Let’s make this World a better place to Live!

Samita's report

Paper- Recycling Workshop for Children, Rawal Resource Center, Islamabad, Pakistan, 22^nd -24^th September, 2007

Background:

Children are not just our future but present as well. They are an important stakeholder in the development of a nation. According to Child Rights Convention, the most rectified document, it is the right of children to have a clean and safe environment. But at the same time children must be directed to take responsibilities for their actions if they are to assert their rights.

Recycling is one of the most important ways of saving energy and conserving environment. Pakistan is an energy deficient country. A lot of energy can be conserved by merely recycling things like plastic, paper etc.

A two days workshop on paper recycling was held for children on 22^nd and 24^th September, 2007. The purpose of this workshop was to raise awareness about the environmental issues among children and let them determine actions to improve their surroundings. It was not limited to make paper but implicitly tried to develop an attitude in children to recycle as many things as they can. Paper being simpler to recycle could stimulate the interest of children and would lead them to think of other ways to make this world a better place to live.

Paper-Recycling Workshop

The workshop was organized in resource center of a public school in Islamabad with the help of Education Development Center (EDC) and Adult and Basic Education Society (ABES), Pakistan. These organizations provided assistance in the logistics and paper recycling training respectively. A total of 40 children and peer mentors between the ages of 10 to 14 participated in the workshop.

Story of a paper- told by children

The children made their own stories about paper. All of these started with the trees, transforming into paper and eventually ending up in landfills. As they discussed these stories, it was concluded that if we continue to cut trees with no or fewer replanting; soon there will be no trees in the world. No child wanted to live in a world without trees. They agreed to keep their surroundings clean by wasting less.

It was also concluded that life must be respected in all forms. Paper is life as it comes from trees and therefore, it should also be respected. These realizations changed the perspectives of the participants about things around them. Now they wanted to learn ways to recycle paper to save a life. The recycled paper will be used for drawing, writing stories, greeting cards and many more creative ways.

Getting Down to Work-Recycling Paper

Two resource persons from ABES conducted this session with children. During this children came to know about the history of paper and the sources from which paper can be obtained. There are many kinds of paper depending on its material and quality. Each kind of paper is used for a different purpose.

The two trainers demonstrated the whole process of making recycled paper. The children watched with great interest and asked many questions about the process. Later they were given a chance to make their own papers. Resources like net frames are though useful in making paper but not a limitation. Children were also told about the alternatives methods of making paper with fewer and low-cost resources.

At first they were a little apprehensive about executing it on their own, but once they gained the confidence then there was no stopping for them. The children got really enthusiastic in making recycled paper. They worked together in groups and helped each other in the process. The experience provided useful learning for everyone. A sense of accomplishment could be seen on their faces as they put the paper on the board. That is just the beginning of bringing about a great change.

At the end, they were shown the ways to use this paper by making cards, notebooks, teaching aids and many more wonderful things. For them it was a miracle called “paper”.

Sharing experiences and Learning from others

Mr. Mannan Rana, from UNICEF, Islamabad introduced children to their rights and the initiative of change-makers in Pakistan. He gave the examples of a few change-makers and inspired all children to act like one them too. The participants were motivated and everyone agreed to be the change-maker in his/her own way.

Samina Sardar, of FOCUS Humanitarian Organization, Pakistan, has an extensive experience of working with children. She discussed the work of children and asked them to come up with the ways to work towards a better future. She told them that you don’t have to wait to grow up to do something, now is the time for action. If we all do a little, we can accomplish a lot.

Imran Rizvi, of AMAL-Human Development Network, Pakistan, and Humaira Naseer, of Rural Support Program Network, Islamabad, urged children to be the change they want to see in the world. They were impressed with the ways children had worked and encouraged them to bring a positive change to the world around them. They appreciated the efforts of the organizers and emphasized the need of replicating this activity in other parts of the country. They also asked their peers to support the children in their initiatives and that such activities should continue to happen.

Manzoor Wahid, of EDC encouraged the children for their efforts. He accentuated the importance of paper recycling and explained that paper recycling was essential because this saved cutting trees. If we save cutting trees, the weather of the area would remain moderate and also that we would achieve timely and adequate rainfall, much needed for our agricultural run economy.

The representative of National Commission of Child Welfare Department, Pakistan, appreciated the efforts and work of children. He promised to support the activities of children in every possible way.

Action Plan:

Based on the discussions and learning of the two days, the children came up with their own plan of actions. They worked together in small groups and came up with action points which will be taken forward by them. The key points included:

v We will stop other children from throwing paper away.

v We will collect used paper from the children in the school.

v We will make recycled paper.

v We will use this recycled paper to make notebooks, drawing books and writing stories.

v We will teach our friends and peers to make recycled paper.

v We will work TOGETHER and keep our environment clean.

In the end children were presented with badges as a token of participation. These badges were created out of the recycled paper made by children themselves. It had written on it “The Green Change-makers”, a name agreed upon by all the children for their group.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that such activities must be done with children on regular basis and not as one time event. There should be follow-up for these so that children can build on their previous learning.

Samita

GPI, GNH, GCH: True Indicators of Progress

Gross domestic product (GDP) is often used as an indicator to measure progress in the economy and society. Everyone usually welcomes GDP growth, and when we think it's not growing enough, we try to find effective measures to raise it. But is it really better when GDP continues to get larger and larger? Can GDP really indicate true progress, including happiness?

GDP goes up when money flows for whatever reason. It adds up any economic activity, that is, the total market value of all final goods and services produced, regardless of whether or not they contribute to people's happiness. It doesn't take into account the aim for which the money flows. In other words, besides goods and services we want, the more traffic accidents, environmental damage, or domestic violence we have, the higher GDP rises. That is because, as part of measuring national economic growth, the GDP also counts up the medical cost for those who suffer, for example, from asthma due to soot and smoke, and the overtime work hours of police devoted to investigating heinous crimes.

We shouldn't be simply delighted when GDP increases. We should very carefully examine the details of any increase in GDP. Let's think about other kinds of activities not accounted for by GDP, but they create happiness, such as housekeeping, child rearing, and so on. When parents read their children some picture books, for example, everyone would agree that they're making their children happy, but since there is no money flow, their activities don't influence GDP. And no matter how hard someone works as a volunteer, the work doesn't affect GDP either, unless a financial transaction occurs.

Because GDP includes what makes us unhappy, and excludes what makes us happy, it cannot be a true indicator to measure social progress. It only measures the amount of money flowing in the economy.

To remedy this, Redefining Progress, a sustainability think tank, created the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) as an alternative to GDP, insisting that relying on GDP as a shorthand indicator of progress is not good for either the Earth or humanity.
http://www.rprogress.org/index.htm

The new GPI starts with the same personal consumption data that GDP is based on, but then it makes some crucial distinctions. It adds factors such as the value of household and volunteer work, which are excluded from GDP, as the value equivalent to the cost that would be paid for
workers doing the same job. Furthermore, it subtracts factors such as the costs arising from crime, pollution, resource depletion, family breakdown, and the estimated cost of damage to human health and the environment.

In a comparison of the two indicators over time, the GPI increased in parallel with the growth of the GDP per capita in both Japan and the United States until somewhere between the 1960s and 1970s. After that, however, while the GDP steadily increased, the GPI stopped rising or
even fell. In other words, despite the GDP increases per capita, our level of happiness may not be bigger, or it may even be fading. If so, is it right to continue advocating economic and national policies that seek ever-higher GDP?

Today's media and government officials alike still insist that we must boost the GDP growth rate, or that no growth is no good. Consider thought, that if the economy grew by three percent per year for 24 years, the GDP would be doubled, something beyond our imagination, given the
human and natural resources, and production and financial capital required for this to happen. In today's social economy, however, shortsighted people, or those who have to take the short-term view, keep investing on a short-term basis, parroting that "at least three percent
of growth" is crucial.

Unlike our GDP-oriented society, there is another country that takes a unique and fundamental approach: Bhutan. The country is attracting increasing attention because the Bhutanese consider Gross National Happiness (GNH), instead of GNP, as the indicator to measure national
progress.

GNH attempts to measure national power and growth by happiness instead of production. The term is said to have been used first by Bhutan's King Jigme Singye Wangchuck (then 21 years old) in 1976, when he stated at the Fifth Conference of the Non-Aligned Countries that GNH is more important than GNP. He thought that simultaneous improvement of material and spiritual wealth is vital.

From the 1960s to the early 1970s, Bhutan studied the experiences and models of developed countries. King Wangchuck eventually concluded that economic development -- often causing North-South confrontation, poverty, environmental destruction, and cultural loss -- does not always lead to happiness. So he decided not to use the GNP enlargement policy but the
idea of GNH instead, which seeks people's happiness. "Progress should be people-oriented." That is the basic philosophy for progress as well as the final goal of progress, according to GNH.

Bhutan is now directing its development based on the four pillars of the GNH: (1) economic growth and development; (2) preservation of cultural assets, and transmission and promotion of traditional cultures; (3) preservation and sustainable use of the environment; and (4) good
governance.

As happiness is subjective and can't be internationally measured using a unified scale, GNH has been thought of as a conceptual idea. Nevertheless, it became popular, and many people wondered if GNH could be expressed as a quantitative indicator like GNP, which prompted the
establishment of the Center for Bhutan Studies in 1999 to start targeted research.

To begin with, the center is aiming to develop an indicator that can be used within Bhutan that measures the concept of happiness using the following nine elements (in random order): living standard, cultural diversity, emotional well being, health, education, time use, ecosystem
health, community vitality, and good governance.

So, how are people spending their time? How vital is the community? These factors would seldom influence GDP. Actually, in the GDP-oriented world, if you're relaxing (not consuming) or spend your time on community activities without being paid, you would be considered to be
"unproductive" and creating a drag on GDP.

But what truly measures national progress? When your children or grandchildren are grown up, which do you think, when looking back, was good? Was it that your country's GDP continued to grow, or was it growth of GNH?

Defined in terms of GDP, Bhutan is a developing country with a low GDP per capita. The country, however, is blessed with an abundant natural environment; 26 percent of its land is nature reserves, and 72 percent is covered by forest. There are no homeless people or beggars on the street. According to a survey, 97 percent of the Bhutanese people answered yes to the question "Are you happy?" What percentage of people would say, "Yes, I'm happy," if the same question was asked in your country?

Does the pursuit of money and economic growth really make us happy? Isn't there anything that might be undermined by seeking them? Bhutan's GNH concept prompts us to reconsider our true purpose in life.

Mukouyama Painting, a company in Japan inspired by the GNH concept, is doing business based on its own idea of measuring the company's success. With about 20 employees, it is located in Kofu City, Yamanashi Prefecture, and deals with a wide range of paint products for industrial
and home use.

See also:
The End of Growth: Efforts in Japanese Society and Business to Slow Down
http://www.japanfs.org/en/newsletter/200510-1.html

Its corporate philosophy is represented by the following mottos: "The purpose of our work is to make the Earth clean" and "Our business will provide satisfaction to customers as well as to the
environment of Mother Earth." The management of the company thinks that it would be no use making profits if we ruined the Earth and turned it into a deserted planet.

Mukouyama Painting, however, had a different business policy until about a decade ago. In those days, the company was making every effort to go public, with the primary focus on sales figures. Setting an ambitious goal, such as a 20 percent increase in sales annually, the company urged employees to meet the goal by finding new customers. But this didn't work. Many workers quit their jobs, and it was difficult to recruit replacements. Then-president Kunifumi Mukouyama (now senior advisor) had a tough time in dealing with these situations, and felt depressed. He seriously asked himself, --"What am I? What is a company? What should I
do?"

When struggling to get out of the depression, he was influenced by various people. Now, he is sure that he wants to live in a world full of love, peace, harmony, cooperation, and self-sufficiency, although he is actually in a capitalist society where individuals tend to be motivated by self-interest. When Mr. Mukouyama heard about Bhutan's GNH, he immediately decided to adopt a new idea, what he calls "GCH" (Gross Company Happiness), namely, the total happiness of all employees.

At that time, company-wide efforts based on ISO 14001 resulted in an annual cost reduction of 15 million yen (about U.S.$130,000), an equivalent to the net income from the sales of 300 million yen (about $2.6 million). "If we have such gains, some reduction in sales won't hurt the company," Mr. Mukouyama thought. In 1995, he started making a business plan with a reduced amount of sales, say 92 percent of the previous year's sales. The company is aiming at "negative growth" rather than becoming a listed company.

Meanwhile, Mukouyama Painting has been successfully enhancing its corporate values by improving its services to the current customers. The company also has established positive relationships with people in the community by inviting them as citizens' ombudsmen for its internal auditing based on ISO 14001.

In response to the question, "Are your sales decreasing as planned?" Mr. Mukouyama replied, "No, I'm afraid not. Because of unexpected circumstances such as the closedown of a competitive company, the sales are not decreasing. But we are not involved in the activities to get new
customers, and no sales quotas are assigned. This allows employees to have pressure-free work life. It is not my intention to run a company at the cost of employees' humanity. I'd like to do human-centered business.

At one time, the turnover rate was so high and half of the workforce left the company in a year, but now employees rarely quit the company."

Mukouyama Painting believes that it can provide better services to customers and society when its employees are satisfied with the company, and that the happiness of the company depends on the total happiness of all employees. We are pleased to introduce this Japanese company that
measures its success not by the amount of sales, but by GCH that's Gross Company Happiness.

Perhaps it's time to take this discussion into the corridors of power in big businesses and governments worldwide. Shouldn't we all have a say in how to measure progress and plan for the future? Which indicator would you vote for: GDP, GPI, GNH, GCH, or a combination?

Written by Junko Edahiro

http://www.japanfs.org/

More:

• Beyond GDP - EU conference

• Alternative to GDP (pdf)
  

Book report "Mining and the environment"

Recently I have read a book concerning Corporate Social Responsibility which is named as “Mining and the environment”. In that book, which is consisted of 8 chapters, 237 pages; there were widely discussed issues of mining mineral resources and its influence on ecology, problems it brings such as air contamination, water pollution, air pollution, ecological degradation; and all environmental costs which occur. And also the book suggests that new regulatory principle, which is named “pollution-prevention pays” should be implemented, as it aims to promote competitive and environmentally sustainable industrial development. The requirement that pollution be reduced at source implies a requirement for technical or organizational change, or both, in the production process. This, in turn, requires that firms develop new technological and managerial capabilities, technological alliances with equipment suppliers, and collaboration with R&D organizations. Also there must be used environmental innovation, mining companies must create new ways of extraction, implement new technologies with the help of which miners can extract several mineral resources at the same time. In order to be better environmental managers for mining companies given below approaches can be used:

1. Stimulate and reward innovation in pollution prevention with tax breaks for R&D and technology investment;
2. Require mandatory pollution-prevention and reclamation plans in project development, and stipulate bonds for that purpose;
3. Stimulate profitable innovation in waste management, such as re-mining, reagent and metals recovery, and biotechnological waste treatment, and remove legislative barriers to re-mining and waste treatment;
4. Reward firms for innovations in clean technology;
5. Use mechanisms such as credit conditionality to facilitate the commercialization and diffusion of pollution-prevention technology and work practices across the boundaries of firms and nations;
6. Promote new approaches to technology transfer, such as interfirm collaboration to develop the technological and managerial capabilities to innovate, in-depth training to manage technical and organizational change, and information-dissemination programs.

Summary of Climate change

Book review from Benjamin













“Climate Change is an issue of intergenerational justice. If we know how our actions affect our planet, it would be criminal to keep acting like we are now, knowing that it jeopardizes future generations.”Greenhouse gases’ is the main contributor to climate change. This is because the earth’satmosphere acts much like a giant greenhouse. The gases allow solar radiation (heat) to pass through the atmosphere but, after it is absorbed and re-radiated by the earth, the gases prevent this heat from escaping back into space. Under natural circumstances this is what keeps the earth warm enough to support life. But current conditions are far from natural. Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, when humans began burning fossil fuels on an unprecedented scale, greenhouse gases have steadily been piling up in the atmosphere. Many of these gases last far longer than a century. As a result, current carbon dioxide (CO2)concentrations are now 35.4% higher than pre-industrial levels and growing rapidly. They are now far above any level in the past 650,000 years. Likewise, methane (CH4) concentrations have more than doubled to far above anything seen in the past 650,000 years. Global emissions of all greenhouse gases have increased by 70% between 1970 and 2004. The consequence of all this is that more and more heat is being trapped in our atmosphere, leading to an ‘enhancedgreenhouse effect.’

The world is warming incredibly fast. Global temperatures have risen by 0.76˚C since 1850, with the rate of warming for the past 50 years double that for the past century. Eleven ofthe past twelve years rank among the twelve warmest years since records began in 1850.

There are many different greenhouse gases responsible for climate change, but just three – CO2 (carbon dioxide), CH4 (methane) and N2O (nitrous oxide) – account for almost 99% of the total.Nitrous Oxide – N2O• Nitrous oxide is 275 times more potent than CO2 Sources:• Agriculture and land-use change – Natural emissions from the soil are greatly increased with the application of fertilisers and other materials, which are commonly used today in intensive agriculture. Deforested and degraded land also releases higher emissions• Combustion of fossil fuels, in cars as well as in industrial processes. Hydrofl uorocarbons, perfl uorocarbons, sulphur hexafl uoride – HFC, PFC, SF6 These three gases are extremely powerful and often have very long lifespans. Sulphur hexafl uoride, for example, is over 22,000 timesmore potent than CO2 and lasts for 3200 years!! Fortunately, these gases are emitted in very small quantities that are generally easy to reduce. Their main sources include semi-conductor manufacturing, the production of aluminium (PFCs) and magnesium (SF6), electricaltransmission (SF6), and the replacement of ozone-depleting substances with HFCs.Carbon Dioxide – CO2• By far the most prevalent greenhouse gas, currently accounting for about 77% of total concentrations. Since it is so common, CO2 (or simply “carbon”) is often used as shorthand for all greenhouse gases.

Sources:• Burning of fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas (eg. for electricity generation and transportation)•

Land-use change: Through photosynthesis, plants absorb CO2, thereby acting as a ‘sink’ and balancing emissions. When forests are destroyed and supplanted by other land uses, such as farms or cities, these important sinks are removed, leading to a net increase in emissions.

Current concentrations of CO2 are at 379 ppm (IPCC, 2007), while total concentrations of all greenhouse gases are at 430ppm CO2e.

Methane – CH4• Though shorter lived, it is 62 times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than CO2Sources:• Agriculture, especially livestock – high emissions from cattle/ sheep. In some livestock-intensive countries, such as New Zealand, methane is often the number one greenhouse gas.• The retrieval, processing and distribution of fossil fuels - coal mining and the use of natural gas account for the second-largest portion of methane emissions• Waste – methane is emitted as a ‘landfill gas’ from decomposing waste in anaerobic (oxygen-free) conditions.

What we can do to reducing emissions:

1. Power Stations- Use less power (and save money) by increasing energy efficiency in your home and workplace- Switch from dirty power to clean, renewable energy like wind and solar, regulate emissions, research new technologies like carbon capture and storage (CCS).

2. Waste Disposal and Treatment- Reduce your waste, re-use, recycle and compost!- Better waste diversion, landfi ll gas recovery, packaging directives Land Use and Biomass Burning- Avoid unsustainably-harvested wood products and paper with a low recycled content- Provide clean energy alternatives to biomass burning, provide incentives for forest conservation Residential, Commercial, and Other Sources- Improve energy effi ciency of buildings by improving insulation, favouring natural light and air circulation, moreeffi cient lighting, appliances, etc.- Introduce greener building standards, better town planning Fossil Fuel Retrieval, Processing, and Distribution- Use fewer fossil fuels by driving less, switching to renewable energy- Regulation and emissions limits for extraction, refi ning and distribution processes, implementation of new technologies Agricutural Byproducts- Support organic agriculture, eat less meat- Regulate intensive agriculture, promote alternatives and lowerimpact farming Transportation Fuels- Drive less by using alternative forms of transport, eat local- Improve vehicle efficiency standards, promote lower-emission technologies.

3. Industrial Processes- Consume less, consume wisely (choose products manufactured in an environmentally-friendlyway)- Government regulation of industrial emissions.

Benjamin

Buy Nothing Day Nov 24th 2007

Hi friends!

The 24th of November is Buy Nothing Day. To take a rest from consumption and think about the ways we are ruining the planet and other people's lives by buying things.
Find more information here:

The Adbusters Buy Nothing Day (BND) page:
http://adbusters.org/metas/eco/bnd/

UK BND page with links to what's happening in other (maybe your?) country:
http://www.buynothingday.co.uk/

Wikipedia entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buy_Nothing_Day

and a TV spot that MTV rejected: http://blip.tv/file/get/Adbusters-BuyNothingDayNorthAmericanPiggy448.flv


best wishes from Germany and Happy Buy Nothing Day!

Kjell

Climate Change - Youth Guide to Action

Download the Climate Change Guide to Action In English (PDF, 2.2 MB)

Link source - Taking IT global

Climate change is any shift in weather patterns lasting at least 30 years. The term “climate” is often confused with weather, which is the short term measurement of atmospheric conditions such as temperature and precipitation patterns. Therefore, while a single hot year might not indicate climate change, a trend toward higher temperatures over many years would.

Most scientists agree, climate change is happening today in the form of manmade global warming. This warming largely began with the Industrial Revolution, which dramatically increased fossil fuel consumption and the release into the atmosphere of greenhouse gases (GHGs), most notably carbon dioxide (CO2). GHGs increase global temperatures by preventing heat from the sun from escaping into outer space. As GHGs accumulate in the atmosphere, so does this solar energy, resulting in steadily rising temperatures in recent decades.

Climate change also occurs naturally depending on many variables including the cyclical changes in the Earth’s position relative the sun and and volcanic activity levels. Historically, the Earth has passed through cool and warm stretches. Typically, colder glaciations last for roughly 100,000 years, while hotter interglacial periods, which is what we’re in today, last for closer to 10,000 years.

Present day warming has caused a broad range of negative consequences and is likely to create more unless stopped. The most direct effects of current climate change are on temperature and precipitation patterns. As of 2006, all eight of the hottest years ever recorded were from the last 10 years. As this warming continues, established weather systems will shift and become more extreme, resulting in both more droughts and floods. As sea surface temperature rises, weather-disturbing El Niño events will become more frequent and powerful. Meanwhile, larger, more severe hurricanes, which feed on the heat of ocean waters, will threaten coasts. This trend may already be visible: the last two decades have seen a sharp increase both in the frequency and power of hurricanes.

Shifts in temperature and precipitation will be a shock to fragile ecosystems which depend on specific climatic conditions. Many species will be unable to adapt as fast as their environment changes and face sharply reduced numbers or extinction.

Plants and animals aren’t the only ones feeling the pressure of changing ecosystems. Many regions will face severe water shortages in a warmer world, creating the potential for conflict. It is believed that the genocide in Sudan’s Darfur region is at least in part a response to water shortages resulting from global warming. In recognition of this growing danger, the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to anti-warming crusaders including the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Al Gore.

An additional threat of climate change is rising sea levels. The main causes of this are the expansion of water as it warms and the flow of melt waters from once land trapped ice to oceans. Though it’s unclear exactly how much oceans will rise, the IPCC projects increases between 9 and 88cm in the 21st century. In this range, many coastal regions including cities would be threatened, and at a time when 70% of the world’s population lives on coastal plains.

Global warming is arguably the greatest danger facing humanity in the years ahead. In many ways, its effects are already being felt and it is too late to prevent warming entirely. However, the situation is not without hope. Though urgent action is needed, through the combined efforts of governments, businesses, scientists, and individuals, it is still possible to stop even greater tragedies and protect the health of our planet for future generations.

Updates from Paddy

Hi Guys!

Just a quick update on some 'new' news on sustainability and where some things seem to be going!

The 'cutting edge' of sustainability seems to be sharpening up quick, but the bad news is that the earth's systems are just about in meltdown.

1)The Bad News

EARTH AUDIT

The global environment is on life support and its being tended to by a manic with a chainsaw.....
the UN just released this ground-breaking report depicting this global emergency in stark terms. It's called the 'Earth Audit' and its one of the greatest pieces of scientific collaboration in history.
http://www.unep.org/geo/geo4/media/media_briefs/Media_Briefs_GEO-4_Executive_Summary.pdf

INDUSTRIALISM

Industrialism has changes the face of the earth- the technological down side! This presentation/slideshow of mindblowing pics puts the earth's plight into perspective.
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/56

CLIMATE CHANGE

The IPCC are about to realeas a new report on Saturday- a synthesis of all reasearch done up till now, and its more dire than ever.....
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/press/reports/ipcc-synthesis-report-briefin

2)The Good News

PROGRESS IS HAPPENING....

Hans Rosling here shows global trends of improved living standards and market development in a truly revolutionary way.Prepare to be amazed!
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/92


BRIGHT GREENISM

Bright Greenism is a movement that puts the optimism back into environmentalism. 'Dark Green' or conservative environmentalsim, it is argued, has no future. Bright Greenism embraces the progressivism of technology and even capitalism to argue that we can do both: protect the environment AND have fast cars and big houses.... Check out the attachment from the Magazine 'What Is Enlightenment?' for more details- I'd love to hear your thoughts, cause I'm doing my
dissertation this year in this area!

SPIRAL DYNAMICS

Spiral Dynamics is a theory of human development introduced in the 1996 book Spiral Dynamics by Don Beck and Chris Cowan. It provides a potentially revolutionary framework for analysing problems through 'worldview' grading and placement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_Dynamics


WORLDCHANGING

Tools, Models and Ideas for Building a Bright Green ... An online publication covering tools, models, and ideas for building a better future.
www.worldchanging.com/

PERMACULTURE

The St Andrews Permaculture Group which I'm a part of is going strong and has just launched its website- we're settign it us as a community garden and base for arts and crafts.
www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~pcgroup

OK, that's all for now...

Keep in touch!
Paddy :)

PS, If anyone wants to do a summary for one of the topics' discussions that still hasn't been covered, now's the time. www.mind42.com is a really great mindmapping tool for that kind of thing- its online and VERY easy to use.

Sustainable World SourceBook

		Download entire book as a pdf (free) It's fairly large and may take a minute or two. Printed version is sold out; new edition expected in late 2007.
		Overview The SourceBook is a concise (58 pages), attractive and user-friendly personal manual for contributing to a sustainable world. It contains essential information on the state of the planet and recommended solutions, effective actions for greening your life, and a resource directory of useful organizations, books, films and websites. We will make available updates on the book periodically that can be downloaded from our site. a a Contents a (see actual Table of Contents) 1. GLOBAL • Overview of the global vital signs and trends in the most critical areas: aaa- Environment: Ecosystems and Natural Resources aaa- Social: People and Communities aaa- Economics: Commerce and Globalization • Wherever possible, accompanying these trends with viable solutions, and ideas about how to best implement these solutions. a a 2. PERSONAL / COMMUNITY • Principles and actions for "greening" one's personal life and lowering one's ecological footprint, covering energy use, purchasing & investment guidelines, waste, transportation, food choices, etc. • How communities can become (and are becoming) more sustainable. • Guidelines for creating and running Community Action Teams. a a 3. RESOURCE DIRECTORY • Directory of organizations relevant to personal engagement and action, with description by category. This includes a regional section (San Francisco Bay Area), national and international. • Listings of useful books, films and websites that similarly support citizen education and engagement.

Strategy for Environmental Education for Sustainability in Mexico

Book review from Unai Sacona

National Strategy 2006-2014

The document collect the main objectives and strategies that national authorities will developed during the next years in order to improve the Sustainability in Mexico through Environmental Education. I want to share the document, because Mexico is one of the first countries, at national level, in elaborate a strategy on the UNDESD framework. The document is very interesting and I think it´s available on line but maybe it is just in Spanish.

Mission: To establish public policies in environmental education for sustainability at national and local level that will foster the construction of an environmental culture, improve the quality of life, strengthen citizenship and the country’s many cultural identities, and protect ecosystems and their biodiversity.

Strategic objectives:

1. To consolidate environmental education for sustainability as a public policy based on specific legislation and mainstreamed in other related fields, on solid governmental and civic institutions, on significant financial resources earmarked for important programs and project that aim for the construction of an environmental culture in Mexico.

2. To create a broad of environmental education and capacity building alternatives that will provide the country and its different areas with environmental educators responding to environment demands for the construction of sustainability and critical activities.

3. To have frameworks, at different levels, for the development of environmental education for sustainability.

4. To consolidate the Environmental Education as field of knowledge through programs to systematize and evaluate practices, foster educational innovations, training researchers, and create mechanisms for articulating, communicating, etc.

The strategy and the main objectives of the strategy sounds really great, but until now that´s just paper. The Sustainable are in the National Strategy Plan as a main goal for the country for the next 6 years, but the specific plan are not ready yet, during the next months we will know what exactly the government are going to develop in order to achieve the goal.

Regards from Mexico,

Unai

Latest UN Environment Report Describes a 'Threatened Planet

Link source:

The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) has released its latest detailed report, "Global Environment Outlook: environment for development (GEO-4)," which examines the state of the planet from a number of different aspects. The scientists who put the report together are concerned. They identified a number of "major threats," including "climate change, the rate of extinction of species, and the challenge of feeding a growing population."

GEO-4 is the latest in UNEP's series of flagship reports. The first one, "Environment and Development, Our Common Future" [the Brundtland Commission], appeared 20 years ago. The reports assess the current state of the "global atmosphere, land, water and biodiversity." The latest one describes the changes since 1987 and identifies priorities for action.

"GEO-4 is the most comprehensive UN report on the environment, prepared by about 390 experts and reviewed by more than 1 000 others across the world," UNEP's bulletin noted.

The report is not entirely negative. There has been progress "in tackling some relatively straightforward problems," and environmental concerns are now "much closer to mainstream politics everywhere." However, there remain "the harder-to-manage issues, the 'persistent' problems." A look at these concerns led the GEO-4 report to state: "There are no major issues raised in Our Common Future for which the foreseeable trends are favorable."

In addition the UNEP warns that "failure to address these persistent problems may undo all the achievements so far on the simpler issues, and may threaten humanity's survival." But it did add: "The objective is not to present a dark and gloomy scenario, but an urgent call for action."

Achim Steiner, UN Under-Secretary General and UNEP Executive Director, noted that the "international community's response to the Brundtland Commission has in some cases been courageous and inspiring. But all too often it has been slow and at a pace and scale that fails to respond to or recognize the magnitude of the challenges facing the people and the environment of the planet.

"But, as GEO-4 points out, there continue to be 'persistent' and intractable problems unresolved and unaddressed. Past issues remain and new ones are emerging - from the rapid rise of oxygen 'dead zones' in the oceans to the resurgence of new and old diseases linked in part with environmental degradation. Meanwhile, institutions like UNEP, established to counter the root causes, remain under-resourced and weak," Steiner continued.

The report makes clear that the world community "does not face separate crises - the 'environmental crisis', 'development crisis' and energy crisis' are all one."

Specifically, a phenomenon such as climate change is interconnected with "extinction rates and hunger." Other problems are driven simply by the world's increasing population – highlighted by the "rising consumption of the rich and the desperation of the poor."

Copies of the GEO- 4 report are available for download at: www.unep.org/geo/geo; and on UNEP's official distributor's web site: http://www.earthprint.com/go.htm?to=DEW0962NA; printed copies are also available through EarthPrint Limited, - P.O. Box 119, Stevenage, Hertfordshire SG1 TP, U.K., or by fax: + 1 38 7 88 -Tel: + 1 38 7 8 111 and e-mail: unep@earthprint.com

Source: UNEP - www.unep.org

>> DOWNLOAD REPORT

Full Report (Large file: 22.5 MB)

i. Acknowledgements ii. Table of Contents iii. Foreword iv. Preface v. Reader's Guide 1. Environment for Development 2. Atmosphere 3. Land 4. Water 5. Biodiversity 6. Sustaining a Common Future 7. Vulnerability of People and the Environment: Challenges and Opportunities 8. Interlinkages: Governance for Sustainability 9. The Future Today - Towards 2015 and Beyond 10. From the Periphery to the Core of Decision Making - Options for Action

The Power of Community: How Cuba Survived Peak Oil

Link: http://www.powerofcommunity.org

When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1990, Cuba's economy went into a tailspin. With imports of oil cut by more than half – and food by 80 percent – people were desperate. This film tells of the hardships and struggles as well as the community and creativity of the Cuban people during this difficult time. Cubans share how they transitioned from a highly mechanized, industrial agricultural system to one using organic methods of farming and local, urban gardens. It is an unusual look into the Cuban culture during this economic crisis, which they call "The Special Period." The film opens with a short history of Peak Oil, a term for the time in our history when world oil production will reach its all-time peak and begin to decline forever. Cuba, the only country that has faced such a crisis – the massive reduction of fossil fuels – is an example of options and hope.

The Power of Community: How Cuba Survived Peak Oil is a project of The Community Solution, a non-profit organization that designs and teaches low-energy solutions to the current unsustainable, fossil fuel based, industrialized, and centralized way of living. Visit www.communitysolution.org for more information.

Presentation: Low-energy Cuba

The End of Suburbia

Link: http://www.endofsuburbia.com/

Suburbia, and all it promises, has become the American Dream.

But as we enter the 21st century, serious questions are beginning to emerge about the sustainability of this way of life. With brutal honesty and a touch of irony, The End of Suburbia explores the American Way of Life and its prospects as the planet approaches a critical era, as global demand for fossil fuels begins to outstrip supply. World Oil Peak and the inevitable decline of fossil fuels are upon us now, some scientists and policy makers argue in this documentary.

The consequences of inaction in the face of this global crisis are enormous. What does Oil Peak mean for North America? As energy prices skyrocket in the coming years, how will the populations of suburbia react to the collapse of their dream? Are today's suburbs destined to become the slums of tomorrow? And what can be done NOW, individually and collectively, to avoid The End of Suburbia ?

Promo trailer:

Full movie (low image quality. only audio quality is fine):

Steep Decline In Oil Production Brings Risk of War and Unrest, Says New Study

Published on Monday, October 22, 2007 by The Guardian/UK

· Output peaked in 2006 and will fall 7% a year
· Decline in gas, coal and uranium also predicted

by Ashley Seager

World oil production has already peaked and will fall by half as soon as 2030, according to a report which also warns that extreme shortages of fossil fuels will lead to wars and social breakdown.

The German-based Energy Watch Group will release its study in London today saying that global oil production peaked in 2006 - much earlier than most experts had expected. The report, which predicts that production will now fall by 7% a year, comes after oil prices set new records almost every day last week, on Friday hitting more than $90 (£44) a barrel.

“The world soon will not be able to produce all the oil it needs as demand is rising while supply is falling. This is a huge problem for the world economy,” said Hans-Josef Fell, EWG’s founder and the German MP behind the country’s successful support system for renewable energy.

The report’s author, Joerg Schindler, said its most alarming finding was the steep decline in oil production after its peak, which he says is now behind us.

The results are in contrast to projections from the International Energy Agency, which says there is little reason to worry about oil supplies at the moment.

However, the EWG study relies more on actual oil production data which, it says, are more reliable than estimates of reserves still in the ground. The group says official industry estimates put global reserves at about 1.255 gigabarrels - equivalent to 42 years’ supply at current consumption rates. But it thinks the figure is only about two thirds of that.

Global oil production is currently about 81m barrels a day - EWG expects that to fall to 39m by 2030. It also predicts significant falls in gas, coal and uranium production as those energy sources are used up.

Britain’s oil production peaked in 1999 and has already dropped by half to about 1.6 million barrels a day.

The report presents a bleak view of the future unless a radically different approach is adopted. It quotes the British energy economist David Fleming as saying: “Anticipated supply shortages could lead easily to disturbing scenes of mass unrest as witnessed in Burma this month. For government, industry and the wider public, just muddling through is not an option any more as this situation could spin out of control and turn into a complete meltdown of society.”

Mr Schindler comes to a similar conclusion. “The world is at the beginning of a structural change of its economic system. This change will be triggered by declining fossil fuel supplies and will influence almost all aspects of our daily life.”

Jeremy Leggett, one of Britain’s leading environmentalists and the author of Half Gone, a book about “peak oil” - defined as the moment when maximum production is reached, said that both the UK government and the energy industry were in “institutionalised denial” and that action should have been taken sooner.

“When I was an adviser to government, I proposed that we set up a taskforce to look at how fast the UK could mobilise alternative energy technologies in extremis, come the peak,” he said. “Other industry advisers supported that. But the government prefers to sleep on without even doing a contingency study. For those of us who know that premature peak oil is a clear and present danger, it is impossible to understand such complacency.”

Mr Fell said that the world had to move quickly towards the massive deployment of renewable energy and to a dramatic increase in energy efficiency, both as a way to combat climate change and to ensure that the lights stayed on. “If we did all this we may not have an energy crisis.”

He accused the British government of hypocrisy. “Tony Blair and Gordon Brown have talked a lot about climate change but have not brought in proper policies to drive up the use of renewables,” he said. “This is why they are left talking about nuclear and carbon capture and storage. ”

Yesterday, a spokesman for the Department of Business and Enterprise said: “Over the next few years global oil production and refining capacity is expected to increase faster than demand. The world’s oil resources are sufficient to sustain economic growth for the foreseeable future. The challenge will be to bring these resources to market in a way that ensures sustainable, timely, reliable and affordable supplies of energy.”

The German policy, which guarantees above-market payments to producers of renewable power, is being adopted in many countries - but not Britain, where renewables generate about 4% of the country’s electricity and 2% of its overall energy needs.

Earth Is Reaching The Point of No Return, Says Major UN Environment Report

Published on Thursday, October 25, 2007 by Times Online/UK

by Lewis Smith

The speed at which mankind is using and abusing the Earth’s resources is putting humanity’s survival at risk, scientists have said.

The bleak assessment of the state of the environment globally was issued as an “urgent call for action” amid growing concerns of worldwide waste, neglect and governmental inertia.

Fundamental changes in political policy and individual lifestyles were demanded by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) as it gave warning that the “point of no return” for the environment is fast being approached.

The damage being done was regarded by the UN programme as so serious that it said the time had come for the environment to be a central theme of policy-making instead of just a fringe issue, even though it would damage the vested interests of powerful industries.

Marion Cheatle, of the environment programme, said that damage sustained by the environment was of fundamental economic concern and, if left unchecked, would affect growth.

“The report provides incontrovertible evidence of unprecedented environmental change over the last 20 years that, unless checked, will fundamentally undermine economic development for current and future generations,” she said as the report was released in London.

The report, the fourth Global Environment Outlook: environment for development (GEO-4), assessed the impact on the environment since 1987.

It was drafted on the basis of reports by almost 400 scientists, all experts in their fields, whose findings were subjected to review by another 1,000 scientists.

Climate change was identified as one of the most pressing problems but the condition of freshwater supplies, agricultural land and biodiversity were considered to be of equal concern.

It came 20 years after the publication Our Common Future by the Brundtland Commission, the first attempt by the UN to provide a comprehensive review of Man’s impact on the environment.

The authors of the latest report said there had been progress on some environmental problems in the past two decades, most notably the international agreement to protect the ozone layer. But while maintaining that they wanted to avoid presenting a “dark and gloomy scneario”, they concluded: “There are no major issues raised in Our Common Future for which the foreseeable trends are favourable.”

They said the scale of the challenge was huge and highlighted a series of problems that need to be faced and tackled by people and governments around the world before damage to the environment becomes irreversible.

Increases in the world population, which has risen almost 34 per cent from 5 billion in 1987 to 6.7 billion today, have caused many of the challenges because of the demands on the Earth’s natural resources.

Demand, heightened by a three-fold increase in trade since 1987, means that more is now being produced than can be sustained in the long term. On average, each person needs 21.9 hectares of the Earth’s surface to supply their needs whereas, it was calculated, the Earth’s biological capacity is 15.7 hectares per person.

The report was critical of the lack of action by governments in protecting the environment. The response to climate change was described as “woefully inadequate” but it was regarded as one of several significant problems that need to be addressed effectively.

“We appear to be living in an era in which the severity of environmental problems is increasing faster than our policy responses,” it said. “To avoid the threat of catastrophic consequences in the future, we need new policy approaches to change the direction and magnitude of drivers of environmental change.

“The need couldn’t be more urgent and the time couldn’t be more opportune, with our enhanced understanding of the challenges we face, to act now to safeguard our own survival and that of future generations.”

Overfishing was singled out as an issue that needed to be tackled as a priority. Measures to protect biodiversity, with species being forced into extinction at a rate 100 times faster than any in fossil records, were regarded as equally urgent.

Achim Steiner, executive director of UNEP, said that the international community’s response to environmental issues was at times “courageous and inspiring”, but all too often was inadequate.

“The systematic destruction of the Earth’s natural and nature-based resources has reached a point where the economic viability of economies is being challenged - and where the bill we hand to our children may prove impossible to pay,” he said.

Mike Childs, of the environmental campaign group Friends of the Earth, said: “The steady degradation of the world’s environment threatens the well-being of everybody on the planet.

John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace UK, said the report illustrated the importance of living sustainably: “It is the only way to improve global life expectancy and income inequality, beat climate change, reduce deforestation and protect biodiversity.”

If we hold on together

These come via Tuco Rides - A cyclist and vegetarian willing to do some fairly crazy stuff to save a few polar bears.

1. Photographer Norbert Rosing planned to take some sunset photos of a group of sled dogs near Churchill, Manitoba, in northern Canada on the Hudson Bay, when from stage left comes a 1200 pound polar bear.

2. The dogs' owner thinks he's just about to lose his pack. The dogs, though, don't growl, but crouch down and bark and wag their tails as though they want to play.

3. The polar bear thinks, yeah, I want to play, too!

4. And it turns out that you don't have to weigh less than a thousand pounds to be gentle.

5. So the dogs say "You should come back and play some more."

6. The polar bear does. He comes back several times during the course of the next week to roughhouse with his little friends.

It's pretty wonderful, this planet we've been given to live on. Need I say more?

Link: No Impact Man

Environmentalism means less deprivation

Link source from "No Impact Man"

People ask me if the reduced use of consumer conveniences that goes with the No Impact project doesn't mean a lot of deprivation. I say that I spend more time with my family, eat more healthily, get more exercise and am a better dad. Then I ask: "Was I more deprived before or am I more deprived now?"

The point is that the money we make, the things we buy and the planetary resources we use--or waste--aren't what make us happier. This is the finding of the forthcoming book The How of Happiness by University of California, Riverside researcher Dr. Sonja Lyubomirsky.

Her findings show that contributions to our happiness come:

• 50% from a genetically-determined set point (which we can do nothing about)
• 10% from our life circumstances or situations (which means we could trash the entire planet to get ourselves the biggest house and fastest car and still barely feel better)
• 40% from--are you ready?--how we act and how we think.

This confirms my No Impact experience that environmentalism--preserving rather than using up planetary resources--means nothing like depriving ourselves of happiness. Instead, it suggests that using less and treating the planet kindly means we get to stop distracting ourselves from what really makes us happy.

Of our assumptions about happiness, Lyubomirsky writes:

"Perhaps the most common error is that we assume that positive events ... will provide much more happiness than they really do. Take materialism, the pursuit of money and possessions, as an example. Why is it so hard for us (even myself!) to believe that money really doesn't make us happy? Because the truth is that money does make us happy. But our misunderstanding, as one happiness researcher eloquently puts it, is that 'we think money will bring lots of happiness for a long time, and actually it brings a little happiness for a short time.' Meanwhile, in our effortful pursuit of such dead ends to pleasure, we end up ignoring other, more effective routes to well-being."

What are the more effective routes? Well, that gets you back to how you think and how you act, and for more on that, you'll have to read Lyubomirsky's book. But a few bullet points include:

• Nurturing and enjoying relationships with family and friends
• Being comfortable expressing gratitude
• Being the first to offer help to coworkers and passersby
• Practicing optimism about the future
• Savoring life's pleasures and living in the moment
• Exercising at least once a week
• Committing to lifelong goals and ambitions
• Coping with challenges with strength and poise

The New Values of the 21st Century Citizen

Link source

Values guide decision making

Values guide decision making. They provide a shorthand to help your mind figure out what actions to take when a decision has to be made.

If you were faced with a choice, for example, between buying a hybrid vehicle or buying an SUV, the decision would be based partly on how much they cost and how much room you needed for groceries, kids, etc. But at least part of the choice is also made based on your values — which is more important to you?

If you are faced with a choice to purchase organic apples versus buying the regular apples, part of the choice is made based on price and taste — but again part of the decision is based on values. How important is eating organic to you compared to eating the normal foods?

Values guide decision making in every part of your life. When you make a decision — even the simple decisions you don’t think about — your values help your brain figure out what to do. Your mind frames the decision against your internal values and makes a decision that’s in line what what’s important to you.

You can tell how much you have in common with other people based on their values. If their values are aligned with yours, that means they would likely make the same decisions as you when faced with certain choices.

The 21st Century Requires New Values

In order to meet the challenges we will all face together in this new century, our values will have to change. Different things will have to become important to us in order to change our behaviors, consumption patterns and the way we solve problems.

The main reasons for this are:

• Global Warming and other environmental challenges won’t be met without significant changes in individual behavior.
• The world will face many new challenges that can’t be met by any single country. We will need to work together differently.
• Governments and corporations can’t be counted on to solve these problems on their own. They have their own agendas.
• The consumption patterns of people are currently unsustainable.

In order to solve the problems of the 21st century, individual citizens will need to play a more active role. We will need to ask — or more likely push and demand — that governments and corporations take the steps required.

This will require that we as individual citizens make decisions differently. It will require that different things become important to us as individuals. It will require, in other words, that our values change.

The New Values of the 21st Century Citizen

What values will people need in the 21st Century to meet the challenges before us?

People will need to adopt values that allow us to work together and collaborate to resolve our common challenges. This means both changing our consumption patterns and our collaborative problem solving skills.

We’ll need to reduce our consumption of resources. Plus we’ll have to begin making a lot of the things we need in sustainable ways. This will be a challenge. We’ll also have to move faster to resolve problems, as well as solve problems that are big.

Governments can’t move fast enough. Worse, they can’t be trusted to provide solutions that are the best for everyone. Governments can force solutions that are only optimal for certain groups.

Corporations can’t be trusted to provide the best solutions to our problems. They work mainly in the interest of their shareholders.

So people will need to work together in collaborative groups to resolve their common problems. And our values will have to change in order for us to do so.

While there are really many, many values that people need — including those that revolve around family, community and faith — here is a set of fundamental values that the 21st Century Citizen will find valuable as we work to face the challenges of this new century:

1. Reduce, Recycle, Reuse
2. The Individual is more important than the corporation
3. Those who make the mess, should clean it up.
4. Collaboration between people is more important than government efforts. And more effective.
5. You can make an impact. To magnify your impact, collaborate with others.
6. Don’t blindly trust your leaders.
7. Don’t blindly believe the media.

Following is a short discussion of each of the above.

Reduce, Recycle, Reuse

I knew people who had lived through the Great Depression when I was young. Their values with regard to waste, saving and getting by on less were much different than today.

A friend’s grandmother always used less detergent to wash clothes than was recommended on the box. And when the box was empty, she’d rinse water through the box to use any detergent dust that was left.

Reduce, Recycle, Reuse means that we will have to learn to adopt some of these same values.

The Individual is more important than the corporation

Corporations are perfect if you want to efficiently turn an old growth forest into paper and building materials. But if what you want is to preserve it for future generations, corporations don’t work.

There are resources on earth that need to be protected from corporations. They only way to do that is if governments put the needs of people before the desires of corporations. Governments won’t do this unless the people force it to.

It’s critical that one of our fundamental values is the assumption that corporations are subservient to the needs of people.

Those who make the mess, should clean it up.

Once I went to a concert with a friend and we sold lemonaid in the parking lot to help pay our expenses. After we’d sold a dozen or so glasses, I began to see the empty plastic cups we’d sold our lemonaid in blowing through the parking lot. One of our customers told us we should’ve provided a garbage can so people didn’t throw the cups on the ground.

She was right. We should’ve.

And if Walmart is going to sell 100 Million Compact Fluorescent Light (CFL) bulbs a year, they should somehow enable you to recycle them after they burn out. Each of the bulbs contains mercury that may otherwise end up in local landfills.

The costs for cleaning up the mess should be built into the price. Otherwise, they’re just creating problems that others will have to pay for later.

Collaboration between people is more important than government efforts. And more effective.

Individuals collaborating are more effective than governments for solving many kinds of problems.

The Linux Operating System is one of the best examples of individuals collaborating on a project that changed the world. If corporations or governments had begun a project to develop Linux, they would’ve failed.

Meeting the challenges of the 21st Century will require bringing the best people in the world together in ways that are flexible and that allow them to quickly and easily share and organize information.

The scientific breakthroughs that solve the next flu crisis could come from a team that includes a scientist in China, a corporate researcher in Texas, a government official in Belgium and a university grad student in Buenos Aires. Teams like that can come together quickly and move faster than government sponsored research groups or corporate think tanks.

Problem solving approaches that rely on governments coordinating research are slower and can be subject to political interference.

One of our fundamental values should be that we work to resolve problems through the creation of collaborative groups, rather than wait for or assume that governments will solve problems for us.

You can make an impact. To magnify your impact, collaborate with others.

One of the key components of collaborative problem solving is having individuals who really believe they can make a difference. A small, committed group of individuals can move faster and accomplish more than groups many times their size.

And the truth is, individuals **can** make a difference. But when individuals change the course of history, it’s normally because they banded together with others to address a common problem.

Two people together make a bigger impact than either would by themselves. Three people can make an even bigger impact. Large groups of committed, collaborating individuals can truly change the world.

In fact, I’d propose that there is almost no problem that can’t be solved by a dedicated group of people collaborating — the trick is just to get a large enough group together.

Don’t blindly trust your leaders.

Your leaders have an agenda. That agenda is likely to be influenced by the individuals who support and fund their efforts to stay in office. Also, they may lie to you in order to retain their elected position and their control of power.

This is especially true in societies where corporations or rich individuals can exercise undue influence over government.

It’s critical then that our values reflect a fundamental distrust of government. This fosters healthy skepticism as well as a belief that government won’t solve our problems for us.

Don’t blindly believe the media.

Media is a business. As a business, it’s charter is to maximize the profits of its shareholders. It is the job of the leaders of the media corporations to put their shareholders first.

That is, you and your well-being is not first in the minds of the media. Their corporate profits are.

For example, media companies that count on advertising revenue from Oil companies and Auto manufacturers are likely to have their presentation of global warming data colored by their need to protect that advertising revenue.

As a result, there are times when news presentation is influenced by the desire to protect or increase profits. It is critical that we build into our values a basic distrust of any media source.

To meet the challenges of the 21st Century, we will need good, accurate information on Global Warming and the many other challenges we’ll face. We need to demand this from the media and learn to impact their profits when they don’t provide it.