What is social change philanthropy?
"Philanthropy is commendable, but it must not cause the philanthropist to overlook the economic injustice that makes philanthropy necessary."
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
For this post, we will explore Social Change Philanthropy. Dr. King's quote is spot on. Honest advocates for social justice must cut to the chase and help move our society beyond superficially addressing the many significant challenges we face. What is needed is an inclusive and effective engagement of the diversity of our nation for self-empowerment and economic justice. We will explore some of the trends and resources in the emerging field of Social Philanthropy which seeks to fund authentic social change from the grass roots up.
Resource Generation
Resource Generation is a national organization that works with young people with financial wealth who are supporting and challenging each other to effect progressive social change through the creative, responsible and strategic use of financial and other resources.
Our purpose is to promote innovative ways for young people with wealth to align their personal values and political vision with their financial resources to deepen their social and civic engagement. Resource Generation supports the ability of these young people to better understand themselves as philanthropists, their place in the socio-economic system, and their capacities to contribute to social change. Resource Generation builds cross-class alliances with people and organizations working for social, racial and economic justice.
http://www.resourcegeneration.org/home.html
What is social change philanthropy?
"Social change philanthropy focuses on the root causes of social, economic and environmental injustices. It strives to include the people who are impacted by those injustices as decision-makers. It also aims to make the field of philanthropy more accessible and diverse. In social change philanthropy, foundations are accountable, transparent and responsive in their grantmaking. Donors and foundations act as allies to social justice movements by contributing not only monetary resources but their time, knowledge, skills and access. Social change philanthropy is also sometimes called social justice philanthropy, social movement philanthropy, and community-based philanthropy.
http://www.resourcegeneration.org/Resources/giving_soc_change.html
Funders’ Network
The Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities is a non-partisan, not-for-profit organization that exists to inspire, strengthen and expand philanthropic leadership and funders’ abilities to support organizations working to improve communities through better development decisions and growth policies. It brings together foundations, nonprofit organizations and other partners to address the range of environmental, social, and economic problems caused by development strategies that fail to consider the big picture.
Poor planning and decision making at every level – national, state, regional and local – has resulted in sprawling metropolitan growth patterns that are rapidly consuming open space and farmland to provide housing and services for new suburban populations. At the same time, these decisions have encouraged the draining of population, jobs and other resources out of cities and older suburbs, contributing to a concentration of poverty in many urban neighborhoods. Rapidly developing suburbs also face their own set of problems as they grapple with the costs of growth—congestion, loss of open space, school overcrowding—without adequate resources.
http://www.fundersnetwork.org/
Social Change Philanthropy and How It's Done
HANDS ON: There are many paths to social change. Here's how funders dedicated to that concept go about supporting it.
by Alison D. Goldberg
"Social change philanthropy" is the term used to describe grantmaking that aims to address the root causes of social and economic inequalities.
A number of social change foundations were created in the last three decades to support community organizing, social activism and political advocacy. These foundations continue to adopt new methods for gathering and integrating the input, experience and leadership of community leaders and disenfranchised populations to make informed grant decisions.
Despite their growth in numbers, the ranks of social change foundations are still relatively small in the world of philanthropy. The National Network of Grantmakers estimates that less than 3 percent of all domestic, private, institutional grantmaking is distributed to social change causes. The numbers show that foundation resources have been overwhelmingly distributed to direct service programs providing important support in a climate of eroding safety nets but not effecting policy changes to solve social problems.
Economic disparity in the United States has worsened significantly during the past two decades, so that today the wealthiest 1 percent of the population controls 40 percent of household wealth. In the contemporary political environment, organizations working for social and economic justice have an immediate need for resources to support their work.
The Means Matters as Much as the Ends
What distinguishes social change philanthropy (also called "social movement," "social justice" or "community-based" philanthropy) from other forms of grantmaking is the central tenet that philanthropy's success is measured not only by where money is given, but also the process by which it is given.
Social change philanthropy strives to incorporate giving principles that provide access to those left out of grantmaking in order to support their campaigns for social and economic justice.
The following are core principles of social change philanthropy:
It focuses on marginalized and disenfranchised communities. Social change philanthropy focuses on social and economic justice issues that affect marginalized and disenfranchised communities. This includes protecting the rights of communities of color, low-income populations, women, immigrants, international communities, disabled people, and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.
The issues and campaigns that social change philanthropy supports include civil and human rights, political access, peace and nonviolence, worker's rights, anti-poverty strategies, environmental justice, corporate reform, prison reform, education and healthcare access, as well as challenges to international trade and privatization.
It addresses root causes. Social change foundations support work by community leaders that creates systemic or policy change to address the root causes of problems. Rather than applying Band-Aid solutions to problems, it aims to prevent the problems in the first place. Such work requires shifting the power dynamics in communities through grassroots organizing, advocacy, policy-related work, research and activism.
It strives to be accountable to marginalized and disenfranchised communities. Grantmakers are accountable to a board of trustees. Social change foundations recognize a second, equally (if not more) important level of accountability the communities where they make grants.
That's why social change foundations invite community leaders and the people affected by the foundation's programs to participate in the needs assessments and related decision making. Participation might range from establishing advisory groups to inviting members of the affected communities to serve as board members. Also, social change foundations investigate the demographics of grantees' leadership to determine whether the organizations are community-led.
It establishes inclusive processes. Social change foundations pay particular attention to the accessibility of their grantmaking processes for grassroots organizations, recognizing that generally these groups operate with very few staff members who have little time to spend writing proposals. They are concerned with grantees' access to information and whether their processes are respectful of grantees' time. Foundation staff often will take part in workshops or other training programs to evaluate their assumptions especially, those that guide their perspectives on social issues, and therefore, their grantmaking. Evaluating the power issues that inform the experiences of grantmakers will help them become more effective and improve their communications with grantees who are likely to have race and class backgrounds different then their own.
While traditional philanthropy also works to benefit marginalized and disenfranchised communities and to support the root causes of issues, the process, players and analysis of politics and power are what distinguish social change philanthropy from other forms of grantmaking. Peace Development Fund Executive Director John Vaughn puts it this way: "It is more than teaching people to fish. It's supporting their efforts to get a company to stop polluting the lake they're trying to fish in."
"Change Not Charity"
Social change philanthropy is not new. It dates back to the early twentieth century and has grown steadily since the 1950s. Support in the 1950s and 1960s went mainly to the civil rights and peace movements.
In the 1970s, the alternative funds that eventually became the Funding Exchange network were created. These public charities, established by wealthy inheritors, created funding boards that included or were made up entirely of local activists under the banner "change, not charity."
Since 1979 the Funding Exchange network (www.fex.org) has had a major influence in shaping social change philanthropy. The http://www.nng.org/ (www.nng.org), which was created 20 years ago, serves as a professional network for practitioners of social change philanthropy and currently is affiliated with more than 200 grantmaking organizations (see the profile of NNG on page 10 of this issue).
More recently, an infrastructure has emerged that supports social change philanthropy among specific demographic groups. The rapid growth of funds to support and promote philanthropy among women, African Americans, Asian/Pacific Americans, Native Americans, Latinos, as well as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people and progressive religious communities are important components of social change philanthropy, providing learning and support networks. In addition, a "young donor organizing movement" has emerged with the development of a number of organizations and networks through which young people are using their financial resources for social change (see "Young donors support social change," page 36).
Varying Degrees of Intensity
Several foundations have incorporated components of social change philanthropy, in varying degrees of intensity, to address a wide range of issues. Examples of methods include: continue here.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Green Power: Buyer Beware
To Heck with Green
With consumers feeling blue, companies are dialing back on green marketing. In a survey of 72 companies by Duke University's Fuqua School of Business, chief marketing officers ranked environmental issues lowest on a list of five priorities over the coming 12 months. Even Wal-Mart (WMT), which has beaten the sustainability drum in recent years, is going easy. Green issues were mentioned in 12 of its press releases in the year through Sept. 11, compared with 29 during the same period last year. (Advertising Age)
—Edited by Harry Maurer & Cristina Linblad
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_39/c4101newsyoun254243_page_2.htm
Green Power: Buyer Beware
Utilities are offering renewable options to customers for a fee—but most of the extra revenue is going to marketing
by Ben Elgin and Diana Holden
Business Week Online
Green Biz September 18, 2008, 5:00PM EST text size: TT
It's one of the latest ways big business claims to be curbing global warming: More than 750 utilities across the country now offer customers the chance to pay a premium on their electricity bills to generate "green power." But it turns out that, in many cases, most of the money goes for marketing costs, and little can be traced to the generation of additional renewable energy.
Lisa Baker of Atlanta jumped at the opportunity last summer to protect the environment when Georgia Power invited consumers to pay extra to "help bring more renewable power to Georgia." Paying the minimum annual premium of $54 "is equivalent to planting 125 trees or not driving 2,000 miles," the utility, a unit of giant Southern Co. (SO), boasts on its Web site. Baker, a 33-year-old freelance writer, joined more than 4,000 other customers who signed up for the Green Energy program. "I wanted [the utility] to know there's a market for renewable power," she says.
But public records show that more than 60% of the $239,000 spent during the second quarter of 2007, when Baker signed up, went to advertising and administration. "They are preying on people's good will," says Stephen Smith, executive director of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, an advocacy group in Knoxville.
Georgia Power says the 60% figure has now dropped to only 15% of overall costs. The company adds that much of the rest goes to purchases from a local landfill that generates methane from decomposing garbage.
But buying gas-powered electricity from the landfill doesn't appear to achieve any additional environmental benefit: The renewable gas-from-trash is now actually less expensive than conventional sources like coal. "Any utility would use the landfill gas [without customers' green premium]. It's a no-brainer," says Smith.
Georgia Power counters that electricity generated by landfill methane was more expensive than other power when the program began in 2006. In addition, the company says it aims to reduce the green premium by as much as 22%.
More than 600,000 U.S. households have signed up for utility-sponsored programs claiming that they reduce greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change. That's nearly double the figure from 2004, according to the federally funded National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colo.
But given their eagerness for environmental bragging rights, many of the power companies are strangely reluctant to explain with specificity how extra payments from consumers produce green energy that wouldn't be generated otherwise.
"ALL ABOUT PR"
In July the Florida Public Service Commission pulled the plug on Florida Power & Light's green energy program after an audit found that more than half of the premiums collected went to marketing and administration instead of renewable energy purchases. The program, known as Sunshine Energy, had more than 38,000 participants paying an additional $9.75 a month. In a regulatory hearing in July, Public Service Commissioner Nathan Skop described the program as "all about PR and of little substance."
Florida Power & Light staunchly defends the program, arguing that billboards, newspaper ads, and bill inserts were needed to alert consumers. The utility says that the rest of the money went to new solar-power installations and the purchase of renewable energy credits. RECs are certificates indicating that a green power developer, such as a wind farm, has generated environmentally friendly energy. Purchasers of RECs take credit for funding the clean power. Florida Power & Light won't disclose, however, most of the sources that supplied RECs to its Sunshine Energy program, citing confidentiality obligations.
Utilities devoting only a modest slice of voluntary green premiums to renewable power generators is something of a pattern. Duke Energy's (DUK) GoGreen Power program in Indiana has signed up more than 1,100 customers, who pay a premium of at least $5 per month. According to Duke's marketing literature: "Purchase of GoGreen power ensures that a specified amount of electricity is produced from renewable sources." But records for 2007 reveal less than 18% of the premiums, or about $15,800, went to brokers to buy RECs; 48%, or $42,950, went to marketing the program.
Duke says that while it has had to spend significant amounts to recover GoGreen's start-up costs, the program has nevertheless already contributed to protecting the environment.
Elgin is a correspondent in BusinessWeek's Silicon Valley bureau . Holden is an intern in BusinessWeek's Atlanta bureau.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_39/b4101068119568.htm?chan=magazine+channel_what%27s+next
With consumers feeling blue, companies are dialing back on green marketing. In a survey of 72 companies by Duke University's Fuqua School of Business, chief marketing officers ranked environmental issues lowest on a list of five priorities over the coming 12 months. Even Wal-Mart (WMT), which has beaten the sustainability drum in recent years, is going easy. Green issues were mentioned in 12 of its press releases in the year through Sept. 11, compared with 29 during the same period last year. (Advertising Age)
—Edited by Harry Maurer & Cristina Linblad
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_39/c4101newsyoun254243_page_2.htm
Green Power: Buyer Beware
Utilities are offering renewable options to customers for a fee—but most of the extra revenue is going to marketing
by Ben Elgin and Diana Holden
Business Week Online
Green Biz September 18, 2008, 5:00PM EST text size: TT
It's one of the latest ways big business claims to be curbing global warming: More than 750 utilities across the country now offer customers the chance to pay a premium on their electricity bills to generate "green power." But it turns out that, in many cases, most of the money goes for marketing costs, and little can be traced to the generation of additional renewable energy.
Lisa Baker of Atlanta jumped at the opportunity last summer to protect the environment when Georgia Power invited consumers to pay extra to "help bring more renewable power to Georgia." Paying the minimum annual premium of $54 "is equivalent to planting 125 trees or not driving 2,000 miles," the utility, a unit of giant Southern Co. (SO), boasts on its Web site. Baker, a 33-year-old freelance writer, joined more than 4,000 other customers who signed up for the Green Energy program. "I wanted [the utility] to know there's a market for renewable power," she says.
But public records show that more than 60% of the $239,000 spent during the second quarter of 2007, when Baker signed up, went to advertising and administration. "They are preying on people's good will," says Stephen Smith, executive director of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, an advocacy group in Knoxville.
Georgia Power says the 60% figure has now dropped to only 15% of overall costs. The company adds that much of the rest goes to purchases from a local landfill that generates methane from decomposing garbage.
But buying gas-powered electricity from the landfill doesn't appear to achieve any additional environmental benefit: The renewable gas-from-trash is now actually less expensive than conventional sources like coal. "Any utility would use the landfill gas [without customers' green premium]. It's a no-brainer," says Smith.
Georgia Power counters that electricity generated by landfill methane was more expensive than other power when the program began in 2006. In addition, the company says it aims to reduce the green premium by as much as 22%.
More than 600,000 U.S. households have signed up for utility-sponsored programs claiming that they reduce greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change. That's nearly double the figure from 2004, according to the federally funded National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colo.
But given their eagerness for environmental bragging rights, many of the power companies are strangely reluctant to explain with specificity how extra payments from consumers produce green energy that wouldn't be generated otherwise.
"ALL ABOUT PR"
In July the Florida Public Service Commission pulled the plug on Florida Power & Light's green energy program after an audit found that more than half of the premiums collected went to marketing and administration instead of renewable energy purchases. The program, known as Sunshine Energy, had more than 38,000 participants paying an additional $9.75 a month. In a regulatory hearing in July, Public Service Commissioner Nathan Skop described the program as "all about PR and of little substance."
Florida Power & Light staunchly defends the program, arguing that billboards, newspaper ads, and bill inserts were needed to alert consumers. The utility says that the rest of the money went to new solar-power installations and the purchase of renewable energy credits. RECs are certificates indicating that a green power developer, such as a wind farm, has generated environmentally friendly energy. Purchasers of RECs take credit for funding the clean power. Florida Power & Light won't disclose, however, most of the sources that supplied RECs to its Sunshine Energy program, citing confidentiality obligations.
Utilities devoting only a modest slice of voluntary green premiums to renewable power generators is something of a pattern. Duke Energy's (DUK) GoGreen Power program in Indiana has signed up more than 1,100 customers, who pay a premium of at least $5 per month. According to Duke's marketing literature: "Purchase of GoGreen power ensures that a specified amount of electricity is produced from renewable sources." But records for 2007 reveal less than 18% of the premiums, or about $15,800, went to brokers to buy RECs; 48%, or $42,950, went to marketing the program.
Duke says that while it has had to spend significant amounts to recover GoGreen's start-up costs, the program has nevertheless already contributed to protecting the environment.
Elgin is a correspondent in BusinessWeek's Silicon Valley bureau . Holden is an intern in BusinessWeek's Atlanta bureau.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_39/b4101068119568.htm?chan=magazine+channel_what%27s+next
Thursday, July 2, 2009
A Vehicle, a Method and a Bridge to a Green Future
A repost from Saturday, September 27, 2008
A Passion for People, Profits and a Sustainable Future
You are not here merely to make a living. You are here to enable the world to live more amply, with greater vision, and with a finer spirit of hope and achievement. You are here to enrich the world. You impoverish yourself if you forget this errand."
~Woodrow Wilson
"I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something. And I will not let what I cannot do interfere with what I can do."
~Edward Everett Hale
Social Entrepreneurship
Social entrepreneurship is the work of a social entrepreneur. A social entrepreneur is someone who recognizes a social problem and uses entrepreneurial principles to organize, create, and manage a venture to make social change. Whereas business entrepreneurs typically measure performance in profit and return, social entrepreneurs assess their success in terms of the impact they have on society and often work through nonprofits and citizen groups.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_entrepreneurship
What is a Social Entrepreneur?
A social entrepreneur is a different kind of social leader who:
-Identifies and applies practical solutions to social problems by combining innovation, resourcefulness and opportunity.
-Innovates by finding a new product, a new service, or a new approach to a social problem
-Focuses first and foremost on social value creation and in that spirit, is willing to share openly the innovations and insights of the initiative with a view to its wider replication
-Doesn’t wait to secure the resources before undertaking the catalytic innovation
-Is fully accountable to the constituencies s/he serves
-Resists being trapped by the constraints of ideology or discipline
-Continuously refines and adapts approach in response to feedback
-Has a vision, but also a well-thought out road-map as to how to attain the goal
What is Social Entrepreneurship?
-Describes an approach to a social issue. It is not a field of discipline that can be learned in academia.
-More related to leadership than to management
-An approach that cuts across disciplines (medicine, engineering, law, education, investment banking, agronomy, environment, etc.) and is not confined to sectors (health, transportation, finance, labor, trade, and the like).
Social Entrepreneurship
http://www.managementhelp.org/soc_entr/soc_entr.htm
“The green economy has the power to deliver new sources of work, wealth and health to low-income people — while honoring the Earth. If you can do that, you just wiped out a whole bunch of problems. We can make what is good for poor black kids good for the polar bears and good for the country.”
~Van Jones, Head of the Ella Baker Center and founder of, Green for All
http://www.greenforall.org/about-us
http://www.ellabakercenter.org/page.php?pageid=28
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/17/opinion/17friedman.html?_r=2&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin
Equal Access to Civil Justice: Pursuing Solutions Beyond the Legal Profession
“When the fundamental principles of fairness and equal justice through the rule of law are shaken, the cornerstones of our democratic society are threatened. Respect for justice and laws is diminished when large segments of our society do not have equal access to civil justice because they cannot obtain legal assistance to resolve disputes that touch on the very basics of life (e.g., health care, food, and shelter) or to seek legal redress of their grievances.”
~Yale Law & Policy Review, Vol. 17, No. 1, 1998
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=192616
"The hostile attitude of conquering nature ignores the basic interdependence of all things and events---that the world beyond the skin is actually an extension of our own bodies---and will end in destroying the very environment from which we emerge and upon which our whole life depends."
~Alan Watts (1915 - 1973), English mystic & writer. "The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are" (Vintage), Page: 9,10
A Vehicle, a Method and a Bridge to a Green Future
A Passion for People, Planet and Profit (P3)
What if we could truly improve our Community?
Would you be willing to give the possibility consideration? Real thought and deliberation? The project before you will elicit “Buy In” at all levels, from Business Executives to Hourly Employees, Entrepreneurs to Civil Servants, and Professionals to Craftsmen. It seems safe to say we all see the need for the stake-holders of our community to fix for ourselves that which should to be fixed, to correct that which needs correcting. Now is the time to come together as a body of citizens, community and business leaders and public servants who recognize our responsibility to ourselves and our neighbors.
What is the vehicle to accomplish such a goal? Oddly enough it is founded in one of the most capitalistic and misunderstood ideas, The Direct Sales Industry or, as it is also known, Network Marketing. We all know the phrase of doom, “We’re looking for a few sharp people” at which point we cringe and run for the exits. However this concept isn’t designed solely to benefit the “Upline & Downline” rather, it is to generate capital to create a social venture capital fund that will manage and allocate resources to an Umbrella Organization made up of citizens, business leaders and civic leaders who will allocate the revenue generated to areas of need within our community. Naturally, individual distributors are compensated and a viable product is offered to people who often need this service when they least can afford it. In the best fashion of capitalism it is a win/win for all parties in the process. A product of value is offered, a need is met, individuals have an additional revenue stream, a community has democratic access to additional capital and is better for the effort.
As you will see after your review of the project, this will be accomplished by adding value to companies, employees and the community, value created from the hopes, dreams and efforts of our fellow citizens. This project will allow them each to contribute to the real improvement of the community with a broadly inclusive, city-wide project of beauty, social up-lift, enterprise and sustainability. I invite you to take a clear-eyed and open-minded look at this innovative project combining the best impulses from our citizenry with the dynamism of the free market to produce a synergy that is greater than the sum total of the parts.
Before we get to the core of this proposal, please review the following commentaries about the critical role of Social Justice to meeting sustainability challenges and how one businessman is blazing a trail for more enlightened business practices.
Five E’s Unlimited
A System's Approach to Sustainable Development
Today’s problems cannot be solved with today’s mindset. Incremental changes are inadequate; a bold and broad agenda for systemic changes in values, lifestyles, institutions, and politics is required.
The Nexus of Sustainability & Social Equity: Virginia’s Eastern Shore (USA) as a Local Example of Global Issues
R. Warren Flint
http://www.eeeee.net/
and
Mona J.E. Danner
Old Dominion University
Abstract
The practice of sustainable development requires society to equally and simultaneously address economic enhancement along with actions that offer environmental protection, while also insuring that the most disadvantaged people in our communities are provided the ability to improve their quality of life. The ethnic and class stratification of different societal sectors represents one of the most tenacious forms of inequality in any part of the world. For this reason, where inequities persist in severe forms, ideas about balancing economic development and environmental preservation may be particularly contentious. The primary premise of this paper assumes that without equity considerations economic and environmental sustainability objectives of a region cannot be achieved.
If we expand the meaning of environmental equity or justice beyond disproportionate impact from pollution on public health, and combine issues of populations that are disproportionately affected by environmental insults as well as adequate access to environmental benefits, then we have a paradigm under which to explore mechanisms for poor people to derive equal benefits from the advantages of environmental related business income. By exploring how poor people might benefit from nature‑based business activities as an example, we can begin to demonstrate important linkages between a foundation of good environmental quality and the prosperous development of economic activity in certain societal sectors that might otherwise not make this connection.
This paper addresses a Virginia Eastern Shore (USA) case history example to explore whether or not a nature‑based economy and consideration of a targeted, value-added tax on this industry's income can finance the transition of a region's neediest citizens to a better quality of life and in‑turn a more amenable setting to further enhance economic development in the region that is environmentally sustainable. A focus on environmental equity emerges as key in this discussion because of the historical disregard for the environmental health and rights of disenfranchised peoples, where a disproportionate and dangerous ecological price for economic growth has been paid by poor people and people of color, both in the United States and in other nations. Thus, the nexus of sustainable development and equity, where equity considerations loom large in the search for economic development that does not degrade natural resources.
The Nexus of Sustainability & Equity
"Individual and collective economic vitality is an important element of any sustainable community. But sustainable development cannot be achieved unless jobs are environmentally clean and do not contribute to air or water pollution or create toxic wastes. Further, social equity must dominate community dynamics so there exists a climate of fairness -- evenhandedness both economically and environmentally -- toward achieving social well‑being for all. In essence, we are practicing sustainable development when we find the means to equally and simultaneously address economic development with environmental protection, while also insuring that the most disadvantaged people in our society are provided the ability to improve their quality of life. If disproportionately impacted community members aren't able to improve their well-being, the best designed plans will not meet with success and future generations will not enjoy a high quality of life. This is the nexus of sustainable development and equity -- without equity and justice considerations sustainability objectives cannot be achieved."
The Meaning of Profit
The Story, Friday, September 26 2008
Part of the bailout package before Washington includes salary limits for top executives of Wall Street companies. The fear is that many CEOs will continue to get rich while the rest of the country, and the world, go into a financial tailspin.
Hal Taussig believes that CEOs have a responsibility to do more than earn wealth for themselves. He created a successful travel company called Untours. The company has a budget in the millions and maintains a healthy profit margin - but Hal does not keep any of the profits. He donates them to charity.
Hal talks to Dick Gordon about the spontaneous moment that led him to this alternative business lifestyle. The result swims against the tide of the profit motive: Hal actually finds that having an empty bank account is exhilarating.
* Learn more about the Untours company and foundation
* Learn more about B Corporation, an organization of business leaders like Hal
http://thestory.org/archive/the_story_612_The_Meaning_of_Profit.mp3/view
http://www.untours.com/
http://www.untoursfoundation.org/
http://www.bcorporation.net/
http://www.newsun.com/untours.html
B Corporation
Higher purpose. Higher standards of accountability, transparency, and performance. These leaders across the United States have created profitable, competitive businesses while taking care of their employees, community, and environment. Meet the B Corps »
We envision a new sector of the economy which harnesses the power of private enterprise to create public benefit.
This sector is comprised of a new type of corporation the B Corporation which is purpose-driven and creates benefit for all stakeholders, not just shareholders.
As members of this emerging sector and as entrepreneurs and investors in B Corporations,
We hold these truths to be self-evident:
- That we must be the change we seek in the world.
- That all business ought to be conducted as if people and place mattered.
- That, through their products, practices, and profits, businesses should aspire to do no harm and benefit all.
- To do so requires that we act with the understanding that we are each dependent upon another and thus responsible for each other and future generations.
http://www.bcorporation.net/
In The News
http://www.bcorporation.net/media/news-archive
http://www.bcorporation.net/
A Passion for People, Profits and a Sustainable Future
You are not here merely to make a living. You are here to enable the world to live more amply, with greater vision, and with a finer spirit of hope and achievement. You are here to enrich the world. You impoverish yourself if you forget this errand."
~Woodrow Wilson
"I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something. And I will not let what I cannot do interfere with what I can do."
~Edward Everett Hale
Social Entrepreneurship
Social entrepreneurship is the work of a social entrepreneur. A social entrepreneur is someone who recognizes a social problem and uses entrepreneurial principles to organize, create, and manage a venture to make social change. Whereas business entrepreneurs typically measure performance in profit and return, social entrepreneurs assess their success in terms of the impact they have on society and often work through nonprofits and citizen groups.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_entrepreneurship
What is a Social Entrepreneur?
A social entrepreneur is a different kind of social leader who:
-Identifies and applies practical solutions to social problems by combining innovation, resourcefulness and opportunity.
-Innovates by finding a new product, a new service, or a new approach to a social problem
-Focuses first and foremost on social value creation and in that spirit, is willing to share openly the innovations and insights of the initiative with a view to its wider replication
-Doesn’t wait to secure the resources before undertaking the catalytic innovation
-Is fully accountable to the constituencies s/he serves
-Resists being trapped by the constraints of ideology or discipline
-Continuously refines and adapts approach in response to feedback
-Has a vision, but also a well-thought out road-map as to how to attain the goal
What is Social Entrepreneurship?
-Describes an approach to a social issue. It is not a field of discipline that can be learned in academia.
-More related to leadership than to management
-An approach that cuts across disciplines (medicine, engineering, law, education, investment banking, agronomy, environment, etc.) and is not confined to sectors (health, transportation, finance, labor, trade, and the like).
Social Entrepreneurship
http://www.managementhelp.org/soc_entr/soc_entr.htm
“The green economy has the power to deliver new sources of work, wealth and health to low-income people — while honoring the Earth. If you can do that, you just wiped out a whole bunch of problems. We can make what is good for poor black kids good for the polar bears and good for the country.”
~Van Jones, Head of the Ella Baker Center and founder of, Green for All
http://www.greenforall.org/about-us
http://www.ellabakercenter.org/page.php?pageid=28
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/17/opinion/17friedman.html?_r=2&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin
Equal Access to Civil Justice: Pursuing Solutions Beyond the Legal Profession
“When the fundamental principles of fairness and equal justice through the rule of law are shaken, the cornerstones of our democratic society are threatened. Respect for justice and laws is diminished when large segments of our society do not have equal access to civil justice because they cannot obtain legal assistance to resolve disputes that touch on the very basics of life (e.g., health care, food, and shelter) or to seek legal redress of their grievances.”
~Yale Law & Policy Review, Vol. 17, No. 1, 1998
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=192616
"The hostile attitude of conquering nature ignores the basic interdependence of all things and events---that the world beyond the skin is actually an extension of our own bodies---and will end in destroying the very environment from which we emerge and upon which our whole life depends."
~Alan Watts (1915 - 1973), English mystic & writer. "The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are" (Vintage), Page: 9,10
A Vehicle, a Method and a Bridge to a Green Future
A Passion for People, Planet and Profit (P3)
What if we could truly improve our Community?
Would you be willing to give the possibility consideration? Real thought and deliberation? The project before you will elicit “Buy In” at all levels, from Business Executives to Hourly Employees, Entrepreneurs to Civil Servants, and Professionals to Craftsmen. It seems safe to say we all see the need for the stake-holders of our community to fix for ourselves that which should to be fixed, to correct that which needs correcting. Now is the time to come together as a body of citizens, community and business leaders and public servants who recognize our responsibility to ourselves and our neighbors.
What is the vehicle to accomplish such a goal? Oddly enough it is founded in one of the most capitalistic and misunderstood ideas, The Direct Sales Industry or, as it is also known, Network Marketing. We all know the phrase of doom, “We’re looking for a few sharp people” at which point we cringe and run for the exits. However this concept isn’t designed solely to benefit the “Upline & Downline” rather, it is to generate capital to create a social venture capital fund that will manage and allocate resources to an Umbrella Organization made up of citizens, business leaders and civic leaders who will allocate the revenue generated to areas of need within our community. Naturally, individual distributors are compensated and a viable product is offered to people who often need this service when they least can afford it. In the best fashion of capitalism it is a win/win for all parties in the process. A product of value is offered, a need is met, individuals have an additional revenue stream, a community has democratic access to additional capital and is better for the effort.
As you will see after your review of the project, this will be accomplished by adding value to companies, employees and the community, value created from the hopes, dreams and efforts of our fellow citizens. This project will allow them each to contribute to the real improvement of the community with a broadly inclusive, city-wide project of beauty, social up-lift, enterprise and sustainability. I invite you to take a clear-eyed and open-minded look at this innovative project combining the best impulses from our citizenry with the dynamism of the free market to produce a synergy that is greater than the sum total of the parts.
Before we get to the core of this proposal, please review the following commentaries about the critical role of Social Justice to meeting sustainability challenges and how one businessman is blazing a trail for more enlightened business practices.
Five E’s Unlimited
A System's Approach to Sustainable Development
Today’s problems cannot be solved with today’s mindset. Incremental changes are inadequate; a bold and broad agenda for systemic changes in values, lifestyles, institutions, and politics is required.
The Nexus of Sustainability & Social Equity: Virginia’s Eastern Shore (USA) as a Local Example of Global Issues
R. Warren Flint
http://www.eeeee.net/
and
Mona J.E. Danner
Old Dominion University
Abstract
The practice of sustainable development requires society to equally and simultaneously address economic enhancement along with actions that offer environmental protection, while also insuring that the most disadvantaged people in our communities are provided the ability to improve their quality of life. The ethnic and class stratification of different societal sectors represents one of the most tenacious forms of inequality in any part of the world. For this reason, where inequities persist in severe forms, ideas about balancing economic development and environmental preservation may be particularly contentious. The primary premise of this paper assumes that without equity considerations economic and environmental sustainability objectives of a region cannot be achieved.
If we expand the meaning of environmental equity or justice beyond disproportionate impact from pollution on public health, and combine issues of populations that are disproportionately affected by environmental insults as well as adequate access to environmental benefits, then we have a paradigm under which to explore mechanisms for poor people to derive equal benefits from the advantages of environmental related business income. By exploring how poor people might benefit from nature‑based business activities as an example, we can begin to demonstrate important linkages between a foundation of good environmental quality and the prosperous development of economic activity in certain societal sectors that might otherwise not make this connection.
This paper addresses a Virginia Eastern Shore (USA) case history example to explore whether or not a nature‑based economy and consideration of a targeted, value-added tax on this industry's income can finance the transition of a region's neediest citizens to a better quality of life and in‑turn a more amenable setting to further enhance economic development in the region that is environmentally sustainable. A focus on environmental equity emerges as key in this discussion because of the historical disregard for the environmental health and rights of disenfranchised peoples, where a disproportionate and dangerous ecological price for economic growth has been paid by poor people and people of color, both in the United States and in other nations. Thus, the nexus of sustainable development and equity, where equity considerations loom large in the search for economic development that does not degrade natural resources.
The Nexus of Sustainability & Equity
"Individual and collective economic vitality is an important element of any sustainable community. But sustainable development cannot be achieved unless jobs are environmentally clean and do not contribute to air or water pollution or create toxic wastes. Further, social equity must dominate community dynamics so there exists a climate of fairness -- evenhandedness both economically and environmentally -- toward achieving social well‑being for all. In essence, we are practicing sustainable development when we find the means to equally and simultaneously address economic development with environmental protection, while also insuring that the most disadvantaged people in our society are provided the ability to improve their quality of life. If disproportionately impacted community members aren't able to improve their well-being, the best designed plans will not meet with success and future generations will not enjoy a high quality of life. This is the nexus of sustainable development and equity -- without equity and justice considerations sustainability objectives cannot be achieved."
The Meaning of Profit
The Story, Friday, September 26 2008
Part of the bailout package before Washington includes salary limits for top executives of Wall Street companies. The fear is that many CEOs will continue to get rich while the rest of the country, and the world, go into a financial tailspin.
Hal Taussig believes that CEOs have a responsibility to do more than earn wealth for themselves. He created a successful travel company called Untours. The company has a budget in the millions and maintains a healthy profit margin - but Hal does not keep any of the profits. He donates them to charity.
Hal talks to Dick Gordon about the spontaneous moment that led him to this alternative business lifestyle. The result swims against the tide of the profit motive: Hal actually finds that having an empty bank account is exhilarating.
* Learn more about the Untours company and foundation
* Learn more about B Corporation, an organization of business leaders like Hal
http://thestory.org/archive/the_story_612_The_Meaning_of_Profit.mp3/view
http://www.untours.com/
http://www.untoursfoundation.org/
http://www.bcorporation.net/
http://www.newsun.com/untours.html
B Corporation
Higher purpose. Higher standards of accountability, transparency, and performance. These leaders across the United States have created profitable, competitive businesses while taking care of their employees, community, and environment. Meet the B Corps »
We envision a new sector of the economy which harnesses the power of private enterprise to create public benefit.
This sector is comprised of a new type of corporation the B Corporation which is purpose-driven and creates benefit for all stakeholders, not just shareholders.
As members of this emerging sector and as entrepreneurs and investors in B Corporations,
We hold these truths to be self-evident:
- That we must be the change we seek in the world.
- That all business ought to be conducted as if people and place mattered.
- That, through their products, practices, and profits, businesses should aspire to do no harm and benefit all.
- To do so requires that we act with the understanding that we are each dependent upon another and thus responsible for each other and future generations.
http://www.bcorporation.net/
In The News
http://www.bcorporation.net/media/news-archive
http://www.bcorporation.net/
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Cause Marketing
Cause Marketing: Examples, Discussion and Stats
August 26, 2008 at 6:14 pm ·
Haagan Dazs have created a cause marketing campaign to help endangered bees.
Bees are an endangered species and also a vital part of our ecology. Did you know that we rely on bees for one third of our food supply?
They have a pretty little micro-site up at http://helpthehoneybees.com/ promoting the fact that honey bees are in danger and that you can help them help the bees by buying their “Bee-Dependent” flavours.
Through purchasing one of their “Bee-Dependent” flavours Haagan Daaz will contribute funds to help save the bees! The site is fun to use and has a download-able lesson plan. I think this gives it some authenticity and extends the campaign further than it being just a branding exercise.
The site has a viral mechanism – send a bee – where you can design your own bee avatar and send an e-card with a message to a friend.
They also have a bee shop where you can purchase merchandise and a percentage goes towards helping the bees.
I have written a bit on this blog outlining the benefits of cause marketing for brands. You can find some more ranting about cause marketing here, and some other examples of campaigns here: Nokia’s N96 Campaign and Ben and Jerry’s Whirrld Peace Campiagn
According to research:
“KANSAS CITY (PR WEB) October 23, 2007 – The 2007 PR Week / Barkley Cause Survey reveals that philanthropic activities can drive business success. In fact, 72% of consumers say that they have purchased a brand because it supports a cause they believe in. Furthermore, corporate respondents say they see positive PR (65.3%), an increase in sales/retail traffic (26.7%) and an enhanced relationship with their target demographic (52%), as a result of their cause marketing efforts.”
Cause Marketing is not new. It began in the 1980’s when American Express kicked off a campaign whereby every time someone used one of their credit cards they would donate money to the Statue of Liberty fund (also their icon image – NB a well selected charity in line with their brand.)
Stats prove it…this is really where it’s at. Help the world – help your brand make money – and help consumers feel good about themselves. It really is a win – win!
Here is a list from 2004 listing many other examples of cause marketing and stats from as far back as the 80’s.
If you are interested in executing these types of campaigns for your business check out the Cause Marketing Forum, Market Watch also a very good post on the subject, and perhaps this article “Cause Marketing Tps: Boost Business by Giving Back” aimed at small businesses may help.
Distribute Press Releases
Send PR to 100,000 Global Contacts. Free Account - No Contracts/Fees!
www.PRWeb.com
Green Branding
Brand innovation for the new consumer.
www.bbmg.com
Cause Partnerships
Customers Buy from Caring Companies cause + business = abundance
www.tlnpartnerships.com
http://jaxinteractive.com/2008/08/26/cause-marketing-example-hd-loves-hb/
Cause Marketing The New Corporate–Nonprofit Engagement
Corporations have long been involved in supporting community, but when
the first cause-marketing programs were successfully implemented, it signaled a
dramatic shift in nonprofit–for-profit relationships: one that recognized corporate
community support could be positioned at the intersection of business objectives
and societal needs.
Cause marketing was initiated over 25 years ago. At the time many nonprofit
professionals viewed it as a fledgling idea, one that should not be considered part
of any serious fund development or nonprofit program. As well-constructed programs reaped benefits for companies and nonprofits alike, the number of programs continued to grow. Now more than two decades later, cause marketing has evolved and developed into a firmly established practice, a new way for corporations and nonprofits to achieve significant bottom-line results and community impact.
http://media.wiley.com/product_data/excerpt/09/04717175/0471717509.pdf
Cause Marketing Emergedgtl
Did you know cause-related marketing promotions can increase your sales as much as 74%*? Nothing builds trust with your brand or service like a connection with worthy causes. You show you stand for more than profits, and the message resonates with your target audience.
We’re an interactive agency specializing in Cause Marketing using online social and viral media. Our cost-effective, innovative campaigns will connect you with non-profit charitable causes, encouraging your most valuable audiences to participate. Using the power of social media, we’ll help spread the word and show the impact of your campaign through the web.
Contact us to discuss ideas for your next Cause Marketing campaign, or to strategize on how to make Cause Marketing part of your online marketing plan.
*2008 study by Cone, Inc. and Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business.
http://cause.emergedgtl.com/?gclid=CMzA1IbA-JoCFRKAxgodCjYgdg
Cause marketing: Altruism or greed?
June 4th, 2009
(PhysOrg.com) -- Companies that join with social causes to sell products not only enhance their image but also improve their bottom line, say University of Michigan researchers.
Build Trust, Do Good. - cause.emergedgtl.com
We bring your cause marketing campaigns to life.
"Cause marketing, in which firms donate part of the proceeds from sales of certain products to a specified cause, is now a strategy adopted by hundreds of firms to increase sales for a wide variety of products, from coffee to cars," said Aradhna Krishna, the Winkelman Professor of Retail Marketing at Michigan's Ross School of Business. "But it is often associated with price increases, as well."
A few well-known examples of cause marketing include Project Red, which encompasses several companies such as the Gap, Motorola, Apple, Converse, Dell, Microsoft, American Express and others to raise money for the Global Fund to fight AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria; 3M's Post-It Super Sticky Notes imprinted with pink ribbons to help fund cancer research and treatment; and Snapple's bottled water sales to help build playgrounds in poor communities.
In a new study forthcoming in Management Science, Krishna and Uday Rajan, an associate professor of finance at Ross, found that cause marketing can increase sales—but can also raise prices—of the cause-related product, as well as of other products that the company sells.
One underlying reason for the price increase that Krishna and Rajan identify is the additional benefit that consumers get from buying a cause-related product. Consumers feel good about the firm selling the product, and also about themselves when they purchase such a product. Further, consumers can even feel good about buying a different product from the firm, one that is not related to a cause.
It's this spillover effect to a company's other products that can make cause marketing worthwhile, the researchers say. In fact, even if a firm is unable to increase the price of a cause-related product enough to compensate for the donated money or if it simply ties a low-selling product to cause marketing, it can still increase its profits—as long as consumers feel good about buying the company's other products.
Moreover, firms that raise prices on both a cause-related product and other non-cause products earn higher profits than if they don't participate in cause marketing at all. In addition, companies will never place their entire portfolio or product line in a social cause campaign.
"Firms can use cause marketing to increase prices and profits, but should be aware of the implications of placing different products on cause marketing," Rajan said. "For public policy officials and consumers who may believe that cause-marketing firms are more caring firms and are genuinely interested in helping others, it may be insightful to understand that cause marketing also allows firms to increase their prices and profits."
Provided by University of Michigan
Cause Marketing - Moving to Win-Win-Win (NAMA 2009)
http://www.slideshare.net/DrakeCo/cause-marketing-moving-to-winwinwin-nama-2009
August 26, 2008 at 6:14 pm ·
Haagan Dazs have created a cause marketing campaign to help endangered bees.
Bees are an endangered species and also a vital part of our ecology. Did you know that we rely on bees for one third of our food supply?
They have a pretty little micro-site up at http://helpthehoneybees.com/ promoting the fact that honey bees are in danger and that you can help them help the bees by buying their “Bee-Dependent” flavours.
Through purchasing one of their “Bee-Dependent” flavours Haagan Daaz will contribute funds to help save the bees! The site is fun to use and has a download-able lesson plan. I think this gives it some authenticity and extends the campaign further than it being just a branding exercise.
The site has a viral mechanism – send a bee – where you can design your own bee avatar and send an e-card with a message to a friend.
They also have a bee shop where you can purchase merchandise and a percentage goes towards helping the bees.
I have written a bit on this blog outlining the benefits of cause marketing for brands. You can find some more ranting about cause marketing here, and some other examples of campaigns here: Nokia’s N96 Campaign and Ben and Jerry’s Whirrld Peace Campiagn
According to research:
“KANSAS CITY (PR WEB) October 23, 2007 – The 2007 PR Week / Barkley Cause Survey reveals that philanthropic activities can drive business success. In fact, 72% of consumers say that they have purchased a brand because it supports a cause they believe in. Furthermore, corporate respondents say they see positive PR (65.3%), an increase in sales/retail traffic (26.7%) and an enhanced relationship with their target demographic (52%), as a result of their cause marketing efforts.”
Cause Marketing is not new. It began in the 1980’s when American Express kicked off a campaign whereby every time someone used one of their credit cards they would donate money to the Statue of Liberty fund (also their icon image – NB a well selected charity in line with their brand.)
Stats prove it…this is really where it’s at. Help the world – help your brand make money – and help consumers feel good about themselves. It really is a win – win!
Here is a list from 2004 listing many other examples of cause marketing and stats from as far back as the 80’s.
If you are interested in executing these types of campaigns for your business check out the Cause Marketing Forum, Market Watch also a very good post on the subject, and perhaps this article “Cause Marketing Tps: Boost Business by Giving Back” aimed at small businesses may help.
Distribute Press Releases
Send PR to 100,000 Global Contacts. Free Account - No Contracts/Fees!
www.PRWeb.com
Green Branding
Brand innovation for the new consumer.
www.bbmg.com
Cause Partnerships
Customers Buy from Caring Companies cause + business = abundance
www.tlnpartnerships.com
http://jaxinteractive.com/2008/08/26/cause-marketing-example-hd-loves-hb/
Cause Marketing The New Corporate–Nonprofit Engagement
Corporations have long been involved in supporting community, but when
the first cause-marketing programs were successfully implemented, it signaled a
dramatic shift in nonprofit–for-profit relationships: one that recognized corporate
community support could be positioned at the intersection of business objectives
and societal needs.
Cause marketing was initiated over 25 years ago. At the time many nonprofit
professionals viewed it as a fledgling idea, one that should not be considered part
of any serious fund development or nonprofit program. As well-constructed programs reaped benefits for companies and nonprofits alike, the number of programs continued to grow. Now more than two decades later, cause marketing has evolved and developed into a firmly established practice, a new way for corporations and nonprofits to achieve significant bottom-line results and community impact.
http://media.wiley.com/product_data/excerpt/09/04717175/0471717509.pdf
Cause Marketing Emergedgtl
Did you know cause-related marketing promotions can increase your sales as much as 74%*? Nothing builds trust with your brand or service like a connection with worthy causes. You show you stand for more than profits, and the message resonates with your target audience.
We’re an interactive agency specializing in Cause Marketing using online social and viral media. Our cost-effective, innovative campaigns will connect you with non-profit charitable causes, encouraging your most valuable audiences to participate. Using the power of social media, we’ll help spread the word and show the impact of your campaign through the web.
Contact us to discuss ideas for your next Cause Marketing campaign, or to strategize on how to make Cause Marketing part of your online marketing plan.
*2008 study by Cone, Inc. and Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business.
http://cause.emergedgtl.com/?gclid=CMzA1IbA-JoCFRKAxgodCjYgdg
Cause marketing: Altruism or greed?
June 4th, 2009
(PhysOrg.com) -- Companies that join with social causes to sell products not only enhance their image but also improve their bottom line, say University of Michigan researchers.
Build Trust, Do Good. - cause.emergedgtl.com
We bring your cause marketing campaigns to life.
"Cause marketing, in which firms donate part of the proceeds from sales of certain products to a specified cause, is now a strategy adopted by hundreds of firms to increase sales for a wide variety of products, from coffee to cars," said Aradhna Krishna, the Winkelman Professor of Retail Marketing at Michigan's Ross School of Business. "But it is often associated with price increases, as well."
A few well-known examples of cause marketing include Project Red, which encompasses several companies such as the Gap, Motorola, Apple, Converse, Dell, Microsoft, American Express and others to raise money for the Global Fund to fight AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria; 3M's Post-It Super Sticky Notes imprinted with pink ribbons to help fund cancer research and treatment; and Snapple's bottled water sales to help build playgrounds in poor communities.
In a new study forthcoming in Management Science, Krishna and Uday Rajan, an associate professor of finance at Ross, found that cause marketing can increase sales—but can also raise prices—of the cause-related product, as well as of other products that the company sells.
One underlying reason for the price increase that Krishna and Rajan identify is the additional benefit that consumers get from buying a cause-related product. Consumers feel good about the firm selling the product, and also about themselves when they purchase such a product. Further, consumers can even feel good about buying a different product from the firm, one that is not related to a cause.
It's this spillover effect to a company's other products that can make cause marketing worthwhile, the researchers say. In fact, even if a firm is unable to increase the price of a cause-related product enough to compensate for the donated money or if it simply ties a low-selling product to cause marketing, it can still increase its profits—as long as consumers feel good about buying the company's other products.
Moreover, firms that raise prices on both a cause-related product and other non-cause products earn higher profits than if they don't participate in cause marketing at all. In addition, companies will never place their entire portfolio or product line in a social cause campaign.
"Firms can use cause marketing to increase prices and profits, but should be aware of the implications of placing different products on cause marketing," Rajan said. "For public policy officials and consumers who may believe that cause-marketing firms are more caring firms and are genuinely interested in helping others, it may be insightful to understand that cause marketing also allows firms to increase their prices and profits."
Provided by University of Michigan
Cause Marketing - Moving to Win-Win-Win (NAMA 2009)
Cause Marketing - Moving to Win-Win-Win (NAMA 2009)
View more OpenOffice presentations from Steve Drake.
http://www.slideshare.net/DrakeCo/cause-marketing-moving-to-winwinwin-nama-2009
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
A Brief History of the Modern Green Movement in America
A Brief History of the Modern Green Movement in America
Written by Sara on August 17th, 2008 - Topics: Geography and Travel, History and Trivia, Nature and Ecosystems, News and Politics
What is the green movement?
The green movement as we think of it today has evolved considerably since the early days. Since there are some popular assumptions about environmental history that are incorrect, if you have an interest in green issues this article will serve as a helpful guide to the origins and evolution of “green”. To understand the modern green movement, we have to trace its origins back to the beginning.
Let’s get started:
While many people associate the beginning of the green movement with Rachel Carson’s breakthrough book Silent Spring and the legislative fervor of the 1970s, environmentalism is in fact rooted in the intellectual thought of the 1830s and 1840s. In fact, the “environmental movement” is a significant thread in the fabric of American philosophical thought - first developed by the Transcendentalists (most famously Henry David Thoreau) but tangibly expanded upon during the era of American pragmatism in the latter half of the 19th century. Environmentalism isn’t a trend, or a cult, or a form of hysteria. It is rooted in American philosophy and, being at once innovative and practical, idealistic and active, one could easily define modern environmentalism as quintessentially American.
Environmentalism in America today is defined as:
“Environmentalists advocate the sustainable management of resources and stewardship of the environment through changes in public policy and individual behavior. In its recognition of humanity as a participant in (not enemy of) ecosystems, the movement is centered on ecology, health, and human rights.”
But how did we get from Thoreau and Teddy Roosevelt to “treehugging” and finally, the eco-friendly consumer-driven developments of today?
1. Roots of Environmentalism
Rachel Carson (1907-1964) certainly helped foster a reawakening of environmentalism, but it was Henry David Thoreau, in his book Maine Woods, who called for the conservation of and respect for nature and the federal preservation of virgin forests.
George Perkins Marsh was another key figure during the first half of the 19th century who championed preserving the natural environment. Leading intellectuals of the antebellum era called into question the standard Puritan pastoral ethic - the belief that cultivating and using the land was inherently moral and leaving the land alone to be “wild” was wasteful and uncivilized (this belief developed in large part because of the violent cultural clash between early Americans and Native Americans - something we tend to forget about in modern times). To this day there are ingrained negative associations between preserving wild lands and pantheistic or pagan values. This tension flares up in popular discourse from time to time (“environmental wackos”, “treehuggers”, and so forth). The classic American conflict between secular rationalism and Puritan morality is certainly not exclusive to our management of natural resources!
2. The Pragmatist Era
Though Transcendentalism was famously reverent of nature, it was the thrust of can-do American Pragmatism (widely viewed to be America’s original contribution to philosophical thought) that doubtless inspired a series of steps to conserve nature. Beginning in the 1860s, the United States government saw fit to create parks and set aside wild lands for public good. Yosemite was claimed in 1864 (John Muir moved there in 1869). It was made our first national park in 1872. The Audubon Society was founded in 1872 and Sequoia and General Grant parks were established. The only setback during this era was the Mining Act of 1890, which is controversial to this day. The Forest Reserve Act finished the era of pragmatism with federal impetus. John Muir was elected president of the new Sierra Club in 1892.
3. Conservation and Teddy Roosevelt
Though the federal government had begun taking actions to preserve lands, it was Teddy Roosevelt and John Muir - a bit of an unlikely pair - who publicized and popularized conservation. Teddy’s visit to Yosemite in 1903 gained national publicity. By 1916 the National Park Service had been established with leadership by Stephen Mather.
But just as swiftly, the World Wars - sandwiching the traumatic Great Depression - forced environmental concerns to the background of public thought. While the Sierra Club continued to grow rapidly and became instrumental in establishing many parks during these years, environmentalism as we know it today was not a concern for most Americans - or, consequently, the federal government. It would take disasters and threats to bring environmental issues out of the organizations and ivory towers and into the mainstream again. In future posts, you can expect these events to be explored in greater detail. Your questions are welcome.
4. Conservation and Catastrophe
After WWII, environmental efforts continued to be focused on conservation of land rather than more personal issues like food safety or consumer products. That soon changed. The 1948 disaster at Donora(called the “death fog”) prompted national outcry; also during this time David Brower became Executive Director of the Sierra Club (1952).
5. Things Get “Personal”
The technological and industrial developments of the Cold War era and a series of surprising events (most notably Donora) fueled a new environmental concern that went beyond saving forests and establishing parks. Carson’s bestseller set off a furor with its expose of toxins in consumer products and philosophical claim that controlling nature is both arrogant and morally bankrupt. The Sierra Club prevented the damming of the Grand Canyon and an oil spill at Santa Barbara caused public outrage. The Wilderness Act was passed in 1964 to limit the construction of dams and other structures on important lands and landmarks. During these years the Environmental Protection Agency was founded. The late 1960s and 1970s saw the rise, then, of the modern green movement.
6. Activism and Codification
The 1970s saw numerous steps to clean up the environment: the National Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Air Act, the founding of Earth Day, the banning of DDT, the Water Pollution Control Act, and the Endangered Species Act (which the Supreme Court upheld in 1977. Disasters at Love Canal in 1978 and Three Mile Island in 1979 terrified the public with the visible consequences of toxic waste, pollution, and contamination. The 1980s were plagued with oil spills (the Exxon Valdezin 1989, among others), and while there was continued significantbacklash from industry against environmental strictures, the various Acts were not overturned.
7. Treehuggers and That Infamous Owl
The 1990s saw the offshoot of radical environmentalism in the face of corporate mistreatment of the land - and groups like PETA, Earth First and ELF got plenty of media attention. As conservative radio hosts went on tirades about minnows and the spotted owl and the merits of clear cutting, passionate young activists famously chained themselves to or took up residence in trees - earning the nickname “treehuggers“. These actions gained notoriety, but unfortunately also had the effect of politicizing and emotionally charging key environmental issues. Environmental protection was alternately depicted as being religious, cult-like, anti-society, anti-property ownership and anti-capitalist. Criminal stunts from fringe environmental groups did nothing to dampen the image of environmentalism as extreme. Vegetarianism experienced a popular resurgence with ground-breaking books like Diet for a New America(Robbins) but it also became the brunt of many a late-night comedian’s routine. The concept of climate change was ridiculed by many as an overreaction from misguided “environmentalist wackos”.
9. The “New” Environmentalism
Sobering international events, catastrophic weather, visible climate change, 9/11 and war, gas shortages and scientific consensus legitimized environmental concerns during the early years of the new century. Al Gore’s blockbuster film An Inconvenient Truth seared the climate crisis into the popular consciousness. Suddenly, the problems were obvious everywhere you looked: our food was chemically treated and genetically modified, our water was contaminated with toxic chemicals, our resources were running out, our wasteful habits were filling landfills, New Orleans was virtually destroyed, and gas prices were soaring - to name but a few key issues that have spurred millions to “go green”.
This post merely reviews the environmental movement as it relates to the United States. Consider: American leaders have yet to sign the Kyoto Protocol or earmark serious funding to green-collar jobs and sustainable technologies and energy. But American citizens have taken it upon themselves join a global movement, to learn more despite the gridlock in Washington; to conserve, to drive the development of eco-friendly consumption, to buy hybrids or use mass transit, even to telecommute. More and more people now recycle, compost, “go organic”, grow gardens and understand the connection between saving money, improving health and helping the environment. More people are interested in technology and efficient living than ever before. And more and more people are becoming curious about the natural world in all its majesty and strangeness.
The great opportunity is that every individual can be a part of the green revolution in some way. Everyone can learn and take a positive step in a greener direction. No one’s perfect, but together we can solve the problems we face. Welcome to the “new” green movement.
Consider this your crash course in environmentalism. In future articles you will learn more about each stage of the green movement, as well as learn about both international and American contributions, challenges and solutions. Our mission is to provide interesting, educational, practical green information and ideas and we welcome everyone.
http://webecoist.com/2008/08/17/a-brief-history-of-the-modern-green-movement/
Written by Sara on August 17th, 2008 - Topics: Geography and Travel, History and Trivia, Nature and Ecosystems, News and Politics
What is the green movement?
The green movement as we think of it today has evolved considerably since the early days. Since there are some popular assumptions about environmental history that are incorrect, if you have an interest in green issues this article will serve as a helpful guide to the origins and evolution of “green”. To understand the modern green movement, we have to trace its origins back to the beginning.
Let’s get started:
While many people associate the beginning of the green movement with Rachel Carson’s breakthrough book Silent Spring and the legislative fervor of the 1970s, environmentalism is in fact rooted in the intellectual thought of the 1830s and 1840s. In fact, the “environmental movement” is a significant thread in the fabric of American philosophical thought - first developed by the Transcendentalists (most famously Henry David Thoreau) but tangibly expanded upon during the era of American pragmatism in the latter half of the 19th century. Environmentalism isn’t a trend, or a cult, or a form of hysteria. It is rooted in American philosophy and, being at once innovative and practical, idealistic and active, one could easily define modern environmentalism as quintessentially American.
Environmentalism in America today is defined as:
“Environmentalists advocate the sustainable management of resources and stewardship of the environment through changes in public policy and individual behavior. In its recognition of humanity as a participant in (not enemy of) ecosystems, the movement is centered on ecology, health, and human rights.”
But how did we get from Thoreau and Teddy Roosevelt to “treehugging” and finally, the eco-friendly consumer-driven developments of today?
1. Roots of Environmentalism
Rachel Carson (1907-1964) certainly helped foster a reawakening of environmentalism, but it was Henry David Thoreau, in his book Maine Woods, who called for the conservation of and respect for nature and the federal preservation of virgin forests.
George Perkins Marsh was another key figure during the first half of the 19th century who championed preserving the natural environment. Leading intellectuals of the antebellum era called into question the standard Puritan pastoral ethic - the belief that cultivating and using the land was inherently moral and leaving the land alone to be “wild” was wasteful and uncivilized (this belief developed in large part because of the violent cultural clash between early Americans and Native Americans - something we tend to forget about in modern times). To this day there are ingrained negative associations between preserving wild lands and pantheistic or pagan values. This tension flares up in popular discourse from time to time (“environmental wackos”, “treehuggers”, and so forth). The classic American conflict between secular rationalism and Puritan morality is certainly not exclusive to our management of natural resources!
2. The Pragmatist Era
Though Transcendentalism was famously reverent of nature, it was the thrust of can-do American Pragmatism (widely viewed to be America’s original contribution to philosophical thought) that doubtless inspired a series of steps to conserve nature. Beginning in the 1860s, the United States government saw fit to create parks and set aside wild lands for public good. Yosemite was claimed in 1864 (John Muir moved there in 1869). It was made our first national park in 1872. The Audubon Society was founded in 1872 and Sequoia and General Grant parks were established. The only setback during this era was the Mining Act of 1890, which is controversial to this day. The Forest Reserve Act finished the era of pragmatism with federal impetus. John Muir was elected president of the new Sierra Club in 1892.
3. Conservation and Teddy Roosevelt
Though the federal government had begun taking actions to preserve lands, it was Teddy Roosevelt and John Muir - a bit of an unlikely pair - who publicized and popularized conservation. Teddy’s visit to Yosemite in 1903 gained national publicity. By 1916 the National Park Service had been established with leadership by Stephen Mather.
But just as swiftly, the World Wars - sandwiching the traumatic Great Depression - forced environmental concerns to the background of public thought. While the Sierra Club continued to grow rapidly and became instrumental in establishing many parks during these years, environmentalism as we know it today was not a concern for most Americans - or, consequently, the federal government. It would take disasters and threats to bring environmental issues out of the organizations and ivory towers and into the mainstream again. In future posts, you can expect these events to be explored in greater detail. Your questions are welcome.
4. Conservation and Catastrophe
After WWII, environmental efforts continued to be focused on conservation of land rather than more personal issues like food safety or consumer products. That soon changed. The 1948 disaster at Donora(called the “death fog”) prompted national outcry; also during this time David Brower became Executive Director of the Sierra Club (1952).
5. Things Get “Personal”
The technological and industrial developments of the Cold War era and a series of surprising events (most notably Donora) fueled a new environmental concern that went beyond saving forests and establishing parks. Carson’s bestseller set off a furor with its expose of toxins in consumer products and philosophical claim that controlling nature is both arrogant and morally bankrupt. The Sierra Club prevented the damming of the Grand Canyon and an oil spill at Santa Barbara caused public outrage. The Wilderness Act was passed in 1964 to limit the construction of dams and other structures on important lands and landmarks. During these years the Environmental Protection Agency was founded. The late 1960s and 1970s saw the rise, then, of the modern green movement.
6. Activism and Codification
The 1970s saw numerous steps to clean up the environment: the National Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Air Act, the founding of Earth Day, the banning of DDT, the Water Pollution Control Act, and the Endangered Species Act (which the Supreme Court upheld in 1977. Disasters at Love Canal in 1978 and Three Mile Island in 1979 terrified the public with the visible consequences of toxic waste, pollution, and contamination. The 1980s were plagued with oil spills (the Exxon Valdezin 1989, among others), and while there was continued significantbacklash from industry against environmental strictures, the various Acts were not overturned.
7. Treehuggers and That Infamous Owl
The 1990s saw the offshoot of radical environmentalism in the face of corporate mistreatment of the land - and groups like PETA, Earth First and ELF got plenty of media attention. As conservative radio hosts went on tirades about minnows and the spotted owl and the merits of clear cutting, passionate young activists famously chained themselves to or took up residence in trees - earning the nickname “treehuggers“. These actions gained notoriety, but unfortunately also had the effect of politicizing and emotionally charging key environmental issues. Environmental protection was alternately depicted as being religious, cult-like, anti-society, anti-property ownership and anti-capitalist. Criminal stunts from fringe environmental groups did nothing to dampen the image of environmentalism as extreme. Vegetarianism experienced a popular resurgence with ground-breaking books like Diet for a New America(Robbins) but it also became the brunt of many a late-night comedian’s routine. The concept of climate change was ridiculed by many as an overreaction from misguided “environmentalist wackos”.
9. The “New” Environmentalism
Sobering international events, catastrophic weather, visible climate change, 9/11 and war, gas shortages and scientific consensus legitimized environmental concerns during the early years of the new century. Al Gore’s blockbuster film An Inconvenient Truth seared the climate crisis into the popular consciousness. Suddenly, the problems were obvious everywhere you looked: our food was chemically treated and genetically modified, our water was contaminated with toxic chemicals, our resources were running out, our wasteful habits were filling landfills, New Orleans was virtually destroyed, and gas prices were soaring - to name but a few key issues that have spurred millions to “go green”.
This post merely reviews the environmental movement as it relates to the United States. Consider: American leaders have yet to sign the Kyoto Protocol or earmark serious funding to green-collar jobs and sustainable technologies and energy. But American citizens have taken it upon themselves join a global movement, to learn more despite the gridlock in Washington; to conserve, to drive the development of eco-friendly consumption, to buy hybrids or use mass transit, even to telecommute. More and more people now recycle, compost, “go organic”, grow gardens and understand the connection between saving money, improving health and helping the environment. More people are interested in technology and efficient living than ever before. And more and more people are becoming curious about the natural world in all its majesty and strangeness.
The great opportunity is that every individual can be a part of the green revolution in some way. Everyone can learn and take a positive step in a greener direction. No one’s perfect, but together we can solve the problems we face. Welcome to the “new” green movement.
Consider this your crash course in environmentalism. In future articles you will learn more about each stage of the green movement, as well as learn about both international and American contributions, challenges and solutions. Our mission is to provide interesting, educational, practical green information and ideas and we welcome everyone.
http://webecoist.com/2008/08/17/a-brief-history-of-the-modern-green-movement/
Going Green can be Financial Windfall
Posted on Mon, Jun. 01, 2009 to the Miami Herald.com
My view | Going green can be financial windfall
BY WALTER BYRD
Special to The Miami Herald
When Al Gore released The Inconvenient Truth, he forced many of us to re-think the ways in which our actions affect the global environment. He also pointed out loud and clear how America is lagging behind other countries in the cause. Those who never before considered a carbon footprint let alone wrestled with the question of ''paper or plastic?'' were suddenly racing to hardware stores to get new energy-efficient light bulbs for their homes. Add $140-per-barrel oil, and many started to look at trading in SUVs for compacts. Then, almost overnight, thanks to the downturn of the economy, the skeptics have resurfaced with their age old chant ``we cannot afford Green.''
However, something has been lost -- going green can be a financial windfall as well. Europeans are ahead of their American counterparts in these types of investments, and European businesses with U.S. subsidiaries frequently adhere to many of the European standards when developing their U.S. business plans.
South Florida is starting to embrace this concept, and Mayor Manny Diaz's recent actions to create a greener city should be applauded. Proclaiming that Miami will become the leading green city in the nation is more than great public relations, it will ultimately provide for a better environment and a tremendous amount of savings for Florida business owners. These ripples will have seismic effects for our region in the future.
Green has now become part of the economic discussion in a positive sense. Unlike a decade ago when the thought of signing on to the Kyoto Protocol was countered with talk of ruin to our economy, in the past eight years, further research and development, gas rising to a high of $4.50 a gallon and a severe economic recession have started to change our perception of the Green Movement. More and more companies are finding that capital investments that help reduce their impact on the environment are as profitable as their other investments.
Sure, the economy is still in a state of recovery, and that is the very reason to go green. Never before has minding the bottom line been as important. Even small inroads into the ''greening'' process are producing immediate returns for companies.
Our company, Transwestern, which is one of the largest privately held commercial real estate and development firms in the United States, has been working with the subsidiary of a large European conglomerate operating a distribution center in Miami that had a corporate mandate to reduce their impact on landfills by recycling. With a $15,000 investment in cardboard compactors, this client began recycling cardboard boxes and reduced their garbage haul-away fees by $60,000 per year. In addition, they started selling the cardboard for $20,000 per year, yielding a $65,000 profit in the first year alone. Good for the environment and great for the bottom line.
Another subsidiary of a European company we work with was interested in reducing the energy cost of a new warehouse they had leased for seven years in the Pacific Northwest. The client replaced all warehouse lighting with new, high efficiency fluorescent bulbs controlled by motion sensors. Easy, right? This client recouped their investment in less than two years and expects a more than 300 percent return over the life of the lease.
In business, just like in people's own homes, small investments in environmentally friendly products, processes or services can yield significant savings. Reducing our impact on the environment by improving energy efficiency, recycling and re-using is a great start. What's good for the environment also makes great business sense.
Walter Byrd is managing director of the South Florida office of Transwestern, one of the largest privately held commercial real estate and development firms in the United States and a leader in sustainability.
http://www.miamiherald.com/business/story/1074221.html
My view | Going green can be financial windfall
BY WALTER BYRD
Special to The Miami Herald
When Al Gore released The Inconvenient Truth, he forced many of us to re-think the ways in which our actions affect the global environment. He also pointed out loud and clear how America is lagging behind other countries in the cause. Those who never before considered a carbon footprint let alone wrestled with the question of ''paper or plastic?'' were suddenly racing to hardware stores to get new energy-efficient light bulbs for their homes. Add $140-per-barrel oil, and many started to look at trading in SUVs for compacts. Then, almost overnight, thanks to the downturn of the economy, the skeptics have resurfaced with their age old chant ``we cannot afford Green.''
However, something has been lost -- going green can be a financial windfall as well. Europeans are ahead of their American counterparts in these types of investments, and European businesses with U.S. subsidiaries frequently adhere to many of the European standards when developing their U.S. business plans.
South Florida is starting to embrace this concept, and Mayor Manny Diaz's recent actions to create a greener city should be applauded. Proclaiming that Miami will become the leading green city in the nation is more than great public relations, it will ultimately provide for a better environment and a tremendous amount of savings for Florida business owners. These ripples will have seismic effects for our region in the future.
Green has now become part of the economic discussion in a positive sense. Unlike a decade ago when the thought of signing on to the Kyoto Protocol was countered with talk of ruin to our economy, in the past eight years, further research and development, gas rising to a high of $4.50 a gallon and a severe economic recession have started to change our perception of the Green Movement. More and more companies are finding that capital investments that help reduce their impact on the environment are as profitable as their other investments.
Sure, the economy is still in a state of recovery, and that is the very reason to go green. Never before has minding the bottom line been as important. Even small inroads into the ''greening'' process are producing immediate returns for companies.
Our company, Transwestern, which is one of the largest privately held commercial real estate and development firms in the United States, has been working with the subsidiary of a large European conglomerate operating a distribution center in Miami that had a corporate mandate to reduce their impact on landfills by recycling. With a $15,000 investment in cardboard compactors, this client began recycling cardboard boxes and reduced their garbage haul-away fees by $60,000 per year. In addition, they started selling the cardboard for $20,000 per year, yielding a $65,000 profit in the first year alone. Good for the environment and great for the bottom line.
Another subsidiary of a European company we work with was interested in reducing the energy cost of a new warehouse they had leased for seven years in the Pacific Northwest. The client replaced all warehouse lighting with new, high efficiency fluorescent bulbs controlled by motion sensors. Easy, right? This client recouped their investment in less than two years and expects a more than 300 percent return over the life of the lease.
In business, just like in people's own homes, small investments in environmentally friendly products, processes or services can yield significant savings. Reducing our impact on the environment by improving energy efficiency, recycling and re-using is a great start. What's good for the environment also makes great business sense.
Walter Byrd is managing director of the South Florida office of Transwestern, one of the largest privately held commercial real estate and development firms in the United States and a leader in sustainability.
http://www.miamiherald.com/business/story/1074221.html
Friday, May 22, 2009
Greening This Old House
Greening This Old House
By Bryan Walsh
Thursday, Apr. 23, 2009
http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1893514,00.html
Would Abraham Lincoln have gone green? Frank Milligan thinks so. Milligan is the director of President Lincoln's Cottage, a Gothic Revival mansion on a breezy hill a few miles from the White House, where Lincoln and his family sought relief from the summer heat during the Civil War. The cottage and its surrounding buildings were made a national monument in 2000, and in preparation for its opening last year, the National Trust for Historic Preservation carried out a multimillion-dollar renovation. But preservationists didn't just restore the buildings. They greened them, beginning with the Beaux Arts house next door that now serves as a visitors' center. Renovators kept 98% of the house's existing walls, roofs and floors and used recyclable material for the rest. Large windows were put in to reduce the need for artificial lighting, and low-flow plumbing was installed to cut water waste. The renovations earned the visitors' center a gold rating from the U.S. Green Building Council--and made the site a model for historic buildings in need of a face-lift. "Lincoln was always ahead of his time," says Milligan. "And going green is the future."
When we think of green buildings, we tend to think of new ones--the kind of high-tech, solar-paneled masterpieces that make the covers of architecture magazines. But the U.S. has more than 100 million existing homes, and it would be incredibly wasteful (not to mention totally unrealistic) to tear them all down and replace them with greener versions. An enormous amount of energy and resources went into the construction of those dwellings. And it would take an average of 65 years for the reduced carbon emissions from a new energy-efficient home to make up for the resources lost by demolishing an old one. So in the broadest sense, the greenest home is the one that has already been built. But at the same time, nearly half of U.S. carbon emissions come from heating, cooling and powering our homes, offices and other buildings. "You can't deal with climate change without dealing with existing buildings," says Richard Moe, the president of the National Trust.
With some exceptions, the oldest homes tend to be the least energy-efficient. Houses built before 1939 use about 50% more energy per square foot than those built after 2000. The main culprit? Tiny cracks and gaps that expand over time and let in more outside air.
Fortunately, there are a tremendous number of relatively simple changes that can green older homes, from historic ones like Lincoln's Cottage to your own postwar abode. And efficiency upgrades can save more than just the earth; they can help shield property owners from rising power costs. Moreover, a nationwide effort to improve existing buildings could create hundreds of thousands of green jobs. (In addition to using less raw materials, renovations are often more labor-intensive per dollar spent than new construction is.) "There's an enormous opportunity here," says Lane Burt, an energy-policy analyst with the Natural Resources Defense Council. "Energy efficiency is a way to spend now to create jobs, while still saving down the line."
The stimulus package includes some $8 billion for weatherization programs for low-income households, but that will cover only a small slice of the country's housing stock. To promote the greening of existing buildings, the National Trust last month launched the Preservation Green Lab, a think tank based in Seattle, and is working with members of Congress to pass energy-efficiency legislation that would increase rebates and subsidies to cover as much as half the cost of a green retrofit. Such incentives are vital. Although lower utility costs mean upgrades will pay for themselves over time, the up-front cost of better insulation or double-pane windows can be prohibitive, especially during a recession.
In the meantime, you can make small changes to begin greening your home. You don't need solar panels or rooftop wind turbines. You just need a good caulking gun. Start by thinking of your house as a submarine, and plug the leaks in your walls, doors and windows. Be sure to insulate the attic and the basement, since up to 20% of energy costs can come from heat loss in those spaces. A home energy audit is also a good idea; energysavers.gov details how to do one yourself as well as how to go about hiring a professional. So be like Lincoln and savor the summer breezes, but avoid winter drafts.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1893514,00.html
By Bryan Walsh
Thursday, Apr. 23, 2009
http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1893514,00.html
Would Abraham Lincoln have gone green? Frank Milligan thinks so. Milligan is the director of President Lincoln's Cottage, a Gothic Revival mansion on a breezy hill a few miles from the White House, where Lincoln and his family sought relief from the summer heat during the Civil War. The cottage and its surrounding buildings were made a national monument in 2000, and in preparation for its opening last year, the National Trust for Historic Preservation carried out a multimillion-dollar renovation. But preservationists didn't just restore the buildings. They greened them, beginning with the Beaux Arts house next door that now serves as a visitors' center. Renovators kept 98% of the house's existing walls, roofs and floors and used recyclable material for the rest. Large windows were put in to reduce the need for artificial lighting, and low-flow plumbing was installed to cut water waste. The renovations earned the visitors' center a gold rating from the U.S. Green Building Council--and made the site a model for historic buildings in need of a face-lift. "Lincoln was always ahead of his time," says Milligan. "And going green is the future."
When we think of green buildings, we tend to think of new ones--the kind of high-tech, solar-paneled masterpieces that make the covers of architecture magazines. But the U.S. has more than 100 million existing homes, and it would be incredibly wasteful (not to mention totally unrealistic) to tear them all down and replace them with greener versions. An enormous amount of energy and resources went into the construction of those dwellings. And it would take an average of 65 years for the reduced carbon emissions from a new energy-efficient home to make up for the resources lost by demolishing an old one. So in the broadest sense, the greenest home is the one that has already been built. But at the same time, nearly half of U.S. carbon emissions come from heating, cooling and powering our homes, offices and other buildings. "You can't deal with climate change without dealing with existing buildings," says Richard Moe, the president of the National Trust.
With some exceptions, the oldest homes tend to be the least energy-efficient. Houses built before 1939 use about 50% more energy per square foot than those built after 2000. The main culprit? Tiny cracks and gaps that expand over time and let in more outside air.
Fortunately, there are a tremendous number of relatively simple changes that can green older homes, from historic ones like Lincoln's Cottage to your own postwar abode. And efficiency upgrades can save more than just the earth; they can help shield property owners from rising power costs. Moreover, a nationwide effort to improve existing buildings could create hundreds of thousands of green jobs. (In addition to using less raw materials, renovations are often more labor-intensive per dollar spent than new construction is.) "There's an enormous opportunity here," says Lane Burt, an energy-policy analyst with the Natural Resources Defense Council. "Energy efficiency is a way to spend now to create jobs, while still saving down the line."
The stimulus package includes some $8 billion for weatherization programs for low-income households, but that will cover only a small slice of the country's housing stock. To promote the greening of existing buildings, the National Trust last month launched the Preservation Green Lab, a think tank based in Seattle, and is working with members of Congress to pass energy-efficiency legislation that would increase rebates and subsidies to cover as much as half the cost of a green retrofit. Such incentives are vital. Although lower utility costs mean upgrades will pay for themselves over time, the up-front cost of better insulation or double-pane windows can be prohibitive, especially during a recession.
In the meantime, you can make small changes to begin greening your home. You don't need solar panels or rooftop wind turbines. You just need a good caulking gun. Start by thinking of your house as a submarine, and plug the leaks in your walls, doors and windows. Be sure to insulate the attic and the basement, since up to 20% of energy costs can come from heat loss in those spaces. A home energy audit is also a good idea; energysavers.gov details how to do one yourself as well as how to go about hiring a professional. So be like Lincoln and savor the summer breezes, but avoid winter drafts.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1893514,00.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
