Archive of blogs

It’s been quite a couple of weeks for the sustainability movement in Canada, since Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver’s comments about “environmental and other radical groups” and their opposition to the Northern Gateway pipeline project.

The unfortunate result of the government and media’s framing of the pipeline issue is that we are presented with a false choice: save the economy or save the environment. It is an age-old myth that many people have been working hard for years to overcome by promoting the idea of sustainable development. We should not have to choose between jobs and the environment. As a native Albertan with many personal and professional connections to the energy industry, an academic background in commerce from the University of Alberta, and now a role leading what some might call an “environmental NGO” based in Ottawa, you would think by this framing that I would be very conflicted: Am I on the side of the economy or the side of the environment? But I am not conflicted.

La fin de semaine dernière, mon collègue Alexandre Magnin et moi avons animé un atelier pour la démarche de plan intégré pour la durabilité de la collectivité de Rivière-du-Loup. Cet atelier avait pour but principal de former des ciotyens bénévoles à la démarche Natural Step de sorte qu'ils puissent se l'approprier et l'appliquer lors des années à venir. Nous y avons rencontré des citoyens engagés et motivés à préparer leur collectivité dans la transition vers la durabilité, ce qui est une priorité comme l'indique la plaque dans la salle du conseil municipal (photo ci-contre).

Nous avons entamé l’atelier du vendredi soir par un rapide tour de table permettant à chacun d’échanger avec un partenaire sur ses motivations à participer à la démarche,

Reflecting on 2011, we at The Natural Step Canada are struck by the year's events that illustrate the global sustainability challenge and the growing sentiment that systemic change is required. To name but a few…

The Arab Spring saw revolution and widespread protest across the Middle East in an effort to combat dictatorship, concentration of wealth and power in few hands, corruption, human rights violations, economic decline, unemployment, and rising food prices.

The United States experienced a record of more than $12 billion of weather disaster-related damage, showing the real and immediate costs of extreme weather related to our changing global climate.

The earthquake, tsunami, and resulting nuclear meltdown in Japan prompted worldwide debate about whether nuclear power should be part of our energy mix in a sustainable future.

And, of course, the Occupy Movement demonstrated a democratic awakening that addresses corporate greed, a growing disparity of wealth, inadequate financial regulation, and corporate influence on politics.

The circumstances that preceded each of these events may seem disparate, but the responses show a growing awareness that a systemic approach will be required to achieve the desired social changes. For example, to develop solutions to the climate change issue, democracy, human rights, and energy issues will all be implicated. In other words, everything is interrelated.

The following editorial by Chad Park, Executive Director of The Natural Step Canada, appeared in the Corporate Citizens Mediaplanet Special Report in the National Post on December 28, 2011.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is outdated and counterproductive to successful enterprise and the global sustainability imperative.

CSR encourages us to incorporate environmental and social considerations into a business-as-usual scenario. This is the triple-bottom-line approach and is often depicted with three overlapping circles representing economy, society, and environment.

This is a flawed paradigm.

There has been a lot of conversation over the past couple of years around bringing sustainability and accountability into business schools. The MBA Oath for responsible value creation is a good attempt at this – the movement was started by Harvard students in 2009 and has since been adopted by over 250 schools internationally and had been broadly lauded. The oath itself underlines the responsibility of business leaders to act in an ethically responsible fashion that goes beyond compliance and speaks to future generations and building trust within their own organizations and throughout society. I would prefer more specifics on some of the definitions (specifically around sustainability and healthy planet), but I would otherwise happily jump on the bandwagon.

My question to those who take the oath and more pointedly at the schools who are churning out MBA graduates: How do you expect students to uphold the tenants of this oath when they have been explicitly trained otherwise?

There are signs all around us that our society is out of balance. Our institutions are failing us, we are riddled with debt, we are lacking social cohesion and trust, and we are consuming at an ever-increasing rate – all the while becoming less happy. These patterns are wreaking havoc on the habitat that sustains us - the Earth - and the social systems on which we rely. If we draw these patterns out to their logical conclusion, the story does not unfold happily.

To address a series of massive and interconnected challenges that includes poverty, pollution and toxicity, species extinction, and climate change, we require a) a unifying strategic planning approach that will allow us to thrive within the planet's limits, and b) leadership that inspires systemic change across sectors, borders and disciplines. The Master’s programme in Strategic Leadership towards Sustainability (MSLS) offers these two things in spades