Global Day of Action

On 6th December the Global Day of Acton will take place. The ambition is through manifestations arranged in hundreds of countries worldwide call on world leaders to take urgent action on climate change during the UN top climate meeting that will be held in Poznan, Poland.

Take the opportunity to demonstrate. Take a look at http://www.globalclimatecampaign.org/

Climate party!

The 16th of October, Think Globally Radio covered a Climate Party in central Stockholm.

The idea of the party, launched by the movement "Klimataktion" in Sweden is to raise awareness of the acute climate situation as well as to highlight the relation of the participants to this global issue. A Climate Party has its roots from the "home sales party" phenomenon. However, instead of a salesman there is a climate whistleblower invited to the party.

Think Globally Radio will soon do a show dedicated for this idea together with representatives of the movement "Klimataktion".

You can visit Klimataktion here.

Sustainable steps: Ecosystem services to be incorporated into business

The responsible investment company GES Investment Services is engaged into developing a new index that will measure companies ecosystem preformance. With the help of World Resources Institutes analyze tool Corporate Ecosystem Review (CER) GES Investment Services takes one step further into shifting the focus of the business sector on end-of-pipe solutions and environmental management standards towards the holistic fact of companies dependency of well-functioning ecosystems. The index will then serve capital investors at the time of investment decision making.

"If we considered the Earth a company, then we would have a capital destruction of 60%", said Cecilia Procopé Repinski, GES Investment Services.

Think Globally Radio wins Community Radio of the Year prize at the Swedish Radio Awards - Wednesday, 24 Sep 2008

Think Globally Radio accepted the award for Community Radio of the Year at a gala event at the Rigoletto theater in Stockholm on September 24th, 2008. The Jury’s motivation for awarding Think Globally Radio with the honor: “A community radio program that takes the environment bloody seriously. A program that through its proximity to science and expertise allows us to understand that we have to think globally in environmental questions.”

Think Globally Radio nominated for "Local Radio Program of the Year" (Årets Närradio)

We are proud to announce that Think Globally Radio has been nominated by the Swedish Radio Academy as Årets Närradio (Local Radio Program of the Year) for 2008. The winner will be chosen from among three nominees on September 24th at the annual Radio Gala.

Disassembling local political power

This week, in the local paper of my south Stockholm suburb dull news came infront of me. Stockholms local municipal district offices are, by the centralized politicians, in favour to become even more disassembled. No particular cause is mentioned, but everyone can realize that it is the resources that just doesnt seem to be enough. So, instead of disassembling them this year, due to total objection by all municipal district offices, they get a dispensation and will probably disassembled next year.

Why should we bother? It is obvious! No local political influence will not deliver the most appropriate decisions for the local community. Then, suddenly you might have a road on your back yard, an enourmos shopping mall in your neighborhood or a giant freeway in the nearest green area. Why can´t we try to hold on to these positive institutions? Why can´t we realize that by making everything more individual we are losing the picture of the bigger whole? By focusing on money, in whatever level of society, primarily will NOT bring us happiness, this is nowdays scientifically proved.

The world we create is simply a result based on the decisions we prioritate. It´s now, both locally, regionally and globally critical to make these decisions integrated with those existing in our hearts and souls.

In search of the common sense

Listen to KG Hammars simple and beautiful message concerning the relation to ourselves as a precondition to the relation between ourselves and nature. From Tellbärg Forum 2008:

http://www.compodium.se/tallberg08/day2/006/

Fashion of climate change..?

Focusing on necessary questions, 3

CSR, social strategies, eco-agendas, sustainbale indexes and sustainable reporting concerning and designed by corporations are fresh concepts that, at best, communicates to consumers that corporations at choise are taking their social and ecological responsibility.

Permeating, or overlooking this trend, the issue transforms into an egoistic or altruistic agenda operated by corporations. As long as CSR strategies are used for a competitive advantage for ever increasing economic growth, issues like total ecosystem footprints (how much goods are produced and how much raw material and energy is used during a year totally in one region/country etc.) and social issues (what are the consequences for social/health implications of the human beings belonging to a more and more commercialized world where competition and economic profitability always comes in first hand / what about social relationships between parents and children when lifes of modern humans are increasingly compartmentilzed due to professional carreers and constant representation of corporate values?)

Should companies/corporatioins really gain total mandate of political power and adress issues that are directly concerning the general public of communities as long as they behave, metaphorically speaking, within the mental framework of a juridical patient diagnosed as a psychopath? The question is important to reflect upon.

Is not the central issue, whether or not we should use our energies as individuals to create a world that is a little more altruistic? What about taking into consideration the publics best, for instance through sound, transparant and sustainable political institutions functioning primarily for the sake of the publics best and through increasing corporate insightful actions of less competition and agendas of economic sufficiency for the sake of the public and our ecosystems?

Balancing egoism with altruism...

Focusing on necessary questions, 2

NCC Roads Norway, supplying products and services that are used in and around roads, newly notified that they one of their green strategies involve replacing fossil fuels with fish oil when producing virgine asphalt. NCC Roads states that the fish oil used is derived from food processing industries as a by-product.

Its so vital to consider the holisitic approach here. Although this action by NCC Roads seems to be green - considering that the European fish stocks already are depleted by 88% and we are depended by third world fish stocks, its not difficult to understand that it is highly controversial.

Not to mention that this most surely will lead to capturing fish solely for the sake of the fish oil in order to saturate a large-scale investment.

Time for large enterprises to put "green" solutions into a broader context including other parts of the society, such as recent and alerting research?

Forza Italia!

No, its not South America, Southeast Asia or Africa - the picture is taken in Italy. An industrial country, part of the G8.

The situation is not much better in Greece, Spain, the balkans and the eastern european countries.

Effective recycling management dramatically reduces the usage of raw materials and energy which directly facilitiates the Kyoto protocol targets and the European Unions immidate target of reducing CO2 emissions by 20% year 2020.

Forza Italia
Forza Europa!

Focusing on necessary questions, 1

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). Billion of dollars are invested in this technology believed to function as a sustainable solution for the energy sector.

To what degree should we depend on fossile fuels in our sustainable society? (CCStored coal can lead to devasted consequences due to the massive pressure it gives rise to as well as fatal acidification of watersheds)

Should not the focus be on completely renewable energy sources + radical energy efficiencies + essential future lifestyle changes towards decreased energy consumption coupled to an massive world population growth?

The Human Factor

Humans have an incredible capacity to destroy -- our sordid history as a race confirms this truth. But human ingenuity cannot be underestimated, either. Tonight's guest, distinguished sustainability expert, consultant and author Alan AtKisson, gave us a refreshingly positive view of the future -- and humanity's capacity to change it. Visit www.thinkgloballyradio.org to hear the programme. Also, pre-order Alan's new book, The Isis Agreement, here: http://www.earthscan.co.uk/?tabid=1157

Also, June 5 was World Environment Day. Sponsored by the United Nations Environment Programme, this year's "day" had a theme of "Kick the Carbon Habit". Loads of good information, including a fact sheet which gives 12 ways for you to "kick" your own carbon habit, is found here: http://www.unep.org/wed/2008/english/Information_Material/index.asp.

Den Reflekterande Ingenjören, part II

On the 15th of April in the campus of the Royal Institute of Technology, the second episode of the seminar serie The Reflective Engineer took place. This time, Magnus Emfel the cheif business manager at the Stockholm Cleantech Park together with Muriel Beser Hugosson, consultant from traffic consultancy company Trivector Traffic shared the one hour long lunch seminar.

Magnus Emfel described how Stockholm Cleantech Park is engaged in bringing ideas for sustainable business into exposure of the market with its extensive network amid the business sector and three heavy university environments in Stockholm; Karolinska Institutet, Stockholms University and the Royal Institute of Technology. Good news that mr. Emfel presented includes that the market in Sweden finally has awakened - by observing parts of the total investments aimed towards cleantech, they have significantly increased over the past 2 years.

Muriel Beser Hugusson from Trivector Traffic spoke about urban traffic planning being so vital for our urban environments. A short historical overview stated that the car along with mobility always have been primary goals for both private as well as public economy. However, access rather than mobility should be the priority based on fundamental aspects such as global warming, oil price and not to forget, human health (noise leading to stress, overweight, poor air quality). In urban planning, considering creating access for bicycles and foot roads, spaces for human interaction and collective transport should each and everyone have equal importance as
creating roads for cars.

Den Reflekterande Ingenjören

Christer Sanne, author and researcher guested the first seminar of the seminar serie Den Reflekterande Ingenjören (The Reflective Engineer) arranged by SEEK, INUG and Think Globally Radio, April 8th. The lunch seminar attracted many curious engineers interested in understanding the relation of their gained knowledge into the context of sustainable local and global development.

Christer held an interesting presentation comprising important sociological concepts such as the increase of wealth but lowering of experienced well-being in relation to the consumption oriented economy of todays Western world and uneconomic growth - where the benefit gained is inferior to the damage being done in ecosystem services which we are entirely depended on.

Next occasion will be held on April 15th - denreflekterandeingenjoren.se

Global food demand

Food riots. That might be a future term to deal with. Perhaps it already is a very relevant phenomenon of how we, the western, industrial, wealthy world have been treating our fellow neighbours in "poorer", less industrialized and largly agricultural countries.

The food prices going up, with so much as 40% during one year only can be explained due to the following fundamental global causes: for the first time in human history more than half of the worlds population are living in cities (1), the demand for meat consumption is everly increasing (2), for the first time transportation fuels are based on agricultural crops (3).

This puts an enormous pressure on the capacity of productivity on agricultural productive lands to feed people in cities, which by the way nowdays are not only headhunting the cheapest available foods but also continually discovering new and exotic meals.

But most importantly, if we are to speak about global sustainability, this puts an enormous pressure on small-scale farmers and their families surviving in a marginal piece of land. Only a handful (more or less 5) gigantic corporations are actually controlling the whole provision business worldwide. And here is a clear example of how not everything can be left for the market to be taken care of: shareholders are put at first place infront of poor, uneducated small-scale farmers, whose whole livelihood are been taken over as large corporations and stock markets are allowed to dictate the profit for well-off urban consumers.

We like to repeat the history of evolution, that the smart naked ape has proceeded far away from the hunter and gatherer era - but if we step back and question ourselves - are we really so independed from nature as we think we are? Are we not completely depended on everyday food?

The big questions of the future will indoubtly be within the issue of global production and consumption of food. We can already begin thinking in terms of resiliance (Think Globally Radios Episode 080316). Actually, and this is the fantastic thing, if we just let people on the rural side of the worlds poor countries manage their business - helping them with fair economic benefits for the work underlying their produce and not forcing them into a market where they are more or less defensless - we will find that the best solutions for survival in socio-economic terms are found in harmony with nature.

Isn´t this actually natural?

Politicians: Promote train travel!

For an upcoming travel within Sweden Im examining tickets between the three main travel alternatives. The domestic flight is, still puzzling, cheaper than the train. Cheapest is of course the bus. However, concerning the time traveling, the bus can easily be avoided in favour for the flight. Train on the third hand, not much faster than the bus, is the most expensive alternative of all three!

Being active in this field of sustainability, I cannot remember how many times I have heard advisors, experts, researchers and activists describing the acute need for economical adjustments (correct and just pricing of polluting travel alternatives) and cultural/awareness improvements/campaignes so that train becomes both cheaper in comparison to other travel alternatives as well as more pleasant/exciting alternative to choose.

Swedish politicians - what are you waiting for? In an era of traveling lifestyles, the most CONTEMPORARY sustainable approach of traveling HAS to be promoted! Independently of short-time economical losses for the aviation industry/municipals - think alternatively - new jobs will arise from a sustainable framework - that originating from the natural capacity of our ecosystems!

Improve your life quality and reduce your ecological footprint!

U&W, a Swedish consultancy company working with sustainabile development held an interesting climate saloon this evening with the interesting and important theme - climate and lifestyle.

Many interesting guests were present and the gathering was divided into smaller groups for discussion - an ideal approach for sustainable communication. During the talks important insights were born by many that lifestyle changes in fact are not doomed to be negative, a burden or another stressful obligation for us Westerners consuming too much. Lifestyle changes ARE infact leading to improved life quality. And what is life quality in the modern society? Is it not having more time to understand oneself, to have the time to deal with emotions, real needs, like love, friendship, have the time to develope one´s own skills, follow interesting courses for only the sake of activating and releasing creativity? Is it not having time to do things that are not as climate intensive as buying and consuming goods, like simply spending time in nature or learning to play an instrument?

In corporate, governmental as well as individual level; the fundamental change of lifestyles toward sustainable living is not always reflected within the direct actions executed (as these actions can regress to old-habits), but within the sustainable values, insights and priorities of the "new" awareness-level!

Prime minister statement

The Swedish Prime Minister, Mr. Fredrik Reinfeldt expressed a couple of days ago worrying news; carbon-taxes are a much more effective approach in combating global warming than investments in rail-infrastructure.

It might come as a chock for people viewing Sweden as a very environmentally-friendly country that top politicians favour more or less business-as-usual rather than taking innovative, bold, corageous and desperately-needed decisions which in turn favour investments in transportation infrastructure.

Moreover top stake-holders in the transportation sector, such as Schenker and Sj (Swedish Railways) scream, and has screamed for years for infrastructure investments in order to better improve logistics and meet increasing demand. In fact, most of the rail capacity has reached its maximum in Sweden.

What is lying behind such as political statement?

Climate change negotiations from Kyoto to Copenhagen with Bo Kjellen

Real Life in the Studio

Tonight's programme on Think Globally Radio included Ms. Camilla Lundberg Ney, Communication & Advocacy Officer together with Björn Lindh, Chief Communication Officer from the Swedish Cooperative Centre (SCC - wonderful work being done there!), who discussed their great report will discuss their latest report on biofuels and African farming. In the studio we also had a special guest, Ms. Edith Mashoko. Edith, in her soft-spoken and eloquent way, related for the listeners the trials and tribulations faced by small-scale farmers such as herself in Zambia and elswhere. She was in Sweden to participate the Cooperative Center's 50th anniversary celebration, visiting with Swedes to talk about her life in Zambia and how her life had iproved thanks to support from SCC.

Edith is 35 years old and comes from Choma, Zambia, a small village 50 KM south of Lusaka. She has one son, but is also the caretaker of her deceased siblings' four children. She lives in a very simple house on her parent's farm, without electricity or running water (the nearest well is 3 KM away). She grows vegetables and fruits on her farm, and raises cattle. She is also beginning to grow crops for use in biofutles. She is a member of the Zambian National Farmers' Union, where she is an enthusiastic and ambitious participant in study circles and training sessions (attending sessions and then sharing the knowledge in Choma). Thanks to the support from SCC to ZNFU (a collaborative partnership rather than a donor-recipient relationship) she has been able to improve her income and, for example, afford to pay the school fees for all five children.

Zambia has faced many years of drought, and since November of last year, it has suffered from heavy rains. Many fields are flooded and roads as well as houses have been destroyed. In the fields some crops have been rotting and there has been little left for consumption and to take to market.

But Edith is not phased; indeed, she is continuing to work to improve her farm and the lives of those who depend on her. She has, for example, been able to use mobile phone bidding to take her products to market (costs for the phone coverage provided by SCC). Having such a nice, dignified guest on the programme was a real treat for Eric, Jimmy and Dave.

Profiting from doing the right thing

According to the Worldwatch Institute, factories around the world churned out a whopping 4-5 trillion of them in 2002. Recently, I've noticed my local ICA grocery store, in addition to selling ordinary plastic bags for 1.5 kronors each, are selling biodegradable, post-consumer material based plastic bags. Nice to see that. But, the new bags are 2 kronor. So rather than doing the right thing and just switching over to the eco friendly bag and continuing to sell them for the kronor and a half, they are still going to sell the harmful ones and sell the eco friendly ones for even more money. Sure, the environmental bags probably cost more to produce. But, given the profit (sorry, in Swedish) the Swedish grocery retailers make on the bags in general, you'd hope they'd do the right thing. One can always hope!

Poverty reduction through biofuels

Think Globally Radio, this Sunday, February 24th at kl 19:00 CET on 95.3 FM in Stockholm (and, as all other TGR episodes, it will be added to online audio archive a few days after broadcast).

Poverty reduction through biofuels
Global land-use is changing in an unprecedented way. Previously small farmers are realizing the potential in earning greater amounts of capital simply by switching to energy crop cultivation. The World Bank along with other international institutions also realizes this potential, and promotes the cultivation of biofuels as a method in combating poverty in poor regions, especially in Africa.

This Sunday, Ms. Camilla Lundberg Ney, Communication & Advocacy Officer together with Björn Lindh, Chief Communication Officer from the Swedish Cooperative Centre will discuss their latest report “With development in thought” presenting possibilities as well as challenges coupled with biofuel cultivation as a method for development and poverty reduction in under-developed countries.

The mining-biofuel connection

Systematic thinking is vital when considering environmental impacts. Just when you think you understand an issue, some new information or analysis comes along that can significantly shift your outlook. Biofuels have taken much criticism lately, but here is another angle that I had not previously considered: certain biofuels (from crops such as corn and soybean) require large amounts of fertilizer to grow, of which phosphorous is a key component; furthermore, phosphorous is derived from relatively scarce phosphate rock, meaning that a non-renewable, mined resource is a crucial component in the biofuel production chain.

This Sunday, we will be talking about the link between biofuel production and poverty alleviation, so some of the definite upsides will be discussed, which of course need to be balanced against some of these red flags which seem to keep popping up.

Marine biological catastrophes?

Few anthropocentric phenomenons are as frustrating to realize as the systematic depletion of every form of biomass from the oceans. It has been well known now for decades that we are overfishing and extracting reproductive organisms faster than they have the chance to reproduce. Species such as blue-fin tuna, cod and eel are almost completely vanished from our oceans. Not to mention that all the worlds fishing stocks have been depleted up to 70% (average value). But sadly, there are other issues of concern:

Now, the next ancient masters of the oceans, the sharks, are also endangered. One of the largest causes for shark decline is the demand for the fin which, in the East, is a delicacy in soups. And the method for fin production? Capture the shark - cut of the fin - release the shark again into the ocean with absolutely no chance of survival. At the AAAS meeting (American Association for the Advancement of Science) in Boston recently, additional causes for shark decline were presented - such as sharks captured as a side-effect of modern efficient fishing boats sucking up large contents of the oceans.

Another exciting scientific statement presented at the AAAS meeting deals with contraceptive pills and their connection to reproductive abnormalities in fish. Gender switches among fishes are not in fact the only marine environmental consequence; contraceptive pills, comprising their hormone molecules, lead indirectly to extinction of fishes (as their reproduction is out of order).

The In Vitro Meat Consortium is a very interesting initiative that reflects the problematic global meat production as well as consumption. According to recent FAO publications, global meat production is projected to more than double from 229 billion kg/year (1999/2000) to 465 billion kg/year (2050). The increase is estimated to take place in now underdeveloped countries that are developing rapidly. Increased meat production is coupled to enhanced global warming due to deforestation to make use of cultivating lands, loss of biodiversity and water depletion.

The In Vitro Meat Consortium is an assembly of scientists that are monitoring the possibility of large-scale industrial investments in manufacturing meat through the use of bioreactors and modern biotechnological equipment.

Interesting developments for modern human food consumption!

More evidence against biofuels

Biofuel skepticism has surfaced several times on Think Globally Radio (see for example "The Dark Side of Biofuels" episode from 9 December 2007 featuring Martina Krueger from Greenpeace, discussing primarily palm oil). This trend seems to be gaining momentum as scientific evidence mounts. A recent NY Times article outlines new studies published in Science that suggest that, if the overall impact of biofuels is analyzed more comprehensively- taking into consideration land use changes provoked by growing crops for fuel- the climate benefits can be outweighed by the costs. Hopefully policy makers will take such reports to heart, and do not succumb to agricultural lobbies and the rush to what many believe is clean fuel source.

DIY electricity

Here's an article from The Economist that discusses a sustainable source of electric energy that we generate all the time: walking around. In parts of the developing world not connected to the electric grid, this may offer a means of providing the energy needed to power, for example, lanterns, medical devices and radios. This could conceivably reduce the need for relatively expensive and carbon-emitting fuels such as kerosene and firewood, and increase access to reading light and informative radio broadcasts. And of course we here at Think Globally Radio like the idea of more people listening to the radio.

Great Pacific Garbage

Some days ago a small piece of shocking of news stole my attention. There are apparently two enormous garbage-continents that combined are bigger than the north american continent and floating around in the pacific ocean. According to scientists, each year, these garbage infernos kill one million sea birds and 100 000 mammals. Other interesting caracteristics include predominant plastic composition, attraction forces by underwater currents and extremely rapid annual accumulation.

Dumping municipal solid waste into oceans is a fast strategy to get rid of the problem for many nations. However, sooner or later, we need to deal with the consequences of our own actions. Not to forget that plastic is practically non-degradable.

Environmental justice - global or local?

During the most recent ThinkGloballyRadio show together with Ms. Karolina Isaksson from the School of Architecture and the Built Environment at the Royal Institute of Technology, an interesting insight was highlighted. Speaking about environmental justice, most often, needless to say in ThinkGloballyRadio, usually takes a global perspective.

The differances between North/South of total ecological footprints due different energy usage, personal mobility and food consumption is obvious. However, environmental justice can take a local perspective.

Research is beginning to show that upper-middle class income families tend to be more active in their consumer choises (recycling waste, consuming ecological food, using ethanol cars & bying carbon offsets for flights), also effective communicators for these active lifestyle choices. However, and very interestingly, in comparison to low-income families, the total ecological footprints are much higher for the upper-middle class, reflecting the so far proportional relationship between high income and more intense ecological footprint.

High income of course can drive the market towards the right direction by for instance investing in cleantech - enhancing the global as well as local environmental justice for high income individuals...

Fair-traded biofuels

In the spotlights of the global climate debate, another, "huge one", is gaining strength and remainding us time and time again that unless coordinated, fair and system-approaches are employed, the world will face huge risks of conflict.

Certainly, it concerns the global agricultural sector that has been and will continue to modify itself depending on the global urban demand. As China and India progresses economically, the meat demand is increasing, influencing a change of farming. Needless to mention the West´s enormous meat consumption, the recent increased demand of "biofuels", (almost exclusively unsustainable ethanol), has commonly resulted that the worlds foodstuff prices have increased by 30% during only the last 6 months!

The strategies for managing emerging agromarkets, such as the huge continent of Africa, differ strongly among various stakeholders. Swedens foreign minister, Mr. Carl Bildt, has personally declared that there is significant risks that we might experience food riots in the near future. Meanwhile, the Swedish Cooperative Centre, helping people for self-help in third world countries since 1958, recently published a report stating that biofuel production from Africa specifically might bring a promising potential in combating poverty. Ensuring a rural worker more in payment through cultivation of energy crops will acertain offspring in educational participation, increasing economic ensurance against diseases and maintaining an "alive" rural side - as long as it is managed socially and environmentally sustainable (conclusions from the report).

However, as it was discussed during the TGR show with Martina Krüger (071209) from Greenpeace, there have been obvious extraction and marketing mismanagements of biofuels in many cases. Apart from not sufficiently benefitting the local community from which the energy crop is cultivated and extracted, no significant considerations are given to the biological multitude (sacrificing precious rainforests) and the ecosystem-services that the subjected biohabitats provide (both for us humans and for all other living creatures). And, interestingly, as Peter Roberntz, WWF, points out: there is a tendency to avoid environmental requirements of biohabitats for the sake of climate relief... Everything is connected...

Not to mention - what is actually hindering a continuation of neo-colonial structures of biofuel/monetary exchange between North/West and South/East when we already live in a world where huge amounts of natural resources are shovelled out from Africa, increasing in value in Europe/North America/Japan/China?

Fair traded & organic produced biofuels
Climate labelled fruites
Sustainable fished fish

Think Globally

Potential EU and US climate plans surprisingly similar

A Washington Post editorial concisely compares surprisingly similar action plans that are on the table in the EU and US. The EU plan calls for emission reductions 20% below 1990 levels by 2020, while the US plan would reduce emissions 20% below 2005 levels by 2020. Both plans would introduce an increasing percentage of auctioned emission caps, and both rely to a large extent on biofuels, certainly something to be concerned about.

Both plans face significant obstacles, the US plan perhaps more formidable ones. But it shows that despite the climate pariah status the United States has earned for itself under the Bush administration, there are those with concrete ideas that are pushing for action on global warming.

Accessing the editorial requires logging in, something well worth doing to access all the excellent free content on the Washington Post website if you are interested in American politics.

Social and ecological clothes

The stylist Siroun Forsberg and the trend expert Stefan Nilsson have newly listed companies that offer clothes, jewellery and other objects aimed to promote social charity.

Simulteneously, I can advise "Asfaltblommans" webpage - listing boutiques that sell ecologic produced clothes!

/Jimmy

The US Election Coverage: Are They Thinking Globally?

While back in the United States visiting family for the holidays, I had the opportunity to see the coverage of the presidential races for the democratic and republican candidates for president in 2008. My personal view on which candidates I like aside, in the first New Hampshire debates and in overall election campaigns, it has been interesting to see how global environment and sustainable development have been addressed. 'Change' is the big word on the election trail, especially on the democratic side and everyone is postulating as to who is best suited to bring about big change.

But what is the change being addressed? While the some environmental issues has landed finally as important to voters, and in some ways and some times as a non-partisan issue. The republican candidates (the conservatives) were asked on energy issues, for example, and several advocated reduced dependence on fossil fuels, reduced emissions standards, and investment in cleaner energy and technologies. The positions put were framed that the "Great Nation of America" can innovate solutions much like it landed a person a moon a half century ago. As much as I actually like some the candidates and the discussion taking place (not the republicans even though most of them would be a lot better than Bush, no matter what) there are some basic issues that have me very concerned over the US and the prospects for sustainable development.

In fact, the word "sustainable," was not mentioned once in the debate. In the UN and the development and environmental communities the word "sustainable" is all over seemingly every agenda, document, initiative, etc. When it comes to global change and the future, everyone think globally radio talks to would answer that, in some form or another, sustainability is the answer. What "sustainable development" actually means and will entail is the big question, but generally being more sustainable is what everyone wants to do or at least seems to talk about. Yet, in the news and debates in the US so far in 2008, the word never comes out. Renewable energy, energy independence, even GHG reductions and reduced carbon emissions are all discussed, yet nothing about sustainable development. In terms of international issues, much more time is spent talking about global Islamic Radical terrorism threats than resource/climate issues.

Why is sustainable development not ever mentioned as part of holistic change? Of course, I don't know, but to speculate (and I love to speculate) is that genuine talk about sustainable development is not electable. Politicians in the US can not try to sell any talk about people changing lifestyles. That can not speak of transforming business. People want WASHINGTON to change (a very natural reaction to Bush with which I concur), and feel that the world or at least their country is off track. But the big changes in individual behavior that people in the environment and development communities are refering to when they discuss a sustainable future is not what anyone is discussing. According to a facebook poll of debate viewers, (which draws a younger and 'hipper' demographic) more viewers thought the economy was underrepresented in the debates than the environment. And this carried on to the second democratic debate that took place a couple days ago, where the environment was barely mentioned. Important issues for sure were debated: poverty, health care, the war in Iraq; but the environment faded to the back.

I guess I like everyone we want the same thing: for other people to change.

/josh

Sustainable business approach?

This recent advertisment of a domestic and inter-european Swedish commercial airline (translation: EUROPE FOR ALL!) is causing some reactions.

The symbolism of a red glove and the tied fist belonging to someone giving loud orders directly gives socialistic or communistic associations. It becomes ironic to recall Ryanair, a low-budget airliner, infamous for its inhuman corporate ethics during training of flight staff. That approach implies a minimum of ethical and social considerations in the business model. And surely, its not quite complicated to understand that low budget airline tickets, as is the case of this advertisment, implies effective cost-reductions at every possible business front - including staff wages and very long working hours. The double moral becomes obvious; Europe for all "class retorics" does not go hand in hand with the most fair treatment of their own staff workers labour rights. And the climate system specifically, and the global environment overall, are somehow, over the advertisment symbolics, sacrificed, so that as many consumers as possible, and as cheap as possible, can fly to a European city over any given weekend...

This is tempting,
but is it sustainable? Or even secure for societies/economies/environments/individuals?

Find out if, when we in TGR discuss the polar bear situation with the polar bear expert Tom Arnbom this Sunday the 27th. See below post!

/Jimmy

Polar bears in peril this Sunday on Think Globally Radio

Polar bears have become an unlikely symbol of global warming, as their icy habitats are threatened by the changing Arctic climate. We are very happy to welcome Tom Arnbom, a polar bear expert and adventurer from the WWF to Think Globally Radio this Sunday to tell of his recent expedition to the Russian Arctic, where he observed polar bears in their natural habitat, and the effect climate change has had on the conditions necessary for the survival of the Earth’s largest land carnivore.

We have all sorts of highly interesting guests on the show, but it will be extra exciting this Sunday to talk to a true field researcher who will share his first hand encounters, observations and anecdotes from one of the "front lines" of climate change.

This episode of Think Globally Radio coincides with the polar bear and Arctic theme this weekend at the Swedish Natural History Museum, where photographs and videos from the Russian Arctic, as well as lectures by Mr. Arnbom, will be featured all day Saturday and Sunday, 26-27 January.

The reflective engineer 2008

Last year, the successfull seminar serie "Den reflekterande ingenjören" ("The reflective engineer") was professionally arranged by SEEK (Sustainable Engineers Everywhere - a KTH Student Organization) in collaboration with INUG (Engineers Without Boarders International, Stockholm) at the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm.

This year, Think Globally Radio is an engaged partner in the planning process for the continuation of the seminar serie. Think Globally Radio is assisting particularly with deeper knowledge and conceptual understanding of sustainability linked to various societal, economical, cultural and environmental aspects. It will be an interesting collaboration without doubt!

SEEK + INUG + TGR!

/Jimmy

Go Sweden! And do more!

In todays "Godmorgon Sverige", Swedish National Television, there was a brief but interested panel debate concerning the great climate and energy package officially released by the European commission today. And the targets are not only tough, but also differentiated depending on the economical situation of the respective countries. Now keep in mind that the European Union has quite high expectations globally as the Union is viewed as a concerned and proactive political power zone in climate politics. Keep in mind the rough and strong position the European Union had towards the States during the recent UN Climate Conference on Bali.

So the challanges are huge. Especially for rich countries within the European Union (reed: Germany, France, Belgium, Italy and UK) to start achieving set targets of climate gas emission reductions. Because, in order for the European Union to show leadership in this important and alerting issue (radical changes are to be done within 15 years so as not to upset the climate system before tipping points arrive), the individual rich countries need to be in resonance.

For Sweden, the case is different. We cannot forget that every country has different prerequisists for these reduction targets. So Sweden can consider itself very lucky being placed in a corner of the world where inland stream-water is rich, securing a renewable energy system. And of course this fact is fast to be used by the politician in place: Maud Olofsson, center party leader of Sweden, said - Sweden is great. With green energy licences, energy-effectiviness of companies, district heating powered by solid waste, installed wind and water power installations and "environmental" cars selling great are making international delegates impressed. And the environmental minister in Bryssels is smiling, explaining that he is proud that Sweden is showing the way. Go Sweden!

The transport sector, the transport sector, that is the problematic area of Sweden sais Maud. And, as Erika Bjerström, European correspondent for STV, said, Sweden has the oldest and heaviest car park of the whole Union. Swallowing enormous amounts of fuel. Of course this sector will be under construction during the coming years of climate politics. Go Sweden!

But the global bell rings higher than this.
What about the average natural capital consumption per capita in Sweden (not to say globally)? Why is the political scene expressing more or less solely energy-effectiviness, biofuels and cap and trade systems when we have a whole Earth in change? Not only climate change, but global change (recall Prof. Will Steffen at Think Globally Radio 071104) - meaning how much of productive land and water we need to carry up our consumption behaviour primarily in the West, that is, what we use and what we discard. Keep in mind ecosystem service stress (70 % of fishing stocks overfished, 30-40% of all land living organisms extinct in a couple of years and water sheds drying out in many parts of the world). If everyone in th world lived as Swedes, there would need to be: 3.5 Earths. Go Sweden! And do more!

/Jimmy

500,000,000 million people is a lot of people

That's roughly equal to the current population of Europe. Or a little less than DOUBLE the current U.S population. It's also the amount of people who will migrate into cities in the rapidly urbanizing China by 2050.

Now, this is certainly not the only "by 2050" statistic that may frighten, scare, or even excite the average person (in fact here is a great list some predictions from the World Future Institute). But, still, before writing anymore I need to take and deep breath and just say it: my lord, urban areas will need to be built up to house, employ, and accommodate some 50 times the population Sweden over the next 4 decades. So, whether all these new urbanites will live like urban Swedes, sub-urban Americans, like the Singaporian Sustainability Superstars, (Singapore is generally recognized for being the most efficient at everything, or at the least in urban planning) or something in between, China's urbanization will be fascinating and crucial to global sustainability. This is displayed excellently in the New York Times series, China: Choking on Growth; and I can attest first hand that perhaps the biggest present and potentially future danger-spot for China will lie in how they build and use their cities (I wrote my thesis on transportation planning in Beijing, and, well, I truly love the city but frankly the traffic is sheer lunacy). So this entry will the first subject of a series of posts on this topic, which will delve into different aspects the urbanization process in China.

Last week, Dr. Douglas Webster, from the School of Sustainability at Arizona State University, was in town last week to give a lecture (as part of the Stockholm Seminar series) on urban land use planning currently underway in China and he seemed hopeful over the current state of urban planning in China. Indeed, there is plenty of positive signs for more sustainable style development (I use this term very loosely, its a blog so please don't crucify me yet, thanks). For one, Chinese cities are generally speaking quite dense, and dense urban structures are generally more resource efficient. Further, major investments are being made in rapid urban transit, subway lines, and highspeed railways to improve connections inside and between cities. One interesting criticism he had of Chinese land use centred around industrial land use, which has been given far too much valuable land in central city areas.

With China's cities growing rapidly, the decisions they make now and over the next couple decades in terms of planning, building and infrastructure will determine their future sustainability. Let's hope more and more of them will look like this environmental gem being built outside Shanghai.

Car fuel taxes approved - what about flight?

Once again I am reacting upon an article by SvD, which by the way happens to be my primary source of news. However, the subscription is coming to an end soon, and we have decided to take the opportunity to switch from printed news-paper and go entirely online...

Anyway - an interesting article a couple of days ago was about the nations reduction strategies. It was written prior to the national climate commitees meeting, scheduled for today, with the aim of national climate objectives and targets formulation. The opposition parties have agreed that 40% reduction of climate gases have to be realized until the year 2020 in order to avoid global average temperature increase to exceed 2 degrees. The comments from politicians reflect wide and different opinions on the purposes and also the approaches to achieve this reduction. Some view Sweden as a isolated nation and that we need to focus on the daily economic activities that are coupled to emission of climate gases and reduce them. Others are more focused on the European level, and Mr. Anders Wijkman, honoured guest at Think Globally Radio, considers that formulations have to be as international profiled as possible.

And very true so. In fact, the climate gas emissions coupled to the production of the products that are pumped into Sweden, for instance, every year, from emerging markets such as China and India, are bigger than the exports from Sweden, making emissions caused by Swedish consumers "invinsible" but nevertheless globally common. They have to be international, because simply switching to products produced by countries that are more environmentally/climate friendly also need to take into consideration on all lost job incomes of huge amounts of employees that are installed to keep the Wests consumption-oriented economy running. The have to be international because introduction and training of green-technology or clean-teach to emerging markets need to go along with joint formulations of alternative jobs descriptions within a global low-carbon, renewable energy, product-recycling sustainable economy. They have to be international , because they are not carried out by single nations, but in an agreed, co-operative and proactive international arena where every nation plays an important part.

Now, the article finishes off with one interesting conclusion after years of political debate - all of the political parties in Sweden today agree that the fuel tax for cars have to increase as one of many climate objectives. I think we really have to see the history to learn fast here; what about flight taxes? Do we really have the time to wait until something radical will happen? Until we realize that taxes are the only sensible solution? The European Union has a great responsibility to start introducing fast-connecting railways between major European cities along with introduction of approriate environmental taxes for flights. This co-operation needs to be fulfilled. Both because the European Union is demographically exemplary for such railway systems, because it has to take proactive action in order to assist the rest of the world in the sustainable transformation, and because of global environmental and social equity; flying around the world is carried out by some small precentage of the world population (rich people) while it affects the major part of the worlds poor.

/Jimmy

Empty Sea, Silent Sea

I would like to follow up a bit on Jimmy’s post below about fish consumption, and how serious a sustainability question it has become. Management of fisheries, and regulation of international fish markets, has proven to be among the most intractable of environmental issues.

This past week, the New York Times started a series of articles called Empty Seas (which also appeared on the front page of the International Herald Tribune), looking at fish consumption in Europe and other issues related to unsustainable fishing practices. I was astounded to read that in London, cod can fetch $30 per kilo! If demand and supply is such that the price of such a staple fish can climb so high, it is difficult to be optimistic on the prospect of sustainable fisheries, in Europe or elsewhere, as the market for fish has reached a global level; great demand and high prices in one region can be answered by fishing fleets from any number of nations (for example, in Empty Seas, it is discussed how Chinese vessels catch fish off the coast of Africa to satisfy demand from the European market).

The Empty Seas article series also calls to mind Isabella Lövin’s award-winning book Tyst Hav (“Silent Sea”), on unsustainable fishing practices in the Baltic Sea and beyond. So far only available in Swedish, the book will likely at some point be translated to English. (Ms. Lövin will be the studio guest on the Think Globaly Radio program on February 10th to discuss these issues in greater depth.)

Aggregate demand for fish and meat can only rise as worldwide population and wealth increases. If fish consumption must be reduced to sustainable levels (or switched to species that are currently more abundant or better managed), where can the substitutes come from to make up the difference? As Jimmy pointed out, the day to day decisions of consumers, which drive markets, are the building blocks of sustainable consumption that cannot be underestimated.

Structural factors, such as government subsidies to fishing fleets, which fuel over-capacity and drive unsustainable fishing practices, also need to be taken into consideration. This is discussed in a NY Times editorial, which suggests addressing the problem through international trade talks at the World Trade Organization. Such policies that cause unintended negative consequences are sometimes called "perverse incentives" and in this case have led to a situation where "too many boats are chasing too few fish".

/Eric

Fish consumption pattern are changing

In yesterdays SvD, there were 2 interesting articles dealing with fish and tiger prawn consumption.

The bigger article was about types of fishes that are being sold in Stockholm and which of them had a green, yellow respective red-listing status by WWF. What was interesting is that the majority of the fishmongers investigated by the journalists of SvD had plenty of cod, wild salmon, plaice and tropical prawns lying freshly ordered on the counter. "I try to convince customers to buy a sustainable alternative, however that is not always so easy" - sometimes I think about the phrase "It´s not easy to learn an old dog to sit", in this case is very applicable... The salesman goes on, "In the end, it is always the demand and access that governs - what the customers want, is what we have to sell, otherwise we would go under".

The other article reflected a decision that was taken from another approach. Tiger prawns, which cultivation demand cut-down of mangrove forests, has been a warm debate for quite a while now (listen to our radio show "the impact of eating: sustainable food consumption in Stockholm" here). Interestingly, 75 restaurants around Stockholm have now promised not to include tiger prawns in their menu´s after lobbying by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, pushing through a so called "prawn promise" to help save the mangrove forests in the world. The change has not been felt as problematic - "There have been no problems whatsoever to give up tiger prawns, we simply serve other alternatives"

So what we have here is fishmonger indecision and stall between red alerts from research and demand of customers versus 75 restaurants taking a proactive and deterministic approach to simply abandon what is unsustainable. On the other hand, simply switching the massive consumption from red-listed to green-listed species like perch, pike and alaskan pollock will simply, after a longer perspective, also make them red-listed unless we realize the most unsustainable motor; our own consumption patterns and the important insight that one planet Earth simply cannot manage the massive stress we expose it to.

So next time we want to buy fresh fish, let´s ask for a gree-listed alternative!

/Jimmy

Proof: CSR = profitable

In todays Svenska Dagbladet´s (SvD) business section, a big article based on a recent study and book conducted and written by Lars Hassel, professor in accounting and auditing at the University of Umeå, has proven the, for some still doubtable; being social and environmental responsible in business increases the profit of the corporation. Corporations that have actively engaged in CSR have increased their profitability and stock exchange value in contrast to comparative companies without sustainable action.

Corporations and companies that still resist modifying their values to accept the fact that their activities are impacting the environment impress me. Shifting into a sustainable and clean course basically means sacrificing some of old (comfortable) habits in order to be more responsible to the common natural capital from which everything derives and to which all is thrown away. The time has come to change. To all corporations - do it!

And most importantly, dont hesitate!

/Jimmy

The Prius and The Whale

Predicting and finding solutions to climate change can be a rather cerebral subject: carbon offsets, climate models, emissions trading schemes and so forth can sometimes feel quite distant from the natural world that we live in today. That's why its refreshing to see that some are still taking actions that are more viscerally appealing, such as Greenpeace going "old school" and interfering with the Japanese whale hunt.

I have never understood why Japan, a nation that is otherwise extremely conscientious of its international image, is so intent on hunting whales while most countries have rejected the practice. For a sector that is so marginal to their economy, why would they jeopardize their reputation among consumers of far more economically significant Japanese products? I can't help but wonder how Toyota, maker of the Prius- one of the stronger environmental symbols of today- feels about Japanese whaling ships hunting and processing perhaps the most potent symbol of classic environmentalism.

(By the way, Toyota has announced that it will offer an electric plug-in version of the Prius by 2010)

/Eric

Climate change in the backseat of US election coverage

Health care, the economy, immigration, national security…certainly all extremely important issues that must be discussed and debated during an election year, and have dominated the recent political dialogue in the United States. Climate change, and the environment in general, however, have been discussed only around the edges in the context of the current American presidential race.

I was just back in the United States for several weeks, and had the opportunity to closely follow the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary, as well as the Democratic and Republican debate between. When mentioned at all, global warming was usually given a back seat to energy security (i.e. dependency on foreign supplies).

After all the media coverage of climate change in 2007, culminating in Al Gore’s Nobel Prize, I was expecting it to be one of the more important election issues of 2008. Apparently not. Now, each candidate at least has a position on the issue (for example, Obama favors cap-and-trade over carbon taxes); however, the television media outlets that I turned to during my visit (primarily MSNBC, which is usually considered fairly balanced politically), showed scant interest in reporting where the candidates stood, and how their proposed policies differed from one another. During the January 5th debate on ABC, little time was devoted to discussing climate change, with only Obama and Richardson having the opportunity to present their position, and no time for the Democratic candidates to challenge each other’s proposed solutions. I can’t remember hearing the Kyoto Protocol, or its successor that was the subject of the recent international conference in Bali, mentioned at all.

This apparent lack of interest stands in stark contrast to the recent election in Australia, where climate change was treated as a top-tier issue and some say was partially responsible for the downfall of the John Howard government, widely considered a climate change pariah. True, Australia has been in the grips of a severe drought that has been described as the developed world’s first climate crisis. But the US too is currently being afflicted by a historic drought in the southeast, and water shortages are certainly an issue for the western states. Not to mention the risks associated with hurricanes, such as Katrina, the frequency and intensity of which some scientists speculate may be linked to climate change.

Whether this paltry coverage truly reflects a lack of public interest, or the candidates’ political strategy, or if the media and pollsters finds climate change a less attractive topic, is an open question that will be interesting to consider while following what nonetheless promises to be a fascinating year in American politics that will certainly have global consequences.

/Eric

it´s our definitive understanding...

I just finished Andreas Malm´s book "Det är vår bestämda uppfattning att om ingenting görs nu kommer det att vara försent", something like: "It is our definitive understanding that if nothing is done now it will be too late" - released by Atlas publishing house, 2007.

This book, I believe, does not leave any of its readers untouched. Malm begins with a historical background of what he acknowledges as a controproductive and dogmatic scientific perspective. All the way from the industrial revolution our scientists have focused and researched narrowly upon individual, separated issues of science and technology. Obviously, up until now, as Professor Will Steffen explicitely pointed out at Think Globally Radio´s episode "Surviving the anthropocene", on the 4th of November 2007 (listen here), the human race has not encountered such common global problems and challenges. Not until now are we commonly facing that the prevalent Western high-carbon and consumer intensive lifestyle is highly unsustainable. Not until now, are we also understanding that the science and technological innovations we have created historically have largely been destructive to our common, precious natural capital. Another important concept that is hindering a real perception of our climate system is the prevalent gradualistic change of the climate and nature as large; the climate, is in fact counter to that theory a beast, that when it is shaked out of its sleep, is capable of contributing to sudden devastating consequences...

Malm continues, after the historical outlook, to give a somewhat nightmarish description of our current and future situation if nothing is done; Greenland melting much faster than scientific models are predicting; glacier´s melting water, bursting out of hidden and unknown temporal bedrock storage devastating downhill villages around the Himalayas; temperate and tropical forests carbon "sinks" turning into carbon "sources" due to natural mechanisms of reverse respiration; much more frequent storms and hurricanes due to a higher energy flow within the biosphere - the grand conclusion is that added spiral feedback loops and self-organizing criticality in the climate systems is enhancing the physical consequences of our emissions. The climate will change abruptely.

You may panic reading this book, especially during the nights... but needless to say, that does not lead to anything constructive whatsoever. This is an important book, because it gives plenty of insights and also wakes up the will to affect and improve. It is important because we, in the Western world, have the responsibility to reconstruct our societies towards sustainability. And whether or not this will be carried out as a revolution, as Malm suggests, or through a common and broad co-operation, only the future will predict. One thing is for sure - scientific reseach need to be transformed into constructive action in order to improve our society at large, not merely improve the energy-efficiency of technology!

/Jimmy

Think Globally Radio blog coming soon!

This blog is an outgrowth of Think Globally Radio, broadcast out of Stockholm, Sweden. Content here will be a complement to our radio program, an extensive archive of which is available at www.thinkgloballyradio.org.