"Government waste is prevalent throughout our daily lives. From the pointless use of Police ATVs patrolling our completely safe beaches, to the quashing of plans for more efficient everything, our governments seem to be avoiding the imminent truth about our environmental crisis. At very least, sustainability does not seem to be on their checklist of mandatory considerations before making a decision. Everything from the policy decisions to the execution of initiatives are often missing the mark on the dire need to transition our society to one that is in alignment with nature, rather than at odds with it."
Article cites sustainability as imperative for Public Policy in government.
Authors Scott Badenoch and Argam Derhartunian are Co-Founders of Creative Citizen, a green wiki for a sustainable lifestyle.
Friday, August 08, 2008
Thursday, August 07, 2008
PROUT - input for the Blueprint for new society?
I experience that we must recreate the systems of organizing ourselves, our economy, and our relationship with Nature. The old system has design flaws and many are saying that signs of its demise are evident.
The question of how long the current economic, political, societal, cultural system will last - or whether or not it is even is in jeopardy, is secondary to the imperative for us to EVOLVE from where we are to optimize the current operating system of our civilization.
PROUT Institute offers some very compelling ideas:
"Mission Statement
The PROUT Institute works to bring new life and a bright future to humanity by applying progressive social theory and concepts - and those of the Progressive Utilization Theory (PROUT) in particular - that provide deep solutions to social problems and give holistic expression to human potentialities.
PROUT's Fundamental Premise
PROUT is based on the fundamental premise that all people should have equitable scope to develop and express their physical, mental, and spiritual potential, while maintaining balance between individual and collective interests, and while maintaining harmony with the rest of life on the planet.
PROUT Design Principles
PROUT does not seek to promote an ideology but to offer a system of practical design principles that are intended to bring balanced progress and vitality to the human society. Read More
Four Essential Conditions
for Creating a New Society
The PROUT Institute identifies four essential conditions for undertaking a transition to a sustainable and equitable future:
* Hope: a rational and grounded sense of hope for humanity's future
* Vision: a comprehensive vision to guide enduring social transformation
* Empowerment: personal vitalization and empowering ideas
* Solutions: a theory based, solution-oriented approach to social renewal
Future Vision
While recognizing that humanity faces unprecedented problems, and that significant disruptions in social life are now upon us, PROUT holds a positive outlook on humanity's future. It sees the difficulties of the present forcing shifts of consciousness and creating conditions for the rapid emergence of a universal humanity, able to work together to develop the rich potentialities of the human species potentialities long suppressed by a materialist culture.
PROUT seeks to help open a path through the darkness of the present to this new stage of human existence and to provide a socio-economic paradigm in which humanity's emerging new consciousness and unity can take root in fertile soil and flourish. It seeks to open a cleared vista, without dogma-created impediments, to the comprehensive fulfillment of human potentialities."
Read all about PROUT here.
Saturday, August 02, 2008
Ecuador is first country to include Nature's rights in constitution!
The recent New Moon update from the Pachamama Alliance announced that just a few weeks ago on July 7th, Ecuador adopted a new constitution which includes the rights of Nature.
Ecuador is the first country to recognize the value of ecosystems officially. It's aim is to foster a new model of develop with humanity in harmony with our natural systems.
"Chapter: Rights for Nature
Art. 1[N2] . Nature or Pachamama, where life is reproduced and exists, has the right to exist, persist, maintain and regenerate its vital cycles, structure, functions and its processes in evolution.
Every person, people, community or nationality, will be able to demand the recognitions of rights for nature before the public organisms.* The application and interpretation of these rights will follow the related principles established in the Constitution.
Art. 2[N3] . Nature has the right to an integral restoration. This integral restoration is independent of the obligation on natural and juridical persons or the State to indemnify the people and the collectives that depend on the natural systems.
In the cases of severe or permanent environmental impact, including the ones caused by the exploitation on non renewable natural resources, the State will establish the most efficient mechanisms for the restoration, and will adopt the adequate measures to eliminate or mitigate the harmful environmental consequences.
Art. 3.[N4] The State will motivate natural and juridical persons as well as collectives to protect nature; it will promote respect towards all the elements that form an ecosystem.
Art. 4[N5] . The State will apply precaution and restriction measures in all the activities that can lead to the extinction of species, the destruction of the ecosystems or the permanent alteration of the natural cycles.
The introduction of organisms and organic and inorganic material that can alter in a definitive way the national genetic patrimony is prohibited.
Art. 5[N6] . The persons, people, communities and nationalities will have the right to benefit from the environment and form natural wealth that will allow wellbeing.
The environmental services are cannot be appropriated; its production, provision, use and exploitation, will be regulated by the State."
Colony Collapse Disorder connected to Pesticides?
Duh!
LA Times writes an article which implies that there is increasing belief that the massive die off of bee colonies is tied to pesticide use.
Why are we spending billions of dollars to put poison on our food, and endanger our planet's fellow inhabitants?
There's a simpler way - ORGANIC!
Here's some excerpts from the article:
"No independent government testing is required before a pesticide is registered for use. Large gaps in basic scientific knowledge about pesticides remain, including their environmental "fate" (where they end up) and their toxicity to humans and to wildlife. A problem pesticide may be removed from the market only after a long process and full trial -- something that should be done before. The Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 improved control of residues in our food. That didn't help the bees.
Rachel Carson was vilified by an industry smear nearly 50 years ago, after the release of her book, "Silent Spring." "If we were to follow the teachings of Miss Carson," said American Cyanamid, the maker of DDT, "we would return to the Dark Ages ... insects, vermin and disease would once again inherit the Earth." But, as Carson so eloquently put it in a CBS documentary in 1964: "Man's attitude toward nature is today critically important simply because we now have acquired a fateful power to alter and destroy nature. But man is part of nature, and his war is inevitably a war against himself."
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Clean Coal? Bullshit!
This article and slideshow shows some of the mess left in our country from strip mining in regions like West Virginia.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
This is the Next American Revolution
A recent article from Common Dreams quoted Dr. Grace Lee Boggs, 93, a long-time Detroit political and labor activist, author, and philosopher.
"We are at a stage in human history that is as monumental as changing from a hunter/gatherer society to an agricultural society and from an agricultural society to and industrial society. Where we're headed now will be different because we have exhausted planetary space and human space for us to continue to look at things through the Cartesian measurement of material things. We need to face the way we used the world for our gains, pleasures, satisfactions. This is the way we evolve to a higher stage of humanity. And unless we want to live in terror for the rest of our lives, we need to change our view about acquiring things. We have the opportunity to take a great leap forward in these very challenging times. We need to change our institutions and ourselves. We need to seize opportunities. We need to launch our imaginations beyond the thinking of the past. We need to discern who we are and expand on our humanness and sacredness. That's how we change the world, which happens because WE will be the change"
"We are at a stage in human history that is as monumental as changing from a hunter/gatherer society to an agricultural society and from an agricultural society to and industrial society. Where we're headed now will be different because we have exhausted planetary space and human space for us to continue to look at things through the Cartesian measurement of material things. We need to face the way we used the world for our gains, pleasures, satisfactions. This is the way we evolve to a higher stage of humanity. And unless we want to live in terror for the rest of our lives, we need to change our view about acquiring things. We have the opportunity to take a great leap forward in these very challenging times. We need to change our institutions and ourselves. We need to seize opportunities. We need to launch our imaginations beyond the thinking of the past. We need to discern who we are and expand on our humanness and sacredness. That's how we change the world, which happens because WE will be the change"
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Straight talk on capitalism and the environment....
From Orion Magazine - The Ecology of Work
"Capitalism as a system of ever-accelerating production and consumption is, as we environmentalists continually insist, not sustainable. That is, it is a system intent on its own death. Yet the capitalist will stoically look destruction in the face before he will stop what he’s doing, especially if he believes that it is somebody else whose destruction is in question. Unlike most of the people living under him, the capitalist is a great risk-taker largely because he believes that his wealth insulates him from the consequences of risks gone bad. Ever the optimistic gambler with other people’s money, the capitalist is willing to wager that, while there may be costs to pay, he won’t have to pay them. Animals, plants, impoverished people near and far may have to pay, but he bets that he won’t. If called upon to defend his actions, he will of course argue that he has a constitutionally protected right to property and the pursuit of his own happiness. This is his “freedom.” At that point, we have the unfortunate habit of shutting up when we ought to reply, “Yes, but yours is a freedom without conscience.”
"Being willing to say such things about capitalism does not mean that one has a special access to the Truth, but it also doesn’t mean that one is a mere ideologue, or that most dismissible of things, a communist. It merely requires honesty about what looks us right in the face. It requires intellectual conscience.
"For instance, as a matter of conscience we should be willing to say that the so-called greening of corporate America is not as much about the desire to protect nature as it is about the desire to protect capitalism itself. Environmentalists are, on the whole, educated and successful people, many of whom have prospered within corporate capitalism. They’re not against it. They simply seek to establish a balance between the needs of the economy (as they blandly put it) and the needs of the natural world. For both capitalism and environmentalism, there is a hard division between land set aside for nature and land devoted to production. Environmentalists consider the preservation of a forest a victory, but part of the point of that victory is (usually) that humans can’t live in this forest. Private interests have been bought out. The forest is now “set aside.” We could draw a national map that showed those spaces that we imagine conform to a fantasy of natural innocence (wilderness, forests, preserves, parks) and those spaces given over to the principles of extraction, exploitation, and profit. The boundary lines within this map are regularly drawn and redrawn by the government in some of our most bitter political fights. ("Mineral extraction! Why, that’s a national wildlife area!” “Snail darter! Why, that’s economic development!") But regardless of which political party is drawing this map, we humans are left right where we have always been, at the mercy of the boss, behaving like functionaries, and participating in the very economic activities that will continue to eat up the natural world. For all its sense of moral urgency, environmentalism too has abandoned humans to the inequalities, the exploitation, and the boredom of the market, while it tries to maintain the world of nature as a place of innocence where a candy wrapper on the ground is a blasphemy. It’s a place to go for a weekend hike before returning to the unrelenting ugliness, hostility, sterility, and spiritual bankruptcy that is the suburb, the strip mall, the office building, and the freeway (our “national automobile slum,” as James Howard Kunstler puts it). Ideally, the map of natural preservation and the map of economic activity would be one map."
"Capitalism as a system of ever-accelerating production and consumption is, as we environmentalists continually insist, not sustainable. That is, it is a system intent on its own death. Yet the capitalist will stoically look destruction in the face before he will stop what he’s doing, especially if he believes that it is somebody else whose destruction is in question. Unlike most of the people living under him, the capitalist is a great risk-taker largely because he believes that his wealth insulates him from the consequences of risks gone bad. Ever the optimistic gambler with other people’s money, the capitalist is willing to wager that, while there may be costs to pay, he won’t have to pay them. Animals, plants, impoverished people near and far may have to pay, but he bets that he won’t. If called upon to defend his actions, he will of course argue that he has a constitutionally protected right to property and the pursuit of his own happiness. This is his “freedom.” At that point, we have the unfortunate habit of shutting up when we ought to reply, “Yes, but yours is a freedom without conscience.”
"Being willing to say such things about capitalism does not mean that one has a special access to the Truth, but it also doesn’t mean that one is a mere ideologue, or that most dismissible of things, a communist. It merely requires honesty about what looks us right in the face. It requires intellectual conscience.
"For instance, as a matter of conscience we should be willing to say that the so-called greening of corporate America is not as much about the desire to protect nature as it is about the desire to protect capitalism itself. Environmentalists are, on the whole, educated and successful people, many of whom have prospered within corporate capitalism. They’re not against it. They simply seek to establish a balance between the needs of the economy (as they blandly put it) and the needs of the natural world. For both capitalism and environmentalism, there is a hard division between land set aside for nature and land devoted to production. Environmentalists consider the preservation of a forest a victory, but part of the point of that victory is (usually) that humans can’t live in this forest. Private interests have been bought out. The forest is now “set aside.” We could draw a national map that showed those spaces that we imagine conform to a fantasy of natural innocence (wilderness, forests, preserves, parks) and those spaces given over to the principles of extraction, exploitation, and profit. The boundary lines within this map are regularly drawn and redrawn by the government in some of our most bitter political fights. ("Mineral extraction! Why, that’s a national wildlife area!” “Snail darter! Why, that’s economic development!") But regardless of which political party is drawing this map, we humans are left right where we have always been, at the mercy of the boss, behaving like functionaries, and participating in the very economic activities that will continue to eat up the natural world. For all its sense of moral urgency, environmentalism too has abandoned humans to the inequalities, the exploitation, and the boredom of the market, while it tries to maintain the world of nature as a place of innocence where a candy wrapper on the ground is a blasphemy. It’s a place to go for a weekend hike before returning to the unrelenting ugliness, hostility, sterility, and spiritual bankruptcy that is the suburb, the strip mall, the office building, and the freeway (our “national automobile slum,” as James Howard Kunstler puts it). Ideally, the map of natural preservation and the map of economic activity would be one map."
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Largest Calif. land conservation deal reached
From MSNBC "LEBEC, Calif. - A group of environmentalists and the owners of a large stretch of wilderness have reached a deal that would set aside the largest parcel of land for conservation in California history.
After years of legal tussles, conservationists including the Sierra Club have agreed not to challenge proposed development on the sprawling Tejon Ranch north of Los Angeles in exchange for close to 240,000 acres, in a deal announced Thursday by officials including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
At 375 square miles, the preserve of desert, woodlands and grasslands would be eight times the size of San Francisco and nearly the size of Los Angeles, said Bill Corcoran, the Sierra Club's senior regional representative.
More here -
After years of legal tussles, conservationists including the Sierra Club have agreed not to challenge proposed development on the sprawling Tejon Ranch north of Los Angeles in exchange for close to 240,000 acres, in a deal announced Thursday by officials including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
At 375 square miles, the preserve of desert, woodlands and grasslands would be eight times the size of San Francisco and nearly the size of Los Angeles, said Bill Corcoran, the Sierra Club's senior regional representative.
More here -
Monday, May 05, 2008
Rethinking GNP/GDP and Growth....
GNP and GDP are outmoded measures of economic growth - out of touch with natural resources, upon which our very economy depends for growth - what is referred to as "natural capital". As such they can not be considered sustainable because they do not account for depletion of either human or natural capital.
Consider this message from the late Robert Kennedy (father of leading activist Robert Kennedy, Jr.) :
"The Gross National Product includes air pollution and advertising for cigarettes, and ambulances to clear out highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors, and jails for people who break them. GNP includes the destruction of the redwoods and the death of Lake Superior. It grows with the production of napalm and nuclear warheads... and if GNP includes all this, there is much that it does not comprehend.
"It does not allow for the health of our families, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play. it is indifferent to the decency of our factories and the safety of our streets alike. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, or the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials... GNP measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country. It measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile."
GDP is “oblivious to the extinction of local economic systems and knowledge; to disappearing forests, wetlands or farmland; to the depletion of oil, minerals, or groundwater, etc.”
Our economy built on old methods of thinking are increasingly self destructive, as our system moves forward. The current methods of evaluating economic reality, disconnected from the rest of our world, were born in the times of Adam Smith and David Ricardo. Such thinking has not evolved to meet twenty first century realities. In the last 200 years global population has grown sixfold, and economic activity has increased roughly 60 times. Meanwhile with massive increase in economic output, we are reaching the limits of the Earth’s ability to support the human species sustainably.
Yet, many people are recognizing the challenges and opport unities in this situation moving toward an economy which takes Nature’s into account.
A group called "Redefining Progress" is addressing these very points. They state: "We believe that if policymakers measure what really matters to people—health care, safety, a clean environment, and other indicators of well-being—economic policy would naturally shift towards sustainability.
Redefining Progress created the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) in 1995 as an alternative to the gross domestic product (GDP). The GPI enables policymakers at the national, state, regional, or local level to measure how well their citizens are doing both economically and socially."
With their Genuine Progress Indicator factors are taken into account which point to the heart of well being for a society. Some of the factors the consider are worthy of note - resource depletion, leisure time, environmental damage, lifespan of consumer durables and public infrastructure - are just some of the factors they consider.
There is much going on in the public zeitgeist that already intuits the need for a move in the right direction. The current State of the World report chimes in – “The emergence of the sustainable economy is visible in a burst of creative experimentation involving design for remanufacture, ‘zero waste’ cities, environmental taxes, cap and trade carbon markets, car-sharing companies, maturing markets for solar and wind power, microfinance, socially responsible investment, land tenure rights for women, product take-back laws, and other innovations… Scaled up and replicated across the world, these and other experiments could form the basis of economies that meet the needs of people at the least cost to the natural environment.”
If we start measuring our economic activity, true costs, benefits it will become much more obvious what needs to be done to steer our system toward well being and sustainability.
The math is simple – if you keep spending your principal, you’re going to run out at some point. We’re seeing signs of life in this new sustainable economy, it is now time for us to get with the program and change the way we operate as a civilization. It all starts with how we measure our progress, and recognizing what is and is not progress.
Consider this message from the late Robert Kennedy (father of leading activist Robert Kennedy, Jr.) :
"The Gross National Product includes air pollution and advertising for cigarettes, and ambulances to clear out highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors, and jails for people who break them. GNP includes the destruction of the redwoods and the death of Lake Superior. It grows with the production of napalm and nuclear warheads... and if GNP includes all this, there is much that it does not comprehend.
"It does not allow for the health of our families, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play. it is indifferent to the decency of our factories and the safety of our streets alike. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, or the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials... GNP measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country. It measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile."
GDP is “oblivious to the extinction of local economic systems and knowledge; to disappearing forests, wetlands or farmland; to the depletion of oil, minerals, or groundwater, etc.”
Our economy built on old methods of thinking are increasingly self destructive, as our system moves forward. The current methods of evaluating economic reality, disconnected from the rest of our world, were born in the times of Adam Smith and David Ricardo. Such thinking has not evolved to meet twenty first century realities. In the last 200 years global population has grown sixfold, and economic activity has increased roughly 60 times. Meanwhile with massive increase in economic output, we are reaching the limits of the Earth’s ability to support the human species sustainably.
Yet, many people are recognizing the challenges and opport unities in this situation moving toward an economy which takes Nature’s into account.
A group called "Redefining Progress" is addressing these very points. They state: "We believe that if policymakers measure what really matters to people—health care, safety, a clean environment, and other indicators of well-being—economic policy would naturally shift towards sustainability.
Redefining Progress created the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) in 1995 as an alternative to the gross domestic product (GDP). The GPI enables policymakers at the national, state, regional, or local level to measure how well their citizens are doing both economically and socially."
With their Genuine Progress Indicator factors are taken into account which point to the heart of well being for a society. Some of the factors the consider are worthy of note - resource depletion, leisure time, environmental damage, lifespan of consumer durables and public infrastructure - are just some of the factors they consider.
There is much going on in the public zeitgeist that already intuits the need for a move in the right direction. The current State of the World report chimes in – “The emergence of the sustainable economy is visible in a burst of creative experimentation involving design for remanufacture, ‘zero waste’ cities, environmental taxes, cap and trade carbon markets, car-sharing companies, maturing markets for solar and wind power, microfinance, socially responsible investment, land tenure rights for women, product take-back laws, and other innovations… Scaled up and replicated across the world, these and other experiments could form the basis of economies that meet the needs of people at the least cost to the natural environment.”
If we start measuring our economic activity, true costs, benefits it will become much more obvious what needs to be done to steer our system toward well being and sustainability.
The math is simple – if you keep spending your principal, you’re going to run out at some point. We’re seeing signs of life in this new sustainable economy, it is now time for us to get with the program and change the way we operate as a civilization. It all starts with how we measure our progress, and recognizing what is and is not progress.
Sunday, April 27, 2008
New Economics - It's all about the collective
We're in a time of collaboration, as opposed to competition.
Partnership model, wikipedia, open source software, youtube, etc. All pointing to a new economic paradigm unfolding.
Yochai Benkler - author of the book "Wealth of Networks" spoke on the matter at the recent TED conference.
The new developments are showing disruptive, and innovative methods of production involving many people are changing fundamental dynamics in the economy.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Cisco's creative green strategy - videoconference and plant a tree...
Cisco just made a deal with CarbonFund.org to creatively show how reducing air travel with their video teleconferencing product is reducing carbon output.
A recent article on the matter states:
"WebEx meetings are a productive alternative to business travel which is a leading contributor to harmful carbon dioxide emissions. A person who flies just 30,000 miles a year puts more than 19,100 pounds of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Replacing even a small number of those trips with web meeting can dramatically reduce carbon dioxide emissions. For example:
-- Using WebEx instead of one person flying from New York to London for
a team meeting would save 2,690 pounds of carbon dioxide
-- Using WebEx instead of two people traveling from Chicago to San
Francisco for a sales presentation would save 4,696 pounds of carbon
dioxide
-- Using WebEx for a training session with 12 participants flying from
Dallas to San Francisco would save 22,377 pounds of carbon dioxide"
They also have a one month promotion to plant trees for free trials with their service.
It's a good start!
A recent article on the matter states:
"WebEx meetings are a productive alternative to business travel which is a leading contributor to harmful carbon dioxide emissions. A person who flies just 30,000 miles a year puts more than 19,100 pounds of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Replacing even a small number of those trips with web meeting can dramatically reduce carbon dioxide emissions. For example:
-- Using WebEx instead of one person flying from New York to London for
a team meeting would save 2,690 pounds of carbon dioxide
-- Using WebEx instead of two people traveling from Chicago to San
Francisco for a sales presentation would save 4,696 pounds of carbon
dioxide
-- Using WebEx for a training session with 12 participants flying from
Dallas to San Francisco would save 22,377 pounds of carbon dioxide"
They also have a one month promotion to plant trees for free trials with their service.
It's a good start!
Monday, March 24, 2008
Article - Key to Happiness: Give Away Money
Here's an entire article I found on the joy in giving.
Key to Happiness: Give Away Money
Those incoming federal tax-rebate checks could do more than boost the economy. They might also boost your mood, with one caveat: You must spend the cash on others, not yourself.
New research reveals that when individuals dole out money for gifts for friends or charitable donations, they get a boost in happiness while those who spend on themselves get no such cheery lift.
Scientists have found evidence that income is linked with a person's satisfaction with their life and other measures of happiness, but less is known about the link between how a person spends their money and happiness.
"We wanted to test our theory that how people spend their money is at least as important as how much money they earn," said Elizabeth Dunn, a psychologist at the University of British Columbia.
The findings, to be detailed in the March 21 issue of the journal Science, come as no surprise to some marketing scientists.
"It doesn't surprise me at all that people find giving money away very rewarding," said Aaron Ahuvia, associate professor of marketing at the University of Michigan-Dearborn, who was not involved in the current study.
The research was funded by a Hampton Research Grant.
Spending habits
Dunn and her colleagues surveyed a nationally representative sample of more than 630 Americans, about evenly split between males and females. Participants indicated their general happiness, annual income and a breakdown of monthly spending, including bills, purchases for themselves and for others, and donations to charity.
Despite the benefits of "prosocial spending" on others, participants spent more than 10 times as much on personal items as they did on charitable options. The researchers note personal purchases included paying bills.
Statistical analyses revealed personal spending had no link with a person's happiness, while spending on others and charity was significantly related to a boost in happiness.
"Regardless of how much income each person made," Dunn said, "those who spent money on others reported greater happiness, while those who spent more on themselves did not."
In a separate study of 13 employees at a Boston-based firm, the researchers found that employees who devoted more of their profit-sharing bonus (which ranged from $3,000 to $8,000) to others reported greater overall happiness than those who spent the windfall on their own needs.
Purchase power
A person apparently doesn't need to drop thousands of dollars on others to reap a gleeful reward.
In another experiment, the researchers gave college students a $5 or $20 bill, asking them to spend the money by that evening. Half the participants were instructed to spend the money on themselves, and the remaining students to spend on others.
Participants who spent the windfall on others ‹ which included toys for siblings and meals eaten with friends ‹ reported feeling happier at the end of the day than those who spent the money on themselves.
If as little as $5 spent on others could produce a surge in happiness on a given day, why don't people make these changes? In another study of more than 100 college students, the researchers found that most thought personal spending would make them happier than prosocial spending.
"Often people, at some implicit level, have this idea that 'buying these things is going to make me happier,'" Ahuvia said. "It does make them momentarily happy," he added, but the warm feelings are short-lived.
Buying buzz
Dunn's team puts forth several possible reasons to explain the charity-happiness link.
"I think it's a lot of factors of prosocial spending that are responsible for these happiness boosts," study researcher of UBC Lara Aknin told LiveScience. "I think it could be that people feel good about themselves when they do it; it could be the fact that it strengthens their social relationships; it could just be the act of spending time with other people."
Perhaps the fuzzy feelings associated with giving last longer than selfish buys. "The happiness 'hit' from giving may last a bit longer if the 'warm glow' from donation lasts longer than the hit from own consumption," said Paul Dolan, an economics professor at the Imperial College London in England. Dolan was not involved in Dunn's study.
Another idea is that charitable spending helps a person express a certain identity.
"People spend a lot of money to make their lives feel meaningful, significant and important," Ahuvia said during a telephone interview. "When you give away money you are making that same kind of purchase, only you are doing it in a more effective way."
He added, "What you're really trying to buy is meaning to life Giving away money to a cause you believe in is a more effective purchase than buying a T-shirt that says "Save a Whale.'"
Key to Happiness: Give Away Money
Those incoming federal tax-rebate checks could do more than boost the economy. They might also boost your mood, with one caveat: You must spend the cash on others, not yourself.
New research reveals that when individuals dole out money for gifts for friends or charitable donations, they get a boost in happiness while those who spend on themselves get no such cheery lift.
Scientists have found evidence that income is linked with a person's satisfaction with their life and other measures of happiness, but less is known about the link between how a person spends their money and happiness.
"We wanted to test our theory that how people spend their money is at least as important as how much money they earn," said Elizabeth Dunn, a psychologist at the University of British Columbia.
The findings, to be detailed in the March 21 issue of the journal Science, come as no surprise to some marketing scientists.
"It doesn't surprise me at all that people find giving money away very rewarding," said Aaron Ahuvia, associate professor of marketing at the University of Michigan-Dearborn, who was not involved in the current study.
The research was funded by a Hampton Research Grant.
Spending habits
Dunn and her colleagues surveyed a nationally representative sample of more than 630 Americans, about evenly split between males and females. Participants indicated their general happiness, annual income and a breakdown of monthly spending, including bills, purchases for themselves and for others, and donations to charity.
Despite the benefits of "prosocial spending" on others, participants spent more than 10 times as much on personal items as they did on charitable options. The researchers note personal purchases included paying bills.
Statistical analyses revealed personal spending had no link with a person's happiness, while spending on others and charity was significantly related to a boost in happiness.
"Regardless of how much income each person made," Dunn said, "those who spent money on others reported greater happiness, while those who spent more on themselves did not."
In a separate study of 13 employees at a Boston-based firm, the researchers found that employees who devoted more of their profit-sharing bonus (which ranged from $3,000 to $8,000) to others reported greater overall happiness than those who spent the windfall on their own needs.
Purchase power
A person apparently doesn't need to drop thousands of dollars on others to reap a gleeful reward.
In another experiment, the researchers gave college students a $5 or $20 bill, asking them to spend the money by that evening. Half the participants were instructed to spend the money on themselves, and the remaining students to spend on others.
Participants who spent the windfall on others ‹ which included toys for siblings and meals eaten with friends ‹ reported feeling happier at the end of the day than those who spent the money on themselves.
If as little as $5 spent on others could produce a surge in happiness on a given day, why don't people make these changes? In another study of more than 100 college students, the researchers found that most thought personal spending would make them happier than prosocial spending.
"Often people, at some implicit level, have this idea that 'buying these things is going to make me happier,'" Ahuvia said. "It does make them momentarily happy," he added, but the warm feelings are short-lived.
Buying buzz
Dunn's team puts forth several possible reasons to explain the charity-happiness link.
"I think it's a lot of factors of prosocial spending that are responsible for these happiness boosts," study researcher of UBC Lara Aknin told LiveScience. "I think it could be that people feel good about themselves when they do it; it could be the fact that it strengthens their social relationships; it could just be the act of spending time with other people."
Perhaps the fuzzy feelings associated with giving last longer than selfish buys. "The happiness 'hit' from giving may last a bit longer if the 'warm glow' from donation lasts longer than the hit from own consumption," said Paul Dolan, an economics professor at the Imperial College London in England. Dolan was not involved in Dunn's study.
Another idea is that charitable spending helps a person express a certain identity.
"People spend a lot of money to make their lives feel meaningful, significant and important," Ahuvia said during a telephone interview. "When you give away money you are making that same kind of purchase, only you are doing it in a more effective way."
He added, "What you're really trying to buy is meaning to life Giving away money to a cause you believe in is a more effective purchase than buying a T-shirt that says "Save a Whale.'"
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
From Oil To Wind - Oil barons going Green!
After looking at oil and gas rigs for decades, Texans are due for an upgrade!
The trend is strong with T. Boone Pickens going green and planning to build a $10 Billion wind farm that can energize a small city to TXU - Texas Utilities, looking to build a 3,000 megawatt farm indicate a very positive trend.
This positive trend is not without challenges, as the case with most new initiatives that are bringing about fundamental change, including getting energy from most wind likely areas to the coastal cities.
All this is outlined in an article recently published in the NY Times.
The trend is strong with T. Boone Pickens going green and planning to build a $10 Billion wind farm that can energize a small city to TXU - Texas Utilities, looking to build a 3,000 megawatt farm indicate a very positive trend.
This positive trend is not without challenges, as the case with most new initiatives that are bringing about fundamental change, including getting energy from most wind likely areas to the coastal cities.
All this is outlined in an article recently published in the NY Times.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
We're all human beings, and we're asked to think....
I bumped into my my friend John Trudell, poet, musician, Native American Icon, voice of humanity, etc.
He told me about his latest project - "Give Love, Give Life" which is an initiative to make sure that every woman and child in the country has healthcare insurance.
His words on the first page of the website for his project are not only applicable to his cause, they are words to consider for all of us, at all times. They speak for themselves:
"WARNING! EXPLICIT REALITY!
Give Love Give Life is a perception focused on the health of women and children, about what we have in common – women and children. This is not about our differences – political, class, racial or religious. This is not about whether we are from the left or from the right. This is not about whose fault it is. This is not about whose medicine is the best.
This is not about our differences. We all have our differences. Give Love Give Life is about what we have in common. Too often in the chaos of the world we are in, there seems to be a programmed focus on our differences, and this focus on our differences is perpetually being emotionally manipulated to the point that we no longer remember what we have in common. We are human beings. It is time to think together and show responsibility to the women and children.
We are human beings. It is time for us to recognize that we are human beings.
As human beings, we have intelligence and it is through this intelligence that we manifest our power.
As human beings, how we use our intelligence to perceive reality dictates how we will use the power of our intelligence.
As human beings, we have a responsibility to use the power of our intelligence clearly and coherently.
As human beings, we find ourselves in a dimensional reality where we feel powerless to deal with the various situations we find ourselves in.
As human beings, it is time to take responsibility for the power of our intelligence and use the power of our intelligence to think clearly and coherently and create solutions to the problems we are confronted with.
Simply put, as human beings, we are asking the human beings to think."
Photo from John Trudell's website www.johntrudell.com
Friday, February 08, 2008
Clearing land for Biofuel Production Produces more greenhouse gas emissions...
A recent article in Washington Post confirms some of my suspicions of biofuels...which are proving to be less and less a solution to the global climate change crisis...
The article speaks for itself:
"Clearing land to produce biofuels such as ethanol will do more to exacerbate global warming than using gasoline or other fossil fuels, two scientific studies show."
"The independent analyses, which will be published today in the journal Science, could force policymakers in the United States and Europe to reevaluate incentives they have adopted to spur production of ethanol-based fuels. President Bush and many members of Congress have touted expanding biofuel use as an integral element of the nation's battle against climate change, but these studies suggest that this strategy will damage the planet rather than help protect it."
"One study - written by a group of researchers from Princeton University, Woods Hole Research Center and Iowa State University along with an agriculture consultant - concluded that over 30 years, use of traditional corn-based ethanol would produce twice as much greenhouse gas emissions as regular gasoline. Another analysis, written by a Nature Conservancy scientist along with University of Minnesota researchers, found that converting rainforests, peatlands, savannas or grasslands in Southeast Asia and Latin America to produce biofuels will increase global warming pollution for decades, if not centuries."
Read the entire article here.
The article speaks for itself:
"Clearing land to produce biofuels such as ethanol will do more to exacerbate global warming than using gasoline or other fossil fuels, two scientific studies show."
"The independent analyses, which will be published today in the journal Science, could force policymakers in the United States and Europe to reevaluate incentives they have adopted to spur production of ethanol-based fuels. President Bush and many members of Congress have touted expanding biofuel use as an integral element of the nation's battle against climate change, but these studies suggest that this strategy will damage the planet rather than help protect it."
"One study - written by a group of researchers from Princeton University, Woods Hole Research Center and Iowa State University along with an agriculture consultant - concluded that over 30 years, use of traditional corn-based ethanol would produce twice as much greenhouse gas emissions as regular gasoline. Another analysis, written by a Nature Conservancy scientist along with University of Minnesota researchers, found that converting rainforests, peatlands, savannas or grasslands in Southeast Asia and Latin America to produce biofuels will increase global warming pollution for decades, if not centuries."
Read the entire article here.
Friday, December 28, 2007
U.S. Not Number One Any More....
Many know that US is not what it used to be, here are some surprising statistics compiled by the Whole Life Times.
The US Ranks worst, or next to worst in all of the following categories:
Overall Child Welfare (UNICEF)
Health Care System Ranking (WHO)
Poverty Rate (OECD)
Income inequality - rich/poor gap (OECD)
Carbon dioxide emissions per capita (UNHDI)
Ecological Footprint (Global Footprint Network)
Personal Savings Rate (OECD)
Income and pension security (OECD)
Balance of payments (OECD)
Municipal waste per capita (UNHDI)
Development Assistance to poor countries per capita
Longevity (OECD)
Infant Mortality (OECD)
Child Abuse (Every Child Matters)
Depression (WHO, AMA)
Anxiety (WHO, AMA)
Obesity (OECD)
Murder Rate (nationmaster.com)
Incarceration Rate (OECD)
Motor vehicle fatalities per capita (OECD)
Vacation Time (CEPR)
Paid Family Leave (GWF)
Paid sick leave (GWF)
The size of the middle class by percent (UNHDI)
Voting Rate (IDEA)
Press freedom (freedomhouse.org)
personal freedom (World Liberty Project)
Sources:
WHO - World Health Organization, OECD - Organization for Ecoconomic Cooperation and Development, UNHDI - United Nations Human Development Index, AMA - American Medical Association, CEPR - Center for Economic and Policy Research, GWF - Global Working Families Study, IDEA - International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance
The US Ranks worst, or next to worst in all of the following categories:
Overall Child Welfare (UNICEF)
Health Care System Ranking (WHO)
Poverty Rate (OECD)
Income inequality - rich/poor gap (OECD)
Carbon dioxide emissions per capita (UNHDI)
Ecological Footprint (Global Footprint Network)
Personal Savings Rate (OECD)
Income and pension security (OECD)
Balance of payments (OECD)
Municipal waste per capita (UNHDI)
Development Assistance to poor countries per capita
Longevity (OECD)
Infant Mortality (OECD)
Child Abuse (Every Child Matters)
Depression (WHO, AMA)
Anxiety (WHO, AMA)
Obesity (OECD)
Murder Rate (nationmaster.com)
Incarceration Rate (OECD)
Motor vehicle fatalities per capita (OECD)
Vacation Time (CEPR)
Paid Family Leave (GWF)
Paid sick leave (GWF)
The size of the middle class by percent (UNHDI)
Voting Rate (IDEA)
Press freedom (freedomhouse.org)
personal freedom (World Liberty Project)
Sources:
WHO - World Health Organization, OECD - Organization for Ecoconomic Cooperation and Development, UNHDI - United Nations Human Development Index, AMA - American Medical Association, CEPR - Center for Economic and Policy Research, GWF - Global Working Families Study, IDEA - International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Emerging Leadership - Movement Diplomats for a Sustainable World
"A specific type of leadership is emerging that is developing the authority and resources to convene and maintain the dialogues for developing shared visions and perspectives. Movement diplomats work to complement civil society's paid staff, charismatic visionaries, influential philanthropists, community organizers, and organizational heads. Trained and supported directly by organizations or communities, these diplomats are charged with the task of building systemic coalitions. They translate the rhetoric of different factions, foster communication and find common ground. They provoke learning in their own organizations in addition to reaching out to form alliances. This new evolution in leadership includes core competencies of facilitation, strategic dialogue, systems thinking, and familiarity with future scenarios and the requirements of a sustainable world."
From a paper from the Tellus Institute - www.tellus.org
From a paper from the Tellus Institute - www.tellus.org
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Building Economies with Heart
The core problem: We have a business relationship with nature and the nurturing qualities in ourselves, rather than a reverence relationship with nature and the nurturing qualities in ourselves.
From business to reverence.
David Korten writes in the latest issue of Yes! Magazine:
"If there is to be a human future, we must bring ourselves into balance with one another and the Earth. This requires building economies with Heart."
His entire article is excellent. I recommend it highly!
Illustration by Don Baker for YES! Magazine.www.evidenceofhumanity.org
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Amma's Project for Ending Farmer Suicide
Project for Ending Farmer Suicide
Quoted from Amma's website: www.amma.org
"Tens of thousands of beneficiaries have been recently added. Please read on for more details.
Due to economic pressures leading to irresolvable debt associated with continually failing crops, many farmers have been committing suicide by drinking the very pesticides that no longer work on their crops. Especially in South India, with the growing rise of climate changes and other factors, crop failure has become more and more common causing suicide to spread like an epidemic amongst the suffering farmers. For example, in 2006 in the Vidarbha region of Maharashtra alone, there were 1,044 reported suicides - one every eight hours.
In the spring of this year, after discussions on the issue with Maharashtra Chief Minister Vilasrao Deshmukh, Amma found herself pledging 43 million dollars to address this problem. She admitted later the large dollar amount she had pledged surprised her but in the moment she had felt drawn to offering at least that much to help the situation. As part of the pledge, Amma offered that the MA Math would launch a massive project to provide aid and hope for the future for these struggling farmers.
"The problem cannot be solved through economic packages alone," Amma told the Maharashtra CM. "What is needed is social and spiritual interventions so that the farmers realize that suicide is not the way out. In fact, it only further aggravates the problem for the families. Feeling immense compassion for their suffering due to their unfortunate circumstances, Amma felt counseling and education could really help them get through to the other side. .Yet another generation should not become slaves of emotional weakness like suicide," Amma said. "Rather than that, they should understand that they need to develop self confidence. The future generation should have the mental strength to face life's challenges."
On 27 September 2007, the Ashram inaugurated two programs responding to this dire situation: Vidyamritam and Amrita SREE. These projects focus aid on the places with highest farmer-suicide rates - Maharashtra, Kerala, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. These two initial relief projects are aimed at lessening the financial strain placed upon such agricultural families.
Vidyamritam - Educational Scholarships
Through Vidyamritam, the Ashram is providing full scholarships for free education to 100,000 children (ages 10 to 15) of farmers living below the poverty line. Many of the beneficiaries are in fact children who have lost one or both parents to suicide. The children receive a monthly stipend until they finish their education, subject to their performance in their studies.
Since the announcement of the project, thousands of applications have been received and they continue to pour in daily. Because of the huge response, the number of beneficiaries continues to grow.
As an extension of this project, the MA Math is conducting awareness programs to inculcate life skills for personality development.
A newsletter containing articles, stories and discussion forums to further facilitate the intellectual and mental growth is also being received by all the children. Furthermore, special advanced-education camps and symposiums on environmental preservation are being conducted.
Amrita SREE (Self-Reliance Education & Employment)
Through Amrita SREE, the Ashram is providing free vocational training to 5,000 different groups of women from impoverished agricultural families. Though many of these women have now incurred their husband's debt due to suicide, the MA math has been supporting them in building their own businesses through vocational training in various fields, including tailoring, making snacks for small-scale industries, electrical repair, and making paper products. After completion of their training, the women are given the necessary start-up capital to begin small, home-based businesses.
The use of pesticides and its effect on the life of farmers:
Currently many non-organic, commercial foods are genetically modified. Genetically modified organisms (GMO) present a profound danger to humans as well as the ecosystem. Many species of animals, such as the monarch butterflies are becoming extinct due to the GMOs. For vegetarians, GMOs pose another problem, as they are frequently spliced from animal DNA. It is hypothesized by many experts that the GMO food will eventually even alter human DNA. As GMOs are a recent creation their long term effects are unknown.
In India and other developing nations, western based GMO / pesticide companies are aggressively promoting extremely heavy use of chemicals for farming. This is leading to serious depletion of soil and contamination of the water. Many insects are developing stronger resistance to pesticides and sometimes even huge amounts of chemical are ineffective. For this reason many farmers have little or no yield, year after year. Having gone deeply in debt to these chemical companies, the farmers begin to feel hopeless. Unfortunately, large numbers of Indian farmers are committing suicide by drinking their pesticides. Amma has expressed concern about this issue, and is working to help the farmers and their families. When we choose organic, non-GMO foods, we can also do our part to end this tragic situation."
Friday, November 16, 2007
Dealing with Rising Oceans...
There are significant costs associated with dealing with the simple EFFECTS of global warming.
This article in the Christian Science Monitor is the first one I have seen being written about how costs of the effects of global warming are being dealt with.
This is a necessary step in maintaining the integrity of our civilization.
Dordrecht, Netherlands - The Dutch enjoy a hard-earned reputation for building river dikes and sea barriers. Over centuries, they have transformed a flood-prone river delta into a wealthy nation roughly twice the size of New Jersey.
If scientific projections for global warming are right, however, that success will be sorely tested. Globally, sea levels may rise up to a foot during the early part of this century, and up to nearly three feet by century's end. This would bring higher tidal surges from the more-intense coastal storms that scientists also project, along with the risk of more frequent and more severe river floods from intense rainfall inland.
Nowhere does this aquatic vise squeeze more tightly than on the world's densely populated river deltas.
So why is one of the most famous deltas – the Netherlands – breaching some river dikes and digging up some of the rare land in this part of the country that rises (barely) above sea level?
In the Biesbosch, a small inland delta near the city of Dordrecht, ecologist Alphons van Winden looks out his car window at a lone excavator filling a dump truck with soil. He considers the question and laughs. "We do have a hard time explaining this to foreigners," he says.
The work here represent a keystone in the country's climate-adaptation plans, Mr. van Winden says. Indeed, nowhere are adaptation planning efforts to address rising sea levels and flooding more advanced than in the Netherlands.
To be sure, the country's economic wealth and long experience dealing with threats from seas and rivers give it an advantage over other low countries that face rising waters, such as Bangladesh, Vietnam, and the tiny tropical island nation of Tuvalu in the South Pacific. But many of the approaches the Netherlands is taking can and are being slowly adopted even in countries far poorer, specialists say.
The excavation work here is one example of what van Winden calls "soft approaches" to flooding in this small nation where competing interests jostle for every square foot of land. By buying out the few farmers remaining in this region, breaching the dikes they built to protect their land, and digging additional water channels, the Dutch government aims to reduce peak flood flows at Dordrecht and other cities downstream. No longer will tightly constricted river and canal channels hold high water captive. Big floods will overspread the Biesbosch, reducing the threat of water spilling over the top of levees that guard densely populated cities to the west.
The Biesbosch may also be critical to the future of farming on the productive southwest coast. There, most of the area's fresh water sources are close to the coast – and vulnerable to salt-water contamination from a rising North Sea. This could make farming difficult, if not impossible. The Biesbosch, however, hosts three large reservoirs, each surrounded by a 20-foot-high dike. Fresh water piped from these reservoirs, some 50 miles inland, could keep coastal areas supplied.
1.4 billion live near seacoast
Globally, some 21 percent of the world's 6.6 billion people live within 20 miles of a seacoast – and nearly 40 percent within 60 miles, says Robert Nicholls, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of Southampton in England.
Seacoast populations who face the greatest risk from floods, storms, and sea-level rise live on river deltas, says the UN-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
In the IPCC's latest set of reports on the impact of global warming, released earlier this year, scientists looked at data from 40 of the globe's river deltas, home to 300 million people. If current trends continue through 2050, flooding in the Nile, Mekong, and Ganges-Brahmaputra river deltas could each displace more than 1 million people. Up to a million more may be forced to head for higher ground in each of another nine deltas, including the Mississippi River delta. Up to 50,000 could be forced to relocate in each of 12 other deltas, including the Rhine River delta – an area known more widely as the Netherlands.
Besides global warming, scientists say the challenges these regions face have other causes as well. Levees, sea walls, drainage canals, dams, and other land-use patterns have taken a toll. Deltas tend to subside (sink) naturally, accentuating the rise in sea level. Past engineering projects can actually limit the ability of natural processes to replenish the land mass of deltas.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)