Does Sustainabilty Include People Or Just Planet?

As "sustainability" penetrates the minds of corporations and consumers alike, we find ourselves attempting to define what that actually means. Sustainable focused ventures speak in 3BL (triple bottom line) while mature enterprises invoke their old CSR badges(corporate social responsibility). So are we talking about planet or people or both?

Most folks on the clean tech side of the world say that if you are doing good by the planet then you are doing good by people. Ok, but are you measuring that social impact? Corporate sustainability reports address energy and materials (planet) and at best solely address slave labor conditions (people). Ok, but are you measuring positive impact? At the other end of the spectrum are mission based social ventures, those operating on the people bottom line first with the profit bottom line last. Great! What is your planet impact and are you measuring that? I point this out because if you want to 'talk' 3BL then you must 'walk' 3BL... which brings us back to the main question: what does sustainability mean?

Addressing a common scorecard or standard is not my intent here. I'll take every effort that all organizations put forth with respect to people and planet to further buoy profit. Its the New Operation Norm (or the "NON" as we like to say at w1sd0m). My point is that however you configure your sustainability scorecard you need measure on all three fronts, not just two. Granted, there will be very very different impacts on these three vectors dependent on the nature of the industry and the company's products and services. But the most important element is to convey to investors and customers alike that you've leveraged the organizations resources to do good by all of us, not solely to benefit the three guys at the top eh.

I do suggest targeting those efforts that return on the investment applied, every organization needs early wins to gain wide spread support. Starting at green washing the brand will sink you in the end, undertake practical projects once you have a baseline, and turn that into positive branding. Side note: we must address BP yes? "Beyond petroleum" did work for the short term, which most of these greed mongers are about, but at a 40% drop in share value its apparent the sentiment now out weighs true value. Whoo hoo I say to the shift in consciousness - because its not about the short term, although that is how we survive, rather its about the long term.

Sustainability starts with mission statement as a guiding principle so a team can begin the baseline process to get an idea of where the company has large and small opportunities related to planet and people. Planet = green house gas; People = lives touched; Profit = dollars. There may be internal commitment already to a specific aim but don't let that override the need to baseline so you can report positive impact.

Common waste reduction efforts for immediate dollar return (Planet): Energy efficiency; renewable energy; waste to energy; packaging; transportation; and supply chain.
Common social impact efforts for immediate brand awareness return (People): non profit and philanthropic impacts; local jobs; employee benefits; community involvement.

Stay tuned as gNav solves the social impact side for a cleantech company -SunTrac Solar. We'll also post addendums on sustainability scorecards and standards, as well as the three vector approach from the big leaders in the space (Walmart, IBM, P&G, ...) gNav's overall effort is to bring true 3BL or integrated bottom line awareness to the clean tech euphoric world that believes simple enviro is the only effort needed.

Ag 1.0 System Effects Lead to Ag 2.0 Sustainbly Local

Recent readings on Ag investment [Silicon Valley investors place bets on sustainable ag] compelled me to post a brief compilation on the movement -organic food to sustainable farming to localization- becomes -urban farming, venture capital, and Ag incubators! This illuminates that different elements in change allow for an entire industry evolutionary step, if not revolutionary. Its absolutely amazing to see so many things changing about our current agriculture production system. A testament to near end use drivers to reset inherent values in the end product (sustenance and health) [Sustainable urban farming ideas that think inside the box], coupled with traditional incumbent motivations to produce a quality product economically [How export-focused agriculture has failed everyone it was meant to help]. THANK YOU Michael Pollan [The Omnivore's Dilemma] for showing us all the the systems impact. Large scale farming was a boon gone awry - loss of family farms, continuing starvation, and dare I say the fattening of America with low cost unhealthy food. Yes, markets and systems are complex but that doesn't mean we need simple catch phrases to point fingers with, it means that we each need the fortitude to look through the other lens -greenies need to look at systemic issues and how it came to be where we are now; capitalists need to see how their cost/margin/competition decisions affect their end users and the externalities alike. The bottom line is NOT solely financial. We're all in this together, there is no conspiracy and activists are not cooks, but we all affect each other's quality of life.

Our ability to learn from mistakes and avoid future problems is what makes us so called 'intelligent' right?

BTW - Grist provides great coverage on the industry http://www.grist.org/kingdom/food

Catalyzing an Ecology

How can an ecology of social networks, venture incubators, conferences, non-profit organizations, and government agencies work together to connect resources in order to accelerate ventures and sustainable initiatives? That is the question in front of the Colorado clean/green/sustainable/social next economy.

You can think of it as facilitation, you can think of it as enablement (with IT), or you can think of it as a chemical reaction that requires a catalyst and a container for the reaction to take place in.

Often we have the catalyst - market perception (reduce foriegn fuel dependence), rapid change in environment (financial meltdown); change the work mentality (millennium generation). But the container is the challenge, a place where facilitation can occur and activities can be coordinated.

One of the biggest problems, and greatest attributes, is free market competition. We end up with so many players doing similar things that the noise overrides the signal. It takes quite awhile for the noise to settle down, for the weaker players to fall by the wayside. Its up to each venture to narrow its focus and become more unique and better able to compliment peripheral capability.

We can go further faster by having a smaller breadth of reach, lock in the traction begun THEN expand across peripheral offerings to touch the next player in ecology. Container (means and rules), catalyst (market and money), and collaborative players (desire for common benefit rather than aggressive competition).