Here's a cool video showcasing Nike's Considered Design project and sustainable product innovation in the shoe industry. They worked alongside the Natural Step Canada to remake this branch of their brand.
Pretty fantastic - a group pranks the New York Post to raise awareness about climate change as we enter into "Climate Week" with a series of meetings and events taking place this week.
Stumbled across some cool stuff PUMA is supporting along with their sustainability reports.
Check out Peace One Day and PUMA Peace (scroll down to see some sweet pics of the soccer matches they've held in support of Peace One Day)
Check out Peace One Day and PUMA Peace (scroll down to see some sweet pics of the soccer matches they've held in support of Peace One Day)
There's been a lot of talk about climate change recently and seems to be the topic-of-choice for the media when it comes to sustainability. The reality however, is that there are numerous other problems that are all interlinked and partially responsible for the current state of the planet and society. Sustainability is such a broad and all-encompasing term that it is beginning to generate some confusion about what it actually means.
Earth System
Regardless of the various definitions thrown around for what sustainability stands for, we can typically draw consensus that it involves systems. At its root, sustainability is about understanding some broader system and how different things interact within it.
Of course the primary system we must consider is the planet earth, but depending on different situations and scenarios, the specific system can be further developed and refined, while keeping in mind that it resides within the larger system of the planet.
The interactions that take place within this large system are extremely important to note. The image above illustrates one view of those interactions. You have the lithosphere on the bottom which is basically the Earth's crust. On top of that layer is the ecosphere, which includes everything from trees, water, and the atmosphere. Within the ecosphere is society, ideally operating within the bounds of the ecosphere.
Each of these three categories interact with the other through various processes. A few of these interactions include:
- Volcanoes (Lithosphere to Ecosphere)
- Mining (Lithosphere to Society)
- Landfill Waste (Society to Ecosphere)
- Nuclear Waste (Society to Lithosphere)
The Sustainability Challenge
So by understanding and recognizing our planet as the key system, what then is the real sustainability challenge?
If you were to try and brainstorm as many issues as you could related to sustainability, you would probably generate a pretty extensive list. A few issues might include climate change, loss of biodiversity, increasing population, loss of good farm land, decreasing fossil fuel reserves, or greater eco-toxicity.
If you then look more closely at that list, you'll notice that nearly every issue is somehow tied to every other in some way or another.
The problem is that too many people view these issues as standard 'everyday' problems that must be periodically overcome, all of the time remaining within some 'safe zone' which society can function and thrive. This is sometimes illustrated by using a cylinder metaphor.
The reality however is that many of these issues will continue to get worse and worse, and in fact, the walls of the cylinder (our supposed 'safe zone') are slowly caving in on us as time goes by. So instead, we have a situation that looks like a funnel.
Depending on the issue, these walls may be caving in more quickly than others. Regardless, by recognizing the funnel, we can see that the longer we wait, the less maneuverability we will have to make a change towards sustainability.
The real sustainability challenge is to recognize the walls and the fact that we are running into them and make systematic moves towards the opening.
How to Plan for Sustainability
So once we recognize this funnel scenario, we need to know how to plan to get to the opening.
As individuals, we sometimes like to plan and solve problems through a process known as backcasting. For example, if you were to move to a new location that you've never been to before (I don't know, let's say Sweden) and needed to find a house you would probably generate a list of neccesary things that must be incorporated with that new house once you arrived. So you might say that it has to be within biking distance of your school, within a certain affordable price range, and big enough to keep all your stuff. You would then envision that perfect solution and once you arrived in Sweden, start looking and making steps towards finding that dream house.
However, when individuals gather in groups, this type of planning typically breaks down and we resort to a planning strategy known as forecasting. Just like with the weather, forecasting involves using your previous knowledge and experience along with past trends to predict what the future might be like. The problem with such a method is that it restricts the future envisioned scenario to past trends and knowledge.
Backcasting from Success
This is of particular importance when planning for sustainability because we need to be able to envision a sustainable society in the future free from today's trends. Then once we have developed that vision of the future (the 'X' in the picture above) we can then backcast to today and develop strategic steps to get us from today to that point.
An example of a potential problem with forecasting related to sustainability may be a case such as energy. Some people may claim that solar or wind energy is the solution for a sustainable society. However, this kind of reasoning is based solely off of our current knowledge and trends. If we were to apply backcasting, we would instead envision energy in the future
Defining Success
So the key then in this whole pictures is that if we want to succeed in a complex system, we need to be able to define what success is. And from there, develop steps to success.
This can typically not be done on the level of detail, and rather, must be built on overarching principles of the system (which for sustainability, means the planet earth). But the problem is that most people who work in the field of sustainability have no idea what the basic principles for sustainability are.
Principles of Sustainability
By having a set of Sustainability Principles that can be used to analyze problems and assist in planning, we are able to create a 'common language' so that everyone working on the problem can properly talk together. A current problem is that experts (who are needed to help solve sustainability issues) get so hung up in their own field that it can be difficult to bring them together and generate consensus. So what are those principles?
There are four basic sustainability principles that have been developed and refined over the past few years by a wide group of scientists through peer-reviewed journals. Of course, as with any science, these are things to be further discussed and refined, but for now, these principles have proven successful and helped numerous businesses, organizations, and municipalities plan towards sustainability.
To generate the principles, scientists came to consensus on four system conditions for a sustainable society. These were built on scientific laws such as Conservation of Mass, the 1st and 2nd law of thermodynamics, and the fact that Earth is an open system to energy but closed to matter (the sun radiates energy to the planet but matter on the planet cannot leave, only change form).
If those four system conditions were true, then as a society, our main sustainability principles should follow that we do not contribute to those four things which can detract from a sustainable society. Summed up, the sustainability principles state the following:
Our sustainability principles are to eliminate our contribution to systematic...
Once we have this basic understanding, we can then start to apply specific planning methodologies such as the 5-Level Framework (discussed in an earlier blog post) or a more specialized approach known as the ABCD Analysis (I'll save to talk about that one for another time).
*For further and expanded information about the stuff previously mentioned, feel free to download the Sustainability Primer from The Natural Step Canada.
Having said that, there are still specific sustainability issues, such as climate change, which are off particular importance in the near future.
Here's a clip from BBC News summing up a few of the concerns and challenges for the Climate Change negotiations to take place in Copenhagen this December. Feel free to jump to around 6:30 for the actual discussions between the guests on the show (or just watch the whole thing - it's tied to 'The Age of Stupid' which premiers next week).
The video gets at a few of the key issues that are hoped to be resolved at Copenhagen. These include:
1) The role that developed countries will play at reducing their emissions.
2) The role that developing countries will play to limit the growth of their emissions.
3) Where will the money come from to help the developing countries.
4) Who will manage that money.
The specific details of the deal may not be reached by December, but if these larger questions can be addressed and answered, then significant progress will have been made in the right direction. The next few days will also launch "Climate Week" as some are calling it, which includes three key meetings in Washington, NY, and Pittsburgh to discuss climate change.
Earth System
Regardless of the various definitions thrown around for what sustainability stands for, we can typically draw consensus that it involves systems. At its root, sustainability is about understanding some broader system and how different things interact within it.
Of course the primary system we must consider is the planet earth, but depending on different situations and scenarios, the specific system can be further developed and refined, while keeping in mind that it resides within the larger system of the planet.
Natural Cycles
The interactions that take place within this large system are extremely important to note. The image above illustrates one view of those interactions. You have the lithosphere on the bottom which is basically the Earth's crust. On top of that layer is the ecosphere, which includes everything from trees, water, and the atmosphere. Within the ecosphere is society, ideally operating within the bounds of the ecosphere.Each of these three categories interact with the other through various processes. A few of these interactions include:
- Volcanoes (Lithosphere to Ecosphere)
- Mining (Lithosphere to Society)
- Landfill Waste (Society to Ecosphere)
- Nuclear Waste (Society to Lithosphere)
The Sustainability Challenge
So by understanding and recognizing our planet as the key system, what then is the real sustainability challenge?
If you were to try and brainstorm as many issues as you could related to sustainability, you would probably generate a pretty extensive list. A few issues might include climate change, loss of biodiversity, increasing population, loss of good farm land, decreasing fossil fuel reserves, or greater eco-toxicity.
If you then look more closely at that list, you'll notice that nearly every issue is somehow tied to every other in some way or another.
The problem is that too many people view these issues as standard 'everyday' problems that must be periodically overcome, all of the time remaining within some 'safe zone' which society can function and thrive. This is sometimes illustrated by using a cylinder metaphor.
Cylinder Metaphor
The reality however is that many of these issues will continue to get worse and worse, and in fact, the walls of the cylinder (our supposed 'safe zone') are slowly caving in on us as time goes by. So instead, we have a situation that looks like a funnel.Funnel Metaphor
Depending on the issue, these walls may be caving in more quickly than others. Regardless, by recognizing the funnel, we can see that the longer we wait, the less maneuverability we will have to make a change towards sustainability.The real sustainability challenge is to recognize the walls and the fact that we are running into them and make systematic moves towards the opening.
How to Plan for Sustainability
So once we recognize this funnel scenario, we need to know how to plan to get to the opening.
As individuals, we sometimes like to plan and solve problems through a process known as backcasting. For example, if you were to move to a new location that you've never been to before (I don't know, let's say Sweden) and needed to find a house you would probably generate a list of neccesary things that must be incorporated with that new house once you arrived. So you might say that it has to be within biking distance of your school, within a certain affordable price range, and big enough to keep all your stuff. You would then envision that perfect solution and once you arrived in Sweden, start looking and making steps towards finding that dream house.
However, when individuals gather in groups, this type of planning typically breaks down and we resort to a planning strategy known as forecasting. Just like with the weather, forecasting involves using your previous knowledge and experience along with past trends to predict what the future might be like. The problem with such a method is that it restricts the future envisioned scenario to past trends and knowledge.
Backcasting from Success
This is of particular importance when planning for sustainability because we need to be able to envision a sustainable society in the future free from today's trends. Then once we have developed that vision of the future (the 'X' in the picture above) we can then backcast to today and develop strategic steps to get us from today to that point.An example of a potential problem with forecasting related to sustainability may be a case such as energy. Some people may claim that solar or wind energy is the solution for a sustainable society. However, this kind of reasoning is based solely off of our current knowledge and trends. If we were to apply backcasting, we would instead envision energy in the future
Defining Success
So the key then in this whole pictures is that if we want to succeed in a complex system, we need to be able to define what success is. And from there, develop steps to success.
This can typically not be done on the level of detail, and rather, must be built on overarching principles of the system (which for sustainability, means the planet earth). But the problem is that most people who work in the field of sustainability have no idea what the basic principles for sustainability are.
Principles of Sustainability
By having a set of Sustainability Principles that can be used to analyze problems and assist in planning, we are able to create a 'common language' so that everyone working on the problem can properly talk together. A current problem is that experts (who are needed to help solve sustainability issues) get so hung up in their own field that it can be difficult to bring them together and generate consensus. So what are those principles?
There are four basic sustainability principles that have been developed and refined over the past few years by a wide group of scientists through peer-reviewed journals. Of course, as with any science, these are things to be further discussed and refined, but for now, these principles have proven successful and helped numerous businesses, organizations, and municipalities plan towards sustainability.
To generate the principles, scientists came to consensus on four system conditions for a sustainable society. These were built on scientific laws such as Conservation of Mass, the 1st and 2nd law of thermodynamics, and the fact that Earth is an open system to energy but closed to matter (the sun radiates energy to the planet but matter on the planet cannot leave, only change form).
If those four system conditions were true, then as a society, our main sustainability principles should follow that we do not contribute to those four things which can detract from a sustainable society. Summed up, the sustainability principles state the following:
Our sustainability principles are to eliminate our contribution to systematic...
1. increases in concentrations of substances brought up from the Earth's crustIn simpler language, we as a society should not be...
2. increases in concentrations of substances produced by society
3. physical degradation of nature
4. undermining of people's capacity to meet their needs
1. taking stuff from the Earth's crust at a rate faster than they can return (such as mining or drilling)By adhering to these principles, we can start to create a common language to work on sustainability issues. Without such a uniting framework, it becomes too difficult to identify where to start with so many different issues tied to sustainability.
2. making stuff faster than it can breakdown in nature (such as plastics)
3. destroying nature (such as deforestation or over-fishing), or
4. making it difficult for others to meet their needs (such as unfair trade or working conditions)
Once we have this basic understanding, we can then start to apply specific planning methodologies such as the 5-Level Framework (discussed in an earlier blog post) or a more specialized approach known as the ABCD Analysis (I'll save to talk about that one for another time).
*For further and expanded information about the stuff previously mentioned, feel free to download the Sustainability Primer from The Natural Step Canada.
Having said that, there are still specific sustainability issues, such as climate change, which are off particular importance in the near future.
Here's a clip from BBC News summing up a few of the concerns and challenges for the Climate Change negotiations to take place in Copenhagen this December. Feel free to jump to around 6:30 for the actual discussions between the guests on the show (or just watch the whole thing - it's tied to 'The Age of Stupid' which premiers next week).
The video gets at a few of the key issues that are hoped to be resolved at Copenhagen. These include:
1) The role that developed countries will play at reducing their emissions.
2) The role that developing countries will play to limit the growth of their emissions.
3) Where will the money come from to help the developing countries.
4) Who will manage that money.
The specific details of the deal may not be reached by December, but if these larger questions can be addressed and answered, then significant progress will have been made in the right direction. The next few days will also launch "Climate Week" as some are calling it, which includes three key meetings in Washington, NY, and Pittsburgh to discuss climate change.
Here's some lyrics that have been rolling through my head a lot recently.
It feels as if I should wait a few months for the program to fully develop before fully jumping in. But hesitation is a hindrance and by waiting for the perfect time to come, I may miss out on some key issues.
Hold me steady, we'll never be ready...
Fortunately, I have already developed some really neat friendships here (in addition to Matt who came along with me) that I'll be able to walk through all of this with. In fact, I think that's one of the key aspects to sustainability. At least for me, I know how much more reassuring it is to see others go ahead and blaze a trail in which I can follow on. It's scary to "just walk on down this road" not entirely sure what the future may bring. By having friends to walk the road with you, the unknowns in life don't seem so big anymore.
I guess that's one of the goals of this program as well. A key difference that we have been discussing is the difference between forecasting and backcasting. We are most used to forecasting, which involves taking our current trends, knowledge, and experience and forecasting it into the future to imagine what a sustainable society might look like. Just like weatherman do to predict our weather for tomorrow. The innate problem for sustainable development with this concept however is that it ties a sustainable future to our current behavior.
Backcasting on the other hand releases us from the trends of today and starts by envisioning what a sustainable society might look like. For example rather than imagining what renewable energy may look like in the future, we could imagine what energy in general would look like in the future.
Backcasting then takes the envisioned sustainable society of the future and determines strategic steps to make towards that point.
Love isn't borrowed
We aren't promised tomorrow...
This was an interesting line that took me a bit to think over in my head. I'm still not entirely sure what it means and would love to hear thoughts from others. For me, it seems to be talking about taking responsibility for the way we live our lives. We can't simply borrow someone else's love. We can't borrow someone else's experiences or joys or fears. Our lives are meant to be lived by us, and we must remember that the good and bad come together in a single package. It's easy to find excuses because of the fears or unknown paths ahead. But it's on those uncharted paths that we will find tomorrow's joys. We aren't promised tomorrow though, so we need to start the journey today.
With regards to sustainability, it is also easy to fall in the trap of recognizing primarily the bad on the path ahead. It's important that we keep our eyes open and recognize both the good and bad. Our eyes and way of seeing have the power to manipulate reality, and we must be careful to objectively and fairly view sustainable development around us.
Every now and then it's encouraging to be reminded that we are all unsure of what the future holds. We are all unsure of the steps to get there and unsure where the high and low points will be. But regardless, tomorrow is ours and we can choose when to start that journey.
It gives me reassurance when thinking about the next step from this master's program. The next year will be a learning and growing experience. The ball is surely already rolling, and we'll see where it goes from there.
p.s. you should check out the rest of Mat Kearney's new album "City of Black and White" - it's awesome!
"Never Be Ready"
-Mat Kearney
Come on and lay down these armsI can really relate to this song, and the feeling of always wanting to wait for the perfect time before jumping in. Especially with this master's program in Sweden. One of the main points of this program is to learn key steps to implementing sustainability initiatives in businesses, organizations, and industries. Of the 75 people in the program, I am one of the youngest. It seems a bit crazy to expect someone with minimal experience to advise those much older than myself on key sustainability issues.
All our best defenses
We're taking our chances here on the run
The fear is an anchor
Time is a stranger
Love isn't borrowed
We aren't promised tomorrow
We'll never be ready if we keep waiting
For the perfect time to come
Hold me steady, we'll never be ready
When we don't know, though we can't see
Just walk on down this road with me
Hold me steady, we'll never be ready
It feels as if I should wait a few months for the program to fully develop before fully jumping in. But hesitation is a hindrance and by waiting for the perfect time to come, I may miss out on some key issues.
Hold me steady, we'll never be ready...
Fortunately, I have already developed some really neat friendships here (in addition to Matt who came along with me) that I'll be able to walk through all of this with. In fact, I think that's one of the key aspects to sustainability. At least for me, I know how much more reassuring it is to see others go ahead and blaze a trail in which I can follow on. It's scary to "just walk on down this road" not entirely sure what the future may bring. By having friends to walk the road with you, the unknowns in life don't seem so big anymore.
I guess that's one of the goals of this program as well. A key difference that we have been discussing is the difference between forecasting and backcasting. We are most used to forecasting, which involves taking our current trends, knowledge, and experience and forecasting it into the future to imagine what a sustainable society might look like. Just like weatherman do to predict our weather for tomorrow. The innate problem for sustainable development with this concept however is that it ties a sustainable future to our current behavior.
Backcasting on the other hand releases us from the trends of today and starts by envisioning what a sustainable society might look like. For example rather than imagining what renewable energy may look like in the future, we could imagine what energy in general would look like in the future.
Backcasting then takes the envisioned sustainable society of the future and determines strategic steps to make towards that point.
Love isn't borrowed
We aren't promised tomorrow...
This was an interesting line that took me a bit to think over in my head. I'm still not entirely sure what it means and would love to hear thoughts from others. For me, it seems to be talking about taking responsibility for the way we live our lives. We can't simply borrow someone else's love. We can't borrow someone else's experiences or joys or fears. Our lives are meant to be lived by us, and we must remember that the good and bad come together in a single package. It's easy to find excuses because of the fears or unknown paths ahead. But it's on those uncharted paths that we will find tomorrow's joys. We aren't promised tomorrow though, so we need to start the journey today.
With regards to sustainability, it is also easy to fall in the trap of recognizing primarily the bad on the path ahead. It's important that we keep our eyes open and recognize both the good and bad. Our eyes and way of seeing have the power to manipulate reality, and we must be careful to objectively and fairly view sustainable development around us.
Every now and then it's encouraging to be reminded that we are all unsure of what the future holds. We are all unsure of the steps to get there and unsure where the high and low points will be. But regardless, tomorrow is ours and we can choose when to start that journey.
It gives me reassurance when thinking about the next step from this master's program. The next year will be a learning and growing experience. The ball is surely already rolling, and we'll see where it goes from there.
p.s. you should check out the rest of Mat Kearney's new album "City of Black and White" - it's awesome!
So I leave the country for just a year and in that time, Playing For Change decides to go on tour. I expect all you people still in the States to go and see them for me.
So I thought it would be helpful for me to start writing down some of my thoughts from lectures here at BTH on my blog. Classes started last Monday and so far, we have gone over the basics of the program, a really innovative way of discussing lots of issues in detail through a process called 'open space', and an introduction to the Natural Step approach.
Our program is entitled Master's of Strategic Leadership towards Sustainability (MSLS). Karl-Hendrik Robert (the founder of the Natural Step) has been lecturing to us for the past few days. He started by introducing his framework for analyzing and implementing sustainability into our companies, governments, and cities. The following day, he then went on to discuss the physics and chemistry underpinning his framework.
But before I get into what was discussed in the lectures, let me give you a very brief overview of the Natural Step (TNS). TNS was started up 20 years ago in Sweden in an effort to bring scientists together in consensus on sustainability. From this point, we would then be able to develop a common language in which to effectively discuss the 'un-sustainability' around us. From that vision, a network of multiple Natural Step's have popped up all over the world in numerous countries to help guide and facilitate companies, governments, and municipalities towards sustainability. This framework, referred to as FSSD (framework for strategic sustainable development) is based upon understanding the systems holding everything together. A common frustration is that we as a people like to specialize in 'things.' And although this is needed in our society, it creates problems because we rarely take the time to look up and see what others are doing in other specialties and fields around us. Such a mindset makes it very difficult to approach sustainability and it is the FFSD that attempts to bridge this gap.
Now back to some of the details from the lecture.
Karl-Hendrik introduced three questions that are key in evaluating 'un-sustainability.'
1) Do you have a definition of sustainability?
2) Referring to that definition, what is your gap?
3) What are you doing to bridge that gap?
The first of these questions is probably the most important. With sustainability being such a hot-topic nowadays, it seems silly that we very rarely actually talk about what sustainability means. Sure we talk about things such as water scarcity, soil degradation, and climate change, but we rarely define sustainability. Without a common definition of the term, it is hard to approach the larger picture, and we end up specializing too soon on the sub-problems rather than the larger picture. After a definition is agreed upon, we can then begin to analyze a our given situation and find ways of striving towards sustainability.
Once answering these questions, we can then move on to look at various strategies for achieving success. Here is the path which KHR suggested:
Step 1 involves understanding the system. This is where understanding basic chemistry and physics is important. This step involves understanding the rules of the game.
Step 2 then defines what success looks like for this specific example. If you don't understand the system well enough (and have a common language to communicate back and forth between one another) then it is impossible to determine what you want (success). This is one of the most commonly lacking aspects of sustainability in the real world.
Step 3 then determines a strategy. It is most often unrealistic to immediately transition to full-sustainability. Just as in chess, it is rare (if not impossible) to win in 1 or 2 steps. However, each move you make (even if it sacrifices one of your own pieces) ideally moves you towards winning. This is the same for making sustainable decisions. Although the intial move may not be fully sustainable, it may facilitiate and allow your next step to achieve success.
Step 4 then identifies those specific actions needed to be taken.
And step 5 includes the tools to get there.
So that is the basic overview of the framework, and then there are numerous steps within this bigger framework which we will be discussing in further detail throughout the year. Some of these we covered in the first lectures but I don't have the time or space to write all of that out at this moment.
However from the lectures, there were some interesting other thoughts that were raised. Here are just a few of them.
"We're looking for knowledge, but we're drowning in detail."
- This refers back to the specializing issue developed in our society. We are so accustomed to knowing more and more but we tend to always look to the detail rather than the system. KHR describes it like a tree - where the trunk and branches are the unifying system and the leaves represent the details. Sometimes we focus so much on our leaf that we forget to look at the leaves around us and more importantly, the branch connecting us to the bigger picture.
"We do not want to become poor now to become rich later."
- Many individuals view sustainability as a poor economical decision. The reality is however that if companies end up making fully sustainable solutions in their company too aggressively, then they will soon drive themselves to bankruptcy and no longer be able to impact those around them. So in fact, it is not in the interest of the company or 'sustainability' to try and push sustainability too fast. The best method is to start by looking for 'low-hanging fruit,' solutions that are financially smart, have a flexible platform, and are in the right direction.
"We don't live our lives to avoid cancer, nor do we live our lives to avoid un-sustainability."
- KHR was originally a medical doctor performing cell and cancer research. For this reason, many analogies and examples of his tend to revolve around cancer or the medical field. This example tries to illustrate how we don't consciously avoid cancer at every second of the day. Sure there are things that we do such as putting on sunscreen and not smoking that help avoid cancer, but most of the time we don't make a conscious effort to avoid cancer. In the same way, many of us don't live our daily lives in a way to be sustainable. Yet there are certain things that we just do such as recycling because it has become a regular habit. The reason we do these unconscious things is because we have developed a framework to understand them - what is needed is to further this framework to better understand the details. This is why there are thousands of cancer researchers throughout the world, now we need an equal amount of sustainability researchers.
"Sustainability is neither top-down or bottom-up."
- Sustainability does not work by educating the politicians and government to make smarter decisions. Neither does it work by educating the general public and expecting them to change the direction of the entire whole. Rather, these must both happen simultaneously. The first step to starting up TNS in Sweden involved something known as the 'Big Mailing.' This involved KHR mailing out a consensus document written by leading scientists on the issues agreed upon relating to sustainability to all households in Sweden. In doing so, KHR put himself in the position to start influencing the upper administration to get things done with the entire public as a witness.
There were plenty of other interesting topics brought up but I won't bore you with all of them right now :) I'm really excited to see how this framework applies to projects and issues I've been involved with in the past. In particular, I am excited to explore how to funnel 'sustainability' into our current culture.
We (at least in the US) are fast-paced and constantly desire to be entertained. This makes it difficult to explain frameworks such as FSSD and other methods to the general public, in less they go out of their way to better understand it. It isn't feasible to get the message across in a short 2 minute overview on CNN. I'm hoping this can tie into my interest in better understanding how organizations such as Disney can impact the public. Walt Disney has a quote "It is not higher education that interests me so much as general mass education." -WD
Disney was one of the first to distinguish that either education can be entertaining or entertainment can be educational (tied to edutainment). How does a structure such as Disney influence 'un-sustainability' - that's what I hope to further explore this year, we'll see where it leads.
Our program is entitled Master's of Strategic Leadership towards Sustainability (MSLS). Karl-Hendrik Robert (the founder of the Natural Step) has been lecturing to us for the past few days. He started by introducing his framework for analyzing and implementing sustainability into our companies, governments, and cities. The following day, he then went on to discuss the physics and chemistry underpinning his framework.
But before I get into what was discussed in the lectures, let me give you a very brief overview of the Natural Step (TNS). TNS was started up 20 years ago in Sweden in an effort to bring scientists together in consensus on sustainability. From this point, we would then be able to develop a common language in which to effectively discuss the 'un-sustainability' around us. From that vision, a network of multiple Natural Step's have popped up all over the world in numerous countries to help guide and facilitate companies, governments, and municipalities towards sustainability. This framework, referred to as FSSD (framework for strategic sustainable development) is based upon understanding the systems holding everything together. A common frustration is that we as a people like to specialize in 'things.' And although this is needed in our society, it creates problems because we rarely take the time to look up and see what others are doing in other specialties and fields around us. Such a mindset makes it very difficult to approach sustainability and it is the FFSD that attempts to bridge this gap.
Now back to some of the details from the lecture.
Karl-Hendrik introduced three questions that are key in evaluating 'un-sustainability.'
1) Do you have a definition of sustainability?
2) Referring to that definition, what is your gap?
3) What are you doing to bridge that gap?
The first of these questions is probably the most important. With sustainability being such a hot-topic nowadays, it seems silly that we very rarely actually talk about what sustainability means. Sure we talk about things such as water scarcity, soil degradation, and climate change, but we rarely define sustainability. Without a common definition of the term, it is hard to approach the larger picture, and we end up specializing too soon on the sub-problems rather than the larger picture. After a definition is agreed upon, we can then begin to analyze a our given situation and find ways of striving towards sustainability.
Once answering these questions, we can then move on to look at various strategies for achieving success. Here is the path which KHR suggested:
Step 1 involves understanding the system. This is where understanding basic chemistry and physics is important. This step involves understanding the rules of the game.
Step 2 then defines what success looks like for this specific example. If you don't understand the system well enough (and have a common language to communicate back and forth between one another) then it is impossible to determine what you want (success). This is one of the most commonly lacking aspects of sustainability in the real world.
Step 3 then determines a strategy. It is most often unrealistic to immediately transition to full-sustainability. Just as in chess, it is rare (if not impossible) to win in 1 or 2 steps. However, each move you make (even if it sacrifices one of your own pieces) ideally moves you towards winning. This is the same for making sustainable decisions. Although the intial move may not be fully sustainable, it may facilitiate and allow your next step to achieve success.
Step 4 then identifies those specific actions needed to be taken.
And step 5 includes the tools to get there.
So that is the basic overview of the framework, and then there are numerous steps within this bigger framework which we will be discussing in further detail throughout the year. Some of these we covered in the first lectures but I don't have the time or space to write all of that out at this moment.
However from the lectures, there were some interesting other thoughts that were raised. Here are just a few of them.
"We're looking for knowledge, but we're drowning in detail."- This refers back to the specializing issue developed in our society. We are so accustomed to knowing more and more but we tend to always look to the detail rather than the system. KHR describes it like a tree - where the trunk and branches are the unifying system and the leaves represent the details. Sometimes we focus so much on our leaf that we forget to look at the leaves around us and more importantly, the branch connecting us to the bigger picture.
"We do not want to become poor now to become rich later."
- Many individuals view sustainability as a poor economical decision. The reality is however that if companies end up making fully sustainable solutions in their company too aggressively, then they will soon drive themselves to bankruptcy and no longer be able to impact those around them. So in fact, it is not in the interest of the company or 'sustainability' to try and push sustainability too fast. The best method is to start by looking for 'low-hanging fruit,' solutions that are financially smart, have a flexible platform, and are in the right direction.
"We don't live our lives to avoid cancer, nor do we live our lives to avoid un-sustainability."
- KHR was originally a medical doctor performing cell and cancer research. For this reason, many analogies and examples of his tend to revolve around cancer or the medical field. This example tries to illustrate how we don't consciously avoid cancer at every second of the day. Sure there are things that we do such as putting on sunscreen and not smoking that help avoid cancer, but most of the time we don't make a conscious effort to avoid cancer. In the same way, many of us don't live our daily lives in a way to be sustainable. Yet there are certain things that we just do such as recycling because it has become a regular habit. The reason we do these unconscious things is because we have developed a framework to understand them - what is needed is to further this framework to better understand the details. This is why there are thousands of cancer researchers throughout the world, now we need an equal amount of sustainability researchers.
"Sustainability is neither top-down or bottom-up."
- Sustainability does not work by educating the politicians and government to make smarter decisions. Neither does it work by educating the general public and expecting them to change the direction of the entire whole. Rather, these must both happen simultaneously. The first step to starting up TNS in Sweden involved something known as the 'Big Mailing.' This involved KHR mailing out a consensus document written by leading scientists on the issues agreed upon relating to sustainability to all households in Sweden. In doing so, KHR put himself in the position to start influencing the upper administration to get things done with the entire public as a witness.
There were plenty of other interesting topics brought up but I won't bore you with all of them right now :) I'm really excited to see how this framework applies to projects and issues I've been involved with in the past. In particular, I am excited to explore how to funnel 'sustainability' into our current culture.
We (at least in the US) are fast-paced and constantly desire to be entertained. This makes it difficult to explain frameworks such as FSSD and other methods to the general public, in less they go out of their way to better understand it. It isn't feasible to get the message across in a short 2 minute overview on CNN. I'm hoping this can tie into my interest in better understanding how organizations such as Disney can impact the public. Walt Disney has a quote "It is not higher education that interests me so much as general mass education." -WD
Disney was one of the first to distinguish that either education can be entertaining or entertainment can be educational (tied to edutainment). How does a structure such as Disney influence 'un-sustainability' - that's what I hope to further explore this year, we'll see where it leads.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
