I read Green Futures from cover to cover (which I rarely do with magazines these days). It’s so full of inspiration and really thought-provoking stuff.

It’s time for the next wave of the sustainability revolution, says Sally Uren
February 2011. Central London. The CEO of a major multinational takes the stage in front of over 1,000 senior people from business and NGOs, to give a compelling presentation about how his organisation is dealing with its direct sustainability impacts. Proof surely that sustainability is now mainstreamed in business? Indeed, this is impressive stuff: a sign of how seriously business leaders now take sustainability.
So, we can all relax. The top guys get it.
Well, not quite. The CEO mentioned above unwittingly went on to offer the audience much more accurate coordinates for where his business is on its journey towards sustainability. When someone piped up with that supremely inconvenient question about whether he saw the company's sustainability programme ever prompting the business to rethink its growth strategy, back came the answer very quickly: "No".
Oh dear.
According to many, we are currently witnessing the next industrial revolution – the one where business puts sustainability at the heart of its operations. If this is a revolution, then most businesses are still in the first wave of change. They see sustainability through the lens of their organisational goals. Which is why the question around what constitutes sustainable economic growth is so difficult.
There are far fewer examples of organisations who have upgraded their lens on sustainability to take a wider view – a systems view. One in which they begin to look at the broader, indirect impacts of their business on both society and the planet. This is the next wave of the revolution. And it needs to happen soon.
It's all very well to see squillions of businesses with carbon reduction targets, tweaking the sustainability credentials of their goods and services. But if we are producing more and more stuff, which is only slightly more sustainable, then on aggregate, it's likely that carbon emissions will keep rising and key resources will either run low, or run out. Frustratingly, many businesses still insist on using 'normalised' targets – to reduce carbon or water intensity per volume of sales – instead of absolute targets. So the impact per product may be less, but they're selling more.
For me, the next wave of this sustainability revolution must be characterised by a fundamental shift in perspective from 'my business' to 'our world'. The question changes from 'How can we reduce our impacts?' to 'What is our role in a sustainable future?' It's a much harder question to answer, but one that can't be avoided for very much longer.
Sally Uren is Deputy Chief Executive at Forum for the Future.
@sallyuren
Overseas House, 19 - 23 Ironmonger Row,
London, EC1V 3QN.
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7324 3660
post@greenfutures.org.uk
© 2011 Forum for the Future | Terms of Use | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Site Map | Login | Logout
The Forum for the Future is a registered charity and a company limited by guarantee, registered in England and Wales. Registered office: Overseas House, 19-23 Ironmonger Row, London, EC1V 3QN, UK. Registered charity no. 1040519. Company no. 2959712. VAT registration no. 677 7475 70
Comments
Super, yes, needs a systems view with fundamental shift in perspective from 'my business' to 'our world'. This suggests 2 things:
1. Upgrade CSR from incremental to absolute improvements. There's no brick wall at zero on this scale so why not net-negative emissions and net-cleaner water businesses?
2. Upgrade perspective from impacts to game-changing policy frameworks to achieve 1. everywhere. The green movement can help by clarifying that value and income could grow while absolute impacts whither away.
James Greyson
This core sustainability business is alive and well in the Forest of Dean. It's being used to create sustainable development initiatives in other countries.
http://tinyurl.com/3rz92te
As stated, when conceived as an alternative to traditional capitalism:
'Just changing the way business is done, if only by a few companies, can change the flow of wealth, ease and eliminate poverty, and leave us all with something better to worry about. Basic human needs such as food and shelter are fundamental human rights - there are more than enough resources available to go around--if we can just figure out how to share. It cannot be "Me first, mine first", rather, "Me, too" is more the order of the day.'
Hi Sally,
Yes, I agree. The core question is "what's the best thing we can do"? After that comes "what's the best way we can do it?".
http://penny-walker.co.uk/blog/2011/02/what-does-sustainability-mean-to-...
I love the idea of shifting from seeing sustainability through the existing organisational goals, to reframing the goals themselves.
Apart from not-for-profits and social enterprises, who's doing this now?
Penny
Add your comment