Jacquelyn Ottman Urges Business Leaders To Adopt More Responsible Green Marketing Strategies from ENN.com
NEW YORK, NY — On Thursday, September 27, Jacquelyn Ottman, green marketing pioneer and author of Green Marketing: Opportunity for Innovation used her keynote address to the Sustainable Brands '07 conference, New Orleans, as a voice of warning to conference attendees for potential regulation of deceptive green marketing practices and bans on polluting products.
In a speech in which she recapped 20 years of green marketing, she challenged her audience to consider whether any real progress has been made. The FTC's green marketing guidelines now exist. Businesses know to spotlight primary benefits in their green messages. Empowerment has become a focal point for the Energy Star label and HSBC Bank's "There's No Small Change" campaign. BP, with a deadly fire at its Texas refinery and oil spills in the Artic, has learned the necessity of "walking its talk."
However, as demonstrated by the Kermit the Frog ad asserting "It's Easy Being Green" for Ford's Escape SUV hybrid or the now defunct Biota Co.'s use of a "biodegradable" claim for corn-based bottles destined for landfills, the marketing community has generally not learned from past green marketing debacles and risks strict regulations in the future.
Ottman, a sought-after speaker who has advised 60 of the Fortune 500, warned about the potential for bans on ads for polluting products like SUVs, bottled water, and disposable diapers. Ottman cautioned that the growing number of eco-labels may result in consumer confusion, and noted that Congress has already held hearings on the now unregulated and often misleading practice of carbon offsets.
Ottman told conference goers, "We need to pursue a course of sustainable branding that is rooted in aligned values, engaged employees, and communication with stakeholders and the public." Noting that by 2025, China is expected to be the largest car market in the world - with its attendant greenhouse gas emissions - and that 1/3rd of the world's people will live in a water-starved area, Ottman urged her audience to follow a course of eco-innovation with the potential to create the next generation of products and services with significantly reduced environmental impacts. Such products, Ottman noted, represent the prospect of significantly enhanced customer benefits and as such, don't need to be promoted through green marketing claims or Kermit the Frog.
For more on the Sustainable Brands '07 Conference visit www.sustainablebrands07.com
For more on Jacquelyn Ottman and her firm visit www.greenmarketing.com
For a more detailed summary of her remarks, email info@greenmarketing.com
Contact Info:
Kyle WeatherholtzE-mail : kweatherholtz@greenmarketing.comTel : 212-879-4160
Website : J. Ottman Consulting
RELATED ARTICLES
The Real News About Green Marketing : Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow
Save the Date! The Business of Green Products 4 AIA Credits!
ENN Weekly: March 27th - 31st
GE Plastics Seminar Includes Environmental Component
Monday, March 17, 2008
Pollution Rankings for Puerto Rico counties
Pollution Rankings for Puerto Rico counties, from www.Scorecard.org
Rank
County Pounds
1.
SALINAS 2,553,064
2.
TOA BAJA 2,277,598
3.
SAN JUAN 1,323,004
4.
GUAYANILLA 1,252,376
5.
GUAYAMA 997,607
6.
BARCELONETA 800,436
7.
PENUELAS 295,049
8.
LAS PIEDRAS 240,355
9.
BAYAMO'N 216,926
10.
ARECIBO 214,485
11.
MANATI 137,174
12.
YABUCOA 85,558
13.
YAUCO 75,480
14.
MAYAGUEZ 72,518
15.
HUMACAO 58,056
16.
ANASCO 43,401
17.
CIDRA 31,410
18.
CAROLINA 24,206
19.
GUAYNABO 19,384
20.
CEIBA 19,111
21.
SAN GERMAN 16,864
22.
FAJARDO 16,738
23.
PATILLAS 4,637
24.
SABANA GRANDE 4,577
25.
SAN LORENZO 3,646
26.
COAMO 2,650
27.
PONCE 1,950
28.
GUANICA 1,462
29.
CAGUAS 1,254
30.
VEGA ALTA 917
31.
GURABO 304
32.
MARICAO 260
33.
AIBONITO 250
34.
AGUADILLA 248
35.
VIEQUES 40
36.
ISABELA 16
37.
CATANO 9
38.
AGUADA 8
39.
VEGA BAJA 7
40.
JAYUYA 5
Rank
County Pounds
1.
SALINAS 2,553,064
2.
TOA BAJA 2,277,598
3.
SAN JUAN 1,323,004
4.
GUAYANILLA 1,252,376
5.
GUAYAMA 997,607
6.
BARCELONETA 800,436
7.
PENUELAS 295,049
8.
LAS PIEDRAS 240,355
9.
BAYAMO'N 216,926
10.
ARECIBO 214,485
11.
MANATI 137,174
12.
YABUCOA 85,558
13.
YAUCO 75,480
14.
MAYAGUEZ 72,518
15.
HUMACAO 58,056
16.
ANASCO 43,401
17.
CIDRA 31,410
18.
CAROLINA 24,206
19.
GUAYNABO 19,384
20.
CEIBA 19,111
21.
SAN GERMAN 16,864
22.
FAJARDO 16,738
23.
PATILLAS 4,637
24.
SABANA GRANDE 4,577
25.
SAN LORENZO 3,646
26.
COAMO 2,650
27.
PONCE 1,950
28.
GUANICA 1,462
29.
CAGUAS 1,254
30.
VEGA ALTA 917
31.
GURABO 304
32.
MARICAO 260
33.
AIBONITO 250
34.
AGUADILLA 248
35.
VIEQUES 40
36.
ISABELA 16
37.
CATANO 9
38.
AGUADA 8
39.
VEGA BAJA 7
40.
JAYUYA 5
Land-Efficient Diet
Most Land-Efficient Diet: Some Dairy, Less Meat
From: Susan Lang, Cornell University
N.Y. Group Trying to Eat Only Local Food
Pesticide Exposure Tied to Asthma in Farmers
Ithica, New York - A low-fat vegetarian diet is very efficient in terms of how much land is needed to support it. But adding some dairy products and a limited amount of meat may actually increase this efficiency, Cornell researchers suggest.
This deduction stems from the findings of their new study, which concludes that if everyone in New York state followed a low-fat vegetarian diet, the state could directly support almost 50 percent more people, or about 32 percent of its population, agriculturally. With today's high-meat, high-dairy diet, the state is able to support directly only 22 percent of its population, say the researchers.
The study, published in the journal Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, is the first to examine the land requirements of complete diets. The researchers compared 42 diets with the same number of calories and a core of grains, fruits, vegetables and dairy products (using only foods that can be produced in New York state), but with varying amounts of meat (from none to 13.4 ounces daily) and fat (from 20 to 45 percent of calories) to determine each diet's "agricultural land footprint."They found a fivefold difference between the two extremes."
A person following a low-fat vegetarian diet, for example, will need less than half (0.44) an acre per person per year to produce their food," said Christian Peters, M.S. '02, Ph.D. '07, a Cornell postdoctoral associate in crop and soil sciences and lead author of the research. "A high-fat diet with a lot of meat, on the other hand, needs 2.11 acres.
Surprisingly, however, a vegetarian diet is not necessarily the most efficient in terms of land use," said Peters.The reason is that fruits, vegetables and grains must be grown on high-quality cropland, he explained. Meat and dairy products from ruminant animals are supported by lower quality, but more widely available, land that can support pasture and hay. A large pool of such land is available in New York state because for sustainable use, most farmland requires a crop rotation with such perennial crops as pasture and hay.Chris Peters, the lead author of the study on New York's agricultural footprint, has been honored for related work on local "foodsheds," as well as his teaching and outreach, with the 2007 Gerald O. Mott Scholarship for Meritorious Graduate Students in Crop Science.
Thus, although vegetarian diets in New York state may require less land per person, they use more high-valued land. "It appears that while meat increases land-use requirements, diets including modest amounts of meat can feed more people than some higher fat vegetarian diets," said Peters."The key to conserving land and other resources with our diets is to limit the amount of meat we eat and for farmers to rely more on grazing and forages to feed their livestock," said Jennifer Wilkins, senior extension associate in nutritional sciences who specializes in the connection between local food systems and health and co-authored the study with Gary Fick, Cornell professor of crop and soil sciences.
"Consumers need to be aware that foods differ not only in their nutrient content but in the amount of resources required to produce, process, package and transport them."According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the average American ate approximately 5.8 ounces of meat and eggs a day in 2005."In order to reach the efficiency in land use of moderate-fat, vegetarian diets, our study suggests that New Yorkers would need to limit their annual meat and egg intake to about 2 cooked ounces a day," Peters said.The research was supported in part by the National Research Initiative of the USDA Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service.
From: Susan Lang, Cornell University
N.Y. Group Trying to Eat Only Local Food
Pesticide Exposure Tied to Asthma in Farmers
Ithica, New York - A low-fat vegetarian diet is very efficient in terms of how much land is needed to support it. But adding some dairy products and a limited amount of meat may actually increase this efficiency, Cornell researchers suggest.
This deduction stems from the findings of their new study, which concludes that if everyone in New York state followed a low-fat vegetarian diet, the state could directly support almost 50 percent more people, or about 32 percent of its population, agriculturally. With today's high-meat, high-dairy diet, the state is able to support directly only 22 percent of its population, say the researchers.
The study, published in the journal Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, is the first to examine the land requirements of complete diets. The researchers compared 42 diets with the same number of calories and a core of grains, fruits, vegetables and dairy products (using only foods that can be produced in New York state), but with varying amounts of meat (from none to 13.4 ounces daily) and fat (from 20 to 45 percent of calories) to determine each diet's "agricultural land footprint."They found a fivefold difference between the two extremes."
A person following a low-fat vegetarian diet, for example, will need less than half (0.44) an acre per person per year to produce their food," said Christian Peters, M.S. '02, Ph.D. '07, a Cornell postdoctoral associate in crop and soil sciences and lead author of the research. "A high-fat diet with a lot of meat, on the other hand, needs 2.11 acres.
Surprisingly, however, a vegetarian diet is not necessarily the most efficient in terms of land use," said Peters.The reason is that fruits, vegetables and grains must be grown on high-quality cropland, he explained. Meat and dairy products from ruminant animals are supported by lower quality, but more widely available, land that can support pasture and hay. A large pool of such land is available in New York state because for sustainable use, most farmland requires a crop rotation with such perennial crops as pasture and hay.Chris Peters, the lead author of the study on New York's agricultural footprint, has been honored for related work on local "foodsheds," as well as his teaching and outreach, with the 2007 Gerald O. Mott Scholarship for Meritorious Graduate Students in Crop Science.
Thus, although vegetarian diets in New York state may require less land per person, they use more high-valued land. "It appears that while meat increases land-use requirements, diets including modest amounts of meat can feed more people than some higher fat vegetarian diets," said Peters."The key to conserving land and other resources with our diets is to limit the amount of meat we eat and for farmers to rely more on grazing and forages to feed their livestock," said Jennifer Wilkins, senior extension associate in nutritional sciences who specializes in the connection between local food systems and health and co-authored the study with Gary Fick, Cornell professor of crop and soil sciences.
"Consumers need to be aware that foods differ not only in their nutrient content but in the amount of resources required to produce, process, package and transport them."According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the average American ate approximately 5.8 ounces of meat and eggs a day in 2005."In order to reach the efficiency in land use of moderate-fat, vegetarian diets, our study suggests that New Yorkers would need to limit their annual meat and egg intake to about 2 cooked ounces a day," Peters said.The research was supported in part by the National Research Initiative of the USDA Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service.
Risks of Inaction on Climate Change
U.N. Report Describes Risks of Inaction on Climate Change
By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL
VALENCIA, Spain, Nov. 16 2007— In its final and most powerful report, a United Nations panel of scientists meeting here describes the mounting risks of climate change in language that is both more specific and forceful than its previous assessments, according to scientists here.
Synthesizing reams of data from its three previous reports, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for the first time specifically points out important risks if governments fail to respond: melting ice sheets that could lead to a rapid rise in sea levels and the extinction of large numbers of species brought about by even moderate amounts of warming, on the order of 1 to 3 degrees.
The report carries heightened significance because it is the last word from the influential global climate panel before world leaders meet in Bali, Indonesia, next month to begin to discuss a global climate change treaty that will replace the Kyoto protocol, which expires in 2012. It is also the first report from the panel since it was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in October — an honor that many scientists here said emboldened them to stand more forcefully behind their positions.
As a sign of the deepening urgency surrounding the climate change issue, the report, which was being printed Friday night, will be officially released by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Saturday.
The full report was embargoed from news organizations until Saturday. But drafts have been circulating for weeks, and descriptions of its findings began to appear on Web sites and in news agency reports on Friday. Bush administration officials held a news conference to discuss the report but insisted that their comments be withheld until after its official release.
“This document goes further than any of the previous efforts,” said Hans Verolme, director of the World Wildlife Fund’s Global Climate Change Program. “The pressure has been palpable — people know they are delivering a document that will be cited for years to come and will define policy.”
The previous three sections, released between February and April, focused on one issue at a time: the first on science, the second on how the world could adapt to warming and the third about how countries could “mitigate,” or reduce the greenhouse gases produced.
This fourth and final assessment — the so-called synthesis report — seeks to combine lessons from all three. Its conclusions are culled from data contained in the thousands of pages that were essentially technical supplements to the panel’s previous publications. How that data is summarized and presented to the world is a powerful guide to what the scientists consider of utmost importance at the end of a five-year process, offering concrete guidelines for policy makers.
“You look to a synthesis report to provide clarity, to clarify what was obscure in previous reports,” said Michael Oppenheimer, a climate scientist at Princeton University. “Now, how can we take these findings and formulate a policy response that’s quick enough and big enough?”
While drafts of the panel’s reports are written by panels of scientists, the language is reviewed and often altered by delegates from 130 governments who meet before their final approval and release. Those negotiations took place here this week, and were often contentious, with the United States, China and India raising many objections, said scientists who spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not allowed to publicly refer to any countries by name.
The scientists and country representatives who had flocked here this week to participate in negotiations on the final wording applauded as the panel’s chairman, Rajendra Pachauri, declared the panel’s years of work concluded, just after 10:30 p.m. on Friday.
Even though the synthesis report is more alarming than its predecessors, some researchers believe that it still understates the trajectory of global warming and its impact. The I.P.C.C.’s scientific process, which takes five years of study and writing from start to finish, cannot take into account the very latest data on climate change or economic trends, which show larger than predicted development and energy use in China.
“The world is already at or above the worst case scenarios in terms of emissions,” said Gernot Klepper, of the Kiel Institute for World Economy in Kiel, Germany. “In terms of emissions, we are moving past the most pessimistic estimates of the I.P.C.C., and by some estimates we are above that red line.”
The panel presents several scenarios for the trajectory of emissions and climate change. In 2006, 8.4 gigatons of carbon were put into the atmosphere from fossil fuels, according to a study in the proceedings of the National Academy of Science, which was co-written by Dr. Klepper. That is almost identical to the panel’s worst case prediction for that year.Skip to next paragraph
Likewise, a recent International Energy Agency report looking at the unexpectedly rapid emissions growth in China and India estimated that if current policies were not changed the world would warm six degrees by 2030, a disastrous increase far higher than the panel’s estimates of one to four degrees by the end of the century.
While the United States, Saudi Arabia and China tried to change the text in order to play down the consequences of global warming, developing nations — which will bear the initial brunt of climate change — were much more forceful than at previous meetings in opposing these efforts, one scientist who was in the negotiating room said.
"I suspect that will continue,” he said. “As they feel more and more threatened by the sea and the storms they will insist that, as one of them put it, ‘We do not want this report to be warm and fuzzy when the reality is cold and risky,’ or something like that,” he said.
One novel aspect of the report is a specific list of “Reasons for Concern.” It includes items that are thought to be very likely outgrowths of climate change that had been mentioned in previous reports, like an increase in extreme weather events.
But it for the first time includes less likely but more alarming possibilities, like the relatively rapid melting of polar ice. Previous reports focused more on changes the scientists felt were “highly likely.”
“This time, they take a step back and look at the totality,” Dr. Verolme said. “Saying it is less likely to occur, but if it does we are fried.”
One such area is the future melting of ice sheets in Greenland and western Antarctica. In earlier reports, the panel’s scientists acknowledged that their computer models were poor at such predictions, and did not reflect the rapid melting that scientists have recently observed. If these areas melt entirely, seas would rise 40 feet, scientists said. While scientists are certain that the sheets will melt over millennia, producing sea-level rises, there is now evidence to suggest that it could happen much faster than this, perhaps over centuries.
“In my view that would make it not just difficult, but impossible to adapt successfully, some of my colleagues would say catastrophic,” said Dr. Oppenheimer. “If they say that it’s possible that melting could occur in centuries leading to meters of change, that’s a headline.”
This final report also puts more emphasis on the ripple effect of small degrees of temperature change, some of which are already being seen, such as species extinctions and loss of biodiversity.
“A relatively modest degree of warming — one to three degrees — spells a lot of trouble and I think that was not clear in the previous report,” Dr. Oppenheimer said. He said part of the reason for the lack of clarity was that governments had “messed around” with the language and structure of the report during the approval process.
This time around, the consequences of different degrees of climate change will be better laid out so that the ministers who meet in Bali next month will understand the options and the consequences of inaction. “This should light a fire under policy makers,” Dr. Oppenheimer said.
By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL
VALENCIA, Spain, Nov. 16 2007— In its final and most powerful report, a United Nations panel of scientists meeting here describes the mounting risks of climate change in language that is both more specific and forceful than its previous assessments, according to scientists here.
Synthesizing reams of data from its three previous reports, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for the first time specifically points out important risks if governments fail to respond: melting ice sheets that could lead to a rapid rise in sea levels and the extinction of large numbers of species brought about by even moderate amounts of warming, on the order of 1 to 3 degrees.
The report carries heightened significance because it is the last word from the influential global climate panel before world leaders meet in Bali, Indonesia, next month to begin to discuss a global climate change treaty that will replace the Kyoto protocol, which expires in 2012. It is also the first report from the panel since it was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in October — an honor that many scientists here said emboldened them to stand more forcefully behind their positions.
As a sign of the deepening urgency surrounding the climate change issue, the report, which was being printed Friday night, will be officially released by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Saturday.
The full report was embargoed from news organizations until Saturday. But drafts have been circulating for weeks, and descriptions of its findings began to appear on Web sites and in news agency reports on Friday. Bush administration officials held a news conference to discuss the report but insisted that their comments be withheld until after its official release.
“This document goes further than any of the previous efforts,” said Hans Verolme, director of the World Wildlife Fund’s Global Climate Change Program. “The pressure has been palpable — people know they are delivering a document that will be cited for years to come and will define policy.”
The previous three sections, released between February and April, focused on one issue at a time: the first on science, the second on how the world could adapt to warming and the third about how countries could “mitigate,” or reduce the greenhouse gases produced.
This fourth and final assessment — the so-called synthesis report — seeks to combine lessons from all three. Its conclusions are culled from data contained in the thousands of pages that were essentially technical supplements to the panel’s previous publications. How that data is summarized and presented to the world is a powerful guide to what the scientists consider of utmost importance at the end of a five-year process, offering concrete guidelines for policy makers.
“You look to a synthesis report to provide clarity, to clarify what was obscure in previous reports,” said Michael Oppenheimer, a climate scientist at Princeton University. “Now, how can we take these findings and formulate a policy response that’s quick enough and big enough?”
While drafts of the panel’s reports are written by panels of scientists, the language is reviewed and often altered by delegates from 130 governments who meet before their final approval and release. Those negotiations took place here this week, and were often contentious, with the United States, China and India raising many objections, said scientists who spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not allowed to publicly refer to any countries by name.
The scientists and country representatives who had flocked here this week to participate in negotiations on the final wording applauded as the panel’s chairman, Rajendra Pachauri, declared the panel’s years of work concluded, just after 10:30 p.m. on Friday.
Even though the synthesis report is more alarming than its predecessors, some researchers believe that it still understates the trajectory of global warming and its impact. The I.P.C.C.’s scientific process, which takes five years of study and writing from start to finish, cannot take into account the very latest data on climate change or economic trends, which show larger than predicted development and energy use in China.
“The world is already at or above the worst case scenarios in terms of emissions,” said Gernot Klepper, of the Kiel Institute for World Economy in Kiel, Germany. “In terms of emissions, we are moving past the most pessimistic estimates of the I.P.C.C., and by some estimates we are above that red line.”
The panel presents several scenarios for the trajectory of emissions and climate change. In 2006, 8.4 gigatons of carbon were put into the atmosphere from fossil fuels, according to a study in the proceedings of the National Academy of Science, which was co-written by Dr. Klepper. That is almost identical to the panel’s worst case prediction for that year.Skip to next paragraph
Likewise, a recent International Energy Agency report looking at the unexpectedly rapid emissions growth in China and India estimated that if current policies were not changed the world would warm six degrees by 2030, a disastrous increase far higher than the panel’s estimates of one to four degrees by the end of the century.
While the United States, Saudi Arabia and China tried to change the text in order to play down the consequences of global warming, developing nations — which will bear the initial brunt of climate change — were much more forceful than at previous meetings in opposing these efforts, one scientist who was in the negotiating room said.
"I suspect that will continue,” he said. “As they feel more and more threatened by the sea and the storms they will insist that, as one of them put it, ‘We do not want this report to be warm and fuzzy when the reality is cold and risky,’ or something like that,” he said.
One novel aspect of the report is a specific list of “Reasons for Concern.” It includes items that are thought to be very likely outgrowths of climate change that had been mentioned in previous reports, like an increase in extreme weather events.
But it for the first time includes less likely but more alarming possibilities, like the relatively rapid melting of polar ice. Previous reports focused more on changes the scientists felt were “highly likely.”
“This time, they take a step back and look at the totality,” Dr. Verolme said. “Saying it is less likely to occur, but if it does we are fried.”
One such area is the future melting of ice sheets in Greenland and western Antarctica. In earlier reports, the panel’s scientists acknowledged that their computer models were poor at such predictions, and did not reflect the rapid melting that scientists have recently observed. If these areas melt entirely, seas would rise 40 feet, scientists said. While scientists are certain that the sheets will melt over millennia, producing sea-level rises, there is now evidence to suggest that it could happen much faster than this, perhaps over centuries.
“In my view that would make it not just difficult, but impossible to adapt successfully, some of my colleagues would say catastrophic,” said Dr. Oppenheimer. “If they say that it’s possible that melting could occur in centuries leading to meters of change, that’s a headline.”
This final report also puts more emphasis on the ripple effect of small degrees of temperature change, some of which are already being seen, such as species extinctions and loss of biodiversity.
“A relatively modest degree of warming — one to three degrees — spells a lot of trouble and I think that was not clear in the previous report,” Dr. Oppenheimer said. He said part of the reason for the lack of clarity was that governments had “messed around” with the language and structure of the report during the approval process.
This time around, the consequences of different degrees of climate change will be better laid out so that the ministers who meet in Bali next month will understand the options and the consequences of inaction. “This should light a fire under policy makers,” Dr. Oppenheimer said.
How Much Is Enough?
How Much Is Enough?
"Enoughness" doesn't mean voluntary poverty - it means discovering who you really are
excepted from an article byVicki Robin from What Is Enough? In Context article #26), http://www.context.org/ICLIB/IC26/Robin2.htm
If I knew that everyone in the world would have enough if I had only essential things, would this be enough for me? Where does necessity end and excess begin? There are a few consistent qualities in the lives of people who have come to know how much is enough for them:
1. They have a sense of purpose larger than their own needs, wants and desires. Desires are infinite. Fill one desire and another emerges. A sense of purpose, though, sorts real needs from whims and preferences and directs your attention to only those things that will really serve your mission - whether the "mission" is raising children, a garden, money or consciousness.
2. They can account for their money. They know where it comes from and where it goes. There's a sense of clarity that comes from such precision and truthfulness. If you don't know how much you have, you can never have enough.
3. They have an internal yardstick for fulfillment. Their sense of "enoughness" isn't based on what others have or don't have (keeping up with the Joneses). It's based on a capacity to look inside and see if something is really adding to their happiness, or is just more stuff to store, insure, fix, forget about and ultimately sell in a garage sale.
4. They have a sense of responsibility for the world, a sense of how their lives and choices fit into the larger social and spiritual scheme of things.
From these findings, I've developed a pledge that may help guide people in finding peace with what they have and what they need:
I pledge to discover how much is enough for me to be truly fulfilled, and to consume only that.
I pledge to be part of the discovery of how much would be enough for everyone not only to survive but to thrive, and to find ways for them to have access to that.
Through this commitment to restraint and justice, I am healing my life and am part of the healing of the world.
"Enoughness" isn't something to "live up to" - it's something to discover through the process of truthful and compassionate living.
"Enoughness" doesn't mean voluntary poverty - it means discovering who you really are
excepted from an article byVicki Robin from What Is Enough? In Context article #26), http://www.context.org/ICLIB/IC26/Robin2.htm
If I knew that everyone in the world would have enough if I had only essential things, would this be enough for me? Where does necessity end and excess begin? There are a few consistent qualities in the lives of people who have come to know how much is enough for them:
1. They have a sense of purpose larger than their own needs, wants and desires. Desires are infinite. Fill one desire and another emerges. A sense of purpose, though, sorts real needs from whims and preferences and directs your attention to only those things that will really serve your mission - whether the "mission" is raising children, a garden, money or consciousness.
2. They can account for their money. They know where it comes from and where it goes. There's a sense of clarity that comes from such precision and truthfulness. If you don't know how much you have, you can never have enough.
3. They have an internal yardstick for fulfillment. Their sense of "enoughness" isn't based on what others have or don't have (keeping up with the Joneses). It's based on a capacity to look inside and see if something is really adding to their happiness, or is just more stuff to store, insure, fix, forget about and ultimately sell in a garage sale.
4. They have a sense of responsibility for the world, a sense of how their lives and choices fit into the larger social and spiritual scheme of things.
From these findings, I've developed a pledge that may help guide people in finding peace with what they have and what they need:
I pledge to discover how much is enough for me to be truly fulfilled, and to consume only that.
I pledge to be part of the discovery of how much would be enough for everyone not only to survive but to thrive, and to find ways for them to have access to that.
Through this commitment to restraint and justice, I am healing my life and am part of the healing of the world.
"Enoughness" isn't something to "live up to" - it's something to discover through the process of truthful and compassionate living.
Green your Business
So, You Want to Green your Business?
Joel Makower, founder of GreenBiz.com has a list of 10 suggestions for companies that want to go green:
• Decide why you want to go green. Is it to capitalize on a trend, or to make a major commitment to the sustainability of your business? Customers can see through things, so it's better to make a commitment if you market yourself as green, instead of just saying you’re green
• Educate yourself and your team.
• Define your shade of green. How far can you go?
• Choose your suppliers and vendors wisely.
• Surround your business with good people.
• Embody your green strategy in your business.
• Green your business and the margins will follow. The biggest benefit to your bottom line is your brand equity.
• Use high standards to distinguish yourself from the competition.
• Approach green as a living entity, a way of life.
• Bring in green and let it spread.
Joel Makower, founder of GreenBiz.com has a list of 10 suggestions for companies that want to go green:
• Decide why you want to go green. Is it to capitalize on a trend, or to make a major commitment to the sustainability of your business? Customers can see through things, so it's better to make a commitment if you market yourself as green, instead of just saying you’re green
• Educate yourself and your team.
• Define your shade of green. How far can you go?
• Choose your suppliers and vendors wisely.
• Surround your business with good people.
• Embody your green strategy in your business.
• Green your business and the margins will follow. The biggest benefit to your bottom line is your brand equity.
• Use high standards to distinguish yourself from the competition.
• Approach green as a living entity, a way of life.
• Bring in green and let it spread.
Eco Tourism Links
List of Eco-Hotels in Puerto Rico
Casa Cubuy Ecolodge, Rio Blanco, Puerto Rico http://www.casacubuy.com/
Casa Grande Mountain Retreat, Utuado, Puerto Rico http://www.hotelcasagrande.com/index.html
Casa Picaflores, El Yunque, Puerto Rico http://www.casapicaflores.com/
Casita Zumbador, El Yunque, Puerto Rico http://www.elyunquehotels.com/23.html
Coqui Inn, Carolina, Isla Verde, Puerto Rico http://www.coqui-inn.com/index.html
Lemon Tree Oceanfront Cottages Coqui Inn, Rincon, Puerto Rico http://www.lemontreepr.com/Home.html
Rain Forest Inn, Rio Grande, Puerto Rico http://www.rainforestinn.com/camping.htm
Rio Grande Plantation Eco Resort, San Juan, Puerto Rico http://www.riograndeplantation.com/
Robin Phillips' Rainforest Cabin, El Yunque, Puerto Rico http://www.elyunquehotels.com/5.html
Ecotourism is about connecting conservation, communities, and sustainable travel. It meets the needs of present tourists and host regions while protecting and enhancing opportunities for the future.
"Sustainable tourism development requires the informed participation of all relevant stakeholders, as well as strong political leadership to ensure wide participation and consensus building. Achieving sustainable tourism ... requires constant monitoring of impacts, introducing the necessary preventive and/or corrective measures whenever necessary. Sustainable tourism should ... ensure a meaningful experience to the tourists, raising their awareness about sustainability issues and promoting sustainable tourism practices amongst them." World Tourism Organization
Sustainable development implies "meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" World Commission on Environment and Development
Responsible tourism:
- minimizes negative economic, environmental and social impacts- generates greater economic benefits for local people and enhances the well being of host communities - improves working conditions and access to the industry- involves local people in decisions that affect their lives and life chances- makes positive contributions to the conservation of natural and cultural heritage embracing diversity- provides more enjoyable experiences for tourists through more meaningful connections with local people, and a greater understanding of local cultural, social and environmental issues- provides access for physically challenged people- is culturally sensitive, encourages respect between tourists and hosts, and builds local pride and confidence.
Cape Town Declaration on Responsible Tourism in Destinations, 2002
LUXURY ECO RESORTS AROUND THE WORLD
Mateya Safari Lodge- MADIKWE GAME RESERVE, NORTH WEST SOUTH AFRICA
Villa Principe Leopoldo & Residence, LUGANO,TICINO, SWITZERLAND
Cuixmala, LA HUERTA, JALISCO, MEXICO
Gaia Retreat & Spa, BROOKLET, BYRON HINTERLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES, AUSTRALIA
Tauana , PONTA DO CORUMBAU, BAHIA, BRAZIL
Bamurru Plains, KAKADU NATIONAL PARK, NORTHERN TERRITORY, AUSTRALIA
URBN Hotels, Shanghai, SHANGHAI, CHINA
Six Senses Hideaway Yao Noi KOH YAO NOI, PHUKET, THAILAND
Praia do Forte EcoResort & Thalasso Spa SALVADOR, BAHIA, BRAZIL
explora en Rapa Nui EASTER ISLAND, RAPA NUI, CHILE
Punta Caracol Acqua Lodge ISLA COLON, BOCAS DEL TORO, PANAMA
Hacienda de San Antonio MUNICIPIO DE COMALA, COLIMA, MEXICO
Inkaterra Machu Picchu MACHU PICCHU, CUSCO, PERU
Conrad Bali Resort & Spa NUSA DUA, BALI, INDONESIA
Six Senses Hideaway Hua Hin PRANBURI, HUA HIN, THAILAND
Alila Ubud UBUD, BALI, INDONESIA
Pousada Maravilha FERNANDO DE NORONHA, PERNAMBUCO, BRAZIL
Sabi Sabi Earth Lodge SABI SABI PRIVATE GAME RESERVE, KRUGER NATIONAL PARK, MPUMALANGA, SOUTH AFRICA
Pousada Picinguaba PARATI, RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL
Cottars 1920’s Camp MASAI MARA RESERVE, KENYA
Fazenda São Francisco do Corumbau PONTA DO CORUMBAU, BAHIA, BRAZIL
Shompole NGURUMAN ESCARPMENT, KENYA
Four Seasons Tented Camp CHIANG RAI, THAILAND
Vil Uyana RANGIRIGAMA, SIGIRIYA, SRI LANKA
Anjajavy l'Hôtel ANJAJAVY, MADAGASCAR
Reserva Amazonica MADRE DE DIOS, PERU
Azura BENGUERRA ISLAND, BAZARUTO ARCHIPELAGO NATIONAL PARK, MOZAMBIQUE
Voyages Longitude 131 AYERS ROCK, NORTHERN TERRITORY, AUSTRALIA
Daintree Eco Lodge & Spa DAINTREE RAINFOREST, QUEENSLAND, AUSTRALIA
Voyages El Questro Wilderness Park KUNUNURRA, WESTERN AUSTRALIA, AUSTRALIA
Jean-Michel Cousteau Fiji Islands Resort VANUA LEVU ISLAND, FIJI
Morgan’s Rock Hacienda & Ecolodge PLAYA OCOTAL, NICARAGUA
Governors' Il Moran Camp MASAI MARA RESERVE, KENYA
Turtle Island Fiji TURTLE ISLAND, FIJI
Aguila de Osa Inn PALMAR SUR, CORCOVADO NATIONAL PARK, PENINSULA DE OSA, COSTA RICA
Baghvan PENCH NATIONAL PARK, MADHYA PRADESH, INDIA
Chan Chich Lodge CHAN CHICH, ORANGE WALK, BELIZE
Etnia Pousada E Loja TRANCOSO, BAHIA, BRAZIL
Treetops Lodge Estate ROTORUA, NORTH ISLAND, NEW ZEALAND
Banyan Tree Phuket, Thailand (http://www.banyantree.phuket.com )
La Residence d’Angkor, Siem Reap, Cambodia (http://www.residencedangkor.com)
Evason Hua Hin Resort & Six Senses Spa, Thailand (http://www.sixsenses.com)
Nihiwatu, Sumba Island, Indonesia (http://www.nihiwatu.com )
Anantara Resort & Spa Golden Triangle, Chiang Rai,Thailand. (http://goldentriangle.anantara.com)
Amarvilas Agra, India (http://www.oberoiamarvilas.com/)
Popa Mountain Resort, Bagan, Myanmar: (http://www.myanmartourex.com/myanmar_hotels/popa_mountain_resort_hotel.html )
Soneva Fushi Resort & Six Senses Spa, Maldive Islands (http://www.six-senses.com/soneva-fushi/ )
Tanjung Sanctuary Hotel, Langkawi, Malaysia
(http://www.tanjung-sanctuary-langkawi.com )
Alila Manggis Resort, Bali, Indonesia (http://www.alilahotels.com/manggis)
Mauna Lani Resort, KAMUELA, HAWAII http://www.maunalani.com/
The Ocean Golf Course Fairmont Sonoma Mission Inn, Calif. http://www.fairmont.com
The Lenox, in Boston http://www.lenoxhotel.com/
Tiamo Resorts, the Bahamas http://www.tiamoresorts.com/
Rancho La Puerta, Tecate, Baja California, Mexico
Rancho Tres Estrellas Organic Garden
Casa Cubuy Ecolodge, Rio Blanco, Puerto Rico http://www.casacubuy.com/
Casa Grande Mountain Retreat, Utuado, Puerto Rico http://www.hotelcasagrande.com/index.html
Casa Picaflores, El Yunque, Puerto Rico http://www.casapicaflores.com/
Casita Zumbador, El Yunque, Puerto Rico http://www.elyunquehotels.com/23.html
Coqui Inn, Carolina, Isla Verde, Puerto Rico http://www.coqui-inn.com/index.html
Lemon Tree Oceanfront Cottages Coqui Inn, Rincon, Puerto Rico http://www.lemontreepr.com/Home.html
Rain Forest Inn, Rio Grande, Puerto Rico http://www.rainforestinn.com/camping.htm
Rio Grande Plantation Eco Resort, San Juan, Puerto Rico http://www.riograndeplantation.com/
Robin Phillips' Rainforest Cabin, El Yunque, Puerto Rico http://www.elyunquehotels.com/5.html
Ecotourism is about connecting conservation, communities, and sustainable travel. It meets the needs of present tourists and host regions while protecting and enhancing opportunities for the future.
"Sustainable tourism development requires the informed participation of all relevant stakeholders, as well as strong political leadership to ensure wide participation and consensus building. Achieving sustainable tourism ... requires constant monitoring of impacts, introducing the necessary preventive and/or corrective measures whenever necessary. Sustainable tourism should ... ensure a meaningful experience to the tourists, raising their awareness about sustainability issues and promoting sustainable tourism practices amongst them." World Tourism Organization
Sustainable development implies "meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" World Commission on Environment and Development
Responsible tourism:
- minimizes negative economic, environmental and social impacts- generates greater economic benefits for local people and enhances the well being of host communities - improves working conditions and access to the industry- involves local people in decisions that affect their lives and life chances- makes positive contributions to the conservation of natural and cultural heritage embracing diversity- provides more enjoyable experiences for tourists through more meaningful connections with local people, and a greater understanding of local cultural, social and environmental issues- provides access for physically challenged people- is culturally sensitive, encourages respect between tourists and hosts, and builds local pride and confidence.
Cape Town Declaration on Responsible Tourism in Destinations, 2002
LUXURY ECO RESORTS AROUND THE WORLD
Mateya Safari Lodge- MADIKWE GAME RESERVE, NORTH WEST SOUTH AFRICA
Villa Principe Leopoldo & Residence, LUGANO,TICINO, SWITZERLAND
Cuixmala, LA HUERTA, JALISCO, MEXICO
Gaia Retreat & Spa, BROOKLET, BYRON HINTERLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES, AUSTRALIA
Tauana , PONTA DO CORUMBAU, BAHIA, BRAZIL
Bamurru Plains, KAKADU NATIONAL PARK, NORTHERN TERRITORY, AUSTRALIA
URBN Hotels, Shanghai, SHANGHAI, CHINA
Six Senses Hideaway Yao Noi KOH YAO NOI, PHUKET, THAILAND
Praia do Forte EcoResort & Thalasso Spa SALVADOR, BAHIA, BRAZIL
explora en Rapa Nui EASTER ISLAND, RAPA NUI, CHILE
Punta Caracol Acqua Lodge ISLA COLON, BOCAS DEL TORO, PANAMA
Hacienda de San Antonio MUNICIPIO DE COMALA, COLIMA, MEXICO
Inkaterra Machu Picchu MACHU PICCHU, CUSCO, PERU
Conrad Bali Resort & Spa NUSA DUA, BALI, INDONESIA
Six Senses Hideaway Hua Hin PRANBURI, HUA HIN, THAILAND
Alila Ubud UBUD, BALI, INDONESIA
Pousada Maravilha FERNANDO DE NORONHA, PERNAMBUCO, BRAZIL
Sabi Sabi Earth Lodge SABI SABI PRIVATE GAME RESERVE, KRUGER NATIONAL PARK, MPUMALANGA, SOUTH AFRICA
Pousada Picinguaba PARATI, RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL
Cottars 1920’s Camp MASAI MARA RESERVE, KENYA
Fazenda São Francisco do Corumbau PONTA DO CORUMBAU, BAHIA, BRAZIL
Shompole NGURUMAN ESCARPMENT, KENYA
Four Seasons Tented Camp CHIANG RAI, THAILAND
Vil Uyana RANGIRIGAMA, SIGIRIYA, SRI LANKA
Anjajavy l'Hôtel ANJAJAVY, MADAGASCAR
Reserva Amazonica MADRE DE DIOS, PERU
Azura BENGUERRA ISLAND, BAZARUTO ARCHIPELAGO NATIONAL PARK, MOZAMBIQUE
Voyages Longitude 131 AYERS ROCK, NORTHERN TERRITORY, AUSTRALIA
Daintree Eco Lodge & Spa DAINTREE RAINFOREST, QUEENSLAND, AUSTRALIA
Voyages El Questro Wilderness Park KUNUNURRA, WESTERN AUSTRALIA, AUSTRALIA
Jean-Michel Cousteau Fiji Islands Resort VANUA LEVU ISLAND, FIJI
Morgan’s Rock Hacienda & Ecolodge PLAYA OCOTAL, NICARAGUA
Governors' Il Moran Camp MASAI MARA RESERVE, KENYA
Turtle Island Fiji TURTLE ISLAND, FIJI
Aguila de Osa Inn PALMAR SUR, CORCOVADO NATIONAL PARK, PENINSULA DE OSA, COSTA RICA
Baghvan PENCH NATIONAL PARK, MADHYA PRADESH, INDIA
Chan Chich Lodge CHAN CHICH, ORANGE WALK, BELIZE
Etnia Pousada E Loja TRANCOSO, BAHIA, BRAZIL
Treetops Lodge Estate ROTORUA, NORTH ISLAND, NEW ZEALAND
Banyan Tree Phuket, Thailand (http://www.banyantree.phuket.com )
La Residence d’Angkor, Siem Reap, Cambodia (http://www.residencedangkor.com)
Evason Hua Hin Resort & Six Senses Spa, Thailand (http://www.sixsenses.com)
Nihiwatu, Sumba Island, Indonesia (http://www.nihiwatu.com )
Anantara Resort & Spa Golden Triangle, Chiang Rai,Thailand. (http://goldentriangle.anantara.com)
Amarvilas Agra, India (http://www.oberoiamarvilas.com/)
Popa Mountain Resort, Bagan, Myanmar: (http://www.myanmartourex.com/myanmar_hotels/popa_mountain_resort_hotel.html )
Soneva Fushi Resort & Six Senses Spa, Maldive Islands (http://www.six-senses.com/soneva-fushi/ )
Tanjung Sanctuary Hotel, Langkawi, Malaysia
(http://www.tanjung-sanctuary-langkawi.com )
Alila Manggis Resort, Bali, Indonesia (http://www.alilahotels.com/manggis)
Mauna Lani Resort, KAMUELA, HAWAII http://www.maunalani.com/
The Ocean Golf Course Fairmont Sonoma Mission Inn, Calif. http://www.fairmont.com
The Lenox, in Boston http://www.lenoxhotel.com/
Tiamo Resorts, the Bahamas http://www.tiamoresorts.com/
Rancho La Puerta, Tecate, Baja California, Mexico
Rancho Tres Estrellas Organic Garden
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
