From TCP News
The Climate Project Hosts First Ever Latin America Summit, Debuts New Online Presence
Al Gore's non-profit continues to build international momentum with latest summit and website.
(Nashville, TN, September 28, 2009) – Former Vice President and Nobel Laureate Al Gore will train 300 people hailing from more the 21 Latin American countries including Mexico, Costa Rica, Argentina, Brazil, Trinidad, and Columbia to become the first Climate Project (TCP) Presenters in the region.
The summit opened today in Mexico City and will run from September 28th – 30th. Mr. Gore, along with other international experts, will train people from all walks of life to talk to their networks, peers, and communities about the climate crisis. This summit also marks the establishment of TCP Mexico in association with Pronatura, a non-profit organization headquartered in Mexico City.
Latin America is an important next step for TCP. From Brazil's Amazon and Mexico's wetlands to the glaciers of the Andes and the coral reefs of the Caribbean – the urgency of climate education and awareness in Latin America is undeniable. “The citizens of this region need to be informed about climate change and engaged in the issue,” said TCP Executive Director Jenny Clad. “After the summit, the new TCP Presenters will return to their countries and communities ready to take on this challenge.”
TCP Latin American Presenters will become dynamic leaders in their region’s ongoing conversations about land use, energy policy, and emissions measures. They will be active participants in solving the climate crisis not just in their home country, but worldwide.
This event is the third TCP Summit held in just four months. Both the North American Summit in May and the Asia Pacific Summit in July played a major role in generating domestic and international momentum for TCP, which now has eight official branches: USA, Australia, Canada, Spain, the United Kingdom, India, Indonesia, and now Mexico.
To help coordinate these efforts, TCP today unveiled a new website (www.theclimateproject.org) where citizens around the world can learn how to get involved in their region. The site identifies where TCP has volunteers internationally and provides a way to unify TCP’s growing movement.
If you'd like to host a TCP presentation in your community, please visit http://www.theclimateproject.org/presentation.php. If you're interested in requesting a presentation in Australia, Canada, India, Spain, or the UK, please visit these countries' websites, which can also be found at http://www.theclimateproject.org/presentation.php.
About The Climate Project
The Climate Project (TCP) is an international non-profit organization founded by Nobel Laureate and former Vice President Al Gore. With its global headquarters in Nashville, Tennessee, TCP’s mission is to increase public awareness of the climate crisis in the United States and abroad. TCP consists of a professional staff and more than 3,000 volunteers worldwide who have personally been trained by Gore to present a version of the slide show featured in the Academy Award-winning film An Inconvenient Truth. In February 2009, TCP expanded its mission with a new commitment to advocacy and activism to combat climate crisis.
10/2/09
9/25/09
Fulbright Grants help finance the work of the world´s leading cultural brokers
The Fulbright Program is the flagship international educational exchange program sponsored by the U.S. government and is designed to “increase mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries.” With this goal as a starting point, the Fulbright Program has provided almost 300,000 participants—chosen for their academic merit and leadership potential — with the opportunity to study, teach and conduct research, exchange ideas and contribute to finding solutions to shared international concerns.
Fulbright Prize
The J. William Fulbright Prize for International Understanding established in 1993 is awarded by the Fulbright Association to recognize individuals who have made extraordinary contributions toward bringing peoples, cultures, or nations to greater understanding of others. Fulbright Prize laureates include:
* Nelson Mandela (1993)
* Jimmy Carter (1994)
* Franz Vranitzky (1995)
* Corazon Aquino (1996)
* Václav Havel (1997)
* Patricio Aylwin Azócar (1998)
* Mary Robinson (1999)
* Martti Ahtisaari (2000)
* Kofi Annan (2001)
* Sadako Ogata (2002)
* Fernando Henrique Cardoso (2003)
* Colin Powell (2004)
* Bill Clinton (2005)
* Desmond Tutu (2008)
Contact Athena Fulay, Program Officer - Outreach and Communication, afulay@cies.iie.org , 202.686.6242
Sources:
http://www.cies.org/about_fulb.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulbright_Program
http://www.cies.org/campus_reps/campus_table.htm
Fulbright Prize
The J. William Fulbright Prize for International Understanding established in 1993 is awarded by the Fulbright Association to recognize individuals who have made extraordinary contributions toward bringing peoples, cultures, or nations to greater understanding of others. Fulbright Prize laureates include:
* Nelson Mandela (1993)
* Jimmy Carter (1994)
* Franz Vranitzky (1995)
* Corazon Aquino (1996)
* Václav Havel (1997)
* Patricio Aylwin Azócar (1998)
* Mary Robinson (1999)
* Martti Ahtisaari (2000)
* Kofi Annan (2001)
* Sadako Ogata (2002)
* Fernando Henrique Cardoso (2003)
* Colin Powell (2004)
* Bill Clinton (2005)
* Desmond Tutu (2008)
Contact Athena Fulay, Program Officer - Outreach and Communication, afulay@cies.iie.org , 202.686.6242
Sources:
http://www.cies.org/about_fulb.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulbright_Program
http://www.cies.org/campus_reps/campus_table.htm
9/23/09
Survey from the International Society of Sustainability Professionals
From the desk of Michelle Hippler, International Society of Sustainability Professionals
¨Greetings!
We are preparing to set our Education Calendar for next year. Please tell us what four-week workshops you are likely to attend. We will base our choices on the results of this survey. The survey will take about 5 minutes to complete.
Take this survey now
Sincerely,
Michelle Hippler
International Society of Sustainability Professionals
¨Greetings!
We are preparing to set our Education Calendar for next year. Please tell us what four-week workshops you are likely to attend. We will base our choices on the results of this survey. The survey will take about 5 minutes to complete.
Take this survey now
Sincerely,
Michelle Hippler
International Society of Sustainability Professionals
9/22/09
An Urgent Message from Global Exchange Regarding the Situation in Honduras
Global Exchange is asking all U.S. citizens to act today to insist that the US State Department speak clearly, honestly, and urgently about the explosive situation in Honduras.
¨As you may have read, the crisis in Honduras moved to a new and more volatile stage yesterday with the clandestine return of President Manuel Zelaya to the capital, Tegucigalpa. Zelaya's successful repatriation came after two prior attempts failed. It took the de facto government -- that came to power as a result of the June 28th military coup -- by surprise, but was hailed by a crowd of thousands who quickly surrounded the Brazilian Embassy where Zelaya and his family have been granted sanctuary.
Early this morning (Tuesday Sept 22), riot police attacked the peacefully assembled Zelaya supporters gathered outside the embassy, violently dispersing them with tear gas, truncheons, and concussion grenades. Dozens of citizens were detained and several serious injuries were reported. At the time of writing, the de facto government has closed the country's airports and land borders.
Please call Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's office at 202-647-5291. Tell the State Department that the US must take forceful and immediate actions to stop the violence against citizens and civil society organizations and to negotiate a handover of power to the democratically elected leader, President Zelaya.
More State Department and Congressional Contact Information:
State Department Honduras Desk: Maria Gabriela Zambrano, 202-647-3482
Office of Central American Affairs: Director Christopher Webster, 202-647-4087
Contact the US State Department Switchboard: 202-647-4000
Find your Congressperson's Contact Info Here:
Congressional Switchboard: 202-224-3121
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/congdir.tt
---------------------
For more information about the immediate situation please see:
"Rally for Ousted Honduran is Dispered," The New York Times -- http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/23/world/americas/23honduras.html?hp
For background analysis and information about US policy:
"Clinton, Speak Clearly Now to Avoid a Massacre in Honduras," The Americas Policy Program -- http://americasmexico.blogspot.com/2009/09/clinton-speak-clearly-now-to-avoid.html?utm_source=streamsend&utm_medium=email&utm_content=6247961&utm_campaign=Clinton%2C%20Speak%20Clearly%20Now%20to%20Avoid%20a%20Massacre%20in%20Honduras
-----------------------
Thank you, as always, for your work on behalf of peace & justice,
Global Exchange
----------------------
¨As you may have read, the crisis in Honduras moved to a new and more volatile stage yesterday with the clandestine return of President Manuel Zelaya to the capital, Tegucigalpa. Zelaya's successful repatriation came after two prior attempts failed. It took the de facto government -- that came to power as a result of the June 28th military coup -- by surprise, but was hailed by a crowd of thousands who quickly surrounded the Brazilian Embassy where Zelaya and his family have been granted sanctuary.
Early this morning (Tuesday Sept 22), riot police attacked the peacefully assembled Zelaya supporters gathered outside the embassy, violently dispersing them with tear gas, truncheons, and concussion grenades. Dozens of citizens were detained and several serious injuries were reported. At the time of writing, the de facto government has closed the country's airports and land borders.
Please call Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's office at 202-647-5291. Tell the State Department that the US must take forceful and immediate actions to stop the violence against citizens and civil society organizations and to negotiate a handover of power to the democratically elected leader, President Zelaya.
More State Department and Congressional Contact Information:
State Department Honduras Desk: Maria Gabriela Zambrano, 202-647-3482
Office of Central American Affairs: Director Christopher Webster, 202-647-4087
Contact the US State Department Switchboard: 202-647-4000
Find your Congressperson's Contact Info Here:
Congressional Switchboard: 202-224-3121
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/congdir.tt
---------------------
For more information about the immediate situation please see:
"Rally for Ousted Honduran is Dispered," The New York Times -- http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/23/world/americas/23honduras.html?hp
For background analysis and information about US policy:
"Clinton, Speak Clearly Now to Avoid a Massacre in Honduras," The Americas Policy Program -- http://americasmexico.blogspot.com/2009/09/clinton-speak-clearly-now-to-avoid.html?utm_source=streamsend&utm_medium=email&utm_content=6247961&utm_campaign=Clinton%2C%20Speak%20Clearly%20Now%20to%20Avoid%20a%20Massacre%20in%20Honduras
-----------------------
Thank you, as always, for your work on behalf of peace & justice,
Global Exchange
----------------------
5/7/09
Bigger Picture Conservation - Promoting Conservation through a Triple Bottom Line Methodology
by Kimberly Maria Newton-Klootwyk
I was pleased that even the Nature Conservancy is realizing that true sustainability and conservation must include a deep integration of the social and economic dynamics surrounding remaining forest areas and that conservation must allow for reasonable land use extraction practices by local stakeholders needing to feed their families in their homeland. People are not the enemy, but they are certainly the main factor damaging our shared ecosystems (oftentimes because of destructive extraction practices taught by U.S. and European transnationals during the first "Green Revolution"). People represent the Social Pillar and should not be shoved aside, displaced or otherwise ignored because that will only come back to haunt us in ways we cannot imagine - including mass environmental degradation.
Economic sustainability is also an important part of the equation, called the Economic Pillar of the Sustainability equation (People, Planet, Profits or Triple Bottom Line). The case of the Indonesian project where The Nature Conservancy participated in advancing peace by helping broker sustainable use of the forest by loggers and local villagers is a great example of the type of triple bottom line approach I and fellow Latin eco-warriors have been calling for for years (read "The Bigger Picture - Socially Responsible Conservation") I am convinced that only through "Bigger Picture Conservation" or "Triple Bottom Line Conservation" will we have true conservation over the long term, especially in "developing" areas of the world.
I have hope when I see the Nature Conservancy, known historically for displacing local communities, changing their course and adopting a triple bottom line approach to their conservation projects. They call it "pathbreaking" - I call it "finally!"
Local conservation and ecological organizations in Latin America have been using this socially integrated approach to conservation for decades and weaving the issue of peace with environmental sustainability (to us it is an obvious reality we live almost daily). Too bad Latin social justice workers and environmentalists have not been able to access the stakeholders that give the most funding for conservation - such as the U.S. environmentalist, thus their voices have been largely unheard.
This is in part why I felt the need to create Instituto Conexiones - I thought it would be good to create an organization that could serve as a cultural liaison and communications outlet in order to bring to the U.S. donor and sustainably minded investor the voices and ideas of the rainforest communities - local entrepreneurs and leaders tend to have realistic and culturally integrated ideas on how to go about 'saving the rainforest' in ways that help the society achieve economic growth and peace and justice too (Central Americans, like me, are particularly vested in the idea of maintaining and advancing peace and social justice due to witnessing the catastrophic environmental, economic and social impacts of revolution and war).
Sounds like others out there are starting to get to the decision makers at the Nature Conservancy and similar organizations - I'm so glad because now I feel there is a realistic chance at actually conserving our last remaining wild places and saving species from becoming extinct. And I have more hope than ever that the good intentions of foreign conservationists in Latin America and other developing countries will continue to be more aligned with social and economic on-the-ground realities, which means that there is real hope for many families to stay together, and indigenous and peasants the world over will suffer less from displacement and disenfranchisement. I have always recognized the U.S. Environmentalist as a key ally - so long as they listen and integrate the local voices in their methodology.
I hope to see more stories like this one on the conservation wires. Please send me any others you know about to add to this blog and our educational archives. We are looking to showcase positive case studies where foreign environmentalists and/or greenpreneurs merge and collaborate in an equitable and positive way with the local people and help support (rather than replace) existing local green initiatives.
I was pleased that even the Nature Conservancy is realizing that true sustainability and conservation must include a deep integration of the social and economic dynamics surrounding remaining forest areas and that conservation must allow for reasonable land use extraction practices by local stakeholders needing to feed their families in their homeland. People are not the enemy, but they are certainly the main factor damaging our shared ecosystems (oftentimes because of destructive extraction practices taught by U.S. and European transnationals during the first "Green Revolution"). People represent the Social Pillar and should not be shoved aside, displaced or otherwise ignored because that will only come back to haunt us in ways we cannot imagine - including mass environmental degradation.
Economic sustainability is also an important part of the equation, called the Economic Pillar of the Sustainability equation (People, Planet, Profits or Triple Bottom Line). The case of the Indonesian project where The Nature Conservancy participated in advancing peace by helping broker sustainable use of the forest by loggers and local villagers is a great example of the type of triple bottom line approach I and fellow Latin eco-warriors have been calling for for years (read "The Bigger Picture - Socially Responsible Conservation") I am convinced that only through "Bigger Picture Conservation" or "Triple Bottom Line Conservation" will we have true conservation over the long term, especially in "developing" areas of the world.
I have hope when I see the Nature Conservancy, known historically for displacing local communities, changing their course and adopting a triple bottom line approach to their conservation projects. They call it "pathbreaking" - I call it "finally!"
Local conservation and ecological organizations in Latin America have been using this socially integrated approach to conservation for decades and weaving the issue of peace with environmental sustainability (to us it is an obvious reality we live almost daily). Too bad Latin social justice workers and environmentalists have not been able to access the stakeholders that give the most funding for conservation - such as the U.S. environmentalist, thus their voices have been largely unheard.
This is in part why I felt the need to create Instituto Conexiones - I thought it would be good to create an organization that could serve as a cultural liaison and communications outlet in order to bring to the U.S. donor and sustainably minded investor the voices and ideas of the rainforest communities - local entrepreneurs and leaders tend to have realistic and culturally integrated ideas on how to go about 'saving the rainforest' in ways that help the society achieve economic growth and peace and justice too (Central Americans, like me, are particularly vested in the idea of maintaining and advancing peace and social justice due to witnessing the catastrophic environmental, economic and social impacts of revolution and war).
Sounds like others out there are starting to get to the decision makers at the Nature Conservancy and similar organizations - I'm so glad because now I feel there is a realistic chance at actually conserving our last remaining wild places and saving species from becoming extinct. And I have more hope than ever that the good intentions of foreign conservationists in Latin America and other developing countries will continue to be more aligned with social and economic on-the-ground realities, which means that there is real hope for many families to stay together, and indigenous and peasants the world over will suffer less from displacement and disenfranchisement. I have always recognized the U.S. Environmentalist as a key ally - so long as they listen and integrate the local voices in their methodology.
I hope to see more stories like this one on the conservation wires. Please send me any others you know about to add to this blog and our educational archives. We are looking to showcase positive case studies where foreign environmentalists and/or greenpreneurs merge and collaborate in an equitable and positive way with the local people and help support (rather than replace) existing local green initiatives.
5/5/09
Great Source of Information about Western Hemisphere Countries, Africa and Europe
Vanderbilt University has a wonderful resource posted online with questionnaires, tecnical information and publications about public opinion, society, international cooperation, and sustainable development of verious countries - especially Latin America.
To access the Latin American Public Opinion Project (LAPOP), click here
New on LAPOP news feed:
- The Inter-American Dialogue, May 8th: Mitchell Seligson and Liz Zechmeister will present the results of the survey on democratic values and behaviors of over 40,000 respondents in the Americas in the event: Will a Bad Economy Hurt Democracy? Evidence from the AmericasBarometer Survey.
- The Americas Barometer Insights Series: I0814. Satisfacción ciudadana con servicios municipales. Por Daniel Montalvo
- Two LAPOP partner organizations named among the most influential "think tanks" in Latin America. Read The Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program 2008
- "State of the Region" report released on Central America; uses AmericasBarometer data.
- "Deepening Our Understanding of the Effects of US Foreign Assistance on Democracy Building Final Report Foreign Assistance on Democracy Building Final Report "
To access the Latin American Public Opinion Project (LAPOP), click here
New on LAPOP news feed:
- The Inter-American Dialogue, May 8th: Mitchell Seligson and Liz Zechmeister will present the results of the survey on democratic values and behaviors of over 40,000 respondents in the Americas in the event: Will a Bad Economy Hurt Democracy? Evidence from the AmericasBarometer Survey.
- The Americas Barometer Insights Series: I0814. Satisfacción ciudadana con servicios municipales. Por Daniel Montalvo
- Two LAPOP partner organizations named among the most influential "think tanks" in Latin America. Read The Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program 2008
- "State of the Region" report released on Central America; uses AmericasBarometer data.
- "Deepening Our Understanding of the Effects of US Foreign Assistance on Democracy Building Final Report Foreign Assistance on Democracy Building Final Report "
4/24/09
Earth Day 2009 in D.C. Report
On April 21st and 22nd, Instituto Conexiones director, Kimberly Newton-Klootwyk, and Connections Consortium member, Amy Seidman, traveled to Washington D.C. to join the Sustainable Business Institute and members of Congress in awarding the Seal of Sustainability award to select U.S. companies who have shown a comitment to sustainable business practices. Companies that were honored with this award include Be Green Packaging, LLC, Gaia Hotels, The Allied Group and Puroast Coffee.
During this time in Washington D.C., representatives of Instituto Conexiones participated in a round table discussion at the Cannon building in Capitol Hill with sustainable business thought-leadres whereas Newton was able to express the position that U.S. companies with operations & partners overseas must uphold high social responsibility standards that include their marketing & competition practices in emerging markets.
She spoke with a congresswoman who is also a committee member of the Waxman Bill, regarding international standards and communicated the position that the actions of U.S. companies in international markets must be included, which she agreed and gave us directions on how to best send them our position.
The trip was a great success and allowed Instituto Conexiones to include the Latin American voice within the U.S. sustainable business movement.
During this time in Washington D.C., representatives of Instituto Conexiones participated in a round table discussion at the Cannon building in Capitol Hill with sustainable business thought-leadres whereas Newton was able to express the position that U.S. companies with operations & partners overseas must uphold high social responsibility standards that include their marketing & competition practices in emerging markets.
She spoke with a congresswoman who is also a committee member of the Waxman Bill, regarding international standards and communicated the position that the actions of U.S. companies in international markets must be included, which she agreed and gave us directions on how to best send them our position.
The trip was a great success and allowed Instituto Conexiones to include the Latin American voice within the U.S. sustainable business movement.
4/17/09
Firmar y Circular Inmediatamente! Avancemos la globalización sustentable y equitativa!
Estimados amigos y colegas,
En celebración del Día de la Tierra 2009, el próximo 22 de abril, miembros del Congreso de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica harán entrega de los premios Seal of Sustainability, en una ceremonia promovida por el Sustainable Business Institute. Soy invitada al Capitolio como representante de la perspectiva Latinoamericana e internacional. Llevaré una carta (abajo) con firmas para apoyar la posición que presentaré a miembros del congreso y otros tomadores de decisiones.
Se espera que el 'Seal of Sustainability' se convierta en el más alto estándar de distinción para empresas y organizaciones comprometidas con la sustentabilidad. Este Sello ofrece a los consumidores elementos para decidir a qué empresas apoyar, sabiendo que así contribuyen a restaurar los sistemas naturales y a establecer practicas empresariales equitativas y justas.
Te invitamos a copiar la carta a un correo, firmarla y reenviarla a tus contactos, colaboradores, etc. siempre con copia a info@connectionsinstitute.net para poder recopilar todas las firmas.
Gracias,
Kimberly Maria Newton-Klootwyk
Directora
Instituto Conexiones
www.connectionsinstitute.net
blog: www.institutoconexiones.org
***************
Abril 22, 2009
Honorables miembros del Congreso de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica:
Como miembros de diferentes organizaciones, empresas y grupos de la Sociedad Civil Organizada de Latinoamérica, estamos conscientes de la importancia que tiene el debate sobre los estándares para los premios “Sello de Sustentabilidad”. Sabemos que este momento, en el que se definen los parámetros de operación de las empresas del país líder de negocios en el mundo, es el idóneo para cambiar de rumbo hacia un mundo justo, congruente, solidario y verdaderamente sustentable.
Para salvaguardar la integridad social y la diversidad biológica de sus países socios, es fundamental que las operaciones internacionales de las empresas de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica se guíen y sean evaluadas con los mismos estándares que rigen las operaciones en su territorio nacional.
Nuestra comunidad de organizaciones, empresas y sociedad civil organizada de Latinoamérica pide que el Congreso de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica, así como los autores y evaluadores de los parámetros para los premios “Sello de Sustentabilidad”, incluyan en su análisis el impacto que las compañías de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica tienen en los ciudadanos y territorios de los países donde operan, tomando en consideración también la huella ecológica y social de su estrategia de comercio en mercados internacionales asi como el de la cadena productiva de todas las operaciones.
Los consumidores norteamericanos están esperando esta certificación por parte de su Congreso como una garantía de que las empresas que porten ese sello operan bajo estándares que cumplen o exceden los estándares de sustentabilidad, y consideran también las externalidades en lo ambiental, social y económico. Por ello, este sello debe garantizar la operación tanto doméstica como internacional de las empresas que lo porten.
Los firmantes hablamos principalmente por América Latina, pero estamos ciertos de que cualquier otro país que tenga tratos comerciales con empresas estadounidenses estará en sincronía con este planteamiento. Por lo tanto, individuos u organizaciones que representan poblaciones impactadas en otras partes del mundo o que son impactados por las acciones de empresas estadounidenses también firman esta carta e identifican su lugar de procedencia en paréntesis después de su firma.
Gracias por su atención a esta posición – una posición que tenemos la certeza, tendrá repercusiones positivas al estar el tema íntimamente relacionado con la migración transnacional masiva de obreros, el calentamiento global, y con el clima socio-político de países en vías de desarrollo o economías emergentes que tienen convenios de libre comercio con los Estados Unidos.
En solidaridad con esta posición firmamos:
(tu nombre, afiliación y país)
En celebración del Día de la Tierra 2009, el próximo 22 de abril, miembros del Congreso de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica harán entrega de los premios Seal of Sustainability, en una ceremonia promovida por el Sustainable Business Institute. Soy invitada al Capitolio como representante de la perspectiva Latinoamericana e internacional. Llevaré una carta (abajo) con firmas para apoyar la posición que presentaré a miembros del congreso y otros tomadores de decisiones.
Se espera que el 'Seal of Sustainability' se convierta en el más alto estándar de distinción para empresas y organizaciones comprometidas con la sustentabilidad. Este Sello ofrece a los consumidores elementos para decidir a qué empresas apoyar, sabiendo que así contribuyen a restaurar los sistemas naturales y a establecer practicas empresariales equitativas y justas.
Te invitamos a copiar la carta a un correo, firmarla y reenviarla a tus contactos, colaboradores, etc. siempre con copia a info@connectionsinstitute.net para poder recopilar todas las firmas.
Gracias,
Kimberly Maria Newton-Klootwyk
Directora
Instituto Conexiones
www.connectionsinstitute.net
blog: www.institutoconexiones.org
***************
Abril 22, 2009
Honorables miembros del Congreso de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica:
Como miembros de diferentes organizaciones, empresas y grupos de la Sociedad Civil Organizada de Latinoamérica, estamos conscientes de la importancia que tiene el debate sobre los estándares para los premios “Sello de Sustentabilidad”. Sabemos que este momento, en el que se definen los parámetros de operación de las empresas del país líder de negocios en el mundo, es el idóneo para cambiar de rumbo hacia un mundo justo, congruente, solidario y verdaderamente sustentable.
Para salvaguardar la integridad social y la diversidad biológica de sus países socios, es fundamental que las operaciones internacionales de las empresas de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica se guíen y sean evaluadas con los mismos estándares que rigen las operaciones en su territorio nacional.
Nuestra comunidad de organizaciones, empresas y sociedad civil organizada de Latinoamérica pide que el Congreso de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica, así como los autores y evaluadores de los parámetros para los premios “Sello de Sustentabilidad”, incluyan en su análisis el impacto que las compañías de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica tienen en los ciudadanos y territorios de los países donde operan, tomando en consideración también la huella ecológica y social de su estrategia de comercio en mercados internacionales asi como el de la cadena productiva de todas las operaciones.
Los consumidores norteamericanos están esperando esta certificación por parte de su Congreso como una garantía de que las empresas que porten ese sello operan bajo estándares que cumplen o exceden los estándares de sustentabilidad, y consideran también las externalidades en lo ambiental, social y económico. Por ello, este sello debe garantizar la operación tanto doméstica como internacional de las empresas que lo porten.
Los firmantes hablamos principalmente por América Latina, pero estamos ciertos de que cualquier otro país que tenga tratos comerciales con empresas estadounidenses estará en sincronía con este planteamiento. Por lo tanto, individuos u organizaciones que representan poblaciones impactadas en otras partes del mundo o que son impactados por las acciones de empresas estadounidenses también firman esta carta e identifican su lugar de procedencia en paréntesis después de su firma.
Gracias por su atención a esta posición – una posición que tenemos la certeza, tendrá repercusiones positivas al estar el tema íntimamente relacionado con la migración transnacional masiva de obreros, el calentamiento global, y con el clima socio-político de países en vías de desarrollo o economías emergentes que tienen convenios de libre comercio con los Estados Unidos.
En solidaridad con esta posición firmamos:
(tu nombre, afiliación y país)
3/13/09
Instituto Conexiones Invited to Attend Earth Day Celebrations on Capitol Hill with Sustainable Business Leaders - A Call for Sponsors!
During Earth Day 2009 (4.22.09) the U.S. Capitol will be buzzing green all over. And during this historic year, corporate responsibility and sustainability awareness is at an all time high. Therefore, leading up to Earth Day and beyond, Congress will be closely listening to presentations regarding the Seal of Sustainability™ to learn about the subject of sustainable business guidelines.
On Earth Day itself, even more attention will be given to this issue than on any other day. Congress will be recognizing sustainable companies during a special Seal of Sustainability Awards Ceremony, which will take place in the U.S. Capitol. In addition, as part of the federal government’s Earth Day events, the Sustainable Business Institute (SBI) will be briefing the U.S. Congress, as they do each year, regarding their advances in the area of sustainable business practices and guidelines.
The Sustainable Business Institute (SBI) has provided Instituto Conexiones the opportunity to add the international perspective to the sustainable business conversation happening in the chambers and halls of the U.S. Capitol on this upcoming historic day.
SBI is most likely the oldest sustainable business organization in the United States and the world. U.S. government leaders and CEO's of the largest corporations in the world turn to SBI for thought-leadership and applied best practices in the area of triple bottom line sustainable business practices. Working with the Pollution Prevention Roundtable (P2) as their third party review committee, they have created standards and guidelines known as the 'Seal of Sustainability' - a Seal that the U.S. government is looking at utilizing as they standardize their sustainable business "certification" - an optional certification businesses will be able to receive.
Where Instituto Conexiones fits into the conversation is through education related to making sure that the Seal of Sustainability standards, as it is adopted by the U.S. government, include rigorous evaluation of the overseas operations of companies receiving any seal or certificate identifying them as being a “sustainable business.”
We know that what U.S. companies do affect the rest of the world and the U.S. is looked to as a business leader. This is a great opportunity for the U.S. to think globally while acting locally and lead the world towards a truly sustainable future. We feel a critical component to true sustainability is making sure ethical and sustainable business practices include considerations of the impact U.S. business activities have on non-U.S. citizens and on ecosystems outside of U.S. territory.
U.S. Consumers will be looking for this "seal" when making their conscious purchases and we believe they will want to know that a logo certifying a product or company as "sustainable" means that those companies are meeting or exceeding sustainable business practices in all three pillars - environment, economic and social sustainability, when operating in other countries.
We have accepted the invitation extended to us by the Sustainable Business Institute (SBI) to join their delegation briefing the U.S. Congress next month. We recognize that this is a critical moment to bring the "international perspective" into the conversation as U.S. government and corporate leadership debate and decide on the new sustainable business standards.
We obviously speak for Latin America more than any other part of the world, but all countries doing business with U.S. based companies and investment groups will be affected by this, so we ask for your support so we can go to the Capitol in DC on Earth Day and advocate for the "International Perspective on Sustainability!”
All individuals reading this, and especially those who represent relevant stakeholder groups are encouraged to send in your opinion letters so we may include them in our position statement and educational materials. We have also posted a poll question on our blog - take a moment to voice your opinion!
We must raise $2,500 to pay for airline tickets, lodging for two nights and creation of special related educational/marketing materials.
Every dollar counts.
Pledge your support today by emailing us at: contact@connectionsinstitute.net or simply donate through the Pay Pal button on our blog: www.institutoconexiones.org.
Sponsors can join the Instituto Conexiones delegation and will have logo placement on our marketing and educational materials. Monetary contributions are best, but pro-bono printing, airline tickets, graphic design, hotel rooms, etc. gladly welcomed.
Thanks!
Kimberly Newton de Klootwyk
Principal
Instituto Conexiones
On Earth Day itself, even more attention will be given to this issue than on any other day. Congress will be recognizing sustainable companies during a special Seal of Sustainability Awards Ceremony, which will take place in the U.S. Capitol. In addition, as part of the federal government’s Earth Day events, the Sustainable Business Institute (SBI) will be briefing the U.S. Congress, as they do each year, regarding their advances in the area of sustainable business practices and guidelines.
The Sustainable Business Institute (SBI) has provided Instituto Conexiones the opportunity to add the international perspective to the sustainable business conversation happening in the chambers and halls of the U.S. Capitol on this upcoming historic day.
SBI is most likely the oldest sustainable business organization in the United States and the world. U.S. government leaders and CEO's of the largest corporations in the world turn to SBI for thought-leadership and applied best practices in the area of triple bottom line sustainable business practices. Working with the Pollution Prevention Roundtable (P2) as their third party review committee, they have created standards and guidelines known as the 'Seal of Sustainability' - a Seal that the U.S. government is looking at utilizing as they standardize their sustainable business "certification" - an optional certification businesses will be able to receive.
Where Instituto Conexiones fits into the conversation is through education related to making sure that the Seal of Sustainability standards, as it is adopted by the U.S. government, include rigorous evaluation of the overseas operations of companies receiving any seal or certificate identifying them as being a “sustainable business.”
We know that what U.S. companies do affect the rest of the world and the U.S. is looked to as a business leader. This is a great opportunity for the U.S. to think globally while acting locally and lead the world towards a truly sustainable future. We feel a critical component to true sustainability is making sure ethical and sustainable business practices include considerations of the impact U.S. business activities have on non-U.S. citizens and on ecosystems outside of U.S. territory.
U.S. Consumers will be looking for this "seal" when making their conscious purchases and we believe they will want to know that a logo certifying a product or company as "sustainable" means that those companies are meeting or exceeding sustainable business practices in all three pillars - environment, economic and social sustainability, when operating in other countries.
We have accepted the invitation extended to us by the Sustainable Business Institute (SBI) to join their delegation briefing the U.S. Congress next month. We recognize that this is a critical moment to bring the "international perspective" into the conversation as U.S. government and corporate leadership debate and decide on the new sustainable business standards.
We obviously speak for Latin America more than any other part of the world, but all countries doing business with U.S. based companies and investment groups will be affected by this, so we ask for your support so we can go to the Capitol in DC on Earth Day and advocate for the "International Perspective on Sustainability!”
All individuals reading this, and especially those who represent relevant stakeholder groups are encouraged to send in your opinion letters so we may include them in our position statement and educational materials. We have also posted a poll question on our blog - take a moment to voice your opinion!
We must raise $2,500 to pay for airline tickets, lodging for two nights and creation of special related educational/marketing materials.
Every dollar counts.
Pledge your support today by emailing us at: contact@connectionsinstitute.net or simply donate through the Pay Pal button on our blog: www.institutoconexiones.org.
Sponsors can join the Instituto Conexiones delegation and will have logo placement on our marketing and educational materials. Monetary contributions are best, but pro-bono printing, airline tickets, graphic design, hotel rooms, etc. gladly welcomed.
Thanks!
Kimberly Newton de Klootwyk
Principal
Instituto Conexiones
2/24/09
Five features of great socially responsible leadership
From: Mallen Baker
Ethical leaders go against the industry grain, like Andrew Witty of GlaxoSmithKline. The new chief executive of GlaxoSmithKline, Andrew Witty, startled commentators, campaigners, and probably a few shareholders, with his announcement that the company would slash the cost of many of its drugs to people that need them in developing countries.
It was a perfect example of the difference that leadership can make. It raises the question – what counts as great leadership in socially responsible business?
There is a wider list to be produced on that topic, but I wanted to highlight here five key thoughts in the light of the GSK and other recent examples. And we always have the sharp contrast of poor leadership we have seen in the last few months of the financial crisis.
Five things that count as great leadership in socially responsible businesses are:
More....
Ethical leaders go against the industry grain, like Andrew Witty of GlaxoSmithKline. The new chief executive of GlaxoSmithKline, Andrew Witty, startled commentators, campaigners, and probably a few shareholders, with his announcement that the company would slash the cost of many of its drugs to people that need them in developing countries.
It was a perfect example of the difference that leadership can make. It raises the question – what counts as great leadership in socially responsible business?
There is a wider list to be produced on that topic, but I wanted to highlight here five key thoughts in the light of the GSK and other recent examples. And we always have the sharp contrast of poor leadership we have seen in the last few months of the financial crisis.
Five things that count as great leadership in socially responsible businesses are:
More....
2/14/09
Institute for Cultural Awareness (ICA) Hosts Return of the Ancestors Gathering in Northern Arizona
By Kimberly Newton, President of Instituto Conexiones
The folks of Institute for Cultural Awareness have been working for years to bring awareness about the teachings and knowledge of the elder wisdom keepers from around the planet, among other things.
We encourage all who read this post to learn more about their upcoming Return of the Ancestors Event in Northern Arizona (April 18-28th) and to consider attending or/and supporting this historic event. Elders and wisdom keepers from around the world will be coming together to share their stories and pray for the sustainable future of our shared planet and peaceful co-existence among its people. This multi-cultural gathering is part of the fulfillment of the ancient prophesy regarding the time when the Eagle and the Condor would unite. The Eagle is the symbol for the North and the Condor is the symbol for the South.
Watch the video here
Click here for a downloadable brochure
Instituto Conexiones is involved with and supports this project as we share in the mission to bring together the Eagle and the Condor in an equitable and peaceful way - We owe Institute for Cultural Awareness a great deal for their support of our work through the years and in return, we support their work whenever possible - hosting elders when they come to the Bay Area, providing free translations of materials, and volunteering as interpreters. They are on our list of philanthropic organizations to give donations to as part of our annual give-away.
We wish them the best of luck with their upcoming event!
The folks of Institute for Cultural Awareness have been working for years to bring awareness about the teachings and knowledge of the elder wisdom keepers from around the planet, among other things.
We encourage all who read this post to learn more about their upcoming Return of the Ancestors Event in Northern Arizona (April 18-28th) and to consider attending or/and supporting this historic event. Elders and wisdom keepers from around the world will be coming together to share their stories and pray for the sustainable future of our shared planet and peaceful co-existence among its people. This multi-cultural gathering is part of the fulfillment of the ancient prophesy regarding the time when the Eagle and the Condor would unite. The Eagle is the symbol for the North and the Condor is the symbol for the South.
Watch the video here
Click here for a downloadable brochure
Instituto Conexiones is involved with and supports this project as we share in the mission to bring together the Eagle and the Condor in an equitable and peaceful way - We owe Institute for Cultural Awareness a great deal for their support of our work through the years and in return, we support their work whenever possible - hosting elders when they come to the Bay Area, providing free translations of materials, and volunteering as interpreters. They are on our list of philanthropic organizations to give donations to as part of our annual give-away.
We wish them the best of luck with their upcoming event!
2/7/09
Attention International Executives and Globally Minded Philanthropists - Cross-Cultural Relations Help is Here!
Instituto Conexiones now provides Cross-Cultural Relations Services to U.S. American visionaries carrying out projects in Latin America - special focus on Costa Rica, Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador and Bolivia.
If you are part of a U.S. team carrying out a business idea (or philanthropic vision) in Latin America, you need more than just a cursory knowledge of the dynamics of intercultural relations between yourself and the local Latin American people you work with, serve, sell to, or have an impact on in some way.
We believe that in order for you to succeed - to have true longevity in your vision - you need someone on your team who has local contacts, who has a deep level of understanding between your culture and the culture of the place where you are doing your business (or carrying out your social enterprise or philanthropic project) and who can engage the local people to subscribe to your project to help you achieve your goals.
Our years of combined research and experience and our multi-stakeholder and multi-disciplinary approach provide us with a unique perspective on best practices related to helping foreigners enter the Latin American world in a truly sustainable way.
Our unique approach includes helping your vision self-reflect on its social and ecological sustainability and coming up with a triple bottom line approach to your venture. Business executives worldwide now know that being socially and ecologically responsible does not have to come at the expense of doing good financially. Actually, businesses and social enterprises that invest in social and ecological responsibility will do better over the long term than their non-responsible counterparts. The costs related to conflict mitigation, public relations band aids, increased security, climate change, sabotage repair, etc. are extremely high. Doing the right thing is good business sense and is the foundation through which you will have success, local support, and staying power, especially in Latin America.
This relates to nonprofit, international cooperation and public sector projects too - having good intentions does not automatically translate into having a positive impact, gaining local support, or having a good public relations reputation. Nonprofits also need to understand how their actions are being perceived and the impact they are having because this lack of knowledge could be working against their cause. For example, rain forest conservation groups that buy out local poor farmers may be contributing to larger environmental problems in the long term, as well as a myriad of social problems (see "Looking at the Bigger Picture When Saving the Rain forest," 2006)
Instituto Conexiones is here to educate and coach you on topics you will need to know about as you navigate the different social dynamics you will encounter, especially if you are a U.S. American entrepreneur or philanthropist who is having an impact on, is needing to interact with, or is reaching out to Latin American stakeholders (and if you think a stakeholder is a type of cutlery- it is time to contact us!!)
To help you along as you educate yourself more about these important topics, we encourage you to read the following blogs/publications:
Phase 1 of Films on Intercultural Relations in Baja California has been funded!
By Kimberly Newton, President of Instituto Conexiones
Additions by Carmina Valiente, President of 7 Filos Producciones
We are proud to announce that a film concept that Instituto Conexiones helped develop with a local Mexican Production Firm, 7 Filos Producciones, is well on its way to becoming a reality!
The concept is a series of investigative film reports focused on showcasing the positive and negative social impacts related to the influx of foreigners coming into Baja California to purchase retirement homes and invest in the growing tourism, real estate development and "green investment" sectors. We will strive to find positive case studies of foreigners and locals working together in an equitable and sustainable way to advance shared goals.
After presenting the concept to a group of Mexican and U.S. donors, 7 Filos Producciones secured the first phase funding for these important and timely investigative video reports.
Instituto Conexiones has contributed to the formation of the concept through ongoing advocacy for a need to look at the social dynamics related to the cultural encounter between wealthy foreigners and Latin American locals, especially in areas considerd biodiversity and tourism "hotspots" & UN World Heritage Sites.
The following links to relevant short films, sent to us by 7Filos Producciones, provide examples to what is happening and how 7Filos Producciones and Instituto Conexiones will be approaching the subject:
Rosarito Documentary by CBS
The Parallel Case Study of Quintara Roo (Cancun) by Sea Studios Foundation
The Parallel Case Study of El Mar Menor, Murcia by El Escarabajo Verde
Instituto Conexiones will be in charge of the translation of the films, subtitling and the U.S. communication and marketing strategy to get these films seen by the relevant U.S. demographic.
We are still looking for Stage 2 funding to actually pay for the marketing and diffusion campaign, website and online presence, and other post production costs.
If interested in learning more on how to be a sponsor, are interested in being involved, or would like to commission this type of intercultural relations study and documentary in your part of the world, feel free to contact us.
info@connectionsinstitute.net
Tel. 415.367.3696
Additions by Carmina Valiente, President of 7 Filos Producciones
We are proud to announce that a film concept that Instituto Conexiones helped develop with a local Mexican Production Firm, 7 Filos Producciones, is well on its way to becoming a reality!
The concept is a series of investigative film reports focused on showcasing the positive and negative social impacts related to the influx of foreigners coming into Baja California to purchase retirement homes and invest in the growing tourism, real estate development and "green investment" sectors. We will strive to find positive case studies of foreigners and locals working together in an equitable and sustainable way to advance shared goals.
After presenting the concept to a group of Mexican and U.S. donors, 7 Filos Producciones secured the first phase funding for these important and timely investigative video reports.
Instituto Conexiones has contributed to the formation of the concept through ongoing advocacy for a need to look at the social dynamics related to the cultural encounter between wealthy foreigners and Latin American locals, especially in areas considerd biodiversity and tourism "hotspots" & UN World Heritage Sites.
The following links to relevant short films, sent to us by 7Filos Producciones, provide examples to what is happening and how 7Filos Producciones and Instituto Conexiones will be approaching the subject:
Rosarito Documentary by CBS
The Parallel Case Study of Quintara Roo (Cancun) by Sea Studios Foundation
The Parallel Case Study of El Mar Menor, Murcia by El Escarabajo Verde
Instituto Conexiones will be in charge of the translation of the films, subtitling and the U.S. communication and marketing strategy to get these films seen by the relevant U.S. demographic.
We are still looking for Stage 2 funding to actually pay for the marketing and diffusion campaign, website and online presence, and other post production costs.
If interested in learning more on how to be a sponsor, are interested in being involved, or would like to commission this type of intercultural relations study and documentary in your part of the world, feel free to contact us.
info@connectionsinstitute.net
Tel. 415.367.3696
1/13/09
Not All Carbon Offsets are Created Equal - Lets Take a Closer Look
By Kimberly Newton de Klootwyk
(Draft)
For the last few years, I have been working with organizations or for organizations that are considering carbon offsets for their projects. I have also been reading about the new trend and its advances in a cursory way - I am a far cry from an expert on this topic.
However, since my time working in Costa Rica on rain forest conservation projects, and my "Bigger Picture" epiphany, I often analyze any new well-meaning trend for its long term sustainability and its potential social impact and layers of complexity.
So far, within my limited scope of knowledge, I have come across the following interesting situations that raise multidisciplinary questions -
1- Carbon offsets that are related to mono crop non-native tree plantations - how is that environmentally sustainable? What a missed opportunity to plant a diverse native tree forest, rather than a monocrop non-native species that cannot feed or adjust to local ecosystem - or that may even hurt it.
2 - Carbon offsets as a way for foreigners to buy up huge tracks of cheap land in hot spot conservation and tourism areas and effectively, make this a good investment opportunity because the land maintenance pretty much pays for itself and a profit can be made. Poor desperate farmers living in the rain forest are seeing more and more foreigners buy up their lands for pennies on the dollar - their displacement means that they will add to the swarm of migrant labor moving to developed areas and their carbon footprint will probably triple or more (need more studies here). In addition to the social and ecological impact of mass migration and land being concentrated yet again in the hands of the few, landless peasants are considered to be one of the top causes of deforestation (~40%- need to look up my source_) because they go and squat on other lands - clearing and burning them to create a new rural settlement. We know that deforestation is one of the main reasons for climate change so what is the carbon footprint of this story being played out globally? And if farms are being converted to tree plantations and local agriculturla production goes down, where will the food come from to feed the people? Will they have to import the food from afar? Doesn't importing food from afar mean more carbon footprint vis a vis the transportation of the food? Carbon offset purchasers who are genuinely interested in curbing climate change or have social justice values, must consider these factors.
3- On the above point - not sure if this is a guideline already being used, but it makes the most sense for the carbon offset of an activity to be offset as near to the source of the carbon "footprint" as possible - this in part to give back to the local community where damage is being done and to also assure that the carbon offset activities are in alignment with local community development plans, include local stakeholders, employ locals for carbon offset related activities, etc.
(End of Draft)
(Draft)
For the last few years, I have been working with organizations or for organizations that are considering carbon offsets for their projects. I have also been reading about the new trend and its advances in a cursory way - I am a far cry from an expert on this topic.
However, since my time working in Costa Rica on rain forest conservation projects, and my "Bigger Picture" epiphany, I often analyze any new well-meaning trend for its long term sustainability and its potential social impact and layers of complexity.
So far, within my limited scope of knowledge, I have come across the following interesting situations that raise multidisciplinary questions -
1- Carbon offsets that are related to mono crop non-native tree plantations - how is that environmentally sustainable? What a missed opportunity to plant a diverse native tree forest, rather than a monocrop non-native species that cannot feed or adjust to local ecosystem - or that may even hurt it.
2 - Carbon offsets as a way for foreigners to buy up huge tracks of cheap land in hot spot conservation and tourism areas and effectively, make this a good investment opportunity because the land maintenance pretty much pays for itself and a profit can be made. Poor desperate farmers living in the rain forest are seeing more and more foreigners buy up their lands for pennies on the dollar - their displacement means that they will add to the swarm of migrant labor moving to developed areas and their carbon footprint will probably triple or more (need more studies here). In addition to the social and ecological impact of mass migration and land being concentrated yet again in the hands of the few, landless peasants are considered to be one of the top causes of deforestation (~40%- need to look up my source_) because they go and squat on other lands - clearing and burning them to create a new rural settlement. We know that deforestation is one of the main reasons for climate change so what is the carbon footprint of this story being played out globally? And if farms are being converted to tree plantations and local agriculturla production goes down, where will the food come from to feed the people? Will they have to import the food from afar? Doesn't importing food from afar mean more carbon footprint vis a vis the transportation of the food? Carbon offset purchasers who are genuinely interested in curbing climate change or have social justice values, must consider these factors.
3- On the above point - not sure if this is a guideline already being used, but it makes the most sense for the carbon offset of an activity to be offset as near to the source of the carbon "footprint" as possible - this in part to give back to the local community where damage is being done and to also assure that the carbon offset activities are in alignment with local community development plans, include local stakeholders, employ locals for carbon offset related activities, etc.
(End of Draft)
1/11/09
Corporate Social Responsibility Reports Now Required By Law in Denmark
Posted by Chris Jarvis on 9 January 2009 at 3:45pm on BusinessFightsPoverty.Ning.com
Should Corporate Social Responsibility be a voluntary response to customer and societal demands? Or, if it is as important as many are suggesting, should it be a legislated requirement? On December 16, 2008, the Danish parliament decidedly found in favor of the latter option. Now, 1100 of the largest companies in Denmark must include CSR information in their annual financial reports...More
Should Corporate Social Responsibility be a voluntary response to customer and societal demands? Or, if it is as important as many are suggesting, should it be a legislated requirement? On December 16, 2008, the Danish parliament decidedly found in favor of the latter option. Now, 1100 of the largest companies in Denmark must include CSR information in their annual financial reports...More
1/9/09
Relevant Master's Program for Professionals Focusing on Corporate Social Responsibility
From: Reuters
University of Barcelona, Spain - Master's Programs in 'Corporate Social Responsibility,...
Originally posted on Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:50am EDT
University of Barcelona, Spain - Master's Programs in 'Corporate Social
Responsibility, Accounting and Social Auditing', and 'Social Economy and Third
Sector' - Degrees from the University of Barcelona
BARCELONA, Spain, June 18 /PRNewswire/ -- The University of Barcelona
(UB), in collaboration with the Economy and Society Research Center Foundation
(Fundacion Centro de Investigacion de Economia y Sociedad - CIES), offers
Master's degrees in Corporate Social Responsibility and Third Sector Company
Management, providing online training in combination with campus-based
classes. Admission requirements include a university degree and professional
experience in each degree field. The academic staff is made up of professors
from four universities, including Georgia State University....More
University of Barcelona, Spain - Master's Programs in 'Corporate Social Responsibility,...
Originally posted on Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:50am EDT
University of Barcelona, Spain - Master's Programs in 'Corporate Social
Responsibility, Accounting and Social Auditing', and 'Social Economy and Third
Sector' - Degrees from the University of Barcelona
BARCELONA, Spain, June 18 /PRNewswire/ -- The University of Barcelona
(UB), in collaboration with the Economy and Society Research Center Foundation
(Fundacion Centro de Investigacion de Economia y Sociedad - CIES), offers
Master's degrees in Corporate Social Responsibility and Third Sector Company
Management, providing online training in combination with campus-based
classes. Admission requirements include a university degree and professional
experience in each degree field. The academic staff is made up of professors
from four universities, including Georgia State University....More
12/21/08
Relevant Event Notice: A Cultural Conversation: Aldo Leopold, the Southwest, and the Evolution of a Land Ethic for the Future
From Bioneers:
Time: February 13, 2008 at 8am to February 14, 2008 at 6pm
Location: National Hispanic Cultural Center
City/Town: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Event Website: http://www.aldoleopold.org/...
Event Type: Opening
Organized By: The Aldo Leopold Foundation
As the opening event in the Aldo Leopold Centennial Celebration 2009, this “cultural conversation” is intended to foster creative discussion about the Southwestern roots of Leopold’s land ethic, the roots of an environmental ethic in Hispanic and Native American traditions, and the historic and potential connections among them. The event is open to the public and welcomes participants from a wide variety of cultural backgrounds and perspectives....More
Time: February 13, 2008 at 8am to February 14, 2008 at 6pm
Location: National Hispanic Cultural Center
City/Town: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Event Website: http://www.aldoleopold.org/...
Event Type: Opening
Organized By: The Aldo Leopold Foundation
As the opening event in the Aldo Leopold Centennial Celebration 2009, this “cultural conversation” is intended to foster creative discussion about the Southwestern roots of Leopold’s land ethic, the roots of an environmental ethic in Hispanic and Native American traditions, and the historic and potential connections among them. The event is open to the public and welcomes participants from a wide variety of cultural backgrounds and perspectives....More
11/7/08
Socially responsible investing reaps rewards in an uncharitable market
Doing well by doing good
Socially responsible investing reaps rewards in an uncharitable market
By Sam Mamudi, MarketWatch
Last Update: 12:03 PM ET Nov 2, 2008
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- The market's meltdown has left every category of stock mutual funds in the red this year, but one area that has held up better than most is socially responsible investing.
As of Oct. 30, a total of 15 out of 91 faith-based and secular socially responsible funds that invest in stocks had outperformed the Dow Jones Industrial Average, some by more than 10 percentage points, according to investment researcher Morningstar Inc.
These results are encouraging for socially responsible investors because the odds are stacked against them. By screening stocks according to various ethical and moral standards, socially responsible funds by definition shrink their universe of investing options. In theory that makes it harder to provide market-beating returns.
But this year the reverse is also true: some socially responsible screens have helped their managers outperform the market and mute investors' losses.
Screen plays
"There are definitely some socially responsible screens that have helped in this environment," said David Kathman, analyst at Morningstar. "This type of market, which is punishing risk, is good for a lot of socially responsible funds."
Among the best performers is Parnassus Workplace Fund (PARWX) , which lost 25.3% through Oct. 30 versus a 29.3% decline for the Dow ($INDU) .
The fund was sprung from Fortune magazine's "100 Best Companies to Work For," said manager Jerome Dodson. While the portfolio now also invests in companies not on the Fortune list -- and also avoids some that are -- the principle of companies which treat their employees well is still the driving force.
"As time goes on, I've become convinced that investing in a company that's a good place to work will do very well for you over time," Dodson said. "There's a connection. When you get this kind of socially good management, you get overall good management."
The fund's screening process includes gauging corporate governance and good accounting practices -- factors that also reflect better managed companies, Dodson said.
Among his non-Fortune picks are Baldor Electric Co. (BEZ) , a Fort Smith, Ark., based maker of motors and generators. The company has a literacy program for its employees, and 15% of its pretax profits go to its workers. The company's stock held up for most of the year, before falling hard in October.
Wells Fargo (WFC) is another company with a good management record that Dodson recommends.
Ahead of the crisis
TIAA-CREF is explicit about how its social screens have helped returns for its Social Choice Equity Fund (TICRX) , which is down about 33% so far this year. The fund's most recent fact sheet, from Jun. 30, lists poorly performing companies that were blocked by its screen. The list includes General Electric Co. (GE) , JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) , American International Group Inc. (AIG) and Citigroup Inc. (C) .
Amy O'Brien, part of the social and community investing department at TIAA-CREF, said that Social Choice Equity screens financial services companies based on factors that include corporate governance, predatory lending practices, transparency and executive pay.
"The themes that underpin the current crisis are themes that the socially responsible investing community and corporate governance people have been talking about for a number of years," O'Brien said.
Matt Zuck, part of a five-person management team of AHA Socially Responsible Equity Fund (AHSRX) , said that while screens can sift out some bad stocks, the discipline of tighter screening requires a manager to dig deeper. "In so far as it forces you to ask more questions about a company, it's valuable as an analytical tool," he said.
Fundamentals rule
One factor that can't be overlooked is fundamental stock selection. A case in point is Amana Trust Income (AMANX) and sibling Amana Trust Growth (AMAGX) -- two mutual funds that are managed according to Islamic principles. Among those principles is a prohibition on usury -- any activity that is interest-bearing. As such, the Amana funds always avoid the financial sector.
Monem Salam, deputy portfolio manager at Saturna Capital, which manages the Amana funds, said that among the holdings are companies such as Pfizer Inc. (PFE) and Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM) , that pay steady and reliable dividends. (Exxon is a company that many socially responsible funds will not invest in because of screens that block oil companies.)
Amana Trust Income was down 22.8% this year through Oct. 30, with annualized three- and five-year returns of 3.5% and 10%, respectively. Amana Trust Growth, meanwhile, was down 27.6% so far this year; the fund's three-year annualized return was 0.3% and its five-year average yearly gain was 7.7%.
Parnassus' Dodson noted that he avoided some of the companies on the Fortune list, such as financials, including Goldman Sachs (GS) , and homebuilders because he thought they were overvalued. "We're paying attention to valuations and macroeconomic factors, too," he said.
The AHA fund had dropped financials for purely fundamental reasons, Zuck added. "In 2007, we owned Citigroup and AIG, but left them because we saw the emerging problems in the financial sector," he said.
Whichever mix of screens and stock-picking is used, socially responsible funds have shown that in tough times they're not a soft touch.
"It used to be thought that you had to give up returns to get those [ethical] screens," said TIAA-CREF's O'Brien. "But we see returns that are on a par with well-performing mainstream funds."
Top socially responsible stock funds
Fund Ticker YTD Return
Appleseed (APPLX) - 17.7%
Ave Maria Rising Dividend (AVEDX) - 20.2
Parnassus Equity Income (PRBLX) - 20.7
Parnassus Small-Cap (PARSX) - 21.7
Amana Trust Income (AMANX) - 22.8
Dow Jones Industrial Average ($INDU) - 29.3
Data: Morningstar Inc. (As of 10/30/08)
Socially responsible investing reaps rewards in an uncharitable market
By Sam Mamudi, MarketWatch
Last Update: 12:03 PM ET Nov 2, 2008
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- The market's meltdown has left every category of stock mutual funds in the red this year, but one area that has held up better than most is socially responsible investing.
As of Oct. 30, a total of 15 out of 91 faith-based and secular socially responsible funds that invest in stocks had outperformed the Dow Jones Industrial Average, some by more than 10 percentage points, according to investment researcher Morningstar Inc.
These results are encouraging for socially responsible investors because the odds are stacked against them. By screening stocks according to various ethical and moral standards, socially responsible funds by definition shrink their universe of investing options. In theory that makes it harder to provide market-beating returns.
But this year the reverse is also true: some socially responsible screens have helped their managers outperform the market and mute investors' losses.
Screen plays
"There are definitely some socially responsible screens that have helped in this environment," said David Kathman, analyst at Morningstar. "This type of market, which is punishing risk, is good for a lot of socially responsible funds."
Among the best performers is Parnassus Workplace Fund (PARWX) , which lost 25.3% through Oct. 30 versus a 29.3% decline for the Dow ($INDU) .
The fund was sprung from Fortune magazine's "100 Best Companies to Work For," said manager Jerome Dodson. While the portfolio now also invests in companies not on the Fortune list -- and also avoids some that are -- the principle of companies which treat their employees well is still the driving force.
"As time goes on, I've become convinced that investing in a company that's a good place to work will do very well for you over time," Dodson said. "There's a connection. When you get this kind of socially good management, you get overall good management."
The fund's screening process includes gauging corporate governance and good accounting practices -- factors that also reflect better managed companies, Dodson said.
Among his non-Fortune picks are Baldor Electric Co. (BEZ) , a Fort Smith, Ark., based maker of motors and generators. The company has a literacy program for its employees, and 15% of its pretax profits go to its workers. The company's stock held up for most of the year, before falling hard in October.
Wells Fargo (WFC) is another company with a good management record that Dodson recommends.
Ahead of the crisis
TIAA-CREF is explicit about how its social screens have helped returns for its Social Choice Equity Fund (TICRX) , which is down about 33% so far this year. The fund's most recent fact sheet, from Jun. 30, lists poorly performing companies that were blocked by its screen. The list includes General Electric Co. (GE) , JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) , American International Group Inc. (AIG) and Citigroup Inc. (C) .
Amy O'Brien, part of the social and community investing department at TIAA-CREF, said that Social Choice Equity screens financial services companies based on factors that include corporate governance, predatory lending practices, transparency and executive pay.
"The themes that underpin the current crisis are themes that the socially responsible investing community and corporate governance people have been talking about for a number of years," O'Brien said.
Matt Zuck, part of a five-person management team of AHA Socially Responsible Equity Fund (AHSRX) , said that while screens can sift out some bad stocks, the discipline of tighter screening requires a manager to dig deeper. "In so far as it forces you to ask more questions about a company, it's valuable as an analytical tool," he said.
Fundamentals rule
One factor that can't be overlooked is fundamental stock selection. A case in point is Amana Trust Income (AMANX) and sibling Amana Trust Growth (AMAGX) -- two mutual funds that are managed according to Islamic principles. Among those principles is a prohibition on usury -- any activity that is interest-bearing. As such, the Amana funds always avoid the financial sector.
Monem Salam, deputy portfolio manager at Saturna Capital, which manages the Amana funds, said that among the holdings are companies such as Pfizer Inc. (PFE) and Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM) , that pay steady and reliable dividends. (Exxon is a company that many socially responsible funds will not invest in because of screens that block oil companies.)
Amana Trust Income was down 22.8% this year through Oct. 30, with annualized three- and five-year returns of 3.5% and 10%, respectively. Amana Trust Growth, meanwhile, was down 27.6% so far this year; the fund's three-year annualized return was 0.3% and its five-year average yearly gain was 7.7%.
Parnassus' Dodson noted that he avoided some of the companies on the Fortune list, such as financials, including Goldman Sachs (GS) , and homebuilders because he thought they were overvalued. "We're paying attention to valuations and macroeconomic factors, too," he said.
The AHA fund had dropped financials for purely fundamental reasons, Zuck added. "In 2007, we owned Citigroup and AIG, but left them because we saw the emerging problems in the financial sector," he said.
Whichever mix of screens and stock-picking is used, socially responsible funds have shown that in tough times they're not a soft touch.
"It used to be thought that you had to give up returns to get those [ethical] screens," said TIAA-CREF's O'Brien. "But we see returns that are on a par with well-performing mainstream funds."
Top socially responsible stock funds
Fund Ticker YTD Return
Appleseed (APPLX) - 17.7%
Ave Maria Rising Dividend (AVEDX) - 20.2
Parnassus Equity Income (PRBLX) - 20.7
Parnassus Small-Cap (PARSX) - 21.7
Amana Trust Income (AMANX) - 22.8
Dow Jones Industrial Average ($INDU) - 29.3
Data: Morningstar Inc. (As of 10/30/08)
11/5/08
Barak Obama's Election to U.S. Presidency Ushers in Tangible Globalization and A "We are all One" Mentality
By Kimberly Newton de Klootwyk
He views the world through an interacial lens is the way Beale put it (ABC 5 o'clock News). Beale was one of the pioneers who helped make Alabama's schools racially integrated. Fifty plus years later, the first black president is elected into the highest office in the United States.
Obama's interacial lens is nothing to be glossed over as it is in great part the reason why many U.S. Americans voted for him - whether consciously or not. He is a great leader because he is a natural cultural broker & mediator - his background, his ancestral mix, his upbringing and his education in a multicultural society has helped form his "oneness" mentality and his ability to perceive multiple perspectives simultaneously.
In short, he represents a new era in many ways - a new period in human history that is racially integrated and where global citizenship trumps nationalism. Of course Obama could not speak about global citizenship while running for a national office in a highly nationalistic country - but there is no doubt that his identity goes beyond the U.S. borders - that his presidency ushers in a new level of global and interconnected consciousness. This is exactly what a country like the United States needed, given that it is made up of people of all backgrounds and is considered a leader in the world stage. Globalization has materialized in a tangible way through the new president elect of the United States. At Instituto Conexiones we will be following this presidency closely because of its relevance to the work that we do to advance global consciousness and peaceful co-existence among people of different cultural backgrounds.
Lets see what Barak Obama, one of the world's most influential cultural brokers does with his new power to change the world for the better for all.
He views the world through an interacial lens is the way Beale put it (ABC 5 o'clock News). Beale was one of the pioneers who helped make Alabama's schools racially integrated. Fifty plus years later, the first black president is elected into the highest office in the United States.
Obama's interacial lens is nothing to be glossed over as it is in great part the reason why many U.S. Americans voted for him - whether consciously or not. He is a great leader because he is a natural cultural broker & mediator - his background, his ancestral mix, his upbringing and his education in a multicultural society has helped form his "oneness" mentality and his ability to perceive multiple perspectives simultaneously.
In short, he represents a new era in many ways - a new period in human history that is racially integrated and where global citizenship trumps nationalism. Of course Obama could not speak about global citizenship while running for a national office in a highly nationalistic country - but there is no doubt that his identity goes beyond the U.S. borders - that his presidency ushers in a new level of global and interconnected consciousness. This is exactly what a country like the United States needed, given that it is made up of people of all backgrounds and is considered a leader in the world stage. Globalization has materialized in a tangible way through the new president elect of the United States. At Instituto Conexiones we will be following this presidency closely because of its relevance to the work that we do to advance global consciousness and peaceful co-existence among people of different cultural backgrounds.
Lets see what Barak Obama, one of the world's most influential cultural brokers does with his new power to change the world for the better for all.
10/6/08
Instituto Conexiones Launches a New Level of Cultural Brokerage for Latin American Organizations Needing a Presence in the U.S.
U.S Identity & Virtual Office Plans
Helping Latin American organizations attract and retain U.S. clients, partners or donors.
At Instituto Conexiones we believe that equitable globalization begins with making sure all global players have an equal chance for success. In today’s world, that often times means having a presence in the U.S. and a partner that understand the U.S. culture and the English language. Without this, Spanish speaking businesses and organizations are oftentimes at a disadvantage even though their product or project is of superior quality. This why we offer Cultural Brokerage Services, which includes high-caliber U.S. Identity & Virtual Office Plans. Our goal with this service is to help our Latin American colleagues bridge the cultural gap so they can compete in the global marketplace and access the large wealth of resources concentrated in the U.S.
To learn more - click here
Helping Latin American organizations attract and retain U.S. clients, partners or donors.
At Instituto Conexiones we believe that equitable globalization begins with making sure all global players have an equal chance for success. In today’s world, that often times means having a presence in the U.S. and a partner that understand the U.S. culture and the English language. Without this, Spanish speaking businesses and organizations are oftentimes at a disadvantage even though their product or project is of superior quality. This why we offer Cultural Brokerage Services, which includes high-caliber U.S. Identity & Virtual Office Plans. Our goal with this service is to help our Latin American colleagues bridge the cultural gap so they can compete in the global marketplace and access the large wealth of resources concentrated in the U.S.
To learn more - click here
8/27/08
Portugal Points The Way For Renewable Energy Adoption
From: Environmental Leader
By Diana Verde Nieto
Founder and CEO
Clownfish
portugal-points-the-7332.jpgAs the world reels at the high price of fossil fuels, business and governments are increasingly casting about for renewable energy models. Portugal is happy to oblige.
Portugal? Yes Portugal. While most of the world remained mired in the old mindset of the fossil fuel driven economy, Portugal committed to leading Europe’s clean-tech revolution with some of the most ambitious targets and timetables for renewable energy adoption. That decision proved visionary. Portugal’s commitment to renewable energy provides an economic cushion at a time when other countries are feeling the pain of high oil prices.
“We have to reduce our dependence on oil and gas,” said Manuel Pinho, Portugal’s Economic Minister. “What seemed extravagant in 2004 when we decided to go for renewables now seems to have been a very good decision.”
Portugal expects to generate 31% of all its energy from clean sources by 2020. This represents increasing its renewable electricity share from 20% in 2005 to 60% in 2020, compared with Britain’s target of 15% of all energy by 2020. Portugal already exceeds its 2010 renewable energy targets.
While these commitments are exceptional, the most exciting part of Portugal’s drive to be a clean-tech leader comes from its rapid adoption of new renewable technologies. Traditionally, the country derived about 30-40% of its electricity from hydropower. While hydro is not a carbon-intensive energy source, it is not exactly cutting edge technology either. But now Portugal’s renewable energy plans include the world’s largest wind, wave and solar energy facilities, demonstrating that these technologies can be deployed at a massive scale.
Portugal’s plans capitalize on plentiful natural resources: the sunniest spot in Europe, a long coastline and abundant wind. The country intends to take advantage of what nature has given it, and are using its resources to establish Portugal as a global clean-tech leader.
Take wave energy. While experts identified the potential for generating electricity from wave power years ago, the technology to do so remained in its infancy. Portugal is now making a major play to both develop the technology and position itself as the world leader in its application. The world’s first commercial wave farm is set to go online this year. While this facility will provide only a modest amount of electricity to the grid, Portugal has set an ambitious generation target of 550MW by 2020. Backed by significant government incentives, the wave energy sector in Portugal is poised to take off.
The solar sector also benefits from similar support. By the end of this year, the world’s largest photovoltaic solar power farm will be in eastern Portugal. The facility, capable of generating enough power for 30,000 homes, represents a play by the country to become a global leader in solar technology.
The high price of fossil fuel energy presents global economic challenges. Although we’ve recently been given a slight reprieve from the record-high cost of oil, the higher prices have rippled through the global economy, driving up the costs of goods and services. But there is a silver lining: the high price of fossil fuels makes renewable energy look more and more attractive. If countries want to learn how to develop renewable energy on a large scale, Portugal points the way.
Diana Verde Nieto is Founder and CEO of Clownfish www.clownfish.co.uk a communications and brand agency dedicated to making sustainability tangible for business.
By Diana Verde Nieto
Founder and CEO
Clownfish
portugal-points-the-7332.jpgAs the world reels at the high price of fossil fuels, business and governments are increasingly casting about for renewable energy models. Portugal is happy to oblige.
Portugal? Yes Portugal. While most of the world remained mired in the old mindset of the fossil fuel driven economy, Portugal committed to leading Europe’s clean-tech revolution with some of the most ambitious targets and timetables for renewable energy adoption. That decision proved visionary. Portugal’s commitment to renewable energy provides an economic cushion at a time when other countries are feeling the pain of high oil prices.
“We have to reduce our dependence on oil and gas,” said Manuel Pinho, Portugal’s Economic Minister. “What seemed extravagant in 2004 when we decided to go for renewables now seems to have been a very good decision.”
Portugal expects to generate 31% of all its energy from clean sources by 2020. This represents increasing its renewable electricity share from 20% in 2005 to 60% in 2020, compared with Britain’s target of 15% of all energy by 2020. Portugal already exceeds its 2010 renewable energy targets.
While these commitments are exceptional, the most exciting part of Portugal’s drive to be a clean-tech leader comes from its rapid adoption of new renewable technologies. Traditionally, the country derived about 30-40% of its electricity from hydropower. While hydro is not a carbon-intensive energy source, it is not exactly cutting edge technology either. But now Portugal’s renewable energy plans include the world’s largest wind, wave and solar energy facilities, demonstrating that these technologies can be deployed at a massive scale.
Portugal’s plans capitalize on plentiful natural resources: the sunniest spot in Europe, a long coastline and abundant wind. The country intends to take advantage of what nature has given it, and are using its resources to establish Portugal as a global clean-tech leader.
Take wave energy. While experts identified the potential for generating electricity from wave power years ago, the technology to do so remained in its infancy. Portugal is now making a major play to both develop the technology and position itself as the world leader in its application. The world’s first commercial wave farm is set to go online this year. While this facility will provide only a modest amount of electricity to the grid, Portugal has set an ambitious generation target of 550MW by 2020. Backed by significant government incentives, the wave energy sector in Portugal is poised to take off.
The solar sector also benefits from similar support. By the end of this year, the world’s largest photovoltaic solar power farm will be in eastern Portugal. The facility, capable of generating enough power for 30,000 homes, represents a play by the country to become a global leader in solar technology.
The high price of fossil fuel energy presents global economic challenges. Although we’ve recently been given a slight reprieve from the record-high cost of oil, the higher prices have rippled through the global economy, driving up the costs of goods and services. But there is a silver lining: the high price of fossil fuels makes renewable energy look more and more attractive. If countries want to learn how to develop renewable energy on a large scale, Portugal points the way.
Diana Verde Nieto is Founder and CEO of Clownfish www.clownfish.co.uk a communications and brand agency dedicated to making sustainability tangible for business.
7/30/08
McKinsey Survey on the State of Corporate Philanthropy
From: The McKinsey Quarterly
February 2008
Consumers’ growing expectations of companies make corporate philanthropy more important than ever. But many respondents to this survey say their companies aren’t meeting social goals or stakeholder expectations very effectively. Companies that are doing well are taking a more strategic approach.
Corporate philanthropy can be an effective tool for companies that are trying to meet consumers’ rising expectations of the role businesses should play in society, say respondents to a McKinsey global survey.1 The survey also suggests, however, that companies aren’t using that tool as well as they could. Executives doubt that their philanthropy programs fully meet their social goals or stakeholders’ expectations for them.
About a fifth of the respondents say their corporate philanthropy programs are very or extremely effective at meeting social goals and stakeholder expectations. Their companies take a somewhat different approach than others do: their programs are more likely to address social and political trends relevant to the business and to be influenced by community and business needs. Executives at these companies expect their programs to become more global and say that efforts are already more likely to involve collaboration with other companies. Finally, these companies are much likelier than others to say they are achieving any business goals they have set for their philanthropy programs in addition to social goals.
A small group of respondents say their companies are reaching beyond traditional corporate goals for philanthropy programs—such as enhancing the company’s reputation or brand—to pursue more concrete business goals, such as gaining information on potential markets. Their approach to focusing the programs also differs from the approach at other companies.
Read the results here:
* Why give?
* What matters, who matters, and where companies are giving instead
* What effective companies do differently
Notes
1The McKinsey Quarterly conducted the survey in January 2007 and received responses from 721 executives around the world—74 percent of them CEOs or other C-level executives. The data are weighted to reflect the proportional representation of segments in the total population.
February 2008
Consumers’ growing expectations of companies make corporate philanthropy more important than ever. But many respondents to this survey say their companies aren’t meeting social goals or stakeholder expectations very effectively. Companies that are doing well are taking a more strategic approach.
Corporate philanthropy can be an effective tool for companies that are trying to meet consumers’ rising expectations of the role businesses should play in society, say respondents to a McKinsey global survey.1 The survey also suggests, however, that companies aren’t using that tool as well as they could. Executives doubt that their philanthropy programs fully meet their social goals or stakeholders’ expectations for them.
About a fifth of the respondents say their corporate philanthropy programs are very or extremely effective at meeting social goals and stakeholder expectations. Their companies take a somewhat different approach than others do: their programs are more likely to address social and political trends relevant to the business and to be influenced by community and business needs. Executives at these companies expect their programs to become more global and say that efforts are already more likely to involve collaboration with other companies. Finally, these companies are much likelier than others to say they are achieving any business goals they have set for their philanthropy programs in addition to social goals.
A small group of respondents say their companies are reaching beyond traditional corporate goals for philanthropy programs—such as enhancing the company’s reputation or brand—to pursue more concrete business goals, such as gaining information on potential markets. Their approach to focusing the programs also differs from the approach at other companies.
Read the results here:
* Why give?
* What matters, who matters, and where companies are giving instead
* What effective companies do differently
Notes
1The McKinsey Quarterly conducted the survey in January 2007 and received responses from 721 executives around the world—74 percent of them CEOs or other C-level executives. The data are weighted to reflect the proportional representation of segments in the total population.
7/23/08
Social Responsibility is Now a Business Imperative, says Roberts of WWF
Social Responsibility is Now a Business Imperative, says Roberts of WWF
From Stanford Graduate School of Business News
Environmental Challenges are Profit Opportunities, Says Roberts of World Wildlife Fund
October 2007
STANFORD GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS — “Companies still thinking about the environment as a social responsibility rather than a business imperative are living in the dark ages,” said Carter Roberts, President and CEO of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). Roberts delivered the annual von Gugelberg Memorial Environmental Lecture at the Stanford Graduate School of Business on October 23, describing how a new era of global threats is changing the work of the world’s largest conservation organization, an organization that represents the concerns of its 6 million members in 100 countries.
What started as a mission to save animals — associated with the widely recognized panda bear logo—has morphed, by necessity, into a broader mandate to address the economics, the science, and the politics of conservation around the world, Roberts said.
Increasingly people’s livelihood needs and the consequences on the environment of global warming and resource scarcity have to be considered along with measures for species preservation and biodiversity, he said.
Conservationists used to worry about getting people’s attention and keeping it, said Roberts, “but now the facts are in: Climate change and increased resource scarcity will likely be one of the most disruptive forces in business since the Industrial Revolution.”
Many businesses commit to do the right thing environmentally, and then under pressure to enhance the bottom line they see initial steps fade away unless confronted by regulation. Roberts said, “My vision for saving the planet holds that you not only need to work with communities and governments but also the forces … that are driven largely by business. We will fail if we don’t change the behavior of business and how it touches the places we care about.”
Under Robert’s leadership, the WWF is partnering with Wal-Mart, Google, Coca-Cola, Ikea, and others to work with government institutions and indigenous communities to address environmental challenges and sustainable growth needs. With large corporations controlling 70 percent of the choices consumers make, such partnerships are the source of greatest leverage, Roberts said.
“The world is finally waking up to the fact that our lifestyle (choices) are threatening the very fabric of the planet.” The WWF’s most recent Living Planet Report estimates that current demands on the earth’s resources are outstripping what the planet can sustain, Roberts said.
“Most people don’t know it but deforestation and land degradation contribute about 20 percent of all C02 emissions. Ironically at WWF, we realize if we want to save the Amazon, we need to head to China.”
“If China catches up to U.S. standards of consumption it will require two planets to sustain our livelihood for the long run, and if the rest of the world catches up, it will require eleven,” he adds.
Instead of pointing fingers at countries such as China and India, the better choice is to help them invest in technologies and practices that will reduce their respective footprints. “The developed world is going to have a difficult time telling the developing world that they won’t be allowed to enjoy the same fruits of economic success and higher living standards,” he said.
The United States needs to view its own behavior in the mirror, Roberts said. “Consider a simple cup of latte. If we think about Starbucks’ footprint, we have … the amount of water to grow the sugarcane to make the sugar, process the milk, harvest the coffee, make the cup, the lid, and to produce the wrapper. If a company looks at the actual numbers, the water to produce a latte adds up to 208 liters per cup.”
“Add energy to transport the raw materials, electricity to grind the beans, brew the coffee, power the lights, the WiFi internet connectivity (in every Starbucks), the gasoline burned getting customers and employees to the store, and the message for companies is clear. They cannot just consider their own business operations when it comes to environmental impact. The way any business buys and sells products has repercussions around the world,” Roberts said.
“It doesn’t matter what industry you’re in, the supply chain will include products from all around the world,” Roberts emphasized. “Whether we’re talking about fabric made in China, soybeans grown in the Amazon, palm oil harvested in Indonesia, biofuels created in Africa—companies will have to know how their products and the raw materials they use in their operations are affecting places, people, biodiversity, and the environment.”
These facts underscore the solid business reasons why sustainability is no longer just a nice thing to do, Roberts said. More importantly, conservation is a way of protecting business. “The smartest, most strategically focused companies are calculating climate change and resource risks into their operations. True visionaries know that if their business practices aren’t sustainable long term, their businesses aren’t either.”
—April Neilsen
From Stanford Graduate School of Business News
Environmental Challenges are Profit Opportunities, Says Roberts of World Wildlife Fund
October 2007
STANFORD GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS — “Companies still thinking about the environment as a social responsibility rather than a business imperative are living in the dark ages,” said Carter Roberts, President and CEO of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). Roberts delivered the annual von Gugelberg Memorial Environmental Lecture at the Stanford Graduate School of Business on October 23, describing how a new era of global threats is changing the work of the world’s largest conservation organization, an organization that represents the concerns of its 6 million members in 100 countries.
What started as a mission to save animals — associated with the widely recognized panda bear logo—has morphed, by necessity, into a broader mandate to address the economics, the science, and the politics of conservation around the world, Roberts said.
Increasingly people’s livelihood needs and the consequences on the environment of global warming and resource scarcity have to be considered along with measures for species preservation and biodiversity, he said.
Conservationists used to worry about getting people’s attention and keeping it, said Roberts, “but now the facts are in: Climate change and increased resource scarcity will likely be one of the most disruptive forces in business since the Industrial Revolution.”
Many businesses commit to do the right thing environmentally, and then under pressure to enhance the bottom line they see initial steps fade away unless confronted by regulation. Roberts said, “My vision for saving the planet holds that you not only need to work with communities and governments but also the forces … that are driven largely by business. We will fail if we don’t change the behavior of business and how it touches the places we care about.”
Under Robert’s leadership, the WWF is partnering with Wal-Mart, Google, Coca-Cola, Ikea, and others to work with government institutions and indigenous communities to address environmental challenges and sustainable growth needs. With large corporations controlling 70 percent of the choices consumers make, such partnerships are the source of greatest leverage, Roberts said.
“The world is finally waking up to the fact that our lifestyle (choices) are threatening the very fabric of the planet.” The WWF’s most recent Living Planet Report estimates that current demands on the earth’s resources are outstripping what the planet can sustain, Roberts said.
“Most people don’t know it but deforestation and land degradation contribute about 20 percent of all C02 emissions. Ironically at WWF, we realize if we want to save the Amazon, we need to head to China.”
“If China catches up to U.S. standards of consumption it will require two planets to sustain our livelihood for the long run, and if the rest of the world catches up, it will require eleven,” he adds.
Instead of pointing fingers at countries such as China and India, the better choice is to help them invest in technologies and practices that will reduce their respective footprints. “The developed world is going to have a difficult time telling the developing world that they won’t be allowed to enjoy the same fruits of economic success and higher living standards,” he said.
The United States needs to view its own behavior in the mirror, Roberts said. “Consider a simple cup of latte. If we think about Starbucks’ footprint, we have … the amount of water to grow the sugarcane to make the sugar, process the milk, harvest the coffee, make the cup, the lid, and to produce the wrapper. If a company looks at the actual numbers, the water to produce a latte adds up to 208 liters per cup.”
“Add energy to transport the raw materials, electricity to grind the beans, brew the coffee, power the lights, the WiFi internet connectivity (in every Starbucks), the gasoline burned getting customers and employees to the store, and the message for companies is clear. They cannot just consider their own business operations when it comes to environmental impact. The way any business buys and sells products has repercussions around the world,” Roberts said.
“It doesn’t matter what industry you’re in, the supply chain will include products from all around the world,” Roberts emphasized. “Whether we’re talking about fabric made in China, soybeans grown in the Amazon, palm oil harvested in Indonesia, biofuels created in Africa—companies will have to know how their products and the raw materials they use in their operations are affecting places, people, biodiversity, and the environment.”
These facts underscore the solid business reasons why sustainability is no longer just a nice thing to do, Roberts said. More importantly, conservation is a way of protecting business. “The smartest, most strategically focused companies are calculating climate change and resource risks into their operations. True visionaries know that if their business practices aren’t sustainable long term, their businesses aren’t either.”
—April Neilsen
Sustainable Business Approaches Explored In New Executive Program at Standford University
Business Strategies for Environmental Sustainability
2008 Dates: September 14 - 20
Limited spaces available
Please contact Brett Cicerone or apply directly online
Program Tuition: $9,000 USD
*Additional funding for applicants from nonprofit/education/government organizations available on a limited basis.
Location: Stanford Sierra Conference Center
True innovators set the bar. They redefine the terms of competition and dictate the future of industries. The Stanford Center for Social Innovation introduces a pioneering new executive program for leaders in business, government, nonprofit, and political action organizations. Drawing from a multi-disciplinary curriculum designed and taught by professors at Stanford Business School, this five-day program delivers innovative approaches to advancing environmental sustainability across organizations.
Content Overview
Business Strategies for Environmental Sustainability, hosted at the Stanford Sierra Conference Center, offers executives a camp-like retreat where they can explore what it means to turn sustainable business practices into competitive advantage. The program is designed to cover a range of issues on the topic of sustainability that are central to those who are leading sustainability initiatives in their roles as leaders in business, government, public agencies, and environmental advocacy organizations.
This program was recently highlighted by the Graduate School of Business.
Key Takeaways
* Frameworks to understand how organizations can strike a balance between business and environmental objectives while managing complex stakeholder relationships
* Strategies to gain competitive advantage through environmentally sustainable practices, including product and process innovation and sustainable supply chain management
* Deeper awareness of best practices across industries in the area of environmentally sustainable business and leadership skills to enable action as an internal change agent
Today, environmental sustainability has become an objective both in our public policies and our business strategies. Consequently, best practice in environmental sustainability needs to be understood by business executives, environmental activists, public administrators, and regulators alike. The goal of our program is to bring together executives from each of these worlds, to expose them to state-of-the-art knowledge on environmental sustainability in business, and to facilitate their learning from one another. The program aims to be a watershed event in each participant's career, accelerating the development of those who will shape tomorrow's sustainable business and public policies.
William P. Barnett
Faculty Director
Programs, dates, fees, and faculty are subject to change.
More info at:
Brett Cicerone
Associate Director, Programs
Office of Executive Education
Stanford Graduate School of Business
Phone: 650.723.0544
Toll Free: 866.542.2205 (US and Canada)
Fax: 650.723.3950
Email: cicerone_brett@gsb.stanford.edu
2008 Dates: September 14 - 20
Limited spaces available
Please contact Brett Cicerone or apply directly online
Program Tuition: $9,000 USD
*Additional funding for applicants from nonprofit/education/government organizations available on a limited basis.
Location: Stanford Sierra Conference Center
True innovators set the bar. They redefine the terms of competition and dictate the future of industries. The Stanford Center for Social Innovation introduces a pioneering new executive program for leaders in business, government, nonprofit, and political action organizations. Drawing from a multi-disciplinary curriculum designed and taught by professors at Stanford Business School, this five-day program delivers innovative approaches to advancing environmental sustainability across organizations.
Content Overview
Business Strategies for Environmental Sustainability, hosted at the Stanford Sierra Conference Center, offers executives a camp-like retreat where they can explore what it means to turn sustainable business practices into competitive advantage. The program is designed to cover a range of issues on the topic of sustainability that are central to those who are leading sustainability initiatives in their roles as leaders in business, government, public agencies, and environmental advocacy organizations.
This program was recently highlighted by the Graduate School of Business.
Key Takeaways
* Frameworks to understand how organizations can strike a balance between business and environmental objectives while managing complex stakeholder relationships
* Strategies to gain competitive advantage through environmentally sustainable practices, including product and process innovation and sustainable supply chain management
* Deeper awareness of best practices across industries in the area of environmentally sustainable business and leadership skills to enable action as an internal change agent
Today, environmental sustainability has become an objective both in our public policies and our business strategies. Consequently, best practice in environmental sustainability needs to be understood by business executives, environmental activists, public administrators, and regulators alike. The goal of our program is to bring together executives from each of these worlds, to expose them to state-of-the-art knowledge on environmental sustainability in business, and to facilitate their learning from one another. The program aims to be a watershed event in each participant's career, accelerating the development of those who will shape tomorrow's sustainable business and public policies.
William P. Barnett
Faculty Director
Programs, dates, fees, and faculty are subject to change.
More info at:
Brett Cicerone
Associate Director, Programs
Office of Executive Education
Stanford Graduate School of Business
Phone: 650.723.0544
Toll Free: 866.542.2205 (US and Canada)
Fax: 650.723.3950
Email: cicerone_brett@gsb.stanford.edu
7/5/08
The Laikipia Predator Project shows how predators like lions and humans can potentially co-exist
From: Nature - The Vanishing Lions
The Laikipia Predator Project
It’s called the Laikipia Plateau. It sits along the equator in central Kenya, in the shadow of snow-capped Mount Kenya. Laikipia’s vast grasslands, riverbanks, and watering holes attract a rich array of wildlife, including some of Kenya’s largest numbers of rhinos, elephants, leopards, and buffalo. Researchers say the area — about 2 million acres — also supports nearly 200 African lions.
Laikipia is also home to people, including Maasai herders, who often come into conflict with lions that have learned to prey on easy-to-catch cows. The end result, too often, is dead cattle and dead lions.
In hopes of protecting both lions and farmers, local communities have embarked on a model experiment in wildlife-friendly land management called the Laikipia Predator Project, sponsored by the Wildlife Conservation Society and an array of other conservation groups. One of its main goals is to help local farmers protect their livestock from lions so they don’t have to kill them.
“Our studies have shown, not surprisingly, that properties that lose fewer livestock to predators tend to kill fewer predators,” write project leaders Laurence Frank and Rosie Woodroffe of the Mpala Research Centre in Kenya. “This suggests that we can conserve predators more successfully if we can prevent them from killing livestock. Better management may not only reduce livestock losses today — it should also prevent young predators from learning to take stock in the first place.”
The science of predator management is in its infancy, the pair says, “and every livestock producer has their own opinions on which practices best protect stock.” So one aim of the project has been to test which approaches work best. So far, the tests show that the best solutions employ basic common sense and are not very expensive, project leaders explain.
For instance, the studies have found that the design and construction of “bomas” — traditional corrals for sleeping livestock — are key to protecting livestock from lions. “The stronger the better,” project officials advise, adding that bomas built from thorny acacia bushes work better than those made from solid posts or stone. The researchers also discovered that the height of boma walls was much less important than their thickness. “Thick walls were especially effective at preventing lion attacks, presumably because they prevented cattle from breaking out,” the researchers concluded.
The studies have also revealed some other tricks. It helps to divide bomas into several “rooms,” for instance, and to place them near human residences. An armed guard nearby, along with a dog or two, also helps, although dogs can sometimes transmit diseases to wildlife. (In the Serengeti, domestic dogs were the source of a virus that killed many lions in the 1990s.)
The Laikipia researchers are now testing the idea that lions are less likely to attack livestock where there is plenty of wild prey nearby. In The Vanishing Lions, for instance, viewers follow scientists with the Wildlife Conservation Society as they track lions that are wearing radio collars. The collars are used to study the cats’ hunting patterns and to try to understand why some prides develop a taste for livestock while others do not.
Ultimately, project officials hope that the “predator-friendly management that we develop as a community in Laikipia will be a model for better conservation in the rest of Africa.” So far, the results are promising, as the Laikipia plateau continues to be one of the few places in Kenya where predator populations are growing, not dwindling.
To order a copy of The Vanishing Lions, visit the NATURE Shop.
The Laikipia Predator Project
It’s called the Laikipia Plateau. It sits along the equator in central Kenya, in the shadow of snow-capped Mount Kenya. Laikipia’s vast grasslands, riverbanks, and watering holes attract a rich array of wildlife, including some of Kenya’s largest numbers of rhinos, elephants, leopards, and buffalo. Researchers say the area — about 2 million acres — also supports nearly 200 African lions.
Laikipia is also home to people, including Maasai herders, who often come into conflict with lions that have learned to prey on easy-to-catch cows. The end result, too often, is dead cattle and dead lions.
In hopes of protecting both lions and farmers, local communities have embarked on a model experiment in wildlife-friendly land management called the Laikipia Predator Project, sponsored by the Wildlife Conservation Society and an array of other conservation groups. One of its main goals is to help local farmers protect their livestock from lions so they don’t have to kill them.
“Our studies have shown, not surprisingly, that properties that lose fewer livestock to predators tend to kill fewer predators,” write project leaders Laurence Frank and Rosie Woodroffe of the Mpala Research Centre in Kenya. “This suggests that we can conserve predators more successfully if we can prevent them from killing livestock. Better management may not only reduce livestock losses today — it should also prevent young predators from learning to take stock in the first place.”
The science of predator management is in its infancy, the pair says, “and every livestock producer has their own opinions on which practices best protect stock.” So one aim of the project has been to test which approaches work best. So far, the tests show that the best solutions employ basic common sense and are not very expensive, project leaders explain.
For instance, the studies have found that the design and construction of “bomas” — traditional corrals for sleeping livestock — are key to protecting livestock from lions. “The stronger the better,” project officials advise, adding that bomas built from thorny acacia bushes work better than those made from solid posts or stone. The researchers also discovered that the height of boma walls was much less important than their thickness. “Thick walls were especially effective at preventing lion attacks, presumably because they prevented cattle from breaking out,” the researchers concluded.
The studies have also revealed some other tricks. It helps to divide bomas into several “rooms,” for instance, and to place them near human residences. An armed guard nearby, along with a dog or two, also helps, although dogs can sometimes transmit diseases to wildlife. (In the Serengeti, domestic dogs were the source of a virus that killed many lions in the 1990s.)
The Laikipia researchers are now testing the idea that lions are less likely to attack livestock where there is plenty of wild prey nearby. In The Vanishing Lions, for instance, viewers follow scientists with the Wildlife Conservation Society as they track lions that are wearing radio collars. The collars are used to study the cats’ hunting patterns and to try to understand why some prides develop a taste for livestock while others do not.
Ultimately, project officials hope that the “predator-friendly management that we develop as a community in Laikipia will be a model for better conservation in the rest of Africa.” So far, the results are promising, as the Laikipia plateau continues to be one of the few places in Kenya where predator populations are growing, not dwindling.
To order a copy of The Vanishing Lions, visit the NATURE Shop.
5/20/08
Creating currency that is readable by the blind says a lot about equality
commentary by knk -
According to the New York Times, a U.S. "federal appeals court panel ruled on Tuesday that the United States discriminates against the blind because the country’s paper currency is the same size regardless of a bill’s value."
This decision says a lot about the quality of care and amount of attention the U.S. society pays to even the smallest cultural group, as the blind could be termed. It also says more about how this group is using the U.S. judicial system to make sure its rights and voice is heard.
If the U.S. goes through with changing all its currency to make sure the blind are taken into account, we would be witnessing a very good example of a society shifting and molding according to higher values of equitable cultural integration.
According to the New York Times, a U.S. "federal appeals court panel ruled on Tuesday that the United States discriminates against the blind because the country’s paper currency is the same size regardless of a bill’s value."
This decision says a lot about the quality of care and amount of attention the U.S. society pays to even the smallest cultural group, as the blind could be termed. It also says more about how this group is using the U.S. judicial system to make sure its rights and voice is heard.
If the U.S. goes through with changing all its currency to make sure the blind are taken into account, we would be witnessing a very good example of a society shifting and molding according to higher values of equitable cultural integration.
5/9/08
Fair Trade Cities Initiatives Prove How Much Power Local Municapilities/Counties Can Have on Social/Sustainability Issues
Communication from Oxfam SF Action Corps-
What: World Fair Trade Day
When: This Saturday, May 10th, from 11 am- 4 pm
Where: Dolores Park in San Francisco
Why: Mayor and Board of Supervisors to Declare San Francisco a Fair Trade City,
live music and performances, community speakers, yummy fairly traded treats,
and more!
This event will feature speakers from the Mayor’s Office, the Board of
Supervisors, the Department of the Environment and the Bay Area Fair Trade
Coalition and highlight the broad community support for fair trade in San
Francisco and the cities achievement of the national guidelines to be
recognized as a Fair Trade City.
Entertainment will be provided by the Bayonics hip hop group, a Senegalese
dance troupe and local DJs. Free samples from Adina World Beat Beverages and
other local Fair Trade Certified retailers and licensees.
We will also join other Fair Trade cities around the country in attempting to
break the Guiness Book World Record for “World’s Largest Coffee Break –
Fair Trade Style” and invite attendees to bring along a Fair Trade coffee
from one of the many neighborhood businesses offering this option to help us
break the record.
More Info at: Bay Area Fair Trade Coalition
5/8/08
The New Philanthropy and Development Aid
Raj M. Desai, Visiting Fellow, Global Economy and Development, Wolfensohn Center for Development
Homi Kharas, Senior Fellow, Global Economy and Development, Wolfensohn Center for Development
A Communication from: The Brookings Institution
April 24, 2008 —
Two annual spring gatherings that shape the agenda for foreign aid have just been held. One of these is well known and was widely reported on while the other was largely ignored. Unfortunately, the world has gotten it backwards. The meeting that no one cared about is the one that offers the greatest hope for ending global poverty.
The Joint Development Committee of the World Bank and the IMF met on Sunday, April 13 in Washington, D.C. In their communiqué, finance ministers noted that “most sub-Saharan African countries are off-track to meet the MDGs [Millennium Development Goals]… we urge donors, including the World Bank Group, to increase their support for the poorest countries’ own development priorities.” During the meetings, donors such as the US, Japan, and the EU were encouraged to “harmonize” their development activities in poor nations.
A few days earlier in California’s Silicon Valley, as it has for the past seven years, the Global Philanthropy Forum held its own annual gathering. This community of donors and social investors committed to international causes aims to promote a new kind of global philanthropy that often blurs the line between “non-profit” and “for-profit” approaches. True to many of their Silicon Valley roots, this new generation of philanthropists uses new technologies to link donors and recipients together, to provide better access to information (whether about microcredit availability or rainfall forecasts), and to build social networks in poor communities.
Approximately 800 press credentials were issued for the World Bank-IMF “Spring Meetings,” as they are called. A Nexis search yields over 400 news articles reporting on the meetings. Meanwhile, at the Global Philanthropy Forum few, if any, members of the press were on hand; Nexis turns up not a single major news story on the proceedings (although one blogger did report on the forum’s discussions).
This lopsidedness is unfortunate. In fact, the attendees who came to Silicon Valley last week will likely give more aid to world’s poor this year than the institutions that convened the Spring Meetings. In 2006, the IMF and World Bank disbursed about $24 billion in loans and credits, not counting debt relief. In the same year, American foundations, charities, and philanthropies gave almost $34 billion to international causes. The best hope for the world’s poor lies in the ability of private aid givers to transform the current system of foreign aid, and to develop partnerships with the public sector, to advance the common good.
The private sector has grown from a small player in development assistance to a major, dynamic force, but the world has little noticed. Since 1998 international giving by US-based corporate and independent foundations has doubled. Giving from “mega-charities” such as the Gates, Ford, and Hewlett foundations has been rising steadily but small foundations actually contribute twice as much, and their giving is growing even faster.
More importantly, there is reason to believe that private aid is more effective than official development assistance, and that larger portions of private aid reach the poor. The allocation of private aid is less likely to be based on geo-strategic considerations, and more according to the actual needs of recipients. Because it deals directly with NGOs and civil society, private aid can avoid the corruption associated with developing country governments. Smaller portions of private aid are spent on overhead and administrative costs, and on “technical assistance”—money that often funds contractors and consultants in rich countries.
A word of caution: private aid can make a difference, but it is by no means a panacea for all that ails the world’s poor. For all the amounts that have been granted, there has been little evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of private aid, and there are few examples of privately-funded programs being expanded in ways needed to make a dent in global poverty. The history of global charity has also had its share of scandals involving misappropriations of funds and theft. And the universe of foundations, charities, educational organizations, and private and voluntary organizations may be too crowded and too fragmented to make a real difference on a large scale.
But the new reality of aid is one where private aid will become a larger and larger share of total development assistance. Along with the proliferation of non-traditional aid agencies, the spread of private aid from individuals and from large and small foundations will make “harmonization” harder to achieve.
So what can private aid accomplish? In a nutshell, it can transform the effectiveness of global foreign aid by making it more competitive. For decades, poor developing nations have faced a “take-it-or-leave-it” attitude from international financial institutions and official donors, and were forced to deal exclusively with a particular official bureaucracy on development projects. Private aid now can change all that by providing an alternative channel for development assistance. But to make this competition work, recipient countries must be free to choose whether aid is channeled through an official government project, or through a more efficient NGO provider. Recipients of aid must also be able to rely on “benchmarks” that compare the effectiveness of private and official aid programs.
A competitive aid system also requires a better understanding of what works and what doesn’t. Neither the “demand” side—what the priority needs of the underserved are—nor the “supply” side—who is doing what and for which communities—have been mapped out at the country level. Without that, it is inevitable that both public and private aid providers will fail to provide systemic change, and will fail to help poor nations develop their own capabilities, both of which are needed for sustained poverty reduction. These are the efforts to which the Development Committee and the Global Philanthropy Forum should dedicate themselves, not to the maintenance of the current inflexible foreign aid system, but to its modernization.
Homi Kharas, Senior Fellow, Global Economy and Development, Wolfensohn Center for Development
A Communication from: The Brookings Institution
April 24, 2008 —
Two annual spring gatherings that shape the agenda for foreign aid have just been held. One of these is well known and was widely reported on while the other was largely ignored. Unfortunately, the world has gotten it backwards. The meeting that no one cared about is the one that offers the greatest hope for ending global poverty.
The Joint Development Committee of the World Bank and the IMF met on Sunday, April 13 in Washington, D.C. In their communiqué, finance ministers noted that “most sub-Saharan African countries are off-track to meet the MDGs [Millennium Development Goals]… we urge donors, including the World Bank Group, to increase their support for the poorest countries’ own development priorities.” During the meetings, donors such as the US, Japan, and the EU were encouraged to “harmonize” their development activities in poor nations.
A few days earlier in California’s Silicon Valley, as it has for the past seven years, the Global Philanthropy Forum held its own annual gathering. This community of donors and social investors committed to international causes aims to promote a new kind of global philanthropy that often blurs the line between “non-profit” and “for-profit” approaches. True to many of their Silicon Valley roots, this new generation of philanthropists uses new technologies to link donors and recipients together, to provide better access to information (whether about microcredit availability or rainfall forecasts), and to build social networks in poor communities.
Approximately 800 press credentials were issued for the World Bank-IMF “Spring Meetings,” as they are called. A Nexis search yields over 400 news articles reporting on the meetings. Meanwhile, at the Global Philanthropy Forum few, if any, members of the press were on hand; Nexis turns up not a single major news story on the proceedings (although one blogger did report on the forum’s discussions).
This lopsidedness is unfortunate. In fact, the attendees who came to Silicon Valley last week will likely give more aid to world’s poor this year than the institutions that convened the Spring Meetings. In 2006, the IMF and World Bank disbursed about $24 billion in loans and credits, not counting debt relief. In the same year, American foundations, charities, and philanthropies gave almost $34 billion to international causes. The best hope for the world’s poor lies in the ability of private aid givers to transform the current system of foreign aid, and to develop partnerships with the public sector, to advance the common good.
The private sector has grown from a small player in development assistance to a major, dynamic force, but the world has little noticed. Since 1998 international giving by US-based corporate and independent foundations has doubled. Giving from “mega-charities” such as the Gates, Ford, and Hewlett foundations has been rising steadily but small foundations actually contribute twice as much, and their giving is growing even faster.
More importantly, there is reason to believe that private aid is more effective than official development assistance, and that larger portions of private aid reach the poor. The allocation of private aid is less likely to be based on geo-strategic considerations, and more according to the actual needs of recipients. Because it deals directly with NGOs and civil society, private aid can avoid the corruption associated with developing country governments. Smaller portions of private aid are spent on overhead and administrative costs, and on “technical assistance”—money that often funds contractors and consultants in rich countries.
A word of caution: private aid can make a difference, but it is by no means a panacea for all that ails the world’s poor. For all the amounts that have been granted, there has been little evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of private aid, and there are few examples of privately-funded programs being expanded in ways needed to make a dent in global poverty. The history of global charity has also had its share of scandals involving misappropriations of funds and theft. And the universe of foundations, charities, educational organizations, and private and voluntary organizations may be too crowded and too fragmented to make a real difference on a large scale.
But the new reality of aid is one where private aid will become a larger and larger share of total development assistance. Along with the proliferation of non-traditional aid agencies, the spread of private aid from individuals and from large and small foundations will make “harmonization” harder to achieve.
So what can private aid accomplish? In a nutshell, it can transform the effectiveness of global foreign aid by making it more competitive. For decades, poor developing nations have faced a “take-it-or-leave-it” attitude from international financial institutions and official donors, and were forced to deal exclusively with a particular official bureaucracy on development projects. Private aid now can change all that by providing an alternative channel for development assistance. But to make this competition work, recipient countries must be free to choose whether aid is channeled through an official government project, or through a more efficient NGO provider. Recipients of aid must also be able to rely on “benchmarks” that compare the effectiveness of private and official aid programs.
A competitive aid system also requires a better understanding of what works and what doesn’t. Neither the “demand” side—what the priority needs of the underserved are—nor the “supply” side—who is doing what and for which communities—have been mapped out at the country level. Without that, it is inevitable that both public and private aid providers will fail to provide systemic change, and will fail to help poor nations develop their own capabilities, both of which are needed for sustained poverty reduction. These are the efforts to which the Development Committee and the Global Philanthropy Forum should dedicate themselves, not to the maintenance of the current inflexible foreign aid system, but to its modernization.
Good Intentions, Bad Outcomes: Social Policy, Informality and Economic Growth in Mexico
A Global Economy and Development and Wolfensohn Center for Development Event
A communication from: Brookings Institution
Event Summary
Despite a decade of macroeconomic stability, Mexico’s growth and productivity performance has been lackluster. A significant factor restricting the Mexican economic growth rate is a social policy that gives workers incentives to seek informal, low-productivity jobs and restricts firms from making strides in growth and investment opportunities.
Event Information
When
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
4:00 PM to 5:30 PM
Where
Saul/Zilkha Rooms
The Brookings Institution
1775 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Washington, DC
Directions
Contact: Brookings Office of Communications
E-mail: events@brookings.edu
Phone: 202.797.6105
Register Now
More Related Content »
On May 13, the Wolfensohn Center for Development at Brookings will host a discussion with Santiago Levy, Brookings nonresident senior fellow and former deputy minister of finance of Mexico. Levy, along with a panel of leading experts, will discuss his new book Good Intentions, Bad Outcomes: Social Policy, Informality and Economic Growth in Mexico (Brookings Institution Press, 2008). In 1997, Levy created Progresa-Oportunidades, an anti-poverty program, focusing on nutrition, health and education. The program has been replicated in over 25 countries and New York City and has helped more than five million families escape from poverty by means of cash transfers. In his book, Levy recommends that these social programs should not be eliminated, but rather improved so that productivity and real wages will increase for all workers and contribute to bringing Mexico’s poor out of poverty.
After the program, speakers will take audience questions. A reception will follow the event.
Participants
Introduction
Lael Brainard
Vice President and Director, Global Economy and Development
Moderator
Johannes F. Linn
Executive Director, Wolfensohn Center for Development
Panelists
Santiago Levy
Nonresident Senior Fellow, Global Economy and Development
Jere Behrman
W.R. Kenan, Jr. Professor of Economics and Director of the Population Studies Center, University of Pennsylvania
Nancy Birdsall
President, Center for Global Development
Francisco Ferreira
Lead Economist, Development Research Group, The World Bank
A communication from: Brookings Institution
Event Summary
Despite a decade of macroeconomic stability, Mexico’s growth and productivity performance has been lackluster. A significant factor restricting the Mexican economic growth rate is a social policy that gives workers incentives to seek informal, low-productivity jobs and restricts firms from making strides in growth and investment opportunities.
Event Information
When
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
4:00 PM to 5:30 PM
Where
Saul/Zilkha Rooms
The Brookings Institution
1775 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Washington, DC
Directions
Contact: Brookings Office of Communications
E-mail: events@brookings.edu
Phone: 202.797.6105
Register Now
More Related Content »
On May 13, the Wolfensohn Center for Development at Brookings will host a discussion with Santiago Levy, Brookings nonresident senior fellow and former deputy minister of finance of Mexico. Levy, along with a panel of leading experts, will discuss his new book Good Intentions, Bad Outcomes: Social Policy, Informality and Economic Growth in Mexico (Brookings Institution Press, 2008). In 1997, Levy created Progresa-Oportunidades, an anti-poverty program, focusing on nutrition, health and education. The program has been replicated in over 25 countries and New York City and has helped more than five million families escape from poverty by means of cash transfers. In his book, Levy recommends that these social programs should not be eliminated, but rather improved so that productivity and real wages will increase for all workers and contribute to bringing Mexico’s poor out of poverty.
After the program, speakers will take audience questions. A reception will follow the event.
Participants
Introduction
Lael Brainard
Vice President and Director, Global Economy and Development
Moderator
Johannes F. Linn
Executive Director, Wolfensohn Center for Development
Panelists
Santiago Levy
Nonresident Senior Fellow, Global Economy and Development
Jere Behrman
W.R. Kenan, Jr. Professor of Economics and Director of the Population Studies Center, University of Pennsylvania
Nancy Birdsall
President, Center for Global Development
Francisco Ferreira
Lead Economist, Development Research Group, The World Bank
4/14/08
Deloitte Makes its 2008 Report Available and highlights environmental sustainability and globalization as top priorities
From: Deloitte
Deloitte: The Business Issues That Will Matter Most in 2008
Published: 1/14/08
Contact: Francine Fiano
Deloitte Services LP
(203) 708-4254
NEW YORK, January 14, 2008 – The 2008 Presidential election. Energy costs expected to continue their upward climb in 2008. Customers demanding more environmentally friendly products than ever before. Each are challenges and opportunities that will frame 2008, and are three areas that will have dramatic impacts across multiple industry sectors in the coming year, according to a Deloitte report being released today by Deloitte & Touche USA LLP.
“Executives who deeply understand the issues in their industry sector can better position their organizations for competitive advantage in an uncertain marketplace,” said Ed Carey, vice chairman and national managing partner, U.S. Industries, Deloitte & Touche USA LLP. “Our experience tells us that breakthrough ideas in one industry sector are often realized by adapting leading practices from other industry sectors. Our analysis takes a ‘horizontal view’ of leading practices that transcend industry sectors and helps to give executives new insights about issues and trends that are ‘around the corner.’"
The business issues that resonated across multiple industry sectors and could have a dramatic impact this year include:
* Globalization
* Convergence
* Environmental Sustainability
* Rising Energy & Health Care Costs
* Transparency
* Technology Use & Integration
* The 2008 Presidential Election
* Talent Management
The “2008 Industry Outlook: A Look around the Corner” report features the combined insights, analyses and recommendations from Deloitte & Touche USA’s industry sector leaders and more than a dozen subject matter specialists collected during a series of in-depth, one-on-one interviews.
There are outlooks, some with trends and projections, for the following sectors: Aerospace & Defense; Automotive; Banking & Securities; Consumer Products; Energy & Resources; Health Sciences; Insurance; Media & Entertainment; Private Equity, Hedge Funds & Mutual Funds; Process & Industrial Products; Real Estate; Retail; Technology; Telecommunications; Tourism, Hospitality & Leisure; and U.S. Federal & State Government.
As used in this document, “Deloitte” refers to Deloitte & Touche USA LLP. Please see www.deloitte.com/about for a detailed description of the legal structure of Deloitte & Touche USA LLP and its subsidiaries.
Download a complimentary copy of the report here.
Deloitte: The Business Issues That Will Matter Most in 2008
Published: 1/14/08
Contact: Francine Fiano
Deloitte Services LP
(203) 708-4254
NEW YORK, January 14, 2008 – The 2008 Presidential election. Energy costs expected to continue their upward climb in 2008. Customers demanding more environmentally friendly products than ever before. Each are challenges and opportunities that will frame 2008, and are three areas that will have dramatic impacts across multiple industry sectors in the coming year, according to a Deloitte report being released today by Deloitte & Touche USA LLP.
“Executives who deeply understand the issues in their industry sector can better position their organizations for competitive advantage in an uncertain marketplace,” said Ed Carey, vice chairman and national managing partner, U.S. Industries, Deloitte & Touche USA LLP. “Our experience tells us that breakthrough ideas in one industry sector are often realized by adapting leading practices from other industry sectors. Our analysis takes a ‘horizontal view’ of leading practices that transcend industry sectors and helps to give executives new insights about issues and trends that are ‘around the corner.’"
The business issues that resonated across multiple industry sectors and could have a dramatic impact this year include:
* Globalization
* Convergence
* Environmental Sustainability
* Rising Energy & Health Care Costs
* Transparency
* Technology Use & Integration
* The 2008 Presidential Election
* Talent Management
The “2008 Industry Outlook: A Look around the Corner” report features the combined insights, analyses and recommendations from Deloitte & Touche USA’s industry sector leaders and more than a dozen subject matter specialists collected during a series of in-depth, one-on-one interviews.
There are outlooks, some with trends and projections, for the following sectors: Aerospace & Defense; Automotive; Banking & Securities; Consumer Products; Energy & Resources; Health Sciences; Insurance; Media & Entertainment; Private Equity, Hedge Funds & Mutual Funds; Process & Industrial Products; Real Estate; Retail; Technology; Telecommunications; Tourism, Hospitality & Leisure; and U.S. Federal & State Government.
As used in this document, “Deloitte” refers to Deloitte & Touche USA LLP. Please see www.deloitte.com/about for a detailed description of the legal structure of Deloitte & Touche USA LLP and its subsidiaries.
Download a complimentary copy of the report here.
4/9/08
What is a Consortia?
Consortia as it applies to Instituto Conexiones:
An open and informal group of independent organizations and individuals joined by common interests.
A combination or group formed in order to undertake a venture that would be beyond the resources of a single individual/company
Sources: Athabasca University, Pearson Education, IEEE
An open and informal group of independent organizations and individuals joined by common interests.
A combination or group formed in order to undertake a venture that would be beyond the resources of a single individual/company
Sources: Athabasca University, Pearson Education, IEEE
4/5/08
The Bigger Picture of Rainforest Conservation & Green Investment in Developing Countries
By Kimberly Maria Newton-Klootwyk, 2006
Also published in Dominical Days, Voice of Nosara, & Mariri under the title: "The Bigger Picture ~ Socially Responsible Conservation"
And in TriplePundit under the title "The Hidden Impacts of Conservation and Green Investment Initiatives in Developing Countries"
In Latin America, particularly Costa Rica and Brazil, we are seeing a record-breaking increase in the amount of foreign conservation groups and green investors arriving ready to buy as much land as they can afford in order to "protect the rainforest" and calling on their friends, relatives and business partners to join in – often times at the expense of farming, ranching and indigenous communities that are seen as 'destructive' and contributing to the environmental problems of the region. Foreign-owned private protected areas, organic farms, native tree plantations, eco-communities, summer camps, retreat centers, and other eco-friendly land uses are replacing the clear-cut ranch and pesticide laden farms once owned by the local people. And although there is no denying that the local people are often times mismanaging precious resources and that most of these types of land buyers are hundreds of times better than large scale land development companies or mono-crop plantations that are also coming in by the thousands and openly destroying endangered ecosystems and local communities, eco-minded land buyers are also having an impact, and not always a positive one. And if the goal of 'green' investors and conservationists is to help solve problems such as environmental degradation, cultural extinction, and social injustice, then it is increasingly important for them to see the larger potential impacts of their interventions so they can help advance genuine solutions to these issues, instead of inadvertently contributing to them.
Also published in Dominical Days, Voice of Nosara, & Mariri under the title: "The Bigger Picture ~ Socially Responsible Conservation"
And in TriplePundit under the title "The Hidden Impacts of Conservation and Green Investment Initiatives in Developing Countries"
In Latin America, particularly Costa Rica and Brazil, we are seeing a record-breaking increase in the amount of foreign conservation groups and green investors arriving ready to buy as much land as they can afford in order to "protect the rainforest" and calling on their friends, relatives and business partners to join in – often times at the expense of farming, ranching and indigenous communities that are seen as 'destructive' and contributing to the environmental problems of the region. Foreign-owned private protected areas, organic farms, native tree plantations, eco-communities, summer camps, retreat centers, and other eco-friendly land uses are replacing the clear-cut ranch and pesticide laden farms once owned by the local people. And although there is no denying that the local people are often times mismanaging precious resources and that most of these types of land buyers are hundreds of times better than large scale land development companies or mono-crop plantations that are also coming in by the thousands and openly destroying endangered ecosystems and local communities, eco-minded land buyers are also having an impact, and not always a positive one. And if the goal of 'green' investors and conservationists is to help solve problems such as environmental degradation, cultural extinction, and social injustice, then it is increasingly important for them to see the larger potential impacts of their interventions so they can help advance genuine solutions to these issues, instead of inadvertently contributing to them.
Foreign conservationists and green-minded investors buying land in developing countries for ecosystem protection and to carry out their eco-friendly business visions don't expect to be seen contributing to a problem. Most come to places like Central America with noble ideas and conservation-oriented economic models that are vital for our developing economies. There is also no denying that environmentally and socially responsible land-buyers, conservation groups, investors, etc. are an asset to Central America and similar regions. In many ways, they are the 'saving grace' and the kinds of allies we need to help us face the many challenges we are dealing with. They can help advance sustainable development, enrich society with new ideas, provide green business opportunities for locals, create national green markets, and enhance social and political stability. But what many of these well-intentioned land buyers don't realize is that when land is taken out of the hands of historically marginalized people, such as indigenous or farming communities, even when for the right reasons, social tensions and other types of ecological impact are increased. It takes a local perspective and a wide-angle view of the dynamics involved to understand how this is possible.
I speak from experience. I am a Central American and have spent years studying these issues and conducting applied work in social and ecological justice organizations both in the U.S. and at home. I did not grasp this concept for a long time either. It wasn’t until 2003, when I helped start Costa Rica Conservation Trust (CRCT), a U.S. non-profit dedicated to protecting the rainforests of Costa Rica, my father’s country, that the error of my previous assumptions about how to help my people and endangered ecosystems came into clear focus. Along with this, came the harsh realization that well-educated Central Americans, like me, are often just as disconnected from the reality of our own countryside-dwelling people as the foreigners that are coming in to try to help us are. This is important to note because we are usually the sector that foreign investors and organizations like CRCT speak to or reach out to about their projects and where most of our political leaders come from. Little do these well-intentioned foreigners know that we educated urbanites are often times just as clueless about the true impact their ventures will have on our most marginalized people. Luckily, with my involvement in CRCT and my decision to volunteer as their field researcher, the wool fell from my eyes.
CRCT’s original approach was to buy farms that were for sale bordering an ecologically sensitive Costa Rican reserve on the northern portion of the Path of the Tapir Biological Corridor, home to the highly endangered Baird’s tapir and jaguar. This is a typical conservation strategy employed by hundreds, if not thousands, of conservation groups worldwide and I had supported other similar groups in the past. It seemed like a good idea at the time because we would prevent destructive entities, which are increasingly coming into Costa Rica, from buying these lands by taking them off the market and putting them in the hands of ‘responsible’ owners. We envisioned expanding protected areas, consolidating biological corridors, and establishing eco-campgrounds and educational trails where visiting guests could learn about the rainforest and thus, be inspired to ‘save it’ and donate money to help us put more land under ‘trust.’ After coming up with this plan in meetings and desks far away from the actual site of action, I moved out to the target area and began meeting with the farmers and ranchers of the areas where CRCT intended to buy land. As I attended these meetings and conducted one-on-one interviews with farmers that were selling their land, very important questions quickly emerged that I simply could not ignore. I felt these questions needed to be answered before moving forward, as I was no longer convinced that our efforts would actually save the rainforests or help anyone over the long term.
Why are the farmers selling their land even though they express a desire to not do so? What will happen to the farming families that are displaced by these land purchases? Will they ever be able to buy land again? How will this transfer of land ownership to foreign organizations and individuals affect the social and political stability of this region, especially if locals can no longer afford to buy land in their own country? Will displaced farmers create more environmental problems elsewhere as they migrate to overcrowded, overtaxed urban centers? How many of them will end up in the United States, where they will adopt a consumer-based, disposable lifestyle and become part of the ‘20% of the world’s population that consumes 80% of the world’s resources’? What happens when large amounts of arable land are allowed to convert back to forests? Will the local populations have to start importing corn, wood, beans, and other products that they traditionally grew on their small farms? How is that ecologically sustainable? Is sustainable development economically viable enough to help small farmers keep their farms? Is it enough to move small farmers out of poverty and improve their quality of life so that they no longer need to hunt, log or raise cattle in an unsustainable way? Are local farmers able to manage their own lands sustainably and do they even want to? What will enable them to do so? Is socially responsible conservation even possible, or must we always choose between the animals and humans?
In pursuing the answers to these questions, I joined local committees, met with government entities and local grassroots environmental groups around the country, as well as studying similar cases from around the world. In doing so, I found that there were hidden impacts with our plan that could end up being worse for my people and the environment and that the “collateral” damage might not be worth moving forward with our original plan. I also found that countless local groups are equally or even more concerned about their own fragile ecosystems and are trying to convert to sustainable income strategies but are facing multiple threats and obstacles. Ironically, in addition to the threats from agro-businesses and land developers, their culture and lifestyle was also being threatened by conservation groups and foreigners coming in buying them out because they are seen as too destructive to stay on their farms.
I listened closely to the stories of the local people – stories filled with difficult and ironic decisions, such as ‘whether or not to clear a new area for pasture so they can get a few more heads of cattle on the farm to pay for one of their children to go to college so they can eventually stop relying on unsustainable cattle ranching.’ It was obvious that many were causing environmental damage because they did not have any other way to make a living and the way they did things was what was taught to them by the government and the agro-chemical companies in the past. Some are simply stuck on an agro-chemical treadmill that they don’t know how to get off of. Selling their land seemed like the only alternative to many of them.
In response to this, I began implementing a socially responsible approach to conservation through CRCT that included the local people’s ideas and initiatives as the core – I worked to empower them to try out their eco-friendly income-generating ideas and to make the necessary changes to become the caretakers of their own precious rainforest and thus, hopefully make enough money so they would not have to sell all their land. By providing them with the necessary inspiration, education, resources, and inroads to the burgeoning market of conscious consumers, the farming communities I worked continued to prove that they were more than willing to engage in the greening of their local economy. I have seen them help each other build methane-digesters on their pig farms to stop pollution of their waterways. I have seen them establish and manage recycling centers. I have seen them build up ecotourism cooperatives and create a multitude of related sustainable income strategies to replace destructive practices, including establishing eco-campgrounds, organic farms, botanical trails and other sustainable tourism initiatives. I have seen them denounce the illegal hunting and logging activities of their neighbors and relatives. I have witnessed them develop and carry out environmental education programs with their children, and I have been amazed at how they will travel for miles on foot through the rainy jungle to attend meetings where they collaboratively develop these solutions. Their only motivation is saving their farms, simple lifestyle, and the natural resources they depend on. Every time CRCT and other support groups provided the strategies, assistance, and space for collaborative problem-solving, the locals have proven themselves, especially the youth.
On the flip side, I have witnessed many rural farming families in Central America sell all their land because of pressures from conservation groups, agro-businesses and foreign land developers. Because of economic desperation, in large part due to either climate change, the agrochemical treadmill, or the drop in beef and coffee prices (or a combination of these), most start off thinking of a willing buyer as a ‘gift from heaven.’ But all too often, illiterate farmers that sell their land find out too late, that the amount they received for their farm was, in fact, not much money at all. Most of them have to pay off debts, divide the money among their children (sometimes up to 18!) and move to the city. Low educational levels, unfamiliarity with market-driven urban culture, and a desire for material commodities they never had before also contribute to their money quickly running out. Thus, within a few years, many families end up as nomadic migrants living in the ghettos of Latin American and U.S. cities, where drugs, violence, gangs, and prostitution consume many of their youth. With no land to go back to, a disintegrated family, and few marketable skills, many of the honest ones end up living an impoverished nomadic life as day laborers, landscapers, domestic maids, etc. And desperate ones fall prey to the temptations of the underground economy or turn to crime (i.e. armed robbery). This is not to say that there aren’t wonderful ‘success’ stories, but these are the minority. And all too often, ‘success’ includes loosing their cultural identity and adopting a materialist lifestyle.
Many farming families struggle to keep their farms, and make difficult choices in order save their land. Many of the men (and sometimes the women) go up to the U.S. illegally in search of a living wage, and leave their families behind. Once established abroad, some never return because they are undocumented and the journey is too risky to undertake twice, while other migrants die or are killed during the difficult journey north, leaving many fatherless children strewn across the landscape. Increasingly, the mothers are forced to venture into the city to find work to feed her children, all too often in the prostitution sectors.
I also want to highlight that massive illegal migration also causes social and cultural tensions in the receiving cities and countries, to the point that the U.S. is building a wall on its border with Mexico to try to stop the flow of these kinds of immigrants and private militias there are taking it upon themselves to kill any “wetbacks” they find crossing into their “territory.” In the urban centers like Mexico City, San Salvador, Guatemala City, Los Angeles and Chicago, gangs are increasing and underground economies involving weapons and illegal drugs are growing. In the local cities, which are often not prepared for this massive migration of the farming sector into their city limits, a host of other problems are ensuing, including lack of access to clean drinking water, sanitation systems and housing. These ghetto conditions are causing deaths in children due to unsanitary conditions, and frustration, hopelessness, and increase radicalism among the inhabitants that have no where else to go.
In Central America, history has shown us that when indigenous and marginalized people feel unjustly displaced and hopelessly desperate, there is a higher chance that they will turn to armed resistance, political radicalism, and to eventually demand land reforms. In addition, owning the land one tills is a strongly held cultural value. To the displaced farming community or indigenous group who find themselves unable to own land again in their own country and living in desperate conditions, it makes no difference if the new land owner is a large multinational, an elite family or a well-intentioned green-minded entrepreneur or conservation-oriented non-profit group. To them it is the same old story of displacement and injustice. The Zapatista rebellion in Chiapas is an example of this. The Zapatista rebellion was sparked in large part due to a large scale conservation project that drove off thousands of farmers and ranchers from one of the last remaining pristine jungles in Mexico. In El Salvador, my birth country, we watched in horror as hundreds of acres of forest were burned down by disgruntled ranchers upset about a new protected area that would force them off their lands.
Significant cultural impact is also involved in all this. Many leaders of conservation organizations and green-investors understand the need to live closer to the land and many try to live a simpler lifestyle. In part, this is why many buy rainforest farms in places like Costa Rica or help set up eco-communities. But ironically, the farming and native communities that epitomize these values in their centuries-old way of life are becoming extinct to make way for these vacation farms, eco-lodges, eco-communities, meditation/yoga resorts, and private reserves owned and operated by foreigners wanting to “commune with nature.” Along with this cultural extinction, we are losing knowledge of age-old uses of medicinal plants, agricultural techniques and ways to live closer to specific types of lands.
The social and cultural issues involved are multi-faceted and complex, but rural to urban migration contributes to environmental problems as well. For example, urban households create, on average, two to four times the amount of garbage that rural farming households produce. After leaving the countryside, families that once lived on the same farm are now dispersed throughout numerous urban households. As each household rapidly adopts the consumption-based, disposable lifestyle typical of urban areas, they begin to create much more garbage than they did as one unit living on a farm complex. Also, the amount of resources consumed by urban dwellers is exponentially higher than rural people. This ingestion of resources and creation of waste is increased even more if members of the family end up settling in the United States (a very common scenario).
To add to the irony, it is also common for those farmers and ranchers who were considered an environmental threat while living in the countryside to become migrant laborers for large agro-businesses or factories owned by multi-national corporations that cause much bigger environmental problems worldwide. The huge landless and displaced labor force (willing to do anything to make some money) creates an atmosphere in which large manufacturers and processing plants can pay low wages, deny worker rights, and curtail environmental regulations, providing companies with higher profits that can be used to exploit more natural resources globally or lobby for decreased environmental protections. So as a cheap laborer for a timber company or plastic toy factory, it may be that the individual now has a greater negative impact on the environment than as a “destructive” rancher back on his small rainforest farm.
Furthermore, a significant number of displaced families that cannot afford to buy land again and that opt out of horrid conditions in the cities, end up going deeper into the jungle, where they squat new land, and clear whole new areas of virgin rainforest, bringing a host of new environmental problems into sensitive ecological areas and conflict with the local governments, especially when they cross national borders. Poor migrant families also contribute to the hunting of endangered animals for survival. For example, in Costa Rica the green iguana is increasingly at risk because the poor displaced Nicaraguan farmers, who are coming into the country in search of work, are killing it to feed themselves and their families. I hear the same problems are occurring in Africa with endangered monkeys.
In Central America, there is no denying that we need foreign investment and are in desperate need of allies with win-win mentalities that can bring resources and new ideas that will help us develop our local green economies and protect our endangered ecosystems simultaneously. But as our governments sign off on neo-liberal trade agreements and decrease regulations on foreign investors, the large and often illiterate farming and indigenous sector is left defenseless. Small locally owned businesses are also having a hard time competing, as is happening in the eco-tourism sector in Costa Rica where locals are going out of business because of foreign-owned tourism agencies and eco-lodges that have more capital, contacts and access to technology.
Thus, a more complicated and very ironic ‘bigger picture’ surfaces and it soon becomes obvious that green sector businesses and conservation initiatives, particularly those working in developing regions like Central America, must look at as many angles of their impact as possible before embarking on projects that could have negative repercussions down the line. And although they are certainly not the main cause of a lot of these problems, they can be part of the solution and are in a particularly good position to lead and model the way for the ‘less-conscious’ sectors of society. Conservation minded businesses and non-profit organizations are the cutting edge when it comes to finding and implementing creative solutions for long term sustainability, social responsibility and prosperity for all. They are also the ones more willing to hear this message and make the necessary changes to assure a positive ecological and social footprint in all that they do. The growing number of conscious investors and conservation groups can opt to work with us to accomplish mutual goals, rather than unintentionally ignoring the hidden impacts of their projects. I am reaching out to these types of foreigners and entrepreneurs because it seems like these sectors want for us in the developing world what we want for ourselves - long-term prosperity, economic growth, healthy communities, vibrant ecosystems and peace, which will benefit us all as well as our shared planet. Our differences are often simply a matter of awareness levels and perspective.
To help further research and advocate about these issues, an institute is being created called Instituto Conexiones (Connections Institute). Our aim is to help U.S. entities carrying out non-profit or for-profit projects in Latin America become aware of their hidden impacts, and provide hands-on, cross-cultural liaison and project development services to help them become true allies to the local people and environment of their sphere of influence. We invite you to join us in our efforts and to comment on what is presented in this publication. E-mail us at info-at-connectionsinstitute.net
++++++++++++
Special thanks to editing work of Lorna Li and Tanya Ridino
Photos courtesy of Jon Orlando Photography.
4/3/08
Calling for Socially Responsible Real Estate Companies and Land Developers in Costa Rica & Mexico
If you are a socially conscious individual or organization participating in the exchange of land and houses in Costa Rica or Mexico, we want to hear from you! We are collecting real life case studies of real estate brokers and land development organizations on how they interact with those who are selling the lands.
We have been involved in looking at the Costa Rican and Nicaraguan campesino (farmer) and Native American side of this exchange and have received negative feedback from them regarding the impact land issues are having on their lives and communities.
We feel there is more we can do with regards to this issue. The interest foreigners have on buying land in these areas should be a positive thing for the local economies and villages. The potential for positive opportunitities for collaboration between these sectors is huge.
Who is out there working in an integrated way while facilitating real estate contracts? Please contact us or nominate someone you feel should be showcased as a model case study for inclusion in our publications.
Gracias.
Contact: info@connectionsinstitute.net
We have been involved in looking at the Costa Rican and Nicaraguan campesino (farmer) and Native American side of this exchange and have received negative feedback from them regarding the impact land issues are having on their lives and communities.
We feel there is more we can do with regards to this issue. The interest foreigners have on buying land in these areas should be a positive thing for the local economies and villages. The potential for positive opportunitities for collaboration between these sectors is huge.
Who is out there working in an integrated way while facilitating real estate contracts? Please contact us or nominate someone you feel should be showcased as a model case study for inclusion in our publications.
Gracias.
Contact: info@connectionsinstitute.net
3/20/08
1Sky Aims to Unite the Voices Calling on the U.S. Government for Sustainability in their Policy Making
Excerpt From: Gillian Caldwell, Campaign Director of 1Sky - 3.19.08
...I honestly feel that the climate crisis, and the opportunity we have to turn it around, represents the defining challenge of our time.
...I honestly feel that the climate crisis, and the opportunity we have to turn it around, represents the defining challenge of our time.
And I just can't look my kids in the eye unless I am working to tackle that challenge.
This is an incredible time for our movement. As last year's Step It Up and Power Shift events so clearly demonstrated, technology and the internet is connecting us in unprecedented ways. And this country -- from our political leaders to our business leaders to our neighbors -- have never been so clear about the severity of the climate crisis.
Thanks to your leadership, what wasn't possible for the climate movement just two years ago is now possible. With your help, 1Sky can build the networks, the alliances, and the political power that we need to turn our country in the right direction.
- As the current Congressional district visits show, we're coordinating a groundswell of activity. In the next few days, 1Sky volunteers have organized and are completing more than 500 planned visits to local Congressional district offices in every state in the country.
- 1Sky is making heavy investments in field. We're busy locating 1Sky organizers in New Mexico, Michigan, Minnesota, Florida, North Carolina, Nevada and Alaska with partnering organizations. And we'll be doubling that number in other states around the country in the coming months.
- We've secured dozens of allies amongst state, regional and national greens, as well as organizations from the business, social justice, student and faith communities. After such a successful year of climate action, there's a groundswell of interest in what we can do together.
- We're also preparing to launch a new website next month with the tools and resources needed to support a truly national movement.
We can do this. But the stakes are high. And we can only do it if we all lean into this together in a truly collaborative and creative way.
It's time for us to speak with one voice. We've identified 3 solutions that will transform America from being part of the problem to paving the way towards a clean energy future. The 1Sky solutions are three bold and inter-related policy solutions, driven by science, that match the scale and severity of the crisis. They are three solutions that our next president and next Congress can implement and transform America from being part of the problem to leading the way towards solutions, here and abroad.
That's what 1Sky is all about -- millions of Americans coming together to make our voices add up. To change the politics of what's possible in Washington, DC and deliver what is necessary.
We're growing, and we're still building the team. If you know anyone passionate about tackling global warming, please send them this link and invite them to apply immediately: http://www.1sky.org/about/jobs
I'm so glad to be working with you,
Gillian Caldwell
Campaign Director
3/14/08
Geraldo Rivera Writes About the Growth of Hispanics in America in his new book, "His Panic: Why Americans Fear Hispanics in the U.S."
Extract from an interview on the Tavis Smiley Show
On PBS/KQED - 3.13.08
Tavis: With all due respect to Eliot Spitzer, let's now turn our attention and talk about something that really does matter, and that is the issue of immigration and specifically, the Hispanic community. I love, as I said earlier, the title of the book, "His Panic." What is this panic all about where your people are concerned?
Rivera: Well, you have a - I'll tell you, I could really encapsulate the whole theme of the book with one phone call I received from a guy named Sergio in Portland, Oregon last week. He's a guy who was brought here by his family at the age of three; his dad got a green card. Sergio ultimately became a citizen of the United States.
He's living now, as I said, in the Portland area, has two children, both boys, five years old and seven years old. So Sergio called me because the boys went home from school crying that they're being called border-jumpers. They said, "Daddy, what's a border-jumper?"
The problem, Tavis, is yes, we have a problem with illegal immigration, no doubt about it. But when you have programs like Lou Dobbs and some of the others who every night are showing pictures of Mexicans jumping over the wall or wading across the Rio Grande River, it casts a taint over the entire community, citizen and immigrant, legal and illegal, alike.
That story I just related to you is part of a generalized phenomenon now. Groups like the KKK and other hate-mongering groups according to the Southern Poverty Law Center with a report released just this week, these groups have been resurgent. They were almost dead in 2000 and now on the backs of this issue, on the backs of these illegal immigrants, they are resurging, they are - hate crimes against Hispanics are exploding.
You have a very, very stressful situation being created because of the demagogues and the savage right-wing talk radio campaign who are scapegoating mainly Latino immigrants for everything from crime to disease to stealing jobs to bringing terrorism in. Next they're going to blame them for acne and eating our sandwiches.
Tavis: You take this head-on in the book. How would you respond to Lou Dobbs or anyone else on that list that you laid out a moment ago that says that it is illegal, first and foremost it is illegal, and from that point on nothing in your book really matters? Geraldo, it's illegal.
Rivera: Well, I point out - and the second sentence is my forebears were also immigrants and they came here illegally. The fact of the matter is in the 19th century, there were no immigration laws. If you weren't a prostitute or a convict and if you were a White person, you could come into this country. The Chinese were excluded in the 1880s, then we had 50 years of White, European immigration, and then in 1924 the National Origins Act, which dispersed visas to foreigners wanting to come to this country on the basis of race.
Seventy-six percent of the visas went to people from the United Kingdom or Scandinavia, and then the percentage went down as you got closer to the Mediterranean and presumably less White. Italians got 3 percent, Greeks got 1.5 percent of the visas. None for Africa, none for Asia, none for Latin America. So we always had a race-based immigration program, so that belies the whole comment that their forebears came here legally; mine couldn't come here legally.
Well, my dad was Puerto Rican, and that's another story; he's a citizen. But my point is that Latinos really had no avenue other than the temporary guest worker programs, the Bracero programs that developed over the years. Right now, you have in the United States a tremendous explosion of the Latino community. Most of it is because of our families having more babies than other families.
We have a very young population, 25 years old on average as opposed to 40 years old for Anglo Americans. So there's definitely something going on. We were four or five million in 1950, 45 million today, and what I believe - and I base my statements on the emails that I've been receiving - racial, racist, racialist, however you want to couch it, Geraldo, go back from where you came from, you brown turd in the nation's toilet bowl. Take these people back with you.
The tone, Tavis, is - and I've been 40 years in public life and I have never received this kind of vibe before. It's an us against them situation that has been created largely by the demagogues and it's very, very troubling.
Tavis: And yet the flip side of that is, which I'm trying to juxtapose here, that everybody wants to make money off of or take advantage of in one way, exploit in one way or another, the fact that they are here. How do you explain that, that there is this visceral maltreatment of immigrants, and yet there's so many people making money - all kinds of American companies.
Every time you go on a plane these days or anywhere you go you hear an English announcement and you hear a Spanish - we know they're here. We're making money off of them. And yet I'm trying to juxtapose that with the hate that you're talking about.
Rivera: Well, we talked earlier about Spitzer and horny hypocrites. There is rampant hypocrisy in the area of illegal immigration as well. I believe that the people who are flogging this issue on a nightly basis are people who have figured out how to cure their ratings problems on cable news or talk radio. They are doing this because it rates.
And then you have situations like Mitt Romney. You've been at our summer house in Massachusetts. For 25 years, I have a real connection to Massachusetts. I was there when Mitt Romney was governor. The person he became when he decided to run for president is not the Mitt Romney that we knew as people from Massachusetts.
This guy is a person who has been exposed. His own lawn crew in the governor's mansion were illegal immigrants, and yet he was demonizing them in a way - I actually had a conversation if you have a minute I could relate to you with Mitt Romney. I was doing Bill O'Reilly's program, as I do every Friday. I came out in the green room. Governor Romney was there and he's a very charming man in person, he couldn't be nicer.
And I said, "Governor, I'm glad I've run into you because I've got to tell you, the extreme rhetoric in your anti-immigration platform is really distressing a lot of Latinos. We're worried; we're hearing stories now where people with mustaches and brown skin are being carded at traffic stops, cops asking them for proof of their citizenship status. This is very troubling."
And he said, "Oh, no, Geraldo, no, no." He's such a sincere guy. "No, no, I only am interested in illegal immigrants." And I told him, I used the word putrid fog. Your rhetoric and the Minute Men and everything that they're doing is creating a climate that's like a putrid fog that lies over the entire Hispanic community now and Governor, I'm telling you, it's going to cost you in Florida.
And he said, "No, Geraldo, I've got 45 Hispanics on my advisory community in Florida." And I said, "Governor, good luck, it's not going to be enough." So sure enough, he spent a fortune in Florida; he drank café con leche; he said, "Cuba is, Castro no;" he wore the Guayaberra shirt; he did all the formulaic things to get the Cubans on his side and guess what? They voted for John McCain five to one. Because even citizens are extremely concerned by the tone of this debate, and finally, we are going to, I hope, hold these public officials accountable.
Tavis: We're just scratching the surface of a fine new book by veteran journalist Geraldo Rivera. The new book is called "His Panic: Why Americans Fear Hispanics in the U.S." Geraldo, always an honor to have you on the program, take care.
Read an exerpt of his book: click here.Is Corporate America Waking up and Smelling Another Kind of Green??
Corporate America goes green
Thurs. March 13, 2008By:
David LouieSANTA BARBARA, CA (KGO) -- For years, environmentalists and corporate America have been at odds over sustainability and climate change -- that's changing.
An "eco"-nomics conference in Santa Barbara is taking place where one-time adversaries say they're ready to move forward together.
Wal-mart's president and CEO, H. Lee Scott, says it was tough dealing with environmental critics. Wal-mart's mission was helping Americans stretch their budgets.
"Some were nipping at our toes, some had a full grasp. It was a little bit of both," said Wal-Mart president and CEO Lee Scott.
Now they are working together and attending a Dow Jones "eco"-nomics conference, learning how companies can make money by being green.
"More and more companies understand that the future is going to be individual consumers and governments demanding environmentally sound products and that they see a profit in supplying the demand," said Environmental Defense Fund President Fred Krupp.
Fred Krupp is President of the Environmental Defense Fund.
Wal-mart says Krupp and other nonprofit groups have helped the company reduce waste, boost energy efficiency and promote green products in its stores.
Krupp's new book puts the spotlight on a number of companies with innovative technology -- such as Miasole in Santa Clara that makes thin solar film. Start-up's that will reform energy use and solve global warming issues.
"The technologies being developed in the Bay Area are going to end up being a boom that will dwarf the switchover to personal computers or even the Internet boom. This is going to be a much, much bigger thing," said Krupp.
However, even big, established companies are jumping in with profits in mind.
Andrew Liveris is President & CEO of Dow Chemical. His global company is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to solve environmental problems.
"We have the science, we have the scientists. I employ 6,500 PhD's. If I can just point them and say, bring me a solution, find me some answers, bring them to the table and see whether there's a business response -- The business of making money in environmental issues," said Dow Chemical Chairman and CEO Andrew Liveris.
Hollywood actor and environmental activist Ed Begley, Jr., also spoke at the conference. He thinks it's only a matter of time before government comes to the table.
"When you see many of the financial magazines having a cover story about the emerging green marketplace, I think the time is now. People know that you can have good products that are energy efficient. You can give people a cool beverage and a warm shower, you're just going to do it more efficiently," said actor and environmental activist Ed Begley.
A word often used today was momentum; however momentum can be broken by two potential problems - immigration policy and a potential brain drain. We'll explore those issues as our coverage continues on Friday.
(Copyright ©2008 KGO-TV/DT. All Rights Reserved.)
3/1/08
From The Earth Day Network - 02.28.2008
If You Want to Do One Thing on Earth Day: CALL FOR CLIMATE!
Global warming is our most urgent environmental problem: The time for waiting and inadequate solutions is over. On Earth Day, April 22nd, join Earth Day Network in our global Call for Climate by contacting your national leaders and demanding bold, swift and fair action to tackle climate change. And from now until Earth Day, take action and sign Earth Day Network's Sky Petition.
| |
- A moratorium on new coal-burning plants,
- Renewable energy,
- Carbon-neutral buildings,
- Protection for the poor and middle class in the new green economy.
Tell five friends about this campaign - have them enter the Capitol number into their phones now. And make sure they call on Earth Day, April 22nd!
This Earth Day, it's time to change the forecast for global warming.
URGENT CALL FOR VOLUNTEERS!
With Earth Day less than 2 months away, we want to break all the records! We are aiming to register 20,000 events this year, and we can't do it without you! If you have some spare time and a computer with internet connection, and would to help us, register at our Volunteer Center or contact Michele Ditto at ditto@earthday.net. Together we can make this the biggest Earth Day yet!
NEW ON EARTH DAY TV
Don't miss our interview with Nobel Peace Prize laureate Professor Mohan Munasinghe, Vice Chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and Bracken Hendricks, author of the hit book Apollo's Fire. Discover how students at Thomas Jefferson High School plan their next Environmental Impact Club activities and be inspired by the passion of the thousands of people who came to DC to lobby Congress during Power Shift 2007.
On April 16th, tune in to the broadcast of Chill Out: Campus Solutions to Global Warming, sponsored by Earth Day Network organized by the National Wildlife Federation and ClimateCounts.org student-made videos, inspiring presentations from contest winners, solution-focused discussions, and live Q&As with people who really are changing the world.
2/28/08
Invitation: A Critical Look at NAFTA - 2.28.08
A communication from Global Exchange:
P.S. Click here to see Global Exchange Human Rights Director Ted Lewis and Associate Fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies Manuel Perez Rocha on Link TV discuss migration push factors, FTAs in Latin America, and how these issues are and are not being addressed by US presidential candidates.
Please attend our March 5 forum in Washington, DC: Linking Agriculture, Development and Migration: A Critical Look at NAFTA Past, Present and Future.
Join experts from the US, Canada, and Mexico as they take a critical look at how NAFTA has impacted the region and what we can do to reverse the trends that displaced farmers and workers in all three countries and sent millions of Mexicans into the migration stream.
In addition to the distinguished panelists, Representative Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), Canadian Member of Parliament Peter Julian, and Mexican congressman Victor Quintana will address the forum.
Click here for more information.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
2nd Floor, Root Room
1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20036
(Close to Dupont Circle metro, south exit)
If you plan to attend, please RSVP by sending an email to Maria@boell.org or call 202-462-7512 by Monday, March 3rd. Also, please indicate in your response if you will need a headset for simultaneous English/Spanish translation.
P.S. Click here to see Global Exchange Human Rights Director Ted Lewis and Associate Fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies Manuel Perez Rocha on Link TV discuss migration push factors, FTAs in Latin America, and how these issues are and are not being addressed by US presidential candidates.
2/26/08
UN World Food Program warns of coming hunger crisis due to new biofuel demands - 2.26.08
 The WFP's budget requirements are rising by millions of dollars a week |
The director of the UN's World Food Programme has said it is considering plans to ration food aid because of rising prices and a shortage of funds.
Josette Sheeran told the BBC that the WFP needed increased contributions from donors to make sure it could meet the needs of those who already rely on it.
She said it also faced growing demands from countries like Afghanistan, where people were now unable to afford food.
Food prices rose 40% last year because of rising demand and other factors.
Earlier this month, the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) said the rising price of cereals such as wheat and maize had become a "major global concern".
The FAO estimated poor countries would see their cereal import bill rise by more than a third this year. Africa as a whole is expected to see a 49% increase.
The organisation has called for urgent action to provide farmers in poor countries with improved access to seeds and fertiliser to increase crop production.
'Growing needs'
In an interview with the BBC on Monday, Ms Sheeran said the WFP was holding talks with experts to decide whether food aid would need to be stopped or rationed if new donations did not arrive at the agency in the short term.
In some of these developing countries, prices have gone up 80% for staple food 
Josette Sheeran,
WFP executive director
The former US undersecretary of state said she hoped the cuts could be avoided, but warned that the agency's budget requirements were rising by several millions of dollars a week because of the higher food prices.
"If food is twice as expensive, we can bring half as much in for the same price and the same contribution," she said.
"It will take increased contributions to make sure we can meet those already assessed needs."
Ms Sheeran said there was an urgent need for the funding shortage to be addressed because "in many places, we are the only source of food for some people".
"We're also seeing some new growing needs in some places like Afghanistan, where people are being thrown into food insecurity just simply due to the higher food prices."
She said those who had been hardest hit so far were people in developing countries who were living on 50 US cents (£0.25) a day, 80-90% of which was already being spent on food.
Global wheat prices have risen 83% in the past year
"In some of these developing countries, prices have gone up 80% for staple food," she added. "When you see those kinds of increases, they are simply priced out of the food markets."
Even middle-class, urban people in countries such as Indonesia, Yemen and Mexico were increasingly being priced out of the food market or forced to sacrifice education and healthcare, she warned.
Ms Sheeran said Egypt had just widened its food rationing system after two decades and Pakistan had reintroduced ration cards after many years.
China and Russia were meanwhile imposing price controls, while Argentina and Vietnam were enforcing foreign sales taxes or export bans, she said.
The WFP's ability to mitigate the impact of rising food prices has also been hampered by a significant decrease in the past five years of supplies of "in-kind food aid" - food produced abroad and delivered to vulnerable people in emergencies.
In-kind food aid peaked in 2000, when there were large surpluses and low prices for cereals.
The US, the world's largest donor of food aid, has since reduced its surplus and instead chosen to provide funding to international agencies.2/15/08
Costa Rican Newspaper (La Nacion) Reports on the Environmental Damages Vacation Home Development is Causing in the Osa Peninsula, Costa Rica - 2.15.08
Por Vanessa Loaiza N. | vloaiza@nacion.com
Minae presenta denuncia ante Ministerio Público
Construcción causa graves daños en un bosque de Osa
Inspectores confirman tala y obras ilegales cerca de laguna de Sierpe
Desarrolladores incumplen orden dada en noviembre de frenar obras
La apertura de varias trochas, tala de bosque y la construcción de supuestos planteles provocaron “graves” daños en los alrededores de la laguna de Sierpe, en la Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce, ubicada en Puntarenas.
Etilma Morales, directora del Área de Conservación Osa (Acosa), en la zona sur del país, no dudó en calificar como “grave” la destrucción provocada dentro de esta área protegida.
En una inspección realizada en setiembre del año pasado por tres guardaparques, en la finca privada Lago Manatí Osa, fue evidente la tala de árboles en los 50 metros de protección de la laguna de Sierpe.
Además, descubrieron varias trochas en las cercanías del humedal y se comprobó que los hombres tiraron tierra sobre los desagües naturales de la laguna, para evitar que los carros se hundan.
Según agregó Morales, “taponear la laguna” podría provocar inundaciones a futuro, pues el agua no tiene salida y buscará por dónde “romper”.
Por último, en la inspección se encontraron los cimientos de 11 supuestos patios de acopio para madera de melina. Sin embargo, como una coincidencia, “todos los patios de acopio tienen vista a la laguna”, precisó Morales.
Acusación. Basada en toda esta evidencia, Acosa ya presentó una denuncia en la Fiscalía de Ciudad Cortes, contra Carlos Luis Quesada Álvarez y Jorge Antonio Rojas Quesada, en representación de la finca Lago Manatí Osa.
Los guardaparques pidieron que se les investigue por violaciones a la Ley Forestal, al realizar tala y trochas sin los estudios de impacto ambiental y sin el visto bueno del Área de Conservación.
Aunque desde noviembre del 2007 el fiscal ambiental de Golfito impuso medidas cautelares y prohibió que las obras continuaran, Morales aseguró que en inspecciones recientes verificaron que la construcción no se suspendió.
Según dijo, los trabajadores siguieron levantando lo que en apariencia son cabinas o cabañas, todas con vista a la hermosa laguna de Sierpe.
Además, ya colocaron postes para cableado eléctrico y siguen utilizando trochas abiertas dentro de un bosque primario, agregó la funcionaria.
La Nación intentó localizar a Jorge Antonio Rojas Quesada, el representante de la finca, pero no respondió al mensaje que se dejó en su teléfono celular.
Además, una de sus hijas dijo el miércoles pasado que Rojas se encontraba en una finca, donde no tenía acceso a teléfonos.
Gravedad del daño. En la denuncia interpuesta en el Ministerio Público, el técnico forestal Daniel Beita Saldaña sostiene que la laguna de Sierpe “es importante en la regulación del régimen hidrológico y la conservación de la flora y fauna” de la zona.
En la laguna viven cocodrilos y caimanes que son especies amenazadas. Además, las plantas que crecen en el humedal son fuente de alimento de dantas y chanchos de monte.
Estos últimos son indispensables en la cadena alimenticia del jaguar, un felino en riesgo de extinción.
Según Álvaro Ugalde, exdirector de Acosa y uno de los fundadores de los parques nacionales en el país, dijo que ya hay un grupo organizado que recurrirá a los tribunales para evitar la destrucción “de uno de los sitios más maravillosos del planeta”. Colaboró el corresponsal Freddy Parrales.
2/14/08
In Memory of Raul R. Salinas (Xicanindio) - 3.17.1934 - 2.13.2008
We would like to take a moment to honor the memory of Raul R. Salinas, who passed away on Feb. 13, 2008. Raul was a poet & international human rights activist - he spent many years documenting and raising awareness about Latin American & Latino American issues from a primary source perspective. We will always be grateful for the work he did to help us understand the perspective of often controversial positions during a very socially dangerous time.
11/11/03
The Hard Numbers on Social Investments
From: The Harvard Business School's Working Knowledge E-Newsletter
Q&A with: Stacey M. Childress
Published: November 10, 2003
Author: Manda Salls
In what is believed to be the largest study of its kind, MBA students at Harvard Business School recently analyzed the financial returns generated by 110 early-stage companies backed by Investors' Circle, a national network dedicated to early-stage investments in companies that "deliver commercial solutions to social and environmental problems."
The goal of the study was to help IC, whose members collectively invested $80 million from 1992 to 2001, the time horizon of the study, develop a fact-based understanding of the financial returns generated by the companies that had received capital through their network. Results would also help IC members discuss the larger question about the relationship of financial returns and social returns. In short, should capital providers expect some lesser degree of financial performance in favor of social returns?
In this e-mail interview, HBS Social Enterprise Initiative executive director Stacey Childress discusses the study and its implications for investors.
Salls: Tell us about the study. What did the team set out to do?
Childress: A team of three MBA 2003 students, Steven Carden, Hank Midgley, and Carolyn Wolff, gathered data on 110 of the 128 IC investments, collecting both the valuation at the time of the initial investment and the current valuation at the time of the study for privately held companies, or the exit value for those that had experienced a liquidity event. After collecting and analyzing the valuation data, the team was able to draw some conclusions about how the companies performed individually and as a hypothetical portfolio. They were also able to make some observations about how investor behavior contributed to the success of individual IC members. The students worked under the supervision of Olive Darragh, a director in McKinsey & Company's Boston office, and me, on behalf of the Social Enterprise Initiative here at HBS.
Q: Why was it important for the Social Enterprise Initiative to sponsor this research?
A: The field of social-purpose investing is growing and becoming more sophisticated. For years an important debate has been raging in the social investing community about the potential of social purpose companies to deliver satisfactory returns to investors.
The conventional wisdom is that capital providers should expect some trade-off between financial returns and social returns, a willingness to accept a social discount to financial returns. However, some in the social investing community believe that this is simply untrue. Because of the increased risk associated with investing in early-stage social ventures, and their ability to dramatically alter conventional approaches to social problems through market solutions, the rate of return on these deals should be at least as high as traditional early stage investments.
Unfortunately, the lack of data about the actual returns of a specific set of companies in this early-stage category has resulted in an ongoing philosophical debate that to date has been based largely on anecdotal investor experience. As far as we could determine in the summer of 2002, this was the largest study ever undertaken to analyze the financial returns of a set of early stage social-purpose companies that had received funding from a discrete group of individual investors.
Q: How did the team determine how the companies had performed as a whole?
A: The team had an important insight during their work. Because of the variability of individual IC member investment expertise, it was difficult to judge the performance of the set of companies solely on the experience of the members. In an effort to evaluate the companies in aggregate, the team created a portfolio containing the 110 companies. The team used the actual initial and current or exit valuation data of the companies, but constructed two hypothetical investment strategies.
In scenario one, the team used a strategy that assumed an initial investment of $175,000, subsequent investments averaging $115,000 in all follow-on rounds, and then cash out, either six months after a liquidity event, or at the current valuation for privately held companies. In this scenario, when treated as a portfolio the 110 companies achieved an IRR of 14 percent.
In scenario two, the team modeled a "buy and hold" strategy that assumed an initial investment of $175,000 but no investments in follow-on rounds, and no cash out (still holds the investment at the current valuation). In this scenario, the hypothetical portfolio achieved an IRR of 8 percent.
During roughly the same investment period, traditional venture capital returns were 33 percent; the Domini Index (investments in socially responsible mutual funds) realized a 13 percent return, and the S&P 500 returned 11 percent. The average returns of traditional angel investing are hard to determine given the fragmented nature of the investment activity, but the team interviewed industry experts who estimated the returns to be significantly lower than professional venture investing due to less investor diversification and capital limitations that prevent investment in follow-on rounds. Given this, the team concluded that the set of companies that received investments from IC members had the ability, as a portfolio, to deliver satisfactory returns, relative both to investor expectations and other investment vehicles.
Q: How did the 110 companies fare?
A: The team collected the current valuation data at the time of the study for companies that were still operating, and exit valuation data for those that had experienced a liquidity event. Of the 110 investments, 95 were operating companies and 15 were other social purpose investment vehicles.
Fifty-five percent of the 95 companies were still in business and privately held. Thirty percent of the companies were bankrupt, 9 percent had been acquired, and 6 percent had experienced an IPO.
The incidence of bankruptcy in these social purpose companies was not unlike traditional early stage companies, but the percentage (15 percent) of companies that were able to achieve a liquidity event either through acquisition or IPO was below average, particularly given the time horizon of the investments (1992-2001).
Q: What were some characteristics of social purpose companies that achieved a positive rate of return for investors?
A: The big winners were in the technology and health care sectors, and in another group of companies that were categorized as industrial. These categories generated higher returns as a group than the consumer goods category. Some of the characteristics of these winners included having a proprietary technology and/or meeting an established market need in an innovative way, attributes not unlike traditional successful ventures.
However, all of the companies in the sample also had some social or environmental benefit as part of their mission. Three success stories in these categories were Sonic Innovations (health care), Evergreen Solar (technology), and Energia Global (industrial).
Sonic Innovations has become the fastest growing hearing aid company in the world since its IPO in 2000. Through the development and use of the smallest single-chip digital signal processor platform ever installed in a hearing aid, they bring to the market small, comfortable and reliable hearing aids. When eight Investors' Circle members invested $2 million in Sonic Innovations, the company had a pre-money valuation of $5 million; seven years later, at IPO, the company's market value was $127 million.
Evergreen Solar is a developer and manufacturer of photovoltaic (PV) modules—the engines of solar electric systems—used in remote power and emerging grid-connected markets. The PV modules produced by Evergreen Solar incorporate proprietary crystalline silicon technology known as String Ribbon. In 1996, seven members invested $3 million; five years later the company was worth $128 million.
Energía Global developed, financed, owned, and operated environmentally sustainable energy generation and electric distribution facilities in Central America. In 1992, seven IC members invested $1.4 million in the company, then worth $4 million. Energia Global was acquired by CHI Energy in 2000 for $74 million. CHI Inc. is now part of Enel Green Power, part of Enel, the world's largest publicly traded electric utility.
There were positive IRR investments in the consumer goods category, Honest Tea and Zip Car being two examples, but this category of companies in aggregate did not perform as well as the technology, industrial, and health care categories.
Q: Do investors expect the same results from social purpose companies?
A: Investors' Circle polled its membership about their return expectations as part of a member survey being conducted at the same time as our study team was conducting the valuation analysis.
The survey showed that 77 percent of members expected an IRR in excess of 10 percent, and that remaining 23 percent expected an IRR between 0 percent and 10 percent. However, in a separate question, 64 percent indicated that they had entered into a deal expecting a lower-than-market rate return in exchange for a high social return.
A key expectation, then, is related to the social or environmental benefit these investments will produce. The member survey indicates that IC members expect a blend of financial and social or environmental returns. Different investors are focused on a variety of social and environmental issues, and the companies receiving investments were involved in businesses as diverse as clean energy technologies, sustainable agriculture, educational toys, and innovative hearing aids.
Our team's analysis showed that only 32 percent of IC members realized a positive IRR on their total investments, 15 percent simply achieved capital preservation, 21 percent experienced a negative IRR, and the remaining 22 percent suffered a total capital loss. These realized financial returns are quite different from the expectations expressed in the IC member survey.
As the field continues to mature, efforts to develop a notion of "blended value," a way to account for social and environmental returns along with financial returns, will be well served by having a clearer understanding of the actual financial returns that can be generated by these types of investments.
Q: Were there common characteristics among successful investing strategies?
A: The team grouped the investors into quartiles based on their realized returns, and was able to identify some differences in the investment strategies of those in the top quartile. The team concluded that, much like traditional early-stage investing, diversification and investing in additional rounds was key to the success of individual investors. Those in the top quartile invested in four times as many companies as those in the lowest quartile and participated in 40 percent more rounds of company financing as compared to all other investors. This allowed them to diversify their holdings across a range of companies and to minimize dilution as the companies raised follow on money.
Additionally, the team observed that members who invested in deals that were also receiving capital from professional investors fared better, as did those who joined other IC members in investing, as opposed to those who were the single IC investor in a deal. In other words, relying on the due diligence and judgment of other experienced investors was an important success factor.
Q: What are the most important things that social purpose investors should learn from this research?
A: While the findings are important because they represent the largest study of early stage social investing of its kind, they are not broad enough to generalize to a recommended investment strategy for all social purpose investors. However, the team did make some recommendations to Investors' Circle based on the findings, and these might be useful to others involved in this kind of investment activity.
One suggestion was that IC should consider creating additional pooled early-stage investment vehicles to take advantage of the specialized expertise of some of its members who have been professional investors, and to create some diversification for its members. IC has experimented with one such vehicle, Commons Capital, LLC, and the team saw this as a model that could be replicated.
An alternate suggestion was that the organization consider performing some basic due diligence on all companies that enter IC's deal flow and screen out some companies before they are presented to broader membership for investment. Traditional investment criteria such as proprietary technologies and experienced management teams are also important in social purpose investing.
The most important finding was that if investors follow a disciplined strategy that incorporates diversification and large enough investment amounts, these social purpose companies have the potential to produce positive IRRs. However, because of the unique problem of exit that these companies seem to exhibit, their ability to provide market rates of return as an asset class are limited. A number of talented people in the social investing community are addressing the question of how to solve this problem, and the field would be advanced by a creative solution.
About the authors
Stacey Childress is Executive Director and Senior Researcher for the HBS Initiative on Social Enterprise.
Manda Salls is the Web editor for Baker Library.
Q&A with: Stacey M. Childress
Published: November 10, 2003
Author: Manda Salls
In what is believed to be the largest study of its kind, MBA students at Harvard Business School recently analyzed the financial returns generated by 110 early-stage companies backed by Investors' Circle, a national network dedicated to early-stage investments in companies that "deliver commercial solutions to social and environmental problems."
The goal of the study was to help IC, whose members collectively invested $80 million from 1992 to 2001, the time horizon of the study, develop a fact-based understanding of the financial returns generated by the companies that had received capital through their network. Results would also help IC members discuss the larger question about the relationship of financial returns and social returns. In short, should capital providers expect some lesser degree of financial performance in favor of social returns?
In this e-mail interview, HBS Social Enterprise Initiative executive director Stacey Childress discusses the study and its implications for investors.
Salls: Tell us about the study. What did the team set out to do?
Childress: A team of three MBA 2003 students, Steven Carden, Hank Midgley, and Carolyn Wolff, gathered data on 110 of the 128 IC investments, collecting both the valuation at the time of the initial investment and the current valuation at the time of the study for privately held companies, or the exit value for those that had experienced a liquidity event. After collecting and analyzing the valuation data, the team was able to draw some conclusions about how the companies performed individually and as a hypothetical portfolio. They were also able to make some observations about how investor behavior contributed to the success of individual IC members. The students worked under the supervision of Olive Darragh, a director in McKinsey & Company's Boston office, and me, on behalf of the Social Enterprise Initiative here at HBS.
Q: Why was it important for the Social Enterprise Initiative to sponsor this research?
A: The field of social-purpose investing is growing and becoming more sophisticated. For years an important debate has been raging in the social investing community about the potential of social purpose companies to deliver satisfactory returns to investors.
The conventional wisdom is that capital providers should expect some trade-off between financial returns and social returns, a willingness to accept a social discount to financial returns. However, some in the social investing community believe that this is simply untrue. Because of the increased risk associated with investing in early-stage social ventures, and their ability to dramatically alter conventional approaches to social problems through market solutions, the rate of return on these deals should be at least as high as traditional early stage investments.
Unfortunately, the lack of data about the actual returns of a specific set of companies in this early-stage category has resulted in an ongoing philosophical debate that to date has been based largely on anecdotal investor experience. As far as we could determine in the summer of 2002, this was the largest study ever undertaken to analyze the financial returns of a set of early stage social-purpose companies that had received funding from a discrete group of individual investors.
Q: How did the team determine how the companies had performed as a whole?
A: The team had an important insight during their work. Because of the variability of individual IC member investment expertise, it was difficult to judge the performance of the set of companies solely on the experience of the members. In an effort to evaluate the companies in aggregate, the team created a portfolio containing the 110 companies. The team used the actual initial and current or exit valuation data of the companies, but constructed two hypothetical investment strategies.
In scenario one, the team used a strategy that assumed an initial investment of $175,000, subsequent investments averaging $115,000 in all follow-on rounds, and then cash out, either six months after a liquidity event, or at the current valuation for privately held companies. In this scenario, when treated as a portfolio the 110 companies achieved an IRR of 14 percent.
In scenario two, the team modeled a "buy and hold" strategy that assumed an initial investment of $175,000 but no investments in follow-on rounds, and no cash out (still holds the investment at the current valuation). In this scenario, the hypothetical portfolio achieved an IRR of 8 percent.
During roughly the same investment period, traditional venture capital returns were 33 percent; the Domini Index (investments in socially responsible mutual funds) realized a 13 percent return, and the S&P 500 returned 11 percent. The average returns of traditional angel investing are hard to determine given the fragmented nature of the investment activity, but the team interviewed industry experts who estimated the returns to be significantly lower than professional venture investing due to less investor diversification and capital limitations that prevent investment in follow-on rounds. Given this, the team concluded that the set of companies that received investments from IC members had the ability, as a portfolio, to deliver satisfactory returns, relative both to investor expectations and other investment vehicles.
Q: How did the 110 companies fare?
A: The team collected the current valuation data at the time of the study for companies that were still operating, and exit valuation data for those that had experienced a liquidity event. Of the 110 investments, 95 were operating companies and 15 were other social purpose investment vehicles.
Fifty-five percent of the 95 companies were still in business and privately held. Thirty percent of the companies were bankrupt, 9 percent had been acquired, and 6 percent had experienced an IPO.
The incidence of bankruptcy in these social purpose companies was not unlike traditional early stage companies, but the percentage (15 percent) of companies that were able to achieve a liquidity event either through acquisition or IPO was below average, particularly given the time horizon of the investments (1992-2001).
Q: What were some characteristics of social purpose companies that achieved a positive rate of return for investors?
A: The big winners were in the technology and health care sectors, and in another group of companies that were categorized as industrial. These categories generated higher returns as a group than the consumer goods category. Some of the characteristics of these winners included having a proprietary technology and/or meeting an established market need in an innovative way, attributes not unlike traditional successful ventures.
However, all of the companies in the sample also had some social or environmental benefit as part of their mission. Three success stories in these categories were Sonic Innovations (health care), Evergreen Solar (technology), and Energia Global (industrial).
Sonic Innovations has become the fastest growing hearing aid company in the world since its IPO in 2000. Through the development and use of the smallest single-chip digital signal processor platform ever installed in a hearing aid, they bring to the market small, comfortable and reliable hearing aids. When eight Investors' Circle members invested $2 million in Sonic Innovations, the company had a pre-money valuation of $5 million; seven years later, at IPO, the company's market value was $127 million.
Evergreen Solar is a developer and manufacturer of photovoltaic (PV) modules—the engines of solar electric systems—used in remote power and emerging grid-connected markets. The PV modules produced by Evergreen Solar incorporate proprietary crystalline silicon technology known as String Ribbon. In 1996, seven members invested $3 million; five years later the company was worth $128 million.
Energía Global developed, financed, owned, and operated environmentally sustainable energy generation and electric distribution facilities in Central America. In 1992, seven IC members invested $1.4 million in the company, then worth $4 million. Energia Global was acquired by CHI Energy in 2000 for $74 million. CHI Inc. is now part of Enel Green Power, part of Enel, the world's largest publicly traded electric utility.
There were positive IRR investments in the consumer goods category, Honest Tea and Zip Car being two examples, but this category of companies in aggregate did not perform as well as the technology, industrial, and health care categories.
Q: Do investors expect the same results from social purpose companies?
A: Investors' Circle polled its membership about their return expectations as part of a member survey being conducted at the same time as our study team was conducting the valuation analysis.
The survey showed that 77 percent of members expected an IRR in excess of 10 percent, and that remaining 23 percent expected an IRR between 0 percent and 10 percent. However, in a separate question, 64 percent indicated that they had entered into a deal expecting a lower-than-market rate return in exchange for a high social return.
A key expectation, then, is related to the social or environmental benefit these investments will produce. The member survey indicates that IC members expect a blend of financial and social or environmental returns. Different investors are focused on a variety of social and environmental issues, and the companies receiving investments were involved in businesses as diverse as clean energy technologies, sustainable agriculture, educational toys, and innovative hearing aids.
Our team's analysis showed that only 32 percent of IC members realized a positive IRR on their total investments, 15 percent simply achieved capital preservation, 21 percent experienced a negative IRR, and the remaining 22 percent suffered a total capital loss. These realized financial returns are quite different from the expectations expressed in the IC member survey.
As the field continues to mature, efforts to develop a notion of "blended value," a way to account for social and environmental returns along with financial returns, will be well served by having a clearer understanding of the actual financial returns that can be generated by these types of investments.
Q: Were there common characteristics among successful investing strategies?
A: The team grouped the investors into quartiles based on their realized returns, and was able to identify some differences in the investment strategies of those in the top quartile. The team concluded that, much like traditional early-stage investing, diversification and investing in additional rounds was key to the success of individual investors. Those in the top quartile invested in four times as many companies as those in the lowest quartile and participated in 40 percent more rounds of company financing as compared to all other investors. This allowed them to diversify their holdings across a range of companies and to minimize dilution as the companies raised follow on money.
Additionally, the team observed that members who invested in deals that were also receiving capital from professional investors fared better, as did those who joined other IC members in investing, as opposed to those who were the single IC investor in a deal. In other words, relying on the due diligence and judgment of other experienced investors was an important success factor.
Q: What are the most important things that social purpose investors should learn from this research?
A: While the findings are important because they represent the largest study of early stage social investing of its kind, they are not broad enough to generalize to a recommended investment strategy for all social purpose investors. However, the team did make some recommendations to Investors' Circle based on the findings, and these might be useful to others involved in this kind of investment activity.
One suggestion was that IC should consider creating additional pooled early-stage investment vehicles to take advantage of the specialized expertise of some of its members who have been professional investors, and to create some diversification for its members. IC has experimented with one such vehicle, Commons Capital, LLC, and the team saw this as a model that could be replicated.
An alternate suggestion was that the organization consider performing some basic due diligence on all companies that enter IC's deal flow and screen out some companies before they are presented to broader membership for investment. Traditional investment criteria such as proprietary technologies and experienced management teams are also important in social purpose investing.
The most important finding was that if investors follow a disciplined strategy that incorporates diversification and large enough investment amounts, these social purpose companies have the potential to produce positive IRRs. However, because of the unique problem of exit that these companies seem to exhibit, their ability to provide market rates of return as an asset class are limited. A number of talented people in the social investing community are addressing the question of how to solve this problem, and the field would be advanced by a creative solution.
About the authors
Stacey Childress is Executive Director and Senior Researcher for the HBS Initiative on Social Enterprise.
Manda Salls is the Web editor for Baker Library.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
