Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category
Will business pick up the signals?
What a different world we awoke to on November 5. For most of us voters, the future looks a little more hopeful, less divisive. For the rest, well, let’s just say not everyone was feeling the love we Obama supporters were feeling.
I’m not certain what this staggering political act by the American electorate means for those of us in business. But I do think voters sent some strong signals our way.
I keep returning to what Rob Walker, author of the recently published book Buying In, calls the “fundamental tension” of modern life: “We all want to feel like individuals. We all want to feel like we are part of something bigger than ourselves.”
Obama personifies this tension. Many see in his achievement the hope and possibility that any individual anywhere can achieve his or her dreams, no matter the odds. Others are drawn to his larger calling to fulfill America’s promise of a perfect union.
Thomas Friedman quotes Harvard University political philosopher Michael Sandel in his New York Times column about Obama’s victory: “Obama’s campaign tapped a dormant civic idealism, a hunger among Americans to serve a cause greater than themselves, a yearning to be citizens again.”
Sandel and Friedman weren’t addressing business directly, but I can’t think of a greater insight for business to take from this election.
With few exceptions, businesses have catered exclusively to our desire to feel like individuals. Our products and our marketing have appealed overwhelmingly to the fulfillment of personal needs and wants through consumption. And because it was good for business, we managed to elevate the role of Americans as consumers above all others, including citizens.
If Sandel is right, Americans want more. Not more stuff; more opportunity to make the world a better place and more leaders who inspire the greatness in all of us. Businesses must recognize the pendulum is swinging away from the all-consuming, me-first excesses of the past quarter century. Those that respect and engage customers and other stakeholders as whole human beings — ready to “serve a cause greater than themselves” — will lead the way in our brave new world.
One great cause is sustainability. Like civil rights, the sustainability movement is a struggle for the ages. From where we stand today, the challenge of preventing catastrophic climate change, healing our natural systems and creating more equitable economies appears as a mountain summit beyond reach. Will the climb be worth the effort? What do you think the civil rights warriors who can now stop dreaming of an African-American president would say?
Tags: Buying In, equitable economies, New York Times, Obama, Rob Walker, Sustainability, Thomas Friedman
Posted in Business & Economics, Climate Change, Consumerism, Current Affairs, Marketing, Politics, Sustainability | 1 Comment »
Marketers’ choice: ‘Lead, follow, or get out of the way’
Consumer spending is falling fast. While that’s bad for the economy, it’s good for the environment. Excessive consumption produces waste and pollution streams that are destroying our planet. The question now is how are we going to respond to the economic crisis at hand. If our elected officials and business leaders seize the moment, the consumption downturn will ignite a movement that saves our economy and our environment for generations to come.
And maybe, just maybe we marketers will heed the call to help lead the way.
In the near term, an environmental benefit will be of little solace to those whose jobs depend on consumer spending, which is to say most of us since consumer spending comprises nearly two-thirds of our economy. It’s all-but certain the current financial crisis will slip into an economic recession, perhaps as rough as any we’ve experienced in decades.
As painful as the near future may become, the glass half-full view reveals the opportunity ahead. Financier George Soros explains:
You see, for the last 25 years the world economy, the motor of the world economy that has been driving it was consumption by the American consumer who has been spending more than he has been saving, all right? Than he’s been producing. So that motor is now switched off. It’s finished…You need a new motor. And we have a big problem. Global warming. It requires big investment. And that could be the motor of the world economy in the years to come.
Over consumption, made possible by easy access to debt, explains much of the financial mess we’re in today. And a consumer economy, stoked by cheap, abundant fossil fuels, is a principle cause of global warming. In the end, reliance on consumer spending is both bad for the economy and bad for the environment. Other than that, it’s great.
What makes the coming elections so critical is the next president and Congress will decide whether we as a nation will fundamentally change the underpinnings of our economy. If we simply find new ways to prop up our consumption-based economy, we will hasten the day of reckoning that climate change requires. If we embrace the environmental and social challenges of climate change as the economic opportunity of our times, we can all look toward the future with hope.
For marketers, the opportunity is to finally begin leading the world in the right direction. If “the motor of the world economy” has been consumption, the fuel has been marketing. Marketers create awareness and demand for goods, services and ideas. The problem is we’ve used our talents overwhelmingly in support of unsustainable economies, employers and clients.
But that can change. Imagine if we were to unleash our creativity and persuasive abilities in service to freeing our economy from dependence on fossil fuels and mindless consumption. I’m convinced the impact would be both enormous and swift for our climate, environment and economy.
I don’t know whether the collective parts of the marketing industry — branding, advertising, PR, direct marketing etc. — are up to the task. The industry is so deeply enmeshed in the profitable, but dead-end ways of consumerism. So be it. The train is leaving with or without us. In the words of Thomas Paine, our choice is simple: “Lead, follow, or get out of the way.”
Tags: Branding, Climate Change, consumer spending, economic crisis, excessive consumption, George Soros, global warming, marketers, over consumption
Posted in Business & Economics, Climate Change, Communications, Consumerism, Current Affairs, Marketing, Politics, Sustainability | No Comments »
What might sustainable, local firms do with $49 mil?
In my vision of sustainable communities, I picture a thriving economy built around locally owned, independent businesses that embrace the triple bottom line: people, planet and profits. So it is that I have little patience for economic development practices prevalent in Oregon and around the country that emphasize national business recruitment over local business development.
I believe we should be doing much more to take care of the businesses that are already here putting down roots, hiring local residents, keeping their profits local and multiplying as they circulate in the local economy and being run by owners who are active in their communities — because they live here, too.
Editors at The Oregonian lost an opportunity to underscore that point in an editorial on Saturday about last week’s announcement of the Hynix semiconductor plant closure in Eugene. The decision puts 1,100 people out of work, many of them paid well above the average Eugene wage. Hynix, like any number of tech companies wooed by Oregon officials in the past several decades, was given large state and local tax credit incentives to locate in Eugene some 13 years ago.
Although the Hynix plant closure is an opportunity to question the wisdom of showering national or international businesses with tax breaks to locate in Oregon, The Oregonian editors say forget about it:
It’s not productive to second-guess the state’s wooing of Hynix and its use of tax incentives, as some in the Legislature have begun to do. A 2003 study by University of Oregon economics students Melinda Rowan and Jennifer Witt found that the $49 million in tax breaks and road enhancements used to lure Hynix resulted in a positive impact in taxes, wages and system development charges of more than $275 million over the first five years of its operation. Had the state not offered its incentives, Hynix wouldn’t have built its plant, employed 1,100 people and paid taxes.
Their argument against re-examining the Hynix recruitment strategy is hardly convincing. The editors conclude Hynix would not have come here without the $49 million incentive package, so the positive impact in taxes, wages and whatever system development charges would not have been realized. But that’s assuming the $49 million in incentives were not spent at all.
What might have happened had the state and city pledged that same $49 million in 1995 for support of locally owned, independent businesses? Hynix received the equivalent of $44,500 for each of its current 1,100 employees from state and local government. What might 1,100 locally owned, independent businesses in the Eugene area been able to do with $44,500 each? Or what might 110 of the best locally owned, independent businesses in Eugene been able to do with $445,000 each?
We’ll never know the answer, but I’m not aware of any state or local economic development group even asking those questions. Businesses based and owned in Oregon are getting the short end of the economic development stick. They can only dream of government officials coming to them and saying, “We believe in you and want you to thrive in Oregon. Here’s a half-million dollar package to help you grow your business.”
Can you imagine what a select group of Oregon’s most innovative, most environmentally and socially committed business owners and their employees could and would do to reward the citizens of this state for making a meaningful public investment in their businesses? Not all of them would succeed, of course, but I’m certain enough would to add at least the equivalent of 1,100 quality jobs.
And most important of all, those successful locally owned, independent and sustainable businesses would keep repaying Oregon’s investment long after the 13-year life span of Hynix in Eugene.
Tags: economic development, Eugene, Hynix, local business, locally owned independent business, Sustainability, sustainable communities, The Oregonian
Posted in Business & Economics, Oregon, Politics, Sustainability | No Comments »
Even Bush Administration can’t ignore climate change
I’m somewhat surprised how little has been made in the media and blogosphere of a federal government report this week on how climate change is already be felt across the US. Why the surprise? Because it’s being issued by the Bush Administration.
(T)he report represents “the very first upfront acknowledgment from the administration that we are already experiencing climate change impacts.” As recently as July 2007, the administration submitted a report to the United Nations that omitted any discussion of how global warming will affect wildfires, heat waves, agriculture or snowpack.
According to the USDA, the report’s lead sponsor:
The report concludes that climate change is already affecting U.S. water resources, agriculture, land resources, and biodiversity, and will continue to do so. Some agricultural and forest systems may experience near-term productivity increases. Over the long-term, however, many such systems are likely to experience diminished ecosystem services and the need for changes to management regimes. Management of water resources will become more challenging. Increased incidence of disturbances such as forest fires, insect outbreaks, severe storms, and drought will command public attention and place increasing demands on management resources. Changes in season length and primary productivity, along with possible breakdowns in traditional pollinator/plant and predator/prey interactions, are stressing and altering current ecosystems.
Tags: Bush Administration, Climate Change, USDA, World Wildlife Federation
Posted in Climate Change, Politics | No Comments »
Recession or no, climate change can’t be put on hold
Here’s a silver lining in the existing or pending US recession: Chances are consumption and production will slow, meaning less fossil fuel expended and fewer greenhouse gases emitted. Feel better? I didn’t think so. None of us wants to see the inevitable wrenching loss of jobs, income and personal security that comes during a major economic slowdown.
The attention of government and business leaders, as well as the public, is increasingly fixed on the economy. And while that’s understandable, every other public concern will likely take a back seat to the economy. Including climate change. America, the largest source of CO2 emissions in the world, will be telling the world that we can only afford to focus on climate change as long as our economy is growing (and spewing growing amounts of CO2).
The effects of a recession are painfully real. I started my career in the early 1980s when Oregon was in the midst of a miserable recession — depression, really. I was fortunate to find a job. Some of my friends, meanwhile, lost their homes. Earlier this decade, I felt the tech implosion in a very personal way. The marketing business I co-founded lost half of our revenue in just a couple months in 2001. Within a year we had laid off nearly half our staff. It doesn’t get much worse than that as an employer.
For those of us who believe global warming is real and human-caused, this recession — if that’s what we’re in — poses a vexing question: Can we or how do we keep the very real concerns of recession from overwhelming the equally real threats of climate change?
We may be entering a very nasty period of job and income loss for millions of Americans — and perhaps for many others around the globe dependent upon our economy. A recession is one of those clear and present dangers experienced at the personal level. It’s difficult to think about much else when you’re faced with the prospect of losing your livelihood or your home.
And yet, climate change is no less urgent of a matter than the health of the US economy. The UN Human Development Report 2007/2008 calls climate change “the greatest challenge humankind has ever faced.” Its authors warn:
(Climate change) is still a preventable crisis — but only just. The world has less than a decade to change course. No issue merits more urgent attention — or more immediate action.
Try telling that to someone who’s lost his or her job or home. Or to the political candidate who can’t get the words “It’s the economy, stupid” out of his or her head. To them, global warming is a faraway worry. Unfortunately, it’s not. When we get through this recession — and we will, as history shows — the issue of climate change will still be with us. Every year our political leaders back burner the issue draws us that much closer to irreversible harm. As the UN report makes clear, “The world’s poor will suffer the earliest and most damaging impacts.” They have no political voice in America. And neither do future generations.
If the world is going to avoid the worst of global warming, America and Americans must be completely engaged and leading the way. We’re about to find out whether we’re up to the challenge.
Tags: Climate Change, consumption, fossil fuel, global warming, greenhouse gases, recession, UN Human Development Report
Posted in Business & Economics, Climate Change, Politics | No Comments »
How can climate change be non-issue in presidential campaigns?
Are you wondering like me how climate change could fail to be a substantive issue in this year’s presidential campaigns?
One explanation may be the unwillingness of debate hosts to raise the issue. Early this year, the League of Conservation voters released an analysis of the debates in 2007 moderated by hosts of the top political programs on television and found that only 24 questions related to climate change or global warming were asked out of a total of 2,275 questions. I haven’t seen an updated analysis of debates since the first of the year. The debates are (or were) a significant source of campaign news; if an issue isn’t raised in a debate, it won’t appear in the next day’s media summaries.
Another explanation is that climate change, while worrisome to Americans, is not among our top concerns. Last year, polls indicated Iraq was top of mind for voters, at least among Democrats. This year it’s the economy, with health care remaining another huge issue. Among Republicans, immigration is a dominant topic. It appears the news media are taking their cue from polling results and covering the issues voters say are their greatest concerns. That relegates climate change to a non-issue in political coverage.
Yet another possible explanation surfaced this week in a post by Joe Romm, editor of Climate Progress (Romm once worked for the Clinton Administration). Citing Elizabeth Kolbert’s book, Field Notes from a Catastrophe, Romm writes: “How can the traditional media cover a story that is almost ‘impossible to imagine’? I don’t think they can.” One reason, he says, is it’s in the nature of the media to lose interest in a story after telling it over and over again. Climate change, because of its complexity and dimensions, is a story that must be repeatedly explored.
While Romm doesn’t refer specifically to political reporters, his analysis suggests the political media simply aren’t up to the task of covering the climate change story; heck, even one of the best climate reporters, Andy Revkin of the New York Times, is singled out for criticism by Romm. If Revkin can’t do justice to the story, certainly no political reporter can.
Revkin responds to Romm here.
Frankly, I think one could write the perfect story on global warming, or create the perfect documentary, and repeat it over and over, and still not see much movement if the goal is to rapidly shift society out of its coal-fired comfort zone as the world heads toward 9 billion people…
As I’ve said, an energy quest — from the bathroom light fixture to the highway to the boardroom to the classroom — does not begin in a newspaper, but must build from deeper within a society (with a big dose of nonpartisn (sic) leadership).
Revkin is right, of course: The news media can only do so much in moving society away from the brink of catastrophe. And leaders of all stripes (and I would add voters, too) must step forward to place climate change at the top of our political agenda and work to keep it there. But I also agree with Romm that the national media is showing no staying power with this story, which I believe to be easily the most important one of our time and will remain so for years to come. The media, like our politicians, must lead, even when the electorate has its mind on other things.
The good news is there’s still time to make global warming a core subject in this year’s presidential campaign — the general election remains eight months away. And the Democratic race is not over. In case you’re interested, here are Clinton’s and Obama’s energy and climate plans.
Tags: Andy Revkin, Climate Change, Climate Progress, Joe Romm, presidential campaign
Posted in Climate Change, Politics | No Comments »