of disconnect between sourcing sustainable materials and then producing garments in a large factory in China," she said.

Modavanti is an online sustainable fashion retailer, launched in 2011 by founder and CEO David Dietz. According to Modavanti, “The main challenge is educating consumers that there is something wrong with the industry." Consumers did not associate apparel with social inequality or environmental pollution until recently. “We believe that if a customer is confronted with a choice between a similar product at a similar price, but one is sustainable and the other is not, then they will choose sustainable every time," the company wrote on its website.

An interview with another fashion designer from NYC, Daniel Silverstein, revealed some very optimistic and inspiring viewpoints. At FIT, he was introduced to the concept of zero fabric waste design. Daniel chose to challenge the industry by designing and manufacturing clothing that produces zero waste by masterful techniques of pattern-making and cutting.

Traditionally, the buyer and the seller for any product seek profits and price advantages respectively. Principles of sustainability are beginning to revolutionize the old school idea where the two parties solely look to gain from a transaction. The concept of mindful consumption is not exclusively limited to consumers, but it also extends to producers who need to be accountable of the waste created by fast fashion. “Mindful production” which is applicable to usage of resources, ethical practices and ecological liability can reorganize the industry from ground up.

Overall, the impact of one decision by one person, for one garment, for one occasion has a story behind it. A story that is hidden behind style, color and design. The fast-moving apparel industry has been spinning off its course, but the fraternity is working rigorously--combining resources and joining hands in reestablishing itself as a social and ethical enterprise. The conscious movement has begun to sprout in style and the fashion world is proclaiming: Green is the new black.

Image credit: Flickr/emilysnuffer

All interview excerpts are from the author's capstone research project.

Raheen Khan is a recent graduate with Masters in Sustainability Studies from Ramapo College of New Jersey.

By Katie Kross

You’ve heard it before: Job searching is about relationship-building. It’s good advice, no matter how many times you hear it—but it’s especially true of the sustainability job search. The fact is, if you’re spending your time looking for sustainability job postings online, you’re going about the job search the wrong way.

Sustainability disciplines—and by that I mean not just corporate sustainability roles, but also corporate social responsibility (CSR), clean tech, impact investing, sustainability consulting, green marketing and a host of other disciplines that make the world a more sustainable place—are evolving at lightning pace. Many of the jobs that will exist a year from now do not even exist today.  Others are largely going to be filled with relationship-based searches—the right person with the right introduction at the right time.  You want to be on the short list for a sustainability job before a job is even posted. (You might even be the one writing the job description!) And no amount of time spent trolling job boards will help you with that.

Here are five tips for a more effective job search.

1. Target organizations, not jobs

The best way to tackle the job search is to start with a list of 30 organizations that interest you most (regardless of whether they currently have an opening or not).  Focus on building relationships within those organizations, meeting key hiring decision-makers, and learning as much as you can about their direction. How and where are they expanding?  What makes someone an ideal fit, culturally, with the organization (or the sustainability department itself)?  What are the challenges they are facing?  The more you learn, the better prepared you’ll be to propose yourself as someone to help tackle those challenges.  Of course, your list will evolve as you research.  Prioritize the organizations that interest you most and drop those that don’t off your list.

2. Network systematically

Looking at your list of 30, start at the top and begin systematically networking your way through the list.  Set a goal of reaching out to six contacts at those organizations a week.  Use LinkedIn and your university’s alumni directory to find contacts, and then email asking for a phone call. Ask your professional colleagues, friends and family members if they can make an introduction to any of the firms. Look for conferences or events where executives from those organizations are speaking, and show up to network.  When you have a conversation with one executive at the organization, ask: “Is there anyone else it would be beneficial for me to speak with?”

3. Nurture the relationships

After you have an interesting conversation with a new contact, don’t drop the ball.  Follow up every three to four weeks.  This follow-up might be as simple as an email thanking them again for a specific piece of advice and letting them know it was useful in your job search.  You might send them an article or recent news story that was particularly relevant to your past conversation.  Or, you can be explicit: “As I continue to network, I feel more committed than ever to work in the impact investing space.  If you hear of any firms that are thinking of expanding their team, I’d appreciate your keeping me in mind.”

4. Narrow your focus

It sounds counterintuitive, but your sustainability job search will actually be more effective if you narrow your search.  When you’re networking and you tell someone, “I’m open to any role that’s related to sustainability,” it is hard for them to imagine what would be a good fit—and consequently, hard for them to recommend other contacts or companies that you should know about.  It also makes you less memorable.  Do you have an industry focus?  A geographic focus?  Do you have expertise in a particular issue (water, energy) or skillset (marketing, finance, lifecycle analysis)? Do you want to work in the private sector or for an NGO?  The more specific you can be, the more useful your networking will be.

5. Remember: You only need one job

Too many job seekers worry, “There just aren’t a lot of sustainability openings.”  The job search is about quality, not quantity.  There could be hundreds of openings and you wouldn’t necessarily have a better chance at landing them.  What’s important is to position yourself as the best candidate for each opening you pursue, not throw your resume in the hat for dozens of openings.  At the end of the day, you only need one job.  That really only requires one job opening—one that you have spent weeks or months cultivating and positioning yourself for, so that when it opens, you are an irresistible candidate.

--

If you’re looking online for job openings, chances are, you’re already too late.  By the time there is an opening, you should already know about it.  You should have relationships with decision-makers—often, several—within the company.  And you should know enough about the organization and department that you can clearly hone in on exactly what the job requires and why you can add value.

So, close down your browser, and start cultivating those relationships.

Katie Kross is managing director of the Center for Energy, Development, and the Global Environment (EDGE) at Duke University's Fuqua School of Business and author of Profession and Purpose: A Resource Guide for MBA Careers in Sustainability, which will be released in 2nd edition in July 2014 by Greenleaf Publishing.

UTZ Certified, the sustainable farming programme and label, has published a new code of conduct, which it says is stronger in content and simpler in structure.

The company maintains that the simpler language of the new structure - consisting of one core code and commodity specific modules – will allow more farmers to join the program.

The code focuses on management practices and elaborates more on climate change adaptation. There is also greater emphasis on measures for preventing, monitoring and remediating child labour, increasing women’s participation, and reaching more smallholders.

By focusing more on management practices in the farm, the new code is expected to lead farmers to take informed decisions while increasing farm profitability over the long term. Farmers will also be guided in adaptation measures to prepare them for unpredictable weather events in tropical areas due to climate change.

The code is further designed to increase farmers’ social and economic resilience. For example, it promotes diversification strategies such as intercropping and home gardens in which highly nutritional plants are established. Other highlights include the treatment of coffee waste water and its post-quality analysis, as well as the explicit promotion of ecological diversity and the protection of ecosystems.

“We seek an approach of continuous improvement in which farm productivity is strengthened by an efficient use of inputs, while also addressing social and environmental challenges more in depth,” said Britta Wyss Bisang, standards director at UTZ Certified. “We want this code of conduct to become an every-day and easy-to-use tool for farmers. A tool that will help them improve agricultural techniques, impact positively on farmers’ lives and enhance environmental protection.” 

The UTZ code of conduct is reviewed every five years by all stakeholders – producers, academics, industry members and NGOs - in order to further enhance the benefits of the UTZ programmw. The review process for this new code began in August 2012 and involved two public online consultations and ten workshops in origin countries.  

With a busy week behind you and the weekend within reach, there’s no shame in taking things a bit easy on Friday afternoon. With this in mind, every Friday TriplePundit will give you a fun, easy read on a topic you care about. So, take a break from those endless email threads, and spend five minutes catching up on the latest trends in sustainability and business.

From the ongoing debate over genetically modified organisms (GMOs) to ingredients lists so complicated they should come with a scientific dictionary, consumers are becoming increasingly active about the ingredients in their favorite food and personal care products. While many companies turn a deaf hear to customers' requests for transparency, some are heeding the call and taking steps toward sustainable ingredients sourcing.

Here are 10 of our favorite success stories (and one cautionary tale that shows what not to do).

1. Mars Inc. raises the bar for sustainable palm oil

Mars Inc. is upping the ante regarding the sustainable palm oil market. In March, the manufacturer of the popular chocolate candy bars Mars Bar, 3 Musketeers and Twix announced its commitment to transition to 100 percent certified sustainable palm oil in its products by the end of 2014.

Unilever, Kellogg's, Starbucks and Dunkin' Donuts have also made bold palm oil commitments in the past year.

2. Coca-Cola and Pepsi ditch brominated vegetable oil

Brominated vegetable oil (BVO), a controversial ingredient used in flame retardants, can be found in roughly 10 percent of all soft drinks. That was until recently when Coca-Cola removed the ingredient from its Powerade sports drink after a Change.org petition started by 15-year-old Sarah Kavanaugh received more than 200,000 signatures.

Another petition started by Kavanaugh inspired PepsiCo to remove BVO from its Gatorade drinks last year. Following Coca-Cola's announcement, Pepsi confirmed it will remove the ingredient from its entire product line, including Mountain Dew and Amp -- two beverages that still contained the ingredient.

3. Subway removes so-called 'yoga mat chemical' from its bread

Earlier this year, Subway decided to remove a chemical called Azodicarbonamide from its bread after a public outcry on social media led by an influential blogger. In March, Vani Hari, who runs the blog FoodBabe.com, launched a petition for the removal of the chemical.

Azodicarbonamide, Hari explained, is used in yoga mats, shoe rubber and synthetic leather, the World Health Organization has linked it to respiratory issues, allergies and asthma, and it is banned as a food additive in Europe and Australia. Subway responded to the petition saying it would phase out the ingredient and announced last month that it has completely eliminated it from its bread.

4. Chipotle becomes the first fast food chain to tag GMOs

In the ongoing debate about genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in our food, last year Denver, Colo.-based Chipotle Mexican Grill made what may turn out to be an important food history “first” in the United States.

The chain, which operates more than 1,450 restaurants across the U.S., Canada, the United Kingdom and France, revealed that since March 2013, it has labeled all the ingredients in its menu items, including GMOs. This makes Chipotle the first American fast food chain to voluntarily display the presence of GMOs in its products.

5. Johnson & Johnson pledges to cleanse its products of harmful chemicals

In 2012, Johnson & Johnson made the landmark announcement that it would ban harmful chemicals from its products. The company has already made the pledge to remove toxic chemicals from its baby products by 2013.

Its new effort extends to its adult brands like Neutrogena, Aveeno, and Clean & Clear. By the end of 2015, the company will be the first major company to remove harmful chemicals from its line of consumer products.

6. Seventh Generation calls for chemical reform

Late last year, leading sustainably-minded companies including Seventh Generation announced the launch of a coalition that urges Congress to update chemical safety laws. Called Companies for Safer Chemicals, Seventh Generation and the American Sustainable Business Council (ASBC) are leading the coalition, which also includes brands like Patagonia, Stonyfield Farm, Aubrey Organics and Method.

Coalition members signed a declaration which asks “Congress to pass comprehensive and effective chemical safety reform legislation now.” The declaration also states that reform “must respect the rights of states to protect their residents when the federal government fails to do so, and require the Environmental Protection Agency to take fast action on the most harmful chemicals.”

7. General Mills introduces GMO-free Cheerios

Environmentalists called it a victory. General Mills, however, said it was just a recipe change.

In a blog post earlier this year, GMO Inside.org took credit for General Mills’ statement that it was making its regular Cheerios out of non-genetically modified sources (GMOs) – a change from its other Cheerios products, which do contain GMOs.

Although General Mills seemed to downplay the shift away from genetically modified sugar and cornstarch in its Cheerios cereal, the move is significant nonetheless and may signal the future of ingredient sourcing.

8. Boulder Brands removes GMO ingredients from Smart Balance spread

Say what you will about butter-like spreads, but at least now there's one on the market that doesn't contain GMOs. Earlier this year, Boulder Brands announced it would change the ingredients in its Smart Balance spread to eliminate GMOs.

“I’ve been in the food industry for 35 years. I have never seen a consumer issue come on this fast,” Stephen Hughes, chairman and chief executive of Boulder Brands, told the Los Angeles Times. “Forty-three percent of our consumers want to see a non-GMO Smart Balance.”

9. Colgate-Polmolive, Avon and others remove triclosan from cosmetics

Late last year, the FDA issued a proposal requiring companies that use the antimicrobial triclosan to prove the ingredient is safe. Johnson & Johnson, Procter & Gamble and Colgate-Palmolive have been reformulating to rid their products of triclosan – a suspected endocrine disruptor – for two years now, the Guardian reports.

Avon joined that list in April, announcing that it will begin phasing the chemical out of "the few" products in its line that include it. Although it remains to be seen how quickly these companies will remove the ingredient from their product lines, it's certainly a step in the right direction.

10. Kraft re-imagines (some of) its mac and cheese

Kraft announced late last year that it would revamp its character-shaped line of mac and cheese for 2014. The new versions will have six additional grams of whole grains, be lower in sodium and saturated fat, and will use spices instead of artificial food dyes to recreate the pasta's famous yellow-orange color, company spokeswoman Lynne Galia told CNN in November.

What not to do: Sigg called out on BPA BS

Back in 2007, water bottle manufacturer Sigg proudly proclaimed that its colorful reusable bottles were free of Bisphenol A (BPA), an endocrine disruptor that has been linked to reproductive health issues. There's only one problem: It wasn't true.

In a 2009 press release, CEO Steve Wasik, the very same man who told publications like Treehugger that Sigg's bottles did not contain BPA, explained that bottles manufactured prior to August 2008 have a water-based epoxy liner which contains trace amounts of BPA. He continued to explain that NOW all Sigg bottles are BPA free, which wasn't much consolation for consumers who had been drinking from their supposedly BPA-free bottles for years already.

So, let this be a lesson to brands big and small: If you're going to do transparency, it's probably a good idea to start by telling the truth.

Image credit: Flickr/carbonnyc

Based in Philadelphia, Mary Mazzoni is an editor at TriplePundit. She is also a freelance journalist who frequently writes about sustainability, corporate social responsibility and clean tech. Her work has appeared on the Huffington Post, Sustainable Brands, Earth911 and The Daily Meal. You can follow her on Twitter @mary_mazzoni.