Search

One of the largest palm oil companies in the world, Singapore-based Golden Agri Resources (GAR), has announced a four-year plan to trace more than 7 million tons of palm oil all the way back to its point of origin. If the company follows through with its plans, it would be a huge shift in how the industry has operated for years -- and spell needed relief for Indonesia's critically important tropical forests.

Palm oil plantations were, of course, a key cause of the fires that devastated Southeast Asia last year, emitting massive amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Indonesia, the main producer of the oil, banned all new plantations last month -- giving hope that, perhaps, last year's disaster finally will give impetus for real change in the industry.

That is why moves like this are welcome. And this is big news from the company, which has a mixed record with regard to sustainability and ethics. In fact it was just last year that GAR, and its local subsidiary PT Kartika Prima Cipta, were prohibited from developing new areas for oil palm cultivation by the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO). The move came after GAR violated free, prior and informed consent when dealing with local communities in Indonesian Borneo. The RSPO, it might be added, has its own dodgy record of enforcing its standards.

Moreover, earlier this month, a study conducted by several Indonesian civil-society organizations found ample palm oil from sources connected to deforestation in the supply chains of not only GAR, but also its competitors Wilmar and Musim Mas, all of which have entered some form of a zero-deforestation pledge.

“We are disappointed that, despite their corporate commitments to stop deforestation, none of these groups has barred legally questionable oil from their supply chains,” said Nursamsu, deforestation monitoring and advocacy manager of WWF-Indonesia, in a press statement. (Like many Indonesians, he goes by one name.) “Buyers should only deal with mills that have a robust working system to trace all the [fresh fruit bunch (FFB) products] they purchase,” he added.

That is why many take this latest announcement with a big grain of salt. This type of headline-making statement is not new. The past decade has seen numerous similar announcements and declarations meant to prevent deforestation, from the emergence of the RSPO in 2004, to the aforementioned zero-deforestation pledges.

Thankfully, GAR seems to recognize the challenge, and has set a four-year timeline to achieve its goals. “The journey will not be easy or straightforward, and will require the involvement of thousands of farmers, but with the support of our partners we have set a goal of 2020 to realize our ambition,” said Mr. Agus Purnomo, managing director for sustainability at GAR, in a press statement.

What is most important is not this announcement, but what GAR does next. The emergence of better technology, including satellite monitoring, means that companies cannot hide behind complex supply chains as before. The company has released a Sustainability Dashboard so that we can keep track of its progress. Now, it is up to us to ensure that GAR follows its plan.

In an ideal world, GAR would have embarked on this years ago, when NGOs were already ringing alarm bells about the huge negative impacts of deforestation. Now, we also need to see the entire industry adopt these standards. This also means that companies that consume lots of palm oil, like PepsiCo, should only purchase from fully-traceable, ethical and sustainable sources.

GAR should be applauded for this. We'll be watching closely to see if this heralds a new era of truly sustainable palm oil.

Image credit: Achmad Rabin Taim via Wikipedia

Jimmy Kimmel -- yes, of girls-jumping-on-trampolines fame -- used his platform for good this week. Sarah Palin is back in the public eye and not just to promote her Judge Judy knockoff. She's stumping for the climate denial film "Climate Hustle," which explains how climate change is a hoax. Her logic, as usual, is impeccable:

"I want people to feel empowered to ask questions about what is being fed them from the scientist community that something's not making a whole lot of sense when it comes to inconsistent data that is being produced and being fed especially to our children when it comes to global warming or climate change or whatever people are calling it today."

She continues: "It's perpetuated, it's repeated so often that too many people believe that, 'Oh, well if 97 percent of all scientists believe that man's activities are creating changes in the weather, who am I to question that?'"

Exactly, Kimmel deadpans. Exactly.

https://youtu.be/9UCdFbyL8y0?t=48s

 

Kimmel goes on to explain that climate change is not a political issue; it's pure science, and the politicians who are perpetuating confusion are reaping big money from oil companies for doing so. He concludes with a panel of PhDs who promise that they are not f**king with us. If they were, in fact f**king with us, getting a PhD in climate science is *really* playing the long game on a joke without a great punchline.

Kudos to Kimmel for making climate denial the butt of a joke it deserves to be.

Image credit: Screenshot

This city of 840,000 scores plenty of props for its work on climate change research. But the fact that it is surrounded by water on three sides means that San Francisco could have a rough go later this century unless more is done worldwide to avert climate change.

At least, that is the assessment of the city’s Department of Public Health, which last week released an interactive map displaying the potential effects that climate change could have on its residents. Unlike many climate change assessments that focus on the risk of damage to property and infrastructure, these maps focus on how floods and extreme weather could eventually affect citizens’ health and well being.

The Bay Area is a fragile environment. The verdant and lush farms and orchards of Santa Clara have been transformed into office parks and housing tracts for the workers in today’s Silicon Valley. The San Francisco Bay has shrunk by at least a third over the past 150 years, as cities including San Francisco expanded by land reclamation and the delta region to the east was diked in order to convert much of the Central Valley into land for farming.

And if current trends continue, the area’s terrain and climate could be unrecognizable by the end of this century. Less snow in the Sierra Nevada Mountains will cause water stress, yet faster melting snowpack could cause more frequent flooding as the region’s cool weather subsides and eventually resembles that of San Diego’s. And as is often the case with the effects of climate change, the impacts will be felt first, and most intensely, by society’s most vulnerable. These public health challenges will range from asthma to mental health disorders in a city that, despite a high cost of living, still offers a relatively decent quality of life for the vast majority of its citizens.

To that end, the San Francisco Department of Public Health evaluated a massive amount of data and created maps that show where such future risks are especially dire. Users can click on maps that highlight the city’s various neighborhoods to gauge where the confluence of flood risks, quality of housing and demographics pose what city officials say are potential dangers in a world where extreme weather and climate volatility become the norm.

Some relatively posh sectors, such as waterfront neighborhoods including Lakeshore, the Marina, North Beach and Lincoln Park, rank high when it comes to future climate-related health risks. But neighborhoods that have always presented a large share of challenges related to poverty, housing and public health problems are also highly vulnerable. Such areas of town include the Tenderloin, Chinatown, much of the Mission District, Bayview/Hunters Point, the Western Addition and what is left of SOMA (South of Market).

Nothing is certain when it comes to what scientists say could be the outcomes of climate change — the operative work, of course, is “risk.” But cities keen on developing climate change adaptation plans that are more sophisticated than where to sandbag and where to build seawalls should consider such an analysis so they can gauge where to focus their limited resources in the event climate change begins to wreak havoc on the built environment.

Furthermore, insurance companies, most of which have overlooked the potential impacts of climate change, but are particularly vulnerable, should also take a hard look at this data so they can protect their long term businesses — and even, pragmatically, develop new products to viable in a world that is very likely going to look vastly different, even a generation from now.

Image credit: Basil D. Soufi/Wiki Commons

 

By Kaz Brecher

The price of a typical Vancouver home rose 21 percent in the past year, which somehow manages to feel quaint in the face of San Francisco’s median price-tag, now standing at $1.1 million, according to Zillow. And amid the uproar in Los Angeles around the city’s seizure of tiny makeshift homes from its homeless -- and similar situations in encampments all over North America -- it’s clear that housing crises are a symptom of much deeper economic shifts.

A global group of diverse innovators spent six months working through a process of human-centered design and business innovation at THNK School of Creative Leadership to see if harnessing the benefits of digital currencies and alternative economic systems (sometimes known as financial tech or FinTech) might offer novel ways to increase access to housing options, across the spectrum of urban dwellers.

What resulted were new proposals for public/private partnerships, mobile platforms, and on-the-ground efforts: an app that allows people in need to locate and access housing, food or medical services using controlled digital currencies; a mechanism for turning smart home data into a non-monetary asset that younger renters might use as currency to secure housing in intergenerational communities; and a specialized agency that matches a broad range of citizens with high-impact social venture investment opportunities that directly benefit their cities. The complete findings can be found in the recently released Future of Capitalism Innovation Report, but the factors that went into shaping the outcomes are almost as important as the insights themselves.

In our increasingly complex and rapidly shifting ecosystem, THNK stakes its success on carefully framing audacious challenge lenses, setting broadly diverse minds loose on the issue, and adhering to a rigorous structured approach to creativity. In examining the future of Capitalism, it became clear that environmental factors must be considered when addressing housing, for example, as buildings are some of the biggest offenders in climate effects and energy efficiency has direct correlation to affordability. So, while some may think it’s the set-up to a joke, we’re deadly serious when we say that the CIO of a bank, a real estate developer and a media producer got together to create a Social Investment Banking exchange to shift some of the market forces. And THNK also throws Innovation Partners into the mix who are already playing in these spaces, like the city of Vancouver and the Digital Finance Institute, as well as Master Practitioners who shake up systems as a matter of course.

“What gets me energized is the prospect of rewriting today’s chaos to harmonize with what we need socially, culturally, and environmentally. It’s not enough to ask whether there could be a different kind of capitalism. We ought to think bigger, and reconstruct capitalism as an entirely new paradigm,” said Sharon Chang, a THNK Challenge partner.

One of the promising concepts, Homegrade, began as a property management approach that specializes in efficiency upgrades, allowing owners and renters to enjoy reduced costs and an opportunity for earned equity of low-carbon housing. But a more holistic view of urban housing included having the company work with renters in low-income units interested in learning to implement and maintain the upgrades as a means of developing a network of stewards as well as providing job opportunities with existing communities.

Simply, Homegrade would shoulder the costs of identifying, implementing and maintaining the upgrades. Once complete, the utilities savings are distributed between the building owner, Homegrade, the investors who put in the initial investment, and the renters – who receive special equity accounts. Each month, renters can accrue equity as the result of a spectrum of upgrades, from simple savings on things like switching to energy efficient light bulbs all the way to net-positive buildings.

Solutions like these touch on the many challenges facing city dwellers and municipalities alike. But, the wellspring of innovation draws from an enthusiasm for engaging sophisticated human-centered design, benefitting the individual and the system, said urban designer Pamela Puchalski, who was on the Homegrade team and leads the Resilient Communities Program at the New America Foundation. So, it’s no wonder that the Vancouver City Council has just approved the creation of a $1 million Building Energy Retrofit Fund to support and expand programs that result in energy efficiency upgrades for buildings while improving quality of living for citizens.

“Nearly 10,000 new affordable rental units have been approved over the past five years, but they take time to build and are only now starting to come through the construction phase to completion,” said Mukhtar Latif, the chief housing officer of the City of Vancouver. “While this supply is being created, the existing low income housing, such as the Single Room Occupancy Hotels, where tenants were paying rents at income assistance levels, are becoming more expensive, leaving those on income assistance with fewer options. Digital currencies might help people on low incomes earn through positive actions and improve their quality of life, as even $200 a month can make a huge difference in the potential affordable housing options for someone on income assistance.”

The insights and solution spaces captured in the first Future of Capitalism Innovation Report are currently being expanded upon with an added focus on coastal climate resilience and how digital currencies might help communities thrive. It is increasingly clear that our most vulnerable populations are at the mercy of not only our economic markets but also increasingly volatile climate effects. So, as we frame our next Innovation Challenge at THNK, we are inspired by the way our participants and partners envision a future of possibility.

Christine Duhaime, co-founder of the Digital Finance Institute, noted: “We launched the first financial inclusion program in 2014 to bank refugees and explore how we could use FinTech like the Blockchain and Bitcoin to provide emergency payments to refugees in a way that eliminates leakage payments and administrative fees … Developing FinTech in Vancouver is an exciting prospect for us, especially because of its global application. As Innovation Partners in the THNK challenge, we discovered that there were additional promises with digital currencies that emerged during the collaborative process – they have the added advantage of being able to improve housing options and accessibility.”

The potential for global application of these explorations cannot be overstated, as we see moments for sharing and cross-pollination like the United Nation’s Habitat III conference on the horizon. The conference will be the first time in 20 years that the international community, led by national governments, has collectively taken stock of fast-changing urban trends and the ways in which these patterns are impacting human development, environmental well-being, and civic and governance systems worldwide. And we hope that the role of FinTech and alternative digital currency systems will be considered as a lever for urban change.

While cranes dominate the skyline in Vancouver, building apartments amid a 0.8% vacancy rate, we feel heartened that diverse minds and innovation techniques mean the sky is the limit for how we might harness seemingly fringe financial mechanisms to create equitable, vibrant urban futures.

Image credit: Pixabay

After years working with emerging technology platforms and solving larger cross-disciplinary problems in the digital agency space, Kaz Brecher, earned her stripes in the start-up world, leading strategy and operations for early social media innovators and then an open-source cloud computing powerhouse focused on the developing world. She founded Curious Catalyst to marry investigation with action, bringing a new take to the business of urban social impact through her experience in agile approaches. She is a Stanford graduate, an alumni of and lead faculty at THNK School of Creative Leadership, and a Certified Scrum Master.

By Leah B. Thibault

Margaret “Peggy” Brown of rural Rumney, New Hampshire, population 1,480, doesn’t just love to sew; it is her therapy, her passion. Daily, she can be found in her sewing nook, creating her signature pieces — colorful, reversible fleece vests, jackets and snowsuits for children. At the same time, she may also be piecing together her next “hope” quilt.

But things began to unravel for Peggy a couple of years ago when she couldn’t breathe, let alone sew. Her son brought her to the Emergency Room at nearby Speare Memorial Hospital late one evening. While her EKG and other testing didn’t indicate any problems, she was kept overnight and scheduled for a stress test in the morning. As Peggy puts it, “That didn’t work out too well.”

The exercise physiologist saw significant evidence of cardiac disease, and Peggy was whisked to another hospital over an hour away in a more urban setting where she underwent a six-way cardiac bypass to restore blood flow to her heart. A month later she was back at Speare as a patient in its Cardiac Rehabilitation Program, where healthcare professionals worked with her and progressed her slowly so that she could get back to her everyday activities and sewing. After two months she was ready to graduate, but decided to stay on in Speare’s maintenance program.

Today Peggy is back to sewing and going to craft fairs. She credits having cardiac rehab and cardiologists just 10 minutes from home. “It’s easy to get to,” she says. “I don’t have to go to Manchester.”

Peggy’s healthcare story is atypical for America’s rural communities that have seen no fewer than 70 hospitals close since 2010, according to the Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research at the University of North Carolina.

Approximately 17 percent of Americans live in a non-metropolitan, or rural, areas. Compared to their urban counterparts, residents of rural areas are older and sicker. While the average resident of a major city can expect to live to 79.1 years of age, the average rural resident will live for 2.4 years less, a disparity that has only widened over time, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. While that may seem counterintuitive to some, the longer average life expectancy in urban areas simply points to fewer early deaths. Rural residents who live past middle age are more likely to suffer from heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), lung cancer,  stroke, and diabetes than their urban counterparts.

Why the disparity? First, rural residents tend to be poorer overall than their urban peers. People in poor households (those living below the Federal poverty line) generally experience less access and a lower quality of healthcare, whether they live in the city or the country. Around 25 percent of adults ages 19 to 64 living in poverty report fair or poor health, compared with about 8 percent of those living above 200 percent of the poverty threshold. They are also less likely to be insured, with a 19.3 percent un-insurance rate for those below the poverty line, compared to 10.4 percent in the country overall and are more likely to delay or not pursue medical care due to cost (13.2 percent verses 10 percent).

But on top of the economic difficulties, rural residents like Peggy must also cope with unique factors, like a lack of providers (only 10 percent of physicians nationwide serve rural communities), a lack of  public transportation to get to and from facilities, and a greater distance to those facilities overall.

That’s what makes the story of Speare Memorial Hospital all the more compelling. It is located in Plymouth, one of New Hampshire’s most economically distressed communities in a federally-designed Medically Underserved Area, where 64 percent of the population served comes from low-income communities.

This data, however, is what qualified Speare for New Markets Tax Credit financing, and counter the national trend of rural hospital closure and instead enable its expansion. With it, Speare was able to construct the building that is home to the rehabilitation services Peggy received, as well as an orthopedics and sports medicine clinic, an internal medicine practice, and an ophthalmologist. Diagnostic support services are also on site, including laboratory and X-ray. In addition to the healthcare services, the project created four dozen jobs.

Nearby Mid-State Health Center (Mid-State) shared many factors in common with Speare: cramped working conditions that limited services and growth, and a mission to provide healthcare to all who needed it, regardless of their ability to pay. Mid-State utilized the New Markets Tax Credit program to find the flexible funding it needed to expand. Since 2005, Mid-State constructed a new facility more than double the size of its previous one and has been able to employ an additional 77 individuals to better serve its 10,024 patients from 29 New Hampshire towns.

In many ways, living in a rural community is like living on an island. And if living in a rural community is like living on an island, imagine how difficult it is to access healthcare if that community actually is on an island.

This was the difficultly faced by the residents of Lāna’i, Hawaii’s smallest publicly-accessible inhabited island. To get to the island, residents and visitors have two options: a $20 roundtrip flight from Honolulu or a $60 ferry ride from Maui. With a limited flight schedule, patients often need to stay in a hotel overnight and miss a day’s work. For the 44 percent of island’s population that live at or below 200 percent of the Federal Poverty level, either choice can be financial burden, meaning most residents receive their healthcare on-island, or not at all.

At Lāna’i Community Health Center (LCHC), no one is turned away for lack of money. For years, LCHC had operated out of a converted three-bedroom home, limiting its ability to attract physicians and provide specialty services.

With the help of New Markets Tax Credit financing targeted at low-income communities, LCHC was recently able to construct a new 6,800-square-foot facility, which includes four exams rooms, two behavioral health consultation rooms, one specialty consultation room, an optometry and three dental operatories (one dedicated to children), allowing LCHC to double its patient capacity and hire adult dentists and a pediatric dentist.

For the communities of Plymouth and Lāna’i, these health clinics are making a major difference in the quality of health, and life and helping to balance some that rural disparity.

Images courtesy of the author. 

Featured image: Pixabay 

Leah B. Thibault is Director of Executive Administration and Special Projects for CEI Capital Management LLC. CEI Capital Management increases opportunity in rural low-income communities through the New Markets Tax Credit program. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of CEI.

By Giles Kirkland

The automotive industry has always been a little behind the times when it comes to sustainability. While the world is investing in green power, the typical car still runs on oil. Not everyone can afford a brand new, all-electric vehicle.

In fact, despite the strides made in green technology, major manufacturers seem more focused on cheating emissions tests, rather than the actual production of less harmful vehicles. With these latest revelations in mind, how green can any car ever be? More than just looking at the fuel source, what can be done to ensure your car is as harmless as you can make it?

Remove unnecessary items

In the future, self-driving cars will be able to micro-manage fuel efficiency across roads and highway. But right now, most of us still have to drive ourselves. The optimal driving speed for fuel consumption, in most cases, is 55 miles per hour. Anything above or below this is generally less efficient and wastes fuel, causing unnecessary emissions.

One of the most basic factors of fuel-efficient driving is weight. If you want to improve your power-to-weight ratio, remove any excess items from your vehicle. Specifically, an empty boot (trunk) will make a noticeable difference in the fuel your car consumes while driving.

The same argument can be made for head-racks or other external additions. These disrupt the aerodynamics of the vehicle, adding air resistance and requiring more power from the motor. If you drive often enough, you can make a worthwhile dent in your fuel consumption and, as a result, reduce your emissions.

Rolling resistance

Similar factors can also be analyzed in the quality of your wheels. As the only part of the vehicle that makes contact with the ground, how well your wheels perform will determine how much power is required.

Rolling resistance, for instance, represents the force working against the vehicle as it pushes against the road surface. The best way to improve this situation is to use economy or eco tyres, which are designed to offer a low resistance. This is another example of reducing the power output of the vehicle, while offering the performance and speed your vehicle needs. This is still vital if you own an electric or hybrid vehicle, as they still require traditional, conventional tyres.

Recycling

Recycling represents a vital way to offset a vehicle’s carbon footprint. Even a modern electric vehicle uses various metals and unsustainable resources in its production. Most steel and aluminum in the automotive industry is already recycled, so it’s up to you to continue this cycle when your car (or one of its parts) is ready to be scrapped. In fact, a wide range of car parts, from the glass windshield to the tyre rubber, can all be recycled.

What you should pay extra attention too, however, are some of the additional eco-friendly features, such as the catalyst converters. These should always be recycled where possible, as they use rare earth metals such as rhodium, palladium and platinum.

The importance of basic maintenance

Furthermore, an ineffective component within your vehicle can disrupt how the engine works. Fortunately, a little bit of basic maintenance is enough to help keep your motor in order. For example, you should aim to change the air filter after a certain mileage -- the figure depends on your specific car -- and the same can also be said for the car’s oil, spark plugs and batteries. When these aren’t at their most efficient, your car’s engine and overall performance isn’t, either.

Aside from the engine, it also helps to pay attention to the tyre pressure. The wrong air pressure changes the way you drive on the road, as too little can reduce the contact area and the overall impact created by the vehicle. This changes the rolling resistance, mentioned previously, thus creating a greater need for fuel.

Biofuels

As you can tell, a lot of making a vehicle more efficient involves reducing how much fuel is required. Still, there is always the possibility of using a greener fuel source without having to buy a completely new car. If you’re looking for a more eco-friendly alternative, there are many ways to make biofuel, including in your own home.

Biofuels are legal in a number of countries, including America, and can often be used in diesel cars, yet the main problem lies in the model you may drive. While most diesel vehicles can be supplied with biofuel (and it’s always worth checking first), some may have the diesel particulate filter (DPF) in their exhaust system cylinders, rather than the pipe itself. The former causes issues with heating and can’t reliable handle pure biofuel. At the very least, however, you should be able to use some form of biofuel for your diesel car, as even many commercial forms of diesel are cut with a small percentage of biodiesel.

The bottom line

As you can see, there are a lot of ways your vehicle can reduce its emissions and become more environmentally friendly as a result. While the automotive industry certainly has a long way to go -- as most green technologies simply aren’t available at a more affordable price-point -- that doesn’t mean individual drivers don’t have the option of taking things into their own hands.

What do you think of these tips? What else can be done to help make any vehicle more environmentally friendly?

Image credit: Pixabay

Giles Kirkland is a mechanic for Oponeo with a passion for both cars and the environment. When he's not tinkering in his garage, he enjoys helping others and discussing how to make vehicles more environmentally friendly and sustainable.

By Brian Collett - Tesco, Britain’s biggest supermarket group, has become the latest retailer to offer leftover food from its stores to charity. Its aim is that by the end of next year, no food in its shops will be ditched. 

         Last year, by contrast, 55,400 tonnes of food were junked at Tesco’s British stores and distribution centres. The company calculates that 30,000 tonnes of this could have provided 70 million meals.

         Tesco chief executive Dave Lewis said: “We believe no food that could be eaten should be wasted. That’s why we have committed that no surplus food should go to waste from our stores.”

         For six months the company has produced 22 tonnes of food from a scheme in 14 stores, enough for 50,000 meals. The Community Food Connection programme, delivered in partnership with FareShare FoodCloud, will be expanded to all Tesco’s large stores by the end of this year and to every store by the end of 2017.

         Tesco has followed the example of several of its large rivals.

         Marks & Spencer has established links with charities so that it can send them its surplus food. It intends to involve all its stores by this spring and to reduce its food waste by 20% within four years – an objective called Plan A.  

         The company has formed a partnership with the national giving platform Neighbourly, on whose website other charities can register to receive food. 

         Louise Nicholls, the company’s head of responsible sourcing, packaging and Plan A, said: “Our key priority is to reduce food waste while ensuring that, where there is food surplus, we put it to the best possible use.

         “This is the first nationwide redistribution scheme to provide an innovative, practical solution to surplus food redistribution by building local connections, enabling all our stores to link with local food projects and help support their communities.”

         Waitrose, part of the John Lewis store group, wants all its shops and depots to arrange with local organisations to take food before it passes its use-by date. “We aim to donate as much food as possible to local charities and good causes,” says Waitrose.

         At present, unsold food not donated goes to create electricity through anaerobic digestion.

         Britain’s second biggest supermarket company Asda, owned by the US Walmart group, has introduced a budget-price “wonky veg box” containing imperfectly shaped vegetables, which are often thrown away.

         Every box contains a leaflet about food waste encouraging responsible conduct and pointing out that of the 15 million tons of food that Britain discards every year more than half is binned in the home. 

         Sainsbury’s contribution is a system through which unsold waste bread is fed to livestock.

         One benefit for companies that distribute surplus food is that they avoid landfill and disposal costs of about £80 ($113, €102) a tonne.

 

Editor's note: To kick off our upcoming series on transparency in the apparel industry, we wanted to show how traceability and transparency have influenced industries and government practices for the last 400+ years.

No issue better highlights the importance of business transparency than the recent battles about the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in food. The agreement by the world’s largest cereal, soup and candy makers to label products earlier this year may have sprung from Vermont’s new GMO labeling law, but it underscored consumers’ demand that they have a right to know what they are buying – right down to the molecule.

So did a 2015 survey by the Center for Food Integrity (CFI), which said that consumers hold manufacturers primarily responsible for that communication. The stores that sell the products, the restaurants that serve them and, in some cases, even the farmers or ranchers who grow or raise the food hold less responsibility for keeping consumers in the know than the guys that source, make and package the food.

Transparency: An age-old demand

But the consumer demand for transparency is anything but a new trend. People have used the collective voice to influence market quality and vendor decisions for hundreds if not thousands of years. In the 18th century, French peasants rioted to draw attention to the lack of quality bread and corrupt business practices in the grain industry. The riots became one of the fertile seeds for the French Revolution. In the 19th century, the growing automation of the textile industry in Britain was viewed with suspicion by Luddite artisans. Although the textile workers didn't succeed in curbing the use of mechanized looms, their distrust toward what they viewed as a subversion of their industry helped to mark this important change in the garment industry.

Consumer conscience has also played heavily into issues of transparency. The 18th- and 19th-century child labor laws that emerged in England and the United States were the first guidelines to regulate how people were treated in the labor force. They highlighted abusive labor conditions and helped send a message to mill owners and other employers that the public was watching and expected better business practices. It also sent the message that there were consequences for irresponsible labor practices.

Across the board: It's the vital link to success

Today, most companies know that business transparency is vital to creating a reliable consumer base. Buyers want good products, but they aren’t necessarily willing to take the manufacturer’s word for it. They want “openness, ongoing communication and public accountability,” says Peter Levesque, president of the Ottawa-based Institute for Knowledge Mobilization (IKM). And these expectations are increasingly driving the way companies work.

Buyers want the ability to influence the way that the appliances they use in the kitchen are made. They want ongoing communication about the funding that builds sports complexes, the information that schools collect about their students and how they use it, and the human costs of the wars our governments undertake. And buyers want accountability by companies and nonprofits for how they spend the money they earn from consumers.

Buyers also want to know that corporate supply chains and business affiliations share the values the company or organization presents to the public. They want to know that the cereal they eat is sourced with good ingredients and made with the ethical choices they expect of the company. And they want to know that the organization's values are reflected in the decisions it makes and stands by -- including its political decisions.

Certainly one of the most interesting examples of this triad of expectations is the ongoing pressure Google received for its decision to live-stream the Republican convention, which will host Donald Trump. Many would say it is Google’s decision to make. Others argue that when it comes to consumers’ views of current affairs, the company’s business decisions are reflective of its accountability to those who use, pay for and support its growth.

In comparison, ice cream manufacturer Ben & Jerry's continues to get high praise from consumers not just because it says it sources ethically, but because it also aligns its political decisions with those it feels best reflect its consumer base -- and it does so publicly.

Not just about food and products, either

But the demand for transparency isn't always related to what we buy. Religious organizations that appear not to live up to the ethics and morals of their times have been subject to harsh rebuke. The scandal concerning the Catholic Church in the U.S. and Canada and the alleged cover-up of child abuse has not only shaped public opinion, but also the actions and expectations of the church itself.

And yet, religious organizations have often played remarkable roles in shaping and encouraging transparency in business sectors. The Sisters of St. Francis of Philadelphia Congregation has helped to shape and strengthen transparency in the environmental sector through shareholder advocacy for years. Similarly, the Jewish rabbinical organization, Coalition on the Environment and Jewish Life (COEJL), uses its strength to highlight environmental issues and press for increased dialogue and government and business accountability.

Meanwhile, sporting organizations have found that pleasing fans isn't always just about giving a good, rousing game. Loyal patrons want to know equal treatment,  sound governance and a respect for human rights are part of the organization's mission statement. Labor scandals in Qatar and charges of corruption in the governance of the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) catalyzed a more earnest effort to show transparency in the sports industry. In both cases, organizations had to acknowledge that increased accountability and communication are driving forces to their success.

Historians suggest that true change in the public's ability to influence business practices really owes its start to the Industrial Revolution and the mechanized boost it gave to the textile industry during the 19th century. If so, it did more than revise business ethics. It transformed the way we look at the consumer and the small, still voice that continues to drive progress to this day.

Image credit: Unsplash

Never mind the social strife and political stability that has long been widespread across the Middle East. Many countries across the MENA (Middle East/North Africa) region are notorious for having painfully slow bureaucracies, as well as suffering from epic corruption and a lack of transparency. Add low oil prices and their impact on national budgets, and one would wonder why anyone in the clean-energy sector would want to do business in this region.

But despite the challenging economic and political environment, renewables -- especially solar power technologies -- are enjoying a surge, from the Mediterranean shores of North Africa to the posh cities within the oil-rich Gulf nations. Add Iran, which is slowly becoming more integrated in the global economy as more sanctions are lifted, therefore sparking the interest of overseas investors seeking to harvest its abundant sunshine.

Of course, just because the skies are often clear does not mean solar is a no-brainer. First, the sandy dust endemic in the region can coat solar panels and reduce their efficiency on the best days; the fierce winds that can blow from the Arabian Peninsula can also knock them out of service. The Middle East’s scorching heat can actually reduce solar cells’ performance as well. Furthermore, the lack of skilled workers in the region, compared to North America and Europe, also affects the speed with which renewables can scale throughout the Middle East.

But in countries lacking energy resources, such as Egypt and Jordan, clean energy is a way to keep the lights on and reduce the need for expensive imported fossil fuels such as diesel. Nations abundant in oil, such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, have an opportunity to diversify their economies and, pragmatically, sell petroleum to countries abroad instead of squandering it on subsidized energy at home.

So as these nations try to transform their economies and adjust to 21st-century realities, renewables have garnered more interest from government officials at home and investors abroad.

In the UAE, while Abu Dhabi scores plenty of attention due to its investment in Masdar, nearby Dubai is holding its own with massive investments in solar power. The emirate’s Dubai Energy and Water Authority (DEWA), for example, has announced that it received a record-low bid of $2.99 per kilowatt hour for the third phase of a huge solar park. Originally targeted to generate 1 gigawatt of power, DEWA now plans for this facility to produce 5 GW of clean power annually by 2030. Dubai World, which operates the city’s ports, is also on a solar binge, with a huge rooftop solar project in the Jebel Ali district that could add up to 40 GW of solar power to the local grid by the end of this year.

For Dubai, investment in renewables makes sense. The city of 2.5 million has arguably become the Middle East’s leading business center in the wake of the Arab Spring. Nevertheless, the emirate has few oil reserves (Abu Dhabi has 94 percent of the UAE’s oil), and the city’s unwieldy real estate market has become an expensive place in which to conduct business.

For the poorer Middle Eastern states, solar and wind power present a tactic to shield citizens from volatile energy prices. In Jordan, the government welcomed investors to build solar installations across the country, largely through a feed-in tariff program. Fossil fuel imports, reports The Economist, generate 96 percent of Jordan's energy at a cost of 10 percent of the nation’s GDP. To the southwest, Egypt has received generous foreign aid from the UAE in the form of new solar installations that have appeared across the country. Meanwhile, an international consortium led by Terra Sola is undertaking projects that will add 2 GW of solar power in the Arab world’s most populous country.

Even Iran, which has a reputation for providing its citizens with some of the most generous subsidies on Earth, is looking to solar as it implements reforms. German investors have shown interest in developing the country’s tiny renewables sector, and news reports suggest that Italian companies are behind a plan to install 1 GW of solar power over the next decade.

For many Middle Eastern countries, the windfalls enjoyed from oil and natural gas have sometimes been a blessing, but often a curse. But despite the fall in oil prices, the combination of cheap solar power, lower operational costs and political will present new opportunities for these nations to expand energy access, diversify their economies and provide new careers for their citizens. And considering many of these nations have the most rapidly growing populations in the world, renewables are a path toward energy security and, therefore, domestic security.

Image credit: DEWA

California is embarking on a disruptive strategy to grow consumer adoption of smart and clean electricity technologies. Starting in 2019 the state’s three investor owned utilities, serving 80 percent of the state’s electricity customers, will launch Time Of Use (TOU) pricing for residential consumers. The utilities are now signing up volunteer residential customers to refine price designs based on actual customer reactions.

The question confronting California’s strategy is whether high prices charged to residential consumers during peak periods is a “bridge too far." Will residential customers respond by buying smart and cleaner technologies to access lower prices? Or will they vote in revolt?

Will TOU pricing help or hurt residential consumers?

Air conditioning is the ultimate challenge for gaining consumer acceptance of TOU pricing. Imagine the third day of a heat wave. You or your business receives a signal from the utility that the price for electricity will jump from 30 cents per kilowatt-hour to $3 per kWh! That is the type of tension TOU pricing will create.

A rate department reported to me during my electric utility career. We implemented a form of TOU pricing called Real Time Pricing (RTP). In this type of price design, consumers are provided a difference price every hour. The consumer characteristics we identified for a win/win result were:

1. Price-elastic consumers. Price elasticity in economics measures how consumers respond to price changes. A price-elastic consumer will change his or her consumption when prices change. A price-inelastic consumer will not. We sought to offer RTP to consumers who would change their consumption based on prices.


2. Real-time attention. RTP and TOU pricing work when consumers (or their smart buildings/appliances) are monitoring and acting on price changes. We sought consumers who were sophisticated enough to monitor and act on price volatility.


3. Ability to change. A person on life support is an extreme example of the wrong type of consumer for TOU pricing. No amount of price signals, or attention to price signals, will impact his or her consumption of electricity. The ability to take action is key to TOU effectiveness.

Based on these criteria, we did not implement RTP for residential consumers. This decision was heavily influenced by focus groups with residential consumers. A summary of their feedback included:

• Air conditioning was a flash-point issue. Consumers can visualize shifting the operation of their washing machine from periods when electricity prices are high to time periods when they are low. But by day three of a heat wave, most consumers view air conditioning to be a “must have” to protect their health and welfare. Charging more during these time periods appeared to produce more anger than load shifts.


• Residential consumers do not want to be focused on hourly electricity prices. They want to watch TV, not utility prices. Focus group participants expressed strong frustration and apprehension over having to pay attention to electricity price changes to avoid higher bills.


• A common theme was, “What am I supposed to do?” When prompted with suggestions like turn your thermostat higher, the response was a frustration that they were already doing so. When prompted with suggestions to buy a higher-efficiency air conditioner, the response was typically a feeling of being coerced into choosing between paying more for a new air conditioner or paying a higher bill.

Conversely, we received very positive engagement from industrial and commercial consumers. These consumers had the ability, and procurement sophistication, to respond to hourly price signals. The result was a win/win. Consumers saved money and felt positive about doing so. The utility saved money from operating its generation more efficiently. The environment won because this more efficient operation also reduced emissions.

Will California TOU prices create a consumer revolt or a technology revolution?

California’s launch of TOU for residential consumers is a real gamble. The need for doing so is obvious. Residential consumers set the state’s peak electricity demand, and their peak demand is tied to their air conditioning use. The state consistently peaks around 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. on the hottest summer days when residential consumers cool their homes for comfort, health protection and the ability to enjoy a good night's sleep.

The question is: Will, or can, California residential consumers respond to peak prices by reducing their demand during the very time period they place such a high value on air conditioning? The answer is yes, if TOU sparks residential consumer purchases of smart appliances, solar power and batteries. TOU can be the financial incentive that drives mass-market adoption of Zero Net Energy buildings. The answer is no, if consumers simply revolt and this revolt translates into voter action.

I applaud California for taking this risk. I am signing up to be in the TOU test program. But professionally, this looks like a bumpy ride.

The great news is that technologies like rooftop solar, onsite batteries and smart building systems are commercially available and will allow consumers to harvest lower bills through TOU pricing. But the key question is: How much price-pain will be required to motivate consumers to buy and use these technologies? I hope consumers and the state can work through this turbulence. The result will be lower electricity bills, increased electricity reliability, increased comfort, dramatic local job growth and reduced emissions.

Image credit: Flickr/Traci Lawson