Search

The Environmental Industries Commission (EIC) has welcomed a new London scheme to improve air quality in the capital, and calls for it to be implemented in other UK cities.

From September, construction sites in London will be required to start replacing or retrofitting with pollution controls machinery such as diggers, cranes, generators and bulldozers to ensure new emissions standards are met. Such machinery is currently the source of 15% of particulate matter pollution and 12% of the toxic gas nitrogen dioxide within London.

With 9,500 people dying prematurely in London each year as a result of long term air pollution, emissions regulation for construction machinery is key to ensuring clean air in London.

Matthew Farrow, EIC executive director said: “This scheme is the result of five years of lobbying by EIC and we strongly welcome it. Emissions from construction sites are a much bigger problem than most of us realise and the scheme will help clean up construction machinery and improve the health of Londoners. We have worked closely with the Mayor’s advisers and other stakeholders to ensure the scheme makes use of the most effective, up to date environmental technology. Once the scheme has bedded in appropriate enforcement will be vital.

“London is not the only city where construction emissions are a health risk and we call on city leaders across the UK to adopt similar scheme.”

 

Picture credit: © Catalin17aka | Dreamstime.com

The biggest names in tech generally have good reputations as corporate citizens. But many companies fail to go beyond traditional philanthropy in their corporate citizenship. Though philanthropy is all well and good, tech companies in the San Francisco Bay Area are often isolated from the communities in which they operate, and in which their employees live and commute.

This constitutes a major blind spot.

As community members, the largest value generators of the Bay Area put massive pressure on public infrastructure – from available housing stock to transportation – which has a negative impact on the communities these companies call home.

What's their real responsibility to the community? And, are they meeting it?

TriplePundit wants to investigate. Here's how we're making it happen.

Image credit: Chris Martin, published under CC 2.0

Tesla did it again. It made jaws drop. The automaker's newest sedan, the all-wheel-drive Tesla Model S P85D (numbers you’ll never remember), just broke the record for the best car ever, according to Consumer Reports. It scored 103 out of 100 possible points (how that can happen is beyond me). There’s no such thing as a perfect car, but compared to all the other cars on the road, this one is the sweetest ride of them all. Why?

It's fast! This Tesla vehicle can accelerate from zero to 60 miles per hour in 3.1 seconds on “insane” mode. If that’s not fast enough for you, you can buy the $10,000 ludicrous mode upgrade that shaves the zero-to-60 down to 2.8 seconds. It’s not the fastest car on the road, but the surge of speed is silent so watch out for squirrels -- they might not hear you coming. "The only other way that you can feel [the surge of silent speed], in a legal setting, is to basically jump out of an airplane," says Mark Rechtin, Consumer Reports’ editor. The car can also fly down the road at 155 mph. Let your dog stick its face out the window of this car, and it will love you forever.

Not only is it fast, but it’s also a fuel-efficient miracle: The new Model S achieves the equivalent of 87 miles per gallon and can run 250 miles before needing more electric juice. It also has enhanced handling and braking power. This unparalleled performance is stunning.

Although it scored a perfect 100, there are a few princess-and-the-pea type issues. The interior is not as luxurious as other high-end cars. The ride is firm and a little loud. Also, there are no reliability ratings, but the older Model S achieved average reliability.

The biggest downside is its price tag of $127,820 which means your significant other probably won’t be gifting you one for Christmas. However, Tesla announced earlier this year that it will produce a more affordable car, the Model 3, for $35,000 in 2018.

According to NPR: “The glowing review generated intense interest in the car Thursday (as of this writing, the Consumer Reports website has crashed); it also propelled Tesla's stock to an 8 percent gain, to a close of $242.99 on the Nasdaq market. That's quite a bounce for a stock that, at the opening of Monday's trading session, could be had (briefly) for $202.”

If you are lucky enough to buy this car, do a little dance … hop in the car, floor the gas, then hit the brakes hard and do the electric slide.

Image credit: TeslaMotors

By Wayne Dunn

I’ve spent more than 25 years working on major extractive projects around the world, helping operators and planners to engage and collaborate with local communities and address local concerns, to earn and maintain a ‘social license’ and align community and shareholder interests.

Last week a major liquified natural gas (LNG) project was announced for my backyard: 2.5 miles from my home on Vancouver Island in Canada and right beside where I love to catch prawns and crabs with my little boat.

Major resource project.  In my backyard.

It is a partnership between an indigenous tribe, the Malahat First Nation, and Steelhead LNG of Vancouver.  The project is a floating LNG platform to liquefy natural gas for export to global markets. It is planned for indigenous-owned land just down the shore from my home of nearly 20 years. See the project description here.  On the surface, it seems an ideal example of an indigenous/non-indigenous business partnership: strategic and impactful.

But, for me, suddenly I am not the ‘international expert’ but one of the ‘local stakeholders.'  And already I am being bombarded with outrageous ‘facts’ seeking to ensure I oppose the project.  It is different, but somehow still the same.

Here is what I know.

We don’t know.  So relax.  Despite the claims and the certainty of opponents and proponents, we don’t know the social, environmental or even economic impacts with any degree of certainty. They will become known as things move forward.

I want to stay curious, stay engaged, and let facts and impacts emerge.  We have a regulatory process that I trust will ensure this happens.

The Malahat Tribe is economically marginalized and deserves better.  The Status Quo is not fair.   Surrounded by non-indigenous people who are relatively comfortable economically, the Malahat First Nation has 80 percent unemployment and has somehow been excluded from much of the economic opportunity that has occurred around them over the past 100 years.

Steelhead LNG is impressive.  For some time I’ve admired how Steelhead has engaged and consulted First Nations and developed collaborative partnerships and mechanisms for ensuring local benefit and value from Steelhead’s LNG projects.

Not just sideshow value, but meaningful upside participation and long-term value creation.  It is impressive.  The company has integrated corporate social responsibility (CSR) into its core business strategy.  I was so impressed that I had Steelhead’s CEO address one of my CSR programs.

Opposition helps make the project better.  No project comes out of the gate without room for improvement. The probes, queries and analysis of investors makes the financial and business model stronger.

Similarly, social and environmental opponents and criticism help to identify opportunities to improve social impacts and environmental performance.

Social, environmental and economic optimization will not happen without opposition.  Smart companies find ways to engage with opponents and improve projects.

Viability.  There is no way the project should proceed if it can’t demonstrate financial, social and environmental viability and risk management.  Fortunately our system has processes (financial markets and regulatory structures) that force demonstration of viability and risk management.

Straight truths are rare.  Hyperbole, balderdash and pure bullsh*t are more common.  This comes from opponents and proponents.  This project won’t solve all the social and economic woes of the Malahat Tribe (nobody has said directly that it will).  It also won’t, as the anti-everything crowd so quickly claimed, bring fracking to Vancouver Island or make the Saanich Inlet bathtub-warm.

Please, everyone, let’s have a discussion informed by truths.  No single project will solve decades of economic marginalization. The claims about fracking are so designed to build on other fears.  Fracking happens at the drill hole, not where gas is liquefied.  And, I’m sure science can find a better use for the heat energy by-product of liquefaction than warming up the Saanich Inlet.

We can’t afford to get it wrong.  The process needs to work and inform how/if we can develop it safely. We can’t afford mistakes.  We need it to be the best it can be.  We can’t afford mistakes environmentally. (I want my grandchildren and their grandchildren to be able to catch prawns and enjoy the Saanich Inlet.)  We also can’t afford mistakes economically.

The Malahat Nation created a huge socio-economic development opportunity for themselves; they deserve a chance to see if it can be developed in an acceptable way.

Certainty?  At this stage we don’t really know anything for sure.  Too much certainty is a sign of closed minds and swallowing (or promoting) misinformation.  An informed, vigorous and comprehensive discussion is necessary in order to know if this project makes social, economic and environmental sense.

The world needs energy.  Natural gas is far from the worst form of energy available. (Would you rather the world used unregulated coal?) Let’s have the process inform us, the discussion and the eventual decision on whether and how the project might proceed.

I know I plan to try and stay as curious, as engaged and as open as possible, and to be as wary as possible of the questionable ‘facts’ that will undoubtedly flow from those who enter the process with closed minds and unmovable positions.

Image credits: Wayne Dunn

Wayne Dunn is President & Founder, CSR Training Institute and Professor of Practice in Corporate Social Responsibility, McGill University. You can sign up for the CSR Training Institute newsletter here and read more from him here.

Follow here Twitter LinkedIn Blog for updates

Walmart said it won’t be selling high-powered rifles that hold multiple rounds of ammo anymore. This is a big deal because Walmart is the largest seller of guns and ammunition in the U.S. The retail giant claims the decision was “done purely based on customer demand” because customers were generally not looking to buy assault-style sporting rifles.

However, “sales of rifles are up,” said Arkadi Gerney, the senior vice president of the liberal think-tank Center for American Progress. “What people in the industry say is that these assault rifles are an increasing portion of rifle sales.” Gerney also said that Walmart’s sales have slowed because of tightened background checks and other measures. So, whether sales are up or down is a little unclear.

However, what is clear is that sales will likely increase as people buy up the remaining assault rifles at Walmart. The rifles are being sold at fewer than 4,600 stores and will be removed from these locations within a week or two as stores receive their fall stock.

Gerney continued: “In my experience working with Walmart in 2008, I found them to be extremely concerned about responsible gun sales. They definitely wanted to stay in the market and serve customers who wanted to buy guns, but they were very interested and responsive to ideas about how to make those sales safer and to make it less likely that the guns that they sell were ultimately misused.”

Earlier this year, the chief executive of Walmart, Doug McMillion, told CNN that he wanted to reduce sales on weapons like the one used to murder nine people at a church in Charleston, South Carolina, in June. High-powered rifles were also used in the Colorado movie theater shooting in July 2012 that left 12 people dead, as well as the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting a few months later in which 20 children and six adults were murdered.

McMillion said: “Our focus … should be hunters and people who shoot sporting clays, and things like that. So, the types of rifles we sell, the types of ammunition we sell, should be curated for those things.”

In most of the world, people are confused by Americans' desire to own guns. According to Vox, one Australian comedian, Jim Jefferies, once had his home invaded. “He was tied up and beaten, and his girlfriend was threatened with rape. So, you might think he'd sympathize with the idea that Americans want guns to protect their families. Quite the opposite — he does an excellent job of summing up why so many foreigners are baffled by America's gun culture.”

Jefferies explains the thought process of most of the world in this profound yet amusing standup routine. If you decide to watch it, invite Walmart CEO McMillion to sit down and watch it with you.

Image credit: Flickr/Mitch Barrie

Add Twitter to the list: With the growing call for improved diversity numbers in California's tech sector, Twitter has announced new diversity metrics for the coming year.

On the whole, the new goals for 2016 represent a 1 to 3 percent increase in women and minorities in targeted roles. The only exception is Twitter's leadership, which currently has zero representation from African American or Hispanic management. The company said on Friday that it intends to "increase underrepresented minorities in leadership roles to 6 percent." It has also stipulated that these new metrics only apply to U.S. positions.

These are bold annual goals, particularly for a company that is still trying to regain its financial footing of two years ago, when its company value was more than twice what it is today.

Still, diversity seems to be the focus these days for tech companies that want to demonstrate that they not only have a marketable product, but also an ear to the needs and values of its consumers. And nothing speaks louder than a company's hiring practices, it seems.

But upping the number of women and underrepresented minorities in tech positions and leadership roles may not be enough, says a new company that helps companies improve their diversity numbers. Porter Braswell, the founder of Jopwell, notes that strategies that support diversity in recruiting is now a "must have" in today's world. The company, which bills itself as a U.S. firm "dedicated to helping bridge the minority employment gap plaguing the U.S.," helps tech companies connect with qualified minority candidates. In so doing, it's also helping to draw focus on the fact that having an office that elevates the need for diversity in the workforce is a good thing.

Airbnb is among the most recent tech companies to take out ads for diversity managers. Its unusual job title of 'Head of Diversity and Belonging' may seem strange, but it pretty much sums up the mantra for a company whose motto is "belong anywhere." It also pinpoints the significant challenges that go along with ensuring open, fair recruitment and at the same time, that those practices represent a changing society.

Diversity is on the rise, and so, it seems, is a new business concept: diversity management. As many companies are now discovering, changing statistical numbers of representation is no longer enough. Diversity in thought takes a change in mindset when it comes to hiring the country's best and brightest talent.

Interested in Silicon Valley tech companies' role as community citizens? TriplePundit is crowdsourcing funds for a deep-dive series to explore just that! Check out the project here. 

Image credits: 1) Flickr/US Mission Geneva; 2) Flickr/Iwan Gabovitch

Many major electronics companies manufacture products in Malaysia, including Apple, Samsung and HP. That is a problem because poor working conditions in Malaysian electronics factories are all too common.

There are hundreds of thousands of foreign migrant workers in Malaysia. They come for a simple reason: to find work. Unfortunately, many end up working in bad conditions. As a report by Verite states, “The conditions faced by foreign electronics workers in Malaysia have the potential to result in forced labor.”

The conditions are so bad for many of the foreign workers that the U.S. Department of Labor put Malaysia on its official watch list for forced labor practices last December. That could potentially restrict the imports of electronic products into the U.S.

The Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition (EICC), a nonprofit coalition concerned with supply chain responsibility, has a solution. The EICC recently announced the launch of a pilot program aiming to protect foreign migrant workers in electronics factories. The purpose of the program is to improve conditions in electronic factories by providing workers with effective ways to report issues.

The program is called Suara Kita, which means “Our Voice” in Malay, and will be piloted from September 2015 through December 2016 in Malaysia. The goal is for the program to eventually be rolled out globally.

One of the key elements of the program is a comprehensive worker survey that seeks to inform and establish a baseline to measure against. Other elements of the program include:

• A worker-management communication program, based on EICC training, specific to foreign migrant workers and their employers


• Worker education on effective grievance mechanisms


• The development and launch of a worker helpline to address issues that are not resolved at the factory level

"By improving communication in factories and enhancing worker grievance mechanisms, companies can identify and address issues in their supply chains more quickly," said Rob Lederer, executive director of the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition (EICC), in a statement. "Our ultimate goal with this program is to create better, safer environments for foreign migrant workers throughout the electronics industry."

Considering the severity of the problem, as the Verite report found, this pilot program is badly needed. Of all workers in the report’s study sample, 28 percent were in forced labor situations. However, the forced labor rate among foreign workers is slightly higher at 32 percent, or almost 1 in 3 foreign workers.

Hopefully, the EICC’s pilot program will be effective. None of us want the cell phones, tablets and laptops that make our modern way of life possible to be made from forced labor.

Image credit: Flickr/Paul Sobszak

By Darcy Hitchcock

A lot of organizations 'get' environmental sustainability, issues related to natural resources, climate change, toxics and waste. It's tangible, and nature sets the bar for sustainability. But many organizations in the developed world struggle to understand what social sustainability has to do with them. They assume we’ve legislated out of existence many of the problems associated with social injustice: slavery, child labor, racial discrimination, unsafe workplaces, etc.

When asked about social sustainability, business owners throw their arms akimbo, thinking they’re done. While it’s true that many of the most egregious social offenses seem to occur outside the industrialized world, those of us in the so-called developed world may share more responsibility for them than we care to know. In addition, there’s a risk that we have become blind or inured to our own special violations and can’t see the dysfunction we’ve created in our own backyards.

"We need love, and to ensure love, we need to have full employment, and we need social justice. We need gender equity. We need freedom from hunger. These are our most fundamental needs as social creatures."

—David Suzuki, Canadian scientist, environmentalist and broadcaster

What women (and men) want

You’ve undoubtedly heard the Brundtland Commission definition of sustainable development: meeting the needs of the present while ensuring that future generations can meet their own needs. Sounds fine, but what exactly does that mean? Defining social sustainability can be tough. What are needs and what are wants? We need a way of defining what a healthy society is. One approach is to base this on research on human needs.

Manfred Max-Neef, a Chilean economist, discovered which human needs were consistent across different cultures. These same needs, Max-Neef found, showed up despite different social norms, conventions or locations. The way we satisfy those needs, he concluded, is what defines the differences from culture to culture. So, his model helps us to see past our differences and understand what is at the core of human behavior and motivation.

Nine human needs — Max-Neef identified the following human needs (used with permission):

• Subsistence


• Protection


• Affection


• Understanding


• Participation


• Leisure


• Creation


• Identity


• Freedom

Not a hierarchy — Max-Neef’s list is not hierarchical like the one Maslow hypothesized. One of Max-Neef’s insights is that a deficit in meeting any of these needs is a type of poverty that in turn generates pathologies. Some are obvious. Certainly if you don’t have enough to eat (subsistence), you have hunger or starvation. In babies, the lack of affection leads to what’s known as “failure to thrive,” sometimes even leading to death. If you don’t have enough leisure, you become a workaholic who suffers from stress and related maladies.

But it’s also true if people don’t have enough opportunities to influence matters that affect them (participation and freedom), they often get passive-aggressive or even aggressive. In organizations, you will often see ‘malicious obedience,’ as one of our colleagues coined it: disgruntled employees doing exactly what they’re told even though they know it’s not the right thing to do.

Not substitutable — Another of Max-Neef’s insights is that these needs cannot be substituted for one another. If you compensate for a lack of affection with food (subsistence), you have another well-recognized problem: obesity.

These needs are all important for a healthy human being.

From a sustainability standpoint, we want to find synergistic ways of meeting these needs while at the same time contributing to a healthier triple bottom line.

For a more detailed conversation of social sustainability, check out this article.

"Our prime purpose in this life is to help others. And if you can’t help them, at least don’t hurt them."

—Dalai Lama

Organizational social sustainability diagnostic

So, now that we know what people need, how do we use this information to assess our social sustainability? In organizations, we need to ask two questions:

• First, do no harm: In what ways are we undermining these needs for our stakeholders?


• Second, make a positive difference: How can we contribute to meeting these needs in a sustainable way?

Use this diagnostic at your next management team meeting to uncover opportunities to improve your social sustainability across your stakeholder groups. We built this on Max-Neef's model with his gracious permission. These questions are not exhaustive but should spark good conversation.

Subsistence

Do No Harm

• Who isn’t earning a living wage (employees and your suppliers' employees)?


• Who in our organization or supply chain doesn’t have access to food, water, shelter and basic healthcare?


• Who is marginalized or disadvantaged?

Make a Positive Difference

• Who in our communities (where we operate or where we serve) are living on the edge?


• What can we do to increase the wealth, well-being and resilience of our employees and the community?


• How can we improve the health and well-being of stakeholders?


• How can we rein in the income gap such that it promotes a sense of equality, fairness and social harmony?

Protection

Do No Harm

• Who is working in unsafe working conditions? (Include jobs requiring repetitive motion or long periods of sitting.)


• Do our benefits adequately protect our employees and is everyone covered?


• Is there a way to change our business model so employees don’t have to work at night (which is associated with health problems and accidents)?


• When was the last time we did a chemical inventory and how can we find safer substitutions for chemicals of concern while ensuring all our material safety data sheets are up to date?


• Have we chosen our interiors with indoor air quality in mind?

Make a Positive Difference

• What dangers face our stakeholders outside of work (eg, crime, domestic abuse, environmental hazards, access to health care)? How might we address these issues through our business?


• What can we do to improve the safety of our employees, customers, suppliers and the public?

Affection

Do No Harm

• Who may be feeling ignored, unloved or unappreciated?


• Where are we missing a sense of caring and mutual support in our organization and work teams?

Make a Positive Difference

• How can we better demonstrate our respect and caring for all stakeholders?


• How do we enhance the ability of our employees to interact with the customers (which can enhance feedback and personalize our service)?

Understanding

Do No Harm

• Who is missing critical information that would help them engage in the business?


• Who is not being intellectually stimulated?


• Who is not being given access to opportunities to develop their potential?


• Do any of our interactions with stakeholders (eg, advertising, sales and service, lobbying, shareholder meetings) undermine their dignity or diminish their views?

Make a Positive Difference

• What perspectives are not yet represented in our decision-making?


• How can we bring in a wider set of voices?


• How might our marketing and advertising build people and communities up, addressing real human needs?

Participation

Do No Harm

• Who doesn’t have influence over major decisions that affect them?


• Are there places where our standardized work processes treat people like machines?

Make a Positive Difference

• How empowered is our workforce? Can we apply democratic practices (see WorldBlu for best practices).


• Could we change our form of ownership so employees would be owners?


• How can we increase the engagement of our stakeholders, even those who may disagree with us?

Leisure

Do No Harm

• Who has too much or not enough work (ie, a lack of appropriate work-life balance)?


• Could some jobs be shared or completed via telework?


• Are employees or managers working 24-7? Do we encourage people to take time to rejuvenate themselves (eg, unplug while at home or on vacation)?

Make a Positive Difference

• How do we cut down on commute or travel times?


• Can we offer sabbaticals, volunteer vacations, or study tours to encourage employees to develop their talents?


• How can we enhance the availability of personal time and work flexibility for family issues (eg, adoptions, elder care, doctors visits, sick children)?

Creation

Do No Harm

• Who has few outlets for creativity or control over how they work?


• In what ways have we become complaisant where instead we should be innovating?

Make a Positive Difference

• How can we increase opportunities for people to express themselves in creative ways and foster innovation?Where can we use the design process more to improve our organization?


• How can we invent more systemic solutions with our stakeholders?


• How do we support the need for art, music and other creative pursuits in schools?

Identity

Do No Harm

• Who may feel marginalized, excluded or disenfranchised?


• How well does the diversity in our organization and board match the customers and communities we intend to serve?

Make a Positive Difference

• How do we ensure we are making decisions based on the greater good, not just our own interests, so doing good or being sustainable becomes part of our self-image?


• How do we move up the three levels of sustainability until our organization sees its mission as solving significant social/environmental problems.

Freedom

Do No Harm

• Is there any forced labor or oppression embedded in any part of our supply chain?


• Where do we have undue influence over others (eg, via lobbying, being the biggest employer in town, or the primary customer for a supplier)?


• Who may feel stuck in their job or be afraid to speak their truth (eg, due to lack of opportunities, poor management or entrenched biases)?

Make a Positive Difference

• How can we give employees more control over their work life: how work is done, who they work with, when they work?


• Who in our communities may feel oppressed and can we be an advocate for their empowerment?

Image credit: Flickr/Bruce Guenter

Adapted from an article called "Confused by Social Responsibility” written by Darcy Hitchcock and Marsha Willard, published by the International Society of Sustainability Professionals.

Darcy Hitchcock is the author of a number of award-winning business books including The Business Guide to Sustainability (now in its third edition). In her latest book, GREAT WORK: 12 Principles for your Work Life and Life’s Work, Darcy shares what she has learned about finding a calling, making a difference and leading organizations. It’s available in print and also three e-books: "Finding Your GREAT WORK," "Designing Organizations for GREAT WORK" and :Leading Others to GREAT WORK."

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

Long gone are the days when sustainable food equates to uninspired veggies stews and mushy ratatouille. These days, chefs and restauranteurs looking to lighten their impact on the environment are serving up everything from classic comfort foods to gastronomic feats with a side of sustainability.

For those die-hard foodies who couldn't dream of traveling without hitting up all the locally-esteemed eateries, this week we pulled together a travel guide featuring sustainable restaurants from all over the world. Bon appétit!

1. Relae: Copenhagen, Denmark

Winner of the 2015 Sustainable Restaurant Award on the annual 50 Best Restaurants list, Relae combines organic, local and fairly-traded ingredients with an innovative menu and a no-frills atmosphere.

Co-owned by director Kim Rossen and chef Christian Puglisi, the restaurant was founded in 2010 with sustainability at its core. The menu rotates nightly, and Chef Puglisi prides himself on the element of surprise for the gastronomic experience he curates at Relae.

The Michelin-starred restaurant in the Nørrebro district of Copenhagen matches its menu with an impressive list of environmentally-friendly practices: On any given night 90 to 100 percent of the ingredients served are certified organic; the chairs and tables are recycled; light fixtures are LED; the chef cooks with induction methods; and local deliveries are collected by bike.

2. Azurmendi: Larrabetzu, Spain

Founded in 1976, this gorgeous restaurant in Northern Spain has been sustainable from the start.

The restaurant itself is a stunning feat of sustainable architecture. Reflecting the Basque aesthetic, the building also integrates photovoltaic solar panels and a geothermic system to produce electricity and harvests rainwater to cover a number of operations. Operators strived to make the space "bioclimatic," and blended its design as seamlessly into the surrounding environment as possible.

As for the food, three-time Michelin star winning Basque chef Eneko Atxa emphasizes local produce and makes it a point to revive lost varieties of local vegetables. The menu features eggs from the restaurant's own hens, cooked from the inside and layered with truffles, as well as mouth-watering veggie dishes like frozen olive and vermouth and artichoke with pesto.

3. Tilth: Seattle, Washington

It makes sense that Seattle would top the list for sustainable eats, and executive chef and owner, Maria Hines, makes her home city proud with this classic American restaurant with an eco twist.

Hines, a James Beard Award winner and "Iron Chef" contestant, makes sure everything at Tilth is as sustainable as possible -- from soy crayons for the kids to organic feminine products in the ladies room. She is also active in the community, fundraising and lending support to the Fresh Bucks program -- a nutrition incentive program that doubles the purchasing power for low-income Seattle residents who use their federal food stamp benefits at farmers markets.

As for the food, Hines uses 95 percent organic ingredients -- local when possible -- for all of her delightful dishes. When an ingredient isn't available organically, she often makes it herself, including homemade butter, ketchup and vinegar, the Huffington Post reports. Menu items range from watermelon carpaccio and house-made tagliatelle to Skagit River Ranch pork belly and mini duck burgers. And be sure to check out Hines' other two restaurants on your visit to Seattle.

4. Uncommon Ground: Chicago, Illinois

Named the Greenest Restaurant in the World by the Green Restaurant Association in 2013, Uncommon Ground brings local sourcing to the next level. Above the restaurant, situated in the Lakeview/Wrigleyville neighborhood of Chicago, sits America's first certified organic rooftop farm -- where co-owners Helen and Michael Cameron source a bounty of ingredients. The farm even includes its own beehive.

The menu features classics like vegetarian chili and huevos rancheros and intriguing additions like 'peaches and pork candy' and seasonal gnocchi. The beer list is dominated by GreenStar Brewing, the first certified organic brewery in Illinois, which donates 5 percent of its proceeds to local nonprofits.

5. Rub & Stub: Copenhagen, Demark

Another win for Copenhagen, critically acclaimed restaurant Rub & Stub takes sustainability to new heights. The first restaurant of its kind in Europe, Rub & Stub is nonprofit, is part of the Danish Refugee Council and is solely staffed by volunteers. But that's not all: The main ingredient in its delectable dishes is leftovers.

The eatery receives donated surplus food from farmers, food cooperatives, local food stores and bakeries, and Food Bank Copenhagen. In its first year and a half of existence, Rub & Stub served around 3.5 tons of food that would otherwise have gone to waste. Food donations tend to be "ugly" produce -- fruits and veggies that are the wrong size, shape or color -- as well as items too close to their "best before" dates.

The restaurant's menu rotates nightly, with an emphasis placed on making sure there's something for everyone. Each nightly menu features a vegetarian option, as well as a variety of local meats. Portion sizes are kept reasonable to reduce food waste, but if you're still hungry, you can ask for a second helping -- for free.

6. The Captain's Galley: Scrabster, Scotland, U.K.

Located in Scrabster, a small fishing town on the north coast of the Highlands in Scotland, The Captain's Galley serves only fresh, local and seasonal seafood.

Jim Cowie, who co-owns the restaurant with his wife Mary, makes daily trips to the Scrabster fish market and hand-selects a catch of the day that's of the highest quality, is wild-caught locally using sustainable methods and is from non-pressure stock species. All produce is sourced within a 50-mile radius of the restaurant.

As you may guess, the menu rotates daily. Past favorites have included Fruit de Mer (which features local lobster, hand-dived scallops and Langoustines) and the day's market fish in a classic bouillabaisse with saffron potatoes and rouille.

7. Rosemary's: New York, New York

For a taste of classic New York City Italian comfort food with an eco twist, check out Rosemary's in Greenwich Village. Created by Carlos Suarez, the owner of two other popular NYC eateries, Bobo and Claudette, Rosemary's sources a good portion of its ingredients from its very own rooftop farm (check out the webcam livefeed here), as well as a school garden and community garden in the Village and another rooftop farm in Brooklyn.

The menu includes Tuscan classics like tasty focaccia, cavatelli with heirloom tomatoes, basil and parmesan, and salmon with spring garlic puree, dandelion greens and smoked almonds.

8. Narisawa: Tokyo, Japan

Chef Yoshihiro Narisawa embraces nature and biomimicry in the way he operates his two-time Michelin starred restaurant. He rotates his menu seasonally to highlight the best Japanese ingredients. Using French culinary techniques, he models "the smell, aspect and inner texture" of his dishes after the natural landscapes from which the ingredients came.

If you decide to visit Narisawa, be sure to arrive hungry. Its tasting menu features 10 seasonal items, listed only by ingredient and concept, and invites diners to enjoy "with an open mind."

9. Riverford at The Duke of Cambridge: London, England, U.K.

The Duke of Cambridge, London's first -- and still only -- certified organic gastropub, recently teamed up with Riverford, a hugely successful family-run farm known for its organic veg box scheme and farm shops.

The Duke’s founder, Geetie Singh, married Guy Watson, the man behind Riverford, in June 2014, so the union of the business was a natural fit. The restaurant is 100 percent organic, including produce, meats and beverages, and prides itself on "ensuring a fair deal for all" -- suppliers, staff, customers and the planet.

The pub's bar features organic beer, wine and spirits from local independent sources. Its menus are field-to-plate and rotate daily. Tonight's dinner menu includes roast cherry tomato and chili soup with yogurt, beef and pork meatballs over polenta, and falafel with herbed quinoa and sautéed savoy cabbage.

10. Woodberry Kitchen: Baltimore, Maryland

Woodberry Kitchen prides itself on its relationship to the Chesapeake Bay, which provides a bounty of fresh and local seafood for its menu. The restaurant features seasonal catches from the Bay, regularly supports conservation efforts, and even saves and returns oyster shells as part of an effort to regenerate oyster beds.

The restaurant's menu boasts fresh local fare that's way beyond seafood. You'll find Maryland classics like crab and catfish -- accented with local veggies like lima beans, corn and spicy peppers -- as well as steak, lamb, brisket and vegetarian options served up in American style with an attitude.

Staff Pick -- The Hall: San Francisco, California

The local watering hole of TriplePundit's San Francisco-based team, The Hall is a temporary food and drink venue in San Francisco's Mid Market neighborhood, featuring six independent local food vendors and a great bar scene.

Enjoy local, approachable food for as little as $5 a plate in a communal atmosphere that's anything but pretentious. Or just stop by for an after-work happy hour served up with local drinks.

Image and video credits: 1) Rosemary's via Facebook 2) VisitDenmark 3) Azurmendi 4) Tilth via Facebook 5) Uncommon Ground 6) Rub & Stub 7) The Captain's Galley 8) Rosemary's via Facebook 9) Narisawa 10) Riverford at The Duke of Cambridge 11) Woodberry Kitchen 12) The Hall

World Water Week is going on right now in Stockholm, Sweden. This year marks the 25th edition of the annual international event aimed at calling attention to issues surrounding water.

Over the years, businesses have played an increasing role in dealing with the issue, which makes sense considering the size of the impact that business has. What also makes sense is the fact that smart water policy can not only save companies money, but in many cases, water also represents a strategic asset, without which many businesses could not operate. A major aspect of the sustainability journey has been the process of making ecosystem assets that were previously considered externalities visible to the financial side of businesses.

Back in 2014, a joint effort between Ecolab, a global leader in water technologies and services, and Trucost, a global leader in valuing natural capital, produced the Water Risk Monetizer.

This secure website is a tool available to businesses at no cost. An expanded version, announced today, provides new insights to help businesses factor current and future water risks into decision-making with a localized assessment of water scarcity impacts on current and future revenue.

The expanded version takes into account the fact that:

• Water scarcity has the potential to increase the cost of water, which makes operations more expensive and reduces profit margins.


• Water scarcity limits availability, making it more difficult to access the water a business needs to operate which can decrease production and result in loss of revenue.

“As water scarcity increases around the world, business leaders need actionable information to help them understand and manage their current and future water-related risks,” said Douglas M. Baker, Jr., Ecolab chairman and chief executive officer. “The Water Risk Monetizer helps businesses make informed decisions to enable growth in this new era of water scarcity.”

Two major factors have interfered with effective water management strategies. First, like many other natural capital resources, water is generally not priced to reflect its full value. As a result, many businesses don’t factor potential cost implications associated with water scarcity into business decisions. Second, businesses often take the water they rely on for granted.

It’s like McGee Young said in our conversation about the ROI of sustainability. Referring to those sticking with a strict show-me-the-impact-on-this-year’s-bottom-line approach, he said, “They are working with the outdated assumption that the environment we are operating in is not about to change into one that will be far more expensive and difficult.”

Not only are the world’s water supplies limited, but demand is increasing and quality is declining due to the need for more food and energy, increased economic development, and other factors. The new monetization tool provides businesses with information on the financial implications related to water scarcity risks and the likelihood that these implications will occur.

Specifically, the tool provides:

• Risk-adjusted water cost: monetary estimate of the full value of water at a facility level, based on what water would cost if supply and demand were accurately reflected.


• Potential revenue at risk: estimated amount and likelihood of the revenue that could potentially be lost at a facility due to the impact of water scarcity on operations.

“The new revenue-at-risk indicator illuminates the threat that businesses face from water scarcity,” said Richard Mattison, chief executive of Trucost. “It helps companies raise awareness about the need for investing in sustainable water management, as well as providing a practical water risk assessment tool to factor water scarcity into business decisions.”

The original water risk premium model calculates a risk-adjusted water cost by correlating local water scarcity to considerations that contribute to the full value of incoming water, based on scarcity, for a specific facility, including:

• Current and projected water use


• Current and projected local water scarcity


• Economic variance and purchasing power


• Historical trends in country-level water tariffs

Using algorithms derived from published scientific studies on water scarcity and in-stream water values, such as groundwater recharge, waste assimilation, wildlife habitat and recreational activities, the tool correlates a facility’s water use to these local water scarcity considerations to calculate a “water risk premium.”

The water risk premium, when added to the local price a business pays for water, quantifies the value a business should place on water based on real and future water scarcity risks (current, three-, five- and 10-year projections).

The new Potential Revenue at Risk function estimates the value of the revenue that a facility could potentially lose due to the impact of water scarcity on operations. The tool uses a revenue-at-risk model to estimate the amount of water available to the facility – its “share” of total water available to industry water users in the basin based on the facility’s contribution to the local economy.

Because water is a finite resource that is shared by many users in a water basin, the amount of water that should be available to a facility may be less than what a facility needs.

That amount available could also change over time, as water scarcity increases or as a local economy grows (the tool forecasts revenue at risk over three, five and 10 years). The revenue-at-risk model compares the estimated amount of water a facility requires to generate revenue (cubic meter per U.S. dollar of revenue) to the facility’s share of water in the basin if water were allocated among water users based on economic activity (contribution to basin-level GDP). If more water is required than the basin share of water allocated (as determined by the model), then a proportion of the facility’s revenue is potentially at risk.

Image credit: Flickr/Susan Nilsson