A return to France (and little has changed…)

Just before I went to Sweden I figured out a quick trip back to Lyon, France to see some old friends. (I lived there in 05-06).Can’t wait to go back and see the great “Marches de Noel” and walk through Vieux Lyon, eat at some bouchons with old friends and reminisce about old times. However, after reading the news this week, I guess little has changed. I was in Paris the day the riots started in 2005 and left to go back to Lyon, where the riots continued. There was tear gas used in the city’s main square, a molotov cocktail thrown on the metro I took everyday (which thankfully didn’t go off) and thousands of cars burned.

Funny thing though, I read more about the events from the International papers than the French ones. Everyone back home was worried about me being in France at that time, and the general opinion I got from friends and workmates were “bon, c’est dans les banlieues quoi… pas de soucis”. (well, it’s in the suburbs, don’t worry).

Honestly, this was the general opinion from most French natives (not immigrants) I got. They were disheartened by it, but they didn’t really care (most of them at least). I was shocked. 8000 CARS BURNED AND YOU HAVE NOTHING TO SAY!!!

Well, shouldn’t be a surprise then that the riots are back. As the article (many articles) point out, massive reforms are needed, and little has been done.

In terms of getting jobs, it also doesn’t help that you need your photograph attached to your resume (very common in Europe). This would perhaps weed out some of the racism happening when finding jobs.

Stockholm, exams, and the efficiency paradox

It’s been a while since I last wrote. I went to Stockholm last week with about 100 other exchange students from Jyvaskyla (needless to say how crazy that was!) and I’ve got quite a bit of studying to do with exams approaching. (Hence, the slowdown)

Just thought I’d do a quick one to let you know I’m alive etc.

I wanted to write about this before I left, and lo and behold, the topic was covered in the news from a CIBC World Markets report when I got back. (Damn, I’m always missing the boat on these things)
About 2 weeks ago, my teacher was talking about the efficiency paradox and it really got me thinking. Essentially, the more we push for efficiency, the gains are lost from increased consumption. As someone who likes to think of herself as somewhat “environmentally conscious” this was a bit of an eye opener.(Common sense, but still an eye opener). Reflecting on my own personal consumption patterns, it’s true – I love to shop – almost everything I own here is new. (new furniture, new dishes, new clothes, new boots, new jacket, etc. etc. etc . (My little trip to Sweden didn’t help this either….I love clothes.)

The solution to this though isn’t to forgo the push for efficiency, like Forbes suggests:

All smart politicians back “more efficiency” because that seems to let them embrace lower energy prices and less consumption as well. But to reduce energy consumption, we should probably mandate less efficiency, not more. Efficiency rises. Energy consumption rises, too. This is the great paradox of the efficiency. Read it and weep.

The solution is in sufficiency.  What do we really need? How do we get enough out of life without just consuming more and more and more?

That’s the actual goal, not suppressing the gains from efficiency (backwards thought no?). And I guess, I for one…. should start working on that….

Thinking of more, but wow, I’ve got an exam tomorrow that I really need to start working on….

Cheers.

And Stockholm is one of the most beautiful cities I’ve ever been to.  My grandma went on the ferry boat crossing the Baltic about 10-15 years ago and even then, at the age of 75 or so, she called it the “Party Boat”. My god, is it ever a party boat….

The new IPCC report: it can scare you or it can empower you.

The fourth and final IPCC report came out today (lots of news on it) . I said before that I don’t really care about the specifics of the global warming debate because in my opinion, change is needed regardless of what people think “scientific consensus” means.  But as I read the G&M article, part of me got the chills knowing what potential disasters lie ahead and part of me felt extremely empowered.

What’s scary:

• Water use and availability is likely to be deeply affected across much of Canada, the report says.
  • Adding to that problem… even though Canada has one of the largest supplies of freshwater in the world, much of it is polluted – surface water and groundwater. Moreover, we don’t really know how to detect how much cleanup we really need to do.

 

• The circle they can’t square is their current support of tar sands development and greenhouse gas reduction,” said Mr. Hazell.
  • Yep, we’re still looking at Alberta with dreamy dollar sign eyes. Oh, and extracting oil from tar sands is also one of the most water-intensive and water-polluting processes (see point above).

 

• “If you look at the scientific knowledge things do seem to be getting progressively worse,” Pachauri (Chairman of IPCC) said later in an interview. “So you’d better start with the interventions even earlier. Now.”
  • And Canada isn’t changing its plans?

• The effects will be greatest in the developing world.
  • Island states submerged, African crop yields down by 50 percent, and cause a 5 percent decrease in global gross domestic product
  • Enough said.

 

What’s empowering:

·        The time to act is now.

·        Business opportunity galore for those that have sustainability in mind

The problem is not just climate change.  

People use that word like it’s just about cleaning up our CO2 mess.  But in reality, the problem is rooted much deeper than that. It’s about changing our habits, our systems and our thinking.

When you start thinking about the possibilities for change…that’s empowering.

GREEN, ENVIRONMENT, SUSTAINABILITY: Are these words starting to annoy you?

Funny that I should write about this since these words appear in almost every post I’ve written so far…

People say that perhaps this “Green Movement” is just a fad. That it’s cool now but later on we’ll be on to the next big thing. As I just mentioned, even Seth Godin wrote that “Zero is the new black”. Well, if that’s the case then it begs the question : if conservation is a style, will go out of style?

In a way, it has to. The media will get tired of this green talk and it’s unrealistic to think otherwise. Already, I’m someone who you could hypothetically call a treehugger (treehugger.com is one of my favourite sites and I am taking two years to study environmental mgmt) and even I’m starting to see how these words are becoming trivial…

However, does that mean the concept will disapear and people will go back to consuming like before – forgetting everything that we know now about the disasters that lie ahead of this irresponsible way of living?

I don’t think so.

Think back to when we’ve gone through other so called social/cultural/business revolutions … did we forget the lessons? or did it just become commonplace and so not discussed as much?

I think (or hope) we are headed towards a “sustainability age” where we think twice about what consumption really means and start fixing up some of the problems that we’ve created in the past.

But… I think we can do that without all of the “green” talk. It should just become the ordinary and business as usual;)

On another note, perhaps this “Green movement” just needs some new marketing – something to shake up the message a little bit so that it strikes a chord with people who are getting peeved with the so-called “green washing”. Whatever people come up with, the message is important and that’s what I care about.

Time to be curious

One of the best pieces of advice came to me from a teacher that I only had for about 3 weeks in university and she scared the bejeezus out of me.

“Now that you’re a student in university you have the time to be curious.  You’re at a point in your life when you can really open up your eyes and just question things in life, explore new things and educate yourself on what you’re passionate about.”

Great advice for life. But… is it really limited to being a student?  Being curious and questioning the basics should be a lifetime trait, not something slotted for university.

I hope I’m still curious when I’m 80. Maybe that’s what being *wise* is all about;)

Ok, off to jazz dance class…. yep, I’m at it again and it feels  great. (Danced for 15 years before university started….for some reason, “working out” wasn’t something that happened during those great 4 years of beer and cramming!)

“Zero is the new black” – Seth Godin meets No Impact Man

No Impact Man has a lot of good posts, but I particularly liked this one with Seth Godin (the marketing guru).

(From Seth’s)

The richest and best-educated people in our economy are shifting, and pretty quickly. They’re just as willing to spend money as they always were, but now it’s not focused on fancy organic stuff at the Whole Foods Market or giant bulletproof cars from Germany or private jet travel. Instead, the market is trying as hard as it can to spend time and money without leaving much of a trace.

I think this story has legs and is going to be around for a long time. Zero is the new black.

This is what I like to see. Marketing meets sustainability. Good news for me. I’ve got my niche interest and it looks like its growing.

However, black will never go out of style. I love my little black dress.

Paradox 2: Tradeoffs for the “Caring”

Last time I talked about the paradox between environmental choices. (i.e. being conscious of one aspect of “saving the environment”, almost inevitably increases another).

This time the question I debate most often is how to handle the environment/social paradox.

A lot of environmentalists are socialists too. The underlying principle of both is CARE. I care about people and I care about the world we live in.

But when you really start studying it, you end up with some very mixed messages.

Main debate for helping the poor – open up trade, stop subsidies to farmers and let the developing countries trade what they do best: agriculture. (WorldBank report for more info)

On the environment side though, do we really want to do that? Do I want my grain shipped from Africa? Aren’t they telling me to buy local? Shouldn’t I support my local farmers so that my food doesn’t have so much of an impact? There are numerous articles out there about how restaurants are “greening “themselves by buying local.

How do you do both? It’s a complex issue.

Just recently I wrote an essay on how to tap the $5 trillion market at the bottom of the pyramid (there’s a book on it)

Prahalad argues that multinational companies not only can make money selling to the world’s poorest, but also that they must undertake such efforts as a way to close the growing gap between rich and poor countries.

Interesting point of view. But therein lies the paradox. I’ll share with you my homework (nerd?…you bet;)

Many reports and even the WBCSD (World Business Council on Sustainable Development) are quick to point out the opportunities for being both profitable and sustainable. Nevertheless, gaining on both sides of this equation is trickier than stated. Once these countries grab onto the development ladder, it is hard to ignore their consumer good needs. Therefore, in order to protect the environment and grow sustainably, development must be carefully monitored so as not to degrade their systems more than they have been already. Perhaps then the question becomes not how to tap into this massive developing market, but how to do so in a way that does not lead to mass consumption of non-renewable products and wasteful systems. The inevitable path to western economic development is hard to sway from as the big emerging countries can contest. Innovation and perhaps a paradigm shift will be needed to ensure that capitalism can indeed by accomplished in a sustainable manner.

As RunDMC would say…. It’s tricky tricky tricky;)