Search

Businesses Embrace the Wisdom of the Crowd

3P Author ID
8550
Primary Category
Content

By Tess Riley

From start-ups to large corporations, businesses are crowdsourcing their future. But is such a strategy wise?

Before the dawn of digital conversation, it made sense for a business to decide on its strategy first, and then go public with it. The thinking went on behind closed doors, perhaps with the help of a select group of stakeholders from the outside world. Today, things are happening backwards: first you ask the public, and then you publish the strategy.

It's partly down to advances in ICT. Digital platforms mean businesses can ignite and sustain conversations with the outside world, letting new expertise inform their activities and decisions. Some businesses are taking this to heart, asking the crowd to help them find the best way forward.

The implications for sustainability are colossal. For businesses looking to nudge the public into new behaviours more in harmony with the resources to hand, engaging them from the outset is crucial. And for consumers and stakeholders wanting to see a bit more leadership on behalf of their favourite brands, there are new ways to speak up. Then there's the potential to come up with completely new ways of running the world – through brainstorms on a scale never seen before.

Forum for the Future is working on ways to nurture this through its project, Wired For Change. It's a series of worldwide "hackathons": day-long events which bring together digital entrepreneurs and those campaigning for systematic change in the food, energy and finance spheres, to search for solutions.

"The key thing is to bring together the 'ideas people,' the coders, the hackers and the designers," James Taplin, an expert on innovation at Forum for the Future, explains. "They then have 24 hours and all the support we can offer to develop a business model that is sustainable in both the ecological and business sense."

Taplin and his colleague Hugh Knowles believe that experimentation is key. If you can launch 1,000 experiments, 100 might have merit, 10 might happen, and out of these, one could create big change, goes the logic. Take HatchTag, for example, one of the projects to emerge from the first Wired for Change event, held in Bristol last September. The app links small-scale egg sellers with customers through a simple text system that then enables buyers to locate the nearest eggs to them through a mobile digital "eggmap." Scale this kind of project up, and you start to challenge the assumption that you need shops to help you find local produce.

Crowdsourcing goes far beyond the inception of new solutions. Startups are drawing on the masses for everything from funding – through investor platforms like Kickstarter – to development. Digital communities are fast-moving, open to experiment, flexible in approach and committed to refinement – all qualities that fit the climate in which social enterprises operate. But, of course, not all these communities see "saving the world" as their raison d'être…

"There's great digital talent out there," says Taplin, "but, in the main, the focus of their work is not sustainability. It still has to register as an opportunity for them, so that these enterprises get fired up about using the crowd to address some of the most significant challenges we face."

The power of live feedback and criticism to drive innovation in business is not just beneficial for entrepreneurs, though. In the last year, one of the UK's largest retailers, Sainsbury's, asked an expert crowd to review its 20 x 20 Sustainability Plan, pioneering an approach to planning for the future which may become a blueprint for the sector.

Not that it was the first: Wikimedia launched a special wiki dedicated to its own strategy back in 2009, generating over 900 proposals over two years. But Sainsbury's is perhaps the first to do it for the sake of sustainability.

"The fundamental thing was to embed sustainability into our wider business strategy – to ask the crowd what was working and what we need to do differently and then to act on that," says Alex Cole, Corporate Affairs Director at Sainsbury's. "We had been quietly getting on with driving forward our sustainability agenda but became increasingly aware that mass stakeholder engagement was critical and would turbocharge momentum into what we were doing. The outcomes have been hugely positive."

Two things stand out from the Sainsbury's review: firstly, the crowd of 220 people included employees from direct competitor chains Tesco and Marks & Spencer. Cole admits that the team at Sainsbury's hesitated over this, but ultimately decided that if any aspect of the business was going to offer positive scope for cooperation, sustainability would be it.

Secondly, Sainsbury's was entirely transparent about what it did in the belief that only a wholly open process, warts and all, would deliver the innovative, strategy-shaping outcomes the company was seeking. As Cole points out, transparency is a trend, not a fad, "so it's important to manage it, and use it as an opportunity to get 360 degree feedback of your performance."

Jim Woods is CEO of the sustainable business network Green Mondays, which played host to Sainsbury's crowd review project: "There are two types of company who are going to benefit from getting naked in front of the crowd," he says. "At one end of the spectrum there are the leaders who are confident of their story and who therefore want to share their innovation, knowing that they'll get a good response. At the other end, and perhaps more surprisingly, are those for whom trust is a big problem, organisations like banks and utilities. If they are able to say 'We're broken, we know we need to change, so help us!', then the crowd will respond and get involved."

This touches on something that not many of those getting down with the crowd are saying overtly, but which much of their evaluation implies. Namely, that crowdsourcing information from external contributors is as tactical from a PR point of view as it is strategic from an operations perspective. In a world where collaborative consumption and peer-to-peer exchanges – from crowdfunding to sharing networks – are becoming the norm, no business wants to be left behind.

Andrew Perchard, an expert in contemporary trends at the University of Strathclyde Business School, believes seeking input from the crowd is, above all, a tactical corporate move: "Sainsbury's have carefully projected an image of themselves of being open. In light of public cynicism of business and politics in the current climate, cultivating that image of a trustworthy company could be a distinct boost and give them a comparative advantage."

Companies need to tune in to the shifting mood of the crowd to keep ahead.

In this, therefore, startups and large corporations share an agenda. Both are looking for a way forward in the context of a new political and economic scene, in which local democracy, collaboration and openness come up trumps. We've already seen iTunes and Spotify knock CDs out of the ring, and Skype has given phone providers a shock. Those companies wanting to keep ahead of the disruptive innovators need to be tuned in to the shifting mood of the crowd.

For Taplin, this is where the real potential for change lies. "There are systems that need to be fundamentally overhauled: we need to find new ways of doing business that work in harmony with wider sustainability goals. The ideas with the potential to overturn the incumbents can come from the crowd, so it's vital that we, as individuals and organisations, have the desire, ability and vision to embrace that change."

Tess Riley is a freelance journalist and environmental campaigner. @tess_riley

Green Futures is the leading magazine on environmental solutions and sustainable futures.

[image credit: James Cridlund: Flickr cc]

3P ID
135892
Prime
Off

Ford Motor Company’s Sustainability Strategy for Growing Sales

3P Author ID
307
Primary Category
Content

During the North American International Auto Show, I had the opportunity to meet with Ford’s Chairman Bill Ford and CEO Alan Mulally to discuss Ford’s business strategy and the role sustainability plays in it.

Bill Ford


Ford Motor Company’s business strategy reflects Bill Ford’s passion to continue his grandfather’s legacy of “making people’s lives better.” Before climate change was a national topic, Bill Ford was recognized as an environmentalist. A measure of true leadership is the ability to hold to your values in the face of criticism. In 1988, when he joined the Ford board of directors, Ford received harsh ridicule from his business peers because of his view that business success is linked to environmental and corporate responsibility. Bill Ford has declined any opportunity to say “I told you so” and instead continues to lead from the front by guiding Ford Motor Company to design and sell products that win competitive advantage on value and values.

Ford’s sales success


Bill Ford’s vision and courage to hold to his values has been validated. Ford Motor Company is setting sales records selling cars and trucks designed around fuel efficiency that achieve lower tailpipe emissions while being fun to drive and price competitive. 2012 marked the second straight year that Ford Motor Company sold more than two million Ford branded vehicles in the U.S. Ford is the only automotive brand to top two million U.S. sales since 2007. The Ford Focus remains the best-selling global vehicle nameplate.

Ford CEO Alan Mulally


A mark of a great leader is the ability to recruit outstanding people. The measure of a leader’s strength is their ability to allow others to lead. Bill Ford epitomizes the words of Coca-Cola’s legendary CEO Robert Woodruff:
There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he doesn’t mind who gets the credit.

Bill Ford demonstrated such leadership when he hired Alan Mulally away from Boeing. Mulally brought to Ford Motor Company strong business skills and global leadership in high-tech manufacturing. Like Ford, he is humble, calling Bill Ford his “supervisor.” But it was Mulally who initiated and led the “One Ford” cultural change inside Ford that is driving down costs while also introducing price competitive products loaded with cutting-edge technologies.

Mulally on sustainability


Mulally views sustainability on two levels. Mulally’s big picture for sustainability is defined by how well a company can survive and grow in today’s intense competitive environment. “Continue to serve” is his definition of sustainability on the enterprise level. “Continue to serve” is achieved by offering products that customers want, and will pay for, produced by using fewer resources and that will achieve cost competitiveness through superior productivity.

From his enterprise-scale definition of sustainability, he then defines every resource as “precious.” This “precious resource” perspective drives the enterprise to reduce the use of water, materials and energy in the production, distribution and sale of product. Tellingly, for every company that thirsts to be a Ford Motor Company vendor, Mulally says,

People I like to associate with have that view of sustainability.

Mulally video interview on sustainability


The following two minute video captures Mulally talking with me about the role he sees sustainability playing at Ford Motor Company.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvgOR0OpzJY

This is the first of a four-part case study on how Ford is going green. Their best practices can be used by every business to grow revenues and win customers. The second article will profile Ford’s Go Further brand messaging built upon sustainability including an exclusive video interview with Ford's Global Director of Sustainability. Upcoming articles will feature Ford's electrification technologies and a test drive of their plug-in electric C-Max Energi car.

Travel and accommodations to NAIAS in Detroit were covered by Ford. Opinions are my own.

Bill Roth is an economist and the founder of Earth 2017 He coaches business owners and leaders on proven best practices in pricing, marketing and operations that make money and create a positive difference. His book, The Secret Green Sauce, profiles business case studies of pioneering best practices that are proven to win customers and grow product revenues. Follow him on Twitter: @earth2017.

3P ID
136404
Prime
Off

V3Solar Claims Solar Cones Generate Electricity Cheaper Than Coal

3P Author ID
367
Primary Category
Content

V3Solar has released a new solar energy technology that the start-up claims could be cheaper than coal. In an exclusive on the Clean Technica blog last Thursday, the southern California-based start up claimed that its conical solar arrays can generate electricity at 8¢ a kilowatt hour: or less than two-thirds of the price of conventional electricity and even a cent cheaper than natural gas. And that figure is the levelized cost of energy, or LCOE, which accounts for the total cost of generating that energy including installation and maintenance.

Naturally, yet another claim about a clean energy disruptive technology will raise eyebrows--such as mine, as I seem to remember a couple years ago when my inbox was constantly flooded with press releases from algae biofuel companies stating they would have a game-changing breakthrough in six months. Those emails stopped coming at least two years ago. Then, of course, there has been the relative silence over the Bloom Box. But there is something about V3Solar that is creating buzz around the web, including at sites such as Grist. So what is in the secret sauce?

As is the case with most new technologies, much of the answer lies in V3Solar’s design. The flat design of conventional photovoltaic (PV) solar panels has an impact on their efficiency: 18 percent on average. If the amount of light hitting a panel increases 20-fold, theoretically, the electricity generated would be 20 times as much, but with one caveat: the heat generated (260ºF) would cause the PV panels to fail.

However, V3Solar’s cones, layered in what the company describes as “spin cells,” avoids that problem. The outer cones’ lensing captures that light at a rate of 20 times more intense, and it is then deflected to the smaller, inner panels within these cones. Furthermore, the conical layering of these cobalt blue cones captures light much more efficiently as the sun changes positions during the day. As the cones rotate via its CoolSpin technology, a “dynamic flash rate” accelerates electrons at a rapid rate that creates even more electricity. Think of these cones as analogous to Russian matryoshka dolls--inside each cone is one smaller, receiving concentrated light from the one hovering over it. To that end, the company claims that one of its spin cells produces as much electricity as five flat PV panels--another key game-changer considering the cost of land.

V3Solar commissioned solar expert Bill Rever to examine the company’s technology and write a review. Overall, Rever was positive about the potential--but as with any new emerging technology, his final conclusion is revealing:

Overall, V3Solar appears to have a concept that can carve out a solid place in the solar and overall electricity market and is pursuing a sound strategy in examining and understanding the details of the technology to provide the best possible initial design.

Whatever the outcome may be, there is no denying that the excitement and innovation surrounding V3Solar is exciting--and that there is even more to look forward to as more startups seek to break the yoke that fossil fuels have long had on our economy.

Leon Kaye, based in Fresno, California, is a sustainability consultant and the editor of GreenGoPost.com. He also contributes to Guardian Sustainable Business; his work has also appeared on Sustainable BrandsInhabitat and Earth911. You can follow Leon and ask him questions on Twitter or Instagram (greengopost). He will explore children’s health issues in India next month with the International Reporting Project.

[Image credit: V3Solar]

3P ID
136378
Prime
Off

Avon Helps Pass Domestic Violence Legislation

3P Author ID
497
Primary Category
Content

In the fall of 2012, the Avon Foundation, supporting several native NGOs, helped pass legislation in Hungary declaring domestic violence illegal. It was a huge victory for women’s rights in Hungary, and the conclusion of a battle that NGOs there had been waging for more than two decades.

Less than a year prior, Avon Hungary threw its support behind these efforts to help raise awareness of the issue and move the bill forward. Avon’s formidable sales force, more than 70,000 strong, was instrumental in helping to gather the signatures needed to force parliament to put the initiative on their agenda and discuss it. While only 50,000 signatures were needed, the petition gained more than 100,000. And then, it almost all fell apart, until one man’s misogyny caused a nation to rally behind this issue.

Although the petition had plenty of support, the legislature had so little regard for this issue, they scheduled discussion for the middle of the night. The bill looked doomed to fail, until one parliamentarian, Fidesz MP István Varga, declared on the record,

Women should primarily focus on raising children, and we should discuss how families could have three, four or five kids rather than only one or two. This would help us to honour each other more, and domestic violence would not be an issue.... After helping the country by giving birth to two, three or four children, … women can find and emancipate themselves.

That singular comment turned the tables on the fate of the bill and unleashed a furor of public outrage at the attitude of Hungary’s government toward the role of its women in society. Within days of that comment becoming public, the bill passed unanimously.

Speak Out


In 2004, the Avon Foundation formally and publicly took up the fight against domestic violence, an admittedly “ugly issue” according to Susan Arnot Heaney, Executive Director, Corporate Responsibility at Avon Products, that not many organizations are willing to take on.

But, the cosmetics giant did not embrace this barbed issue lightly. “You cannot lead if no one will follow,” Heaney said. The foundation commissioned a global study by a large consulting firm to determine the worldwide scope of the problem and if it was a fit for Avon. In addition, the foundation wanted to know if their own sales force and customers would rally behind this cause. The answer to both questions, Heany said, “was a resounding YES," and Avon's Speak Out Against Domestic Violence program was born.

Due to the nature of their direct sales cosmetics business, Avon representatives themselves are in a unique position to view domestic situations up close as they visit customers’ homes or meet with them one-on-one during an office consultation. Many times these representatives intuit a bad situation right away. When Avon announced their formal support for this issue, their sales force cheered. The company also discovered how close to home this issue really is when some of their own representatives disclosed that they had been victims of such abuse.

Veronika Toth, Communications Specialist, Avon Hungary, said, "Violence against women is a worldwide epidemic of devastating proportions. Approximately one in three women worldwide will be beaten, coerced into sex or otherwise abused by an intimate partner in the course of her lifetime."

The Avon Foundation doesn’t believe in a singular approach to a problem, but rather uses a multi-pronged, systemic attack in order to make progress. Heaney believes the strongest tool at this stage of the issue is awareness and education. "There are two types of awareness: awareness [by the perpetrators] that it's wrong, and awareness for victims that they deserve something better." Then, Heaney said, the next step is to pass laws and enforce them, and educate law enforcement on how to deal with these situations.

In 2009, Avon established the Avon Global Center for Women and Justice at Cornell Law School. The center works with legal professionals and NGOs to "improve access to justice in an effort to eliminate violence against women and girls." It has pioneered studies around the world relating to violence against women and recommended actions for governments to aid in prevention.

The Speak Out program is now in more than 50 countries, putting Avon in a position to have a huge impact on a global problem. However, Avon does not go in and impose Western morals on native cultures. "Working in different countries demands cultural knowledge and sensitivity," Heaney said. The foundation excels at finding NGOs that are culturally savvy and socially sensitive, and finding ways to support them and raise awareness to effect change. Toth agreed, emphasizing the relationships Avon Hungary built with NGOs there to finally get the petition heard, and ultimately, the bill passed.

Financial empowerment


One of the strongest holds over women in bad situations is the lack of financial means to escape. Avon offers women who might not have the immediate means to find work, a chance at a career and financial independence. Studies show that empowering women benefits communities. While domestic violence might seem like a purely personal problem, it is, in fact, a significant business problem.

According to the Battered Women's Shelter, in the U.S.:


  • Intimate partner violence costs exceed $5.8 billion each year, $4.1 billion of which is for direct medical and mental health services.

  • Victims of intimate partner violence lose almost 8 million days of paid work each year. This is equivalent to more than 32,000 full-time jobs and almost 5.6 million days of household productivity.

  • There are 16,800 homicides and 2.2 million (medically treated) injuries due to intimate partner violence annually, which costs $37 billion.

  • Between 35% and 56% of victims of intimate partner violence are harassed at work by their abusers.

  • Over 1.75 million workdays are lost as a result of domestic violence each year.

  • $3 to $5 billion is lost annually in absenteeism, decreased productivity, and health and safety costs.

  • Many domestic violence victims report that they have lost a job due to domestic violence.

The jobless landscape and economic climate only exacerbate this problem. Reports of domestic violence have skyrocketed since the economic downturn.

Future plans


In addition to continuing their current initiatives, Avon is not resting on its laurels, but looking toward the future, taking aim at prevention and incorporating some high-tech weapons, as well as focusing its attention on certain at-risk segments of the U.S. population. The Battered Women's Justice Project supports military personnel and veterans, and Honor Our Voices listens to children who witnessed domestic violence, trying to break the cycle and prevent future violence. The foundation and the Institute of Medicine (IOM) have even joined together to create the Ending Violence @ Home App Challenge, a program to create apps that drive awareness and prevention of domestic abuse.

Avon won a significant battle by helping pass legislation in Hungary, hopefully it is on its way to winning the war on domestic violence around the world.

[image credit: Beth Punches: Flickr cc]

3P ID
135753
Prime
Off

How the Sharing Economy Can Serve Professional Consumers

3P Author ID
5125
Primary Category
Content

Let’s say you've played the guitar for couple of years, and you’re really good at it. You’re probably not the next Hendrix, but you enjoy playing with your friends or jamming in your living room once in a while. Lately, you started wondering if the time hasn’t come to get yourself a more professional guitar, maybe even the Gibson Les Paul Standard Plus you have been secretly fantasizing about for some time. But you keep wondering – is it really worth paying $3,000 for what is basically just a hobby?

Here’s another scenario – you have been taking private golf lessons for about a year or so, and both you and your instructor feel that it’s time for you to get new clubs. You’re getting good at golf (still, nothing for Tiger Woods or Rory McIlroy to worry about) and want to have a set of really good clubs to keep improving your game. You have your eye on Mizuno golf clubs, but you’re not sure if you’re ready to spend $700 on clubs, even if they’re offering “super game improvement and explosive distance that all cavemen crave!”

These are just examples of the struggles some consumers experience, mostly with regards to a hobby that they are ready to take to the next level. This group is also known as professional consumers or prosumers (not to be confused with Alvin Toffler’s prosumers, which refers to proactive consumers or the "progressive blurring of the line that separates producer from consumer"). In other words, these are amateurs that have requirements of professionals.

The conflicts this group has derive from the fact that in most cases, getting whatever their object of desire is involves a purchase with a questionable value (i.e. is it really worth it?). The question we’d like to explore is whether the sharing economy can provide prosumers with a better and more sustainable way to enjoy the guitar or golf clubs they want so much.

The risk in buying fancy golf clubs or an expensive guitar is that it will end up just like the home power drill, which as Alex Steffen explains, is used in average somewhere between 6 and 20 minutes in its entire lifetime, and the rest of the time, “it sits quietly stored away, gathering dust.” The waste, both ecological and financial, might be even greater when we look at the items prosumers are interested in, which probably have a larger ecological footprint and a higher price tag than a power drill.

When it comes to a power drill, the sharing economy has no problem providing alternatives that are cheaper and more sustainable than purchasing one – from neighborhood tool-lending websites to stores that would hand it to you for a reasonable price. The problem is that what prosumers have in mind is nothing like a home power drill.

First, it’s probably not a generic item that is just needed to drill a hole and it doesn’t really matter what brand or type it is, but a piece of equipment that needs to meet higher expectations. Second, prosumers would probably use the requested item more than 20 minutes in its lifetime so pricing is more of an issue as it needs to be attractive enough even when the use is occasional rather than rare. Last, but not least, this is a hobby we’re dealing with, not a chore, so the whole process of getting and bringing back the item should be easy and user-friendly as to not to take the fun out of whatever the prosumer wants to do.

Can the sharing economy deal with this list of requirements? I believe it is. Luckily we already have a few examples that provide us with an idea how it can be done. Take, for example, Sweat Shop, a Parisian “café couture” equipped with 10 Singer sewing machines that can be rented by the hour (EUR 6 per hour) and one central communal table. In addition to state of the art sewing machines, Sweat Shop offers sewing enthusiasts courses in sewing as well as “a serene atmosphere where work and relaxation go hand-in-hand.” Another example is Bill’s Music in Baltimore, which offers a rent-to-own electric guitar program in prices ranging from $10 to $49 per month.

Some businesses still don’t offer options to all prosumers, but show a potential to do so - take for example City Cookhouse in NY, which features a full-size kitchen, coupled with an intimate dining and instructional area. The place offers chefs, bakers and culinary students a fully equipped kitchen with the space and equipment necessary for recipe development, trending and innovation. Wouldn’t it be great if these services could also be offered to experienced, amateur bakers that want to try new recipes?

If you ask yourself why businesses should bother with the prosumers in the first place, the answer is that while prosumers will probably stay a small niche, it is also a profitable one given the type of items they want to have.

Companies that will look into sharing options for prosumers will be able to identify opportunities to generate more business – from a local cigar shop offering cigar lovers personal humidor services to a scuba diving gear supplier offering divers a subscription plan or rent-to-own options. The demand is already there, now they just need to figure out how to meet it.

[Image credit: rastariza, Flickr Creative Commons]

Raz Godelnik is the co-founder of Eco-Libris and an adjunct faculty at the University of Delaware’s Business School, CUNY SPS and Parsons The New School for Design, teaching courses in green business, sustainable design and new product development. You can follow Raz on Twitter.

3P ID
135223
Prime
Off

"Game Changer" Water Conservation Plan Pairs H&M with WWF

3P Author ID
4227
Primary Category
Content

Just a few months ago, fashion retailer H&M made waves by hooking up with cutting edge chanteuse Lana Del Rey, and how do you follow that act? Well, given H&M's rather impressive record on sustainability, you form a partnership with the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) to develop a plan for ensuring sustainable water use throughout your supply chain. The strategy, which H&M describes as a "game changer in the fashion industry," will be based on an evaluation of H&M's operations, which the company undertook with WWF in 2012.

Urgent need for sustainable water use


H&M is a good example of a company that is not simply responding to current environmental issues, but is also looking several years ahead and planning for a world in which basic resources are growing increasingly scarce.

Water is a particularly urgent area of focus for manufacturers like H&M. According to WWF's 2012 Living Planet Report, about 40 percent of the world's population lives in river basins that are already experiencing severe water scarcity at least part of the year. By 2025, about one-third of H&M's "wet processing" units will be located in areas of extreme water scarcity.

H&M's water sustainability strategy


H&M has been actively pursuing water-related initiatives for about 10 years, but the new partnership with WWF puts it on a different plane altogether. According to WWF, H&M is the first fashion company to apply a comprehensive conservation strategy across its entire business.

The company plans to implement the new strategy in all of its 48 national markets, including 750 direct suppliers and fabric manufacturers.

The strategy also calls for improving water efficiency within H&M's operations, and using the company's high public profile to encourage its customers to adopt more responsible water use habits.

The effort includes educating all 94,000 H&M employees on water issues, as well as deploying about 1,000 employees to implement the strategy (mainly in buying offices, production and sales).

The initial push will include the 190 suppliers that make most of H&M's products, located the Yangtze river basin in China and Brahmaputra in Bangladesh. In addition to encouraging water responsibility by these suppliers, H&M will also support WWF's conservation projects in these two river basins.

Green is the new black


With its trend-of-the-season image, H&M is perfectly positioned to help trigger a shift in public perceptions about sustainability. It wasn't too long ago that conservation was linked in the public mind with sacrifice and discomfort, and H&M has a great opportunity to show how environmental responsibility can go hand-in-glove with the enjoyment that so many people get from keeping up with the latest trends.

The company has already made some inroads in that area. A couple of years ago it became the largest buyer of organic cotton in the world. It has also been launching recycled and organic clothing lines for several years, and it stepped up those initiatives last year with the introduction of a glamorous, red carpet-themed line.

Just last month, H&M also announced the launch of a worldwide clothing recycling initiative, in which customers in all of its 48 markets can conveniently drop off their used H&M clothes at any H&M store.

Who is the most sustainable fashion company of them all?


While H&M leads the fashion industry in sustainable water strategies according to WWF, it's only fair to note the outstanding contributions that Levi Strauss & Co. has making to corporate environmental leadership and social responsibility.

In a speech back in May 2011, Levi CEO and President John Anderson described how apparel companies can and should take it to the next level, by moving beyond site compliance to embrace the daily lives of workers in communities that host a company's facilities.

Under Anderson's plan, Levi's will coordinate its efforts with the United Nations Millennium Development anti-poverty initiatives.

[Image (cropped): H&M window by The Relevant Authorities, flickr]

Follow me on Twitter: @TinaMCasey.

 

 

3P ID
136395
Prime
Off

SF Plan to Buy Clean Energy from Dirty Company Stirs Controversy

3P Author ID
365
Primary Category
Content

The path to a sustainable future will surely be filled with detours, wrong turns and dead ends. There will be times when we are asked to choose the lesser of two evils and sometimes to forgive the sins of bad actors attempting to rehabilitate their reputations with earnest new proposals. That is, at least in part, just human nature. As Sir Walter Scott once said, “Oh, what a tangled web we weave.” The path, of course, although being paved with good intentions, might still lead us away from climate hell, but will it do so quickly enough to make a difference? Other questions raised by today’s story include, "Should you buy a good product from a bad company?" And, maybe even a little bit of, "Do you believe in the possibility of redemption?"

What I am referring to is a $19.5 million proposal passed by the City of San Franciso’s Board of Supervisors back in September, known as CleanPower SF,  which will require roughly half of the city’s residents to purchase green electricity from Shell Energy, a North American subsidiary of Royal Dutch Shell, rather than from PG&E, despite the fact that the change would increase residential utility bills by an average of $23 per month. An additional $1.4 million outreach campaign, aimed at promoting the program and informing the public of their choices, was approved last week.

At first, the SF Public Utility Commission (PUC) was hoping that they could acquire green power at a lower cost than what PG&E is charging for their power (which comes from a multitude of sources), but failing to do so, they enlisted the help of Shell Energy. According to press reports, 180,000 customers will be automatically enrolled in the new plan, though they will have the ability to opt-out if they so choose. This has drawn a great deal of protest, both from those objecting to higher prices, as well as those citing Shell’s rather dubious record across a wide range of issues from social justice to environmental impact in regions ranging from Nigeria to Alaska. Meanwhile, some environmental groups are pleading for people consider the larger climate change issue,  arguing that clean power, no matter who it comes from, or what it costs, is urgently needed now.

There is a Facebook page, Stop San Francisco Shell Shock, decrying everything from the 100 jobs that the plan will supposedly cost the area, to the price of power under this plan, to a litany of Shell’s accumulated misdeeds. There is also a petition running on Change.org, funded by the local electrical workers union, for those opposing the campaign to sign.

According to PUC spokesman Tyrone Jue, the rates presented to the board are the maximum allowable and are "just the beginning of the conversation" suggesting that the final rate will likely be lower.

Proponents of the plan say that the rates will eventually decrease when competitors begin offering their own green energy plans. PG&E has already announced a plan for green energy, mostly likely at a cheaper rate than Shell Energy.

As it stands now, though, the PUC appears to be counting on the fact that either people will be willing to pay considerably more for green power, or that they simply will passively go along with the automatic increase.

As to the lesser of the two evils question, I think it’s best to take the long view and ask what is most sustainable. Perhaps companies like Shell need to see that money can indeed be made in renewables which could persuade them to invest more in that technology and less in lobbying for more access to oil and gas in sensitive areas. It’s fine to vote with your dollars. That is something we should all do. But it’s also important to not cut off your nose to spite your face.

Perhaps, rather than charging people more for green power, they should add a one cent per gallon tax to Shell gasoline and let that cover the difference.

[Image credit: davidyuweb: Flickr Creative Commons]

RP Siegel, PE, is an inventor, consultant and author. He co-wrote the eco-thriller Vapor Trails, the first in a series covering the human side of various sustainability issues including energy, food, and water in an exciting and entertaining format. Now available on Kindle.

Follow RP Siegel on Twitter.

3P ID
136446
Prime
Off

Investing in Collaborative Consumption: Venture Funding in 2012

3P Author ID
100
Primary Category
Content

By Stephanie Brincat

Dubbed the “Megatrend that swallowed Silicon Valley,” collaborative consumption ventures will continue to be a hot area for investors in 2013. Investments in startups topped $431M in 2012, up from $400M in 2011. While not a significant increase in overall funding, the collaborative consumption space has received consistent venture capital over the last 12 months from leading investors such as Sequoia, Union Square Ventures and Floodgate.

Here’s our roundup of where the big investments were made across sectors:

Money


The biggest winner in the payment space was Social Finance (SoFi) - a peer-to-peer student loan network - raising an outstanding $77.2M. With student debt in the U.S. reaching $1 trillion in 2012, SoFi offers students a lending fund with a better fixed loan rate than unsubsidized government loans.

Marketplace payment platform Stripe picked up $38M in funding over two rounds, with an estimated valuation of $500M. Stripe makes it much easier for businesses to start accepting online payments, a big friction point for collaborative consumption marketplaces. Y-Combinator backed Balanced Payments is another player in the space, securing $1.4M in funding. The platform focuses on making sure sellers get paid quickly and is already being used by TheFancy, Kitchit, CrowdTilt, Copious and Zaarly.

Travel and accommodation

Airbnb’s success after its $117M Series B round in mid-2011 has paved the way for other startups seeking funding in the travel and accommodation space. HouseTrip, a platform that allows people to rent out their homes online, picked up an impressive $40M in Series C funding. Couchsurfing received $15M in Series B funding to help extend its 5-million-strong social travel network. Overall, the travel and accommodation space received over $78M in funding in 2012, making it an ongoing trend to watch for 2013.

Fashion


Online fashion marketplaces were one of the standout trends for 2012, with fashion startups receiving more than $56M in funding. Recently, there has been a move away from swapping or "swishing" marketplaces towards the buy/sell or consignment model. Poshmark, a peer-to-peer clothing marketplace for new and used clothes, raised $12M in Series B funding. Users can download the app and start taking photos of their closet immediately, giving potential buyers the chance to purchase unwanted items. ThredUP, the children’s clothing exchange platform, moved away from swapping to a consignment model, meaning parents can now send a bag of children’s clothing, which then gets individually sorted and listed online via the thredUP marketplace. ThredUP raised $14.3M in Series C funding to help expand the business.

Ridesharing


Ridesharing experienced explosive growth in 2012, attracting investors to make some big bets. Startups in the space received more than $48M in funding worldwide. European companies BlaBlarCar, Hailo and Carpooling.com (recently expanded into the U.S) secured $37M of this funding pool, demonstrating the immense success of ridesharing in Europe.

It’s all in the niche


Collaborative consumption startups that focus on a niche market opportunity continue to attract interest as people experiment with sharing services in other parts of their lives. Pet-sitting services received just over $10M in funding, with DogVacay securing $7M over two rounds and Rover.com getting $3.4M in Series A. Cherry, an on-demand carwash service launched in San Francisco that enables you to wash your car on the spot, landed $4.5M in Series A.

Our top 3 trends for 2013


While 2012 has been about increased activity and competition in a number of key verticals across the collaborative consumption space, 2013 will see a focus on the market leaders, as well as enthusiasm for a number of emerging sectors. Here are our top three picks for what will make the headlines this year:

  • Errand networks go international: After proven success in local markets, errand networks like TaskRabbit will focus investment dollars on scaling up and global expansion.

  • Building trust in p2p transactions: If 2012 was the year of p2p payment systems, the rise of identity and reputation tools focused on further reducing friction in p2p marketplaces will be a hot investment area in 2013.

  • Shareable office space: The next frontier in space rental, we are seeing progression from bespoke coworking spaces, to tapping into the assets of corporate work environments through the likes of LiquidSpace, which closed a $6M round in January this year.

Where would you place your bets on the hot investment areas for the collaborative consumption space in 2013?

***

Stephanie Brincat is Community Manager for CollaborativeConsumption.com, the premier online portal for curated news, information and examples related to collaborative consumption worldwide.

3P ID
136254
Prime
Off

Quinoa Farming Practices Push Consumers Toward Fair Trade

3P Author ID
100
Primary Category
Content

By Nellie Stadtherr

A few days ago I set out on my weekly shopping adventure as usual, the Farmer’s Market for seasonal veggies, Whole Foods for my other produce, grains and specialty items, and Trader Joe’s for everything else. To my extreme dismay, none of my spots had celery, zucchini, or asparagus. Not a stalk to be found. Southern California’s “arctic blast” (read: 50 degrees) had devastated the crops. And me. How was I supposed to make soup without celery to mingle with the myriad of organic veggies, organic boxed broth, and free range turkey breast? How could it be palatable without such a key ingredient?

How crazy is it that we can walk into any store and buy pretty much whatever we want, regardless of the season or if the product grows in our country, let alone our state? It's even crazier that I go to three different locations to buy my food “needs.” And the craziest thing is that I would be upset over a celery drought.

So, when I read an article in The Guardian the next day discussing how the Western food trend of quinoa was driving poverty in the regions the grain (well, actually it’s a seed) is sourced from, I felt like a real consumerist jerk. I’ve been a gluten-free health nut for over a decade, and I eat a lot of quinoa. How much damage have I done during my pursuit of protein-packed whole grain goodness?

According to the article by Joanna Blythman, the demand for quinoa by developed countries has caused the price for the grain to increase so much that the poorer Peruvian and Bolivian locals can’t afford it anymore. And unlike us, who choose quinoa to enjoy its health benefits and flavor, these locals depend on the nutritional powerhouse as a staple food.

In Peru, the poorest part of the country is the Andes where quinoa is grown. The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) estimates over 4.475 million people (over 50 percent of the population) living in rural Peru are impoverished. These people are now turning to imported junk food to replace quinoa because it is so much cheaper. Not exactly an even trade, health-wise.

So what can we socially/health-conscious consumers do? Feel guilty with every nutty bite? I don’t think eliminating quinoa from our diets would benefit us or rural farmers…while Western demand has driven the cost in local markets, it has also driven economic growth in producing countries. It is good to purchase goods from rural farmers. If they are paid fairly, the impact of supporting them creates a domino effect of health and economic benefits for their communities. So what we can do is influence the market with our purchasing power.

Global agricultural value chains are complex, especially with crops such as quinoa, which are cultivated in poor, rural regions of developing countries. Farmers often have little to no access to current market prices, tools or education for best farming practices, or transportation to get to market centers. This leaves farmers at the mercy of collectors and traders who purchase the crops for much below market value and sell them to larger traders/exporters at a higher margin, which they sell in return for an even higher margin to Western distributors/brands.

Farmers are certainly getting the short end of the stick. Yes, they are making money from the sale of their crops, but are not being paid a fair price. Considering the exorbitant increase in demand for quinoa exports over the past decade, if farmers were getting their fair share of the pie their economic development would be more on par with the rest of the country.

Of course not all quinoa we purchase is “unethical quinoa.” According to IFAD, roughly 20,0000 families have moved from “subsistence farming… enabl[ing] many to increase their financial and physical assets…” This has been accomplished through IFAD’s programs focused on empowering farmers through education and technology and increasing local ownership of land and crops. These are the kinds of systems that create opportunity out of global markets. These are the reasons we should purchase internationally-sourced products.

But how do we know where our quinoa comes from and how the small farmers are being paid?  This is where Fair Trade makes a big difference. As consumers, this symbol ensures that the market chain is not exploiting farmers. And while getting Fair Trade Certified can be an arduous process, the small step of establishing a few farms as Fair Trade can shift the entire value chain.

For example, if a few local farmers are working with a Fair Trade exporter (who invests in the process), other farmers will become aware of the price and opportunities. As Western demand for Fair Trade quinoa increases, exporters will expand their network of farmers. This will pressure the other traders/collectors who have been underpaying to begin paying farmers outside of the Fair Trade network higher prices for their crops so they don’t become obsolete from the chain.

Of course, buying Fair Trade directly is the best way to support farmers and your humanitarian ideology. Brands such as AlterEco, La Yapa, and Andean Naturals offer Fair Trade Certified quinoa from Bolivian and Peruvian farmers.

So, while the American Whole Grains Council encourages quinoa consumption, stating “...even as you are improving your own health by eating delicious, nutritious quinoa, you can feel good that your purchase of this very special whole grain is doing good elsewhere, too,” and the president of the Quinoa Corporation of LA claimed in the New York Times “It’s kind of discouraging to see stuff like this happen, but that’s part of life and economics,” this is clearly a more difficult conundrum than what to pair with quinoa for the night.

If we are enjoying the nutritional benefits of quinoa, shouldn't the civilizations that have grown and depended on it for centuries be able to do the same? The answer is undoubtedly, yes. The solution begins with us resisting the ease of ignorance. If you can afford $4.50 a pound on a “luxury” grain, can’t you afford a few bucks more for Fair Trade and know that your small purchase here can make a world of difference somewhere else?

[image credit: Emily Barney: Flickr cc]

3P ID
136371
Prime
Off

The New Solution That Makes Crops "Invisible" to Pests

3P Author ID
100
Primary Category
Content

A version of this story originally appeared on NoCamels – Israeli Environment News

By Tal Sandler

If you are a farmer, you will know that pests are just about the biggest enemy to your crops and livelihood. Pests can destroy every single one of your crops and they are sometimes resistant to insect repellants. Enter EdenShield - an innovative Israeli company that is working on an odor-masking product that tricks pests into believing your crops simply aren't there.

EdenShield is designed to trick pests such as thrips, whiteflies, and tomato leafminer, in Israel and abroad. Edenshield’s formula is applied to greenhouse screens where it masks the odor of the crops inside and lowers insect attraction. The all natural, allegedly nontoxic bug repellent conceals the smell of plants and flowers – and possibly even people. It’s like putting a “nose clip” on bugs so they can’t smell and detect a potential host.

The natural extract comes from a bush that grows in Israel, the Sinai desert and Jordan, and is already being tested in Israeli greenhouses. These plants have evolved to survive in desert environments, so the plants eventually develop compounds that help them exist and survive in these kinds of environments. EdenShield Founder & CEO Yaniv Kitron, a chemical engineer, tells NoCamels: “This particular bush has been used for centuries by Bedouin in tea as a way to counter inflammation. [This is proof that] the plants we use are nontoxic. It has been used as medicine for centuries taken orally. So there are no safety hazards in using our product.  Also it is not applied directly onto the plant.”

A mask, not a repellent


“Four years ago, I [came up] with the idea to do research on some botanical compounds that deter insects such as thrips and white flies. That is what initiated the research activity and later we founded the company,” Kitron says.  Kitron’s business partner is Menashe Yonatan Eitan, a computer engineer with 20 years of business development and project management.

Kitron is still analyzing the plant's chemical makeup in order to determine which molecule in the bush produces the repellent effect. He strongly suspects that the extract does not smell bad to the bug, but somehow masks the odor of the plants the pests would otherwise destroy. The company's product is intended for use on greenhouse nets. Kitron explains that although the screens are designed to protect the crops, they can't be sealed completely, since the plants need air. The pests that attack the crops are small enough to get through the holes in the screen.

“At the time there were a lot of problems with chives and other herbs,” says Kitron, “[and] countries returned the produce that was exported from Israel. The ministry of agriculture called out for help with exports going out, as the market value was declining unexpectedly. That was the motivation behind the product. The issue was that the insects attack such a big verity of plants, including vegetables and orchards. The main problem, apart from the esthetics and the market value are the virus vectors. The plant viruses carried by thrips and whiteflies terminate the plant, or cause the fruit that comes out [defective].”

Entire crops lost


Kitron claims that the problem is so severe, that pests are capable of causing a yield loss of 100 percent.

“The main focus at the moment is a net applied over greenhouses that camouflage or masks the crop fragrance,” explains Kitron. According to him, pests quickly become resistant to pesticide, to the point that "it’s like pouring water on them," he says.

The reason that the company focused on masking the entire greenhouses and not individual plants, according to the founders, is that the regulatory process for plant-applied chemicals is long and complicated – even for natural substances. Eventually, Kitron estimates that the extract will be refined and will be deemed strong and safe enough to spray directly onto plants.

“The initial greenhouse general market makes $30 billion in total,” says Kitron. "We are looking to partner with a [strategic partner], a large chemical company, so that we can raise the funds that we need to be ready to begin sales in 2014.”

Kitron explains, “As far as we’ve seen, this product really falls into a niche. There isn’t anything that I know of that works in this way. Usually pesticides are aimed to kill or alter one of the stages which affect the lifecycle of the pest, but odor-masking and repellents are not very popular because they are not so efficient in their repellent effects. We need some more funds for research and development of the active ingredient for producing plans."

In addition to the utilization of their product in the field of agriculture, EdenShield is also testing the potency of the product for a humanitarian project. If it works against thrips that attack tomatoes, why couldn’t it protect people against malaria-carrying mosquitoes or kissing bugs in developing countries? The kissing bug transmits chagas - a parasite that can cause organ damage and, eventually, death. It kills 20,000 people a year, and Forbes has called it the new AIDS of the developing world.

Initially funded with money from Israel’s Chief Scientist’s Office and the Mofet Venture Accelerator in Kiryat Arba, where EdenShield is based, Kitron currently seeks $1.7 million to take his company from the incubator stage to a commercial product.

The company intends to collaborate with greenhouse screen companies, and will license its product to pesticide companies.

Photo by: World Bank Photo Collection

3P ID
136399
Prime
Off