(Editor’s Note: This article is the first in a series of guest articles to be included in future issues of the Forum Newsletter.  The article is reprinted with permission from Norman Myers, Science, Vol.287, page 2419.  Copyright 2000, American Association for the Advancement of Science. Norman Myers is an Honorary Visiting Fellow at Green College, Oxford University, and specializes in the environment and development.  We would be pleased to receive comments on his article and suggestions for future guest articles.) 

“In order to achieve all-round sustainability of our economies and lifestyles, we need to revise our consumption patterns.  Hence the significance of two conferences to be held in Tokyo in late May 2000.  The first, entitled “The Transition to Sustainability,” will place much emphasis on consumption and is organized by the Inter-Academy Panel, composed of 80 scientific academies around the world and headed by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.  The second, “Business and Environment,” is primarily a gathering of business leaders and is equally important because the corporate community holds an outsize key to achieving sustainable consumption.

A first step toward sustainable consumption is to recognize that consumption patterns will inevitably change in the future, if only by force of environmental circumstance - notably global warming, among a host of environmental problems. As that future arrives, we must ensure that there is an increase in consumption by the three billion people with incomes of less than $3 per day. At the same time, the 800 million people in developing  and transition countries who earn enough to move into the high-consuming classes should be able to enjoy the fruits of their newfound affluence.  How to enable them to do so without undue disruption of environmental systems, especially those of global scope, such as the climate?

One answer may lie with the business sector, often fingered as the source of consumption-derived environmental problems.  Were human communities to deploy all of the eco-technologies that are already available from innovative business (such as energy efficiency, pollution controls, waste management, recycling, cradle-to-grave products, and zero-emissions industry) we could enjoy only half as much pollution and waste. (See P.Hawken, A.B. Lovins, Natural Capitalism:  The Next Industrial Revolution; Little, Brown; Boston,  MA, 1999) Eco-technologies are now worth $600 billion per year, on a par with the global car industry. There are big profits ahead for truly enterprising businesses.

Three policy initiatives could promote the transition to sustainable consumption.  We could abandon gross national product (GNP) as an indicator of economic well-being; it suggests to the consumer that our economies need take no account of sustainability.  In the United States, per capita GNP rose by 49% during 1976-98, whereas per capita “genuine progress” (the economy’s output with environmental and social costs subtracted and added weight given to education, health, etc.) declined by 30% (See C.Cobb, G.S. Goodman, M. Wackernagel, Why Bigger Isn’t Better: The Genuine Progress Indicator,  Redefining Progress, San Francisco, CA 1999) Several alternative indicators, such as Net National Product, are being developed by Canada, Britain, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Austria.  Second, we could ensure that prices reflect all environmental and social costs. For example, US society ultimately pays at least $6 to burn a gallon of gasoline (through pollution, road accidents, traffic congestion, etc.).  Pricing gasoline realistically would curtail the excessive car culture and open up huge market demand for improved public transportation.  Similar considerations apply to the true price of a hamburger, a shirt, and even a house.

Yet (and herein lies the third initiative) consumers are encouraged to practice environmental ignorance thanks to subsidies that, for example, support fossil fuels 10 to 15 times more than clean and renewable sources of energy such as solar energy and wind power.  Were all these subsidies to be phased out and a marketplace with a level playing field established, the energy alternatives would soon become commercially competitive. There are hosts of other subsidies that promote the car culture, over-intensive agriculture, wasteful use of water, over-logging of forests, and over-harvesting of marine fisheries. Worldwide they total almost $1.5 trillion, or twice as much as all military spending. They induce massive distortions in our economies and do massive harm to the environment.  Although it will be hard to change consumption patterns, they may be more plastic than currently supposed. (For example, during a recent 20-year period, almost 40 million Americans gave up smoking.)  Similarly, it may be possible to change many production patterns - the flip side of the consumption coin.

However hard it will be to live with the drastic changes required, it will not be so hard as to live in a world drastically impoverished by the environmental injuries of current consumption.”

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) is a process designed to improve the management of ecosystems and their contribution to human development by helping to bring the best available information and knowledge on ecosystem goods and services to bear on policy and management decisions. The MA consists of a global scientific assessment as well as catalytic regional, national and local assessments and has the aim of building capacity at all levels to undertake integrated ecosystem assessments and to act on their findings. The primary users of the MA will be the international ecosystem-related conventions, national governments, civil society, and the private sector. The MA will provide information and strengthen capacity but it will not set goals or advocate specific policies or practices. It will be policy relevant but not policy prescriptive.  The defining features of the MA are its focus, process, and institutional structure, described as follows:

The MA will focus on the capacity of ecosystems to provide goods and services that are important to human development, including consideration of the underlying ecosystem processes on which those goods and services depend. The MA will address both the biological attributes of goods and services and the social and economic attributes such as employment and economic value. 

Within this broad focus, the users of the MA -conventions, national governments, civil society, and the private sector - will help to shape the specific content to ensure that the Assessment provides them with the information that they need.  More specifically, the Assessment will address:

• Current ecosystem extent, trends, pressures, condition, and value.
  The MA will provide “baseline” information for the year 2000 on the geographic extent of different ecosystems - including terrestrial, freshwater, and marine - and the land-or resource-use patterns associated with them.  It will present information on trends in ecosystem goods and services, their condition and value, their contribution to human development, and pressures affecting them.
• Ecosystem scenarios and tradeoffs.
  The MA will present a range of plausible scenarios for how the quantity and quality of ecosystem goods and services may change in coming decades in different regions of the world.  It will assess the tradeoffs among various goods and services and identify opportunities to increase the aggregate benefits that ecosystems provide.
• Response options.
  The MA will identify policy, institutional, or technological changes that could improve the management of ecosystems, thereby increasing their contributions to development and maintaining their long-term sustainability.

During 2000, the institutions represented on the MA Steering Committee and Advisory Group are seeking endorsement for the creation of the MA for the potential users of the Assessment’s findings, including the ecosystem-related Conventions, UN Agencies, national governments, private sector and NGOs. They will also be seeking financial support for the MA, which will be similar in cost to other international science assessments such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Global International Waters Assessment. Once there is a clear statement of demand from the various users and financial resources are secured, the new governance Board will be established to guide the Assessment. The first meeting of this new Board is expected in mid-2000. Meetings to establish the detailed technical design for the Assessment will take place following the first meeting of the new Board.

Finally, several of the institutions represented on the Steering Committee are working to raise awareness of the need for sound ecosystem management both to meet human needs and to support sustainable development.  During 1999, WRI, UNDP,UNEP, and the World Bank, in collaboration with FAO, WCMC, the International Food Policy Research Institute, and others are undertaking a Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems (PAGE).  The results will be released in May 2000 and published in World Resources 2000-2001.  The Government of Norway, in collaboration with UNEP, also held a conference in September, 1999 on the “Ecosystem Approach for Sustainable Use of Biodiversity.”  And UNEP, the World Bank, and the United States have recently released a report, entitled Protecting our Planet, Securing our Future, that calls for an integrated assessment along the lines of the Millennium Assessment.  These and other activities should help to ensure a growing international focus on issues related to the sound management of ecosystems at the turn of the millennium.

Contact: For further information, see the Millennium Assessment Website:  http://www.millenniumassessment.org

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) is a process designed to improve the management of ecosystems and their contribution to human development by helping to bring the best available information and knowledge on ecosystem goods and services to bear on policy and management decisions. The MA consists of a global scientific assessment as well as catalytic regional, national and local assessments and has the aim of building capacity at all levels to undertake integrated ecosystem assessments and to act on their findings. The primary users of the MA will be the international ecosystem-related conventions, national governments, civil society, and the private sector. The MA will provide information and strengthen capacity but it will not set goals or advocate specific policies or practices. It will be policy relevant but not policy prescriptive.  The defining features of the MA are its focus, process, and institutional structure, described as follows:

The MA will focus on the capacity of ecosystems to provide goods and services that are important to human development, including consideration of the underlying ecosystem processes on which those goods and services depend. The MA will address both the biological attributes of goods and services and the social and economic attributes such as employment and economic value. 

Within this broad focus, the users of the MA -conventions, national governments, civil society, and the private sector - will help to shape the specific content to ensure that the Assessment provides them with the information that they need.  More specifically, the Assessment will address:

• Current ecosystem extent, trends, pressures, condition, and value.
  The MA will provide “baseline” information for the year 2000 on the geographic extent of different ecosystems - including terrestrial, freshwater, and marine - and the land-or resource-use patterns associated with them.  It will present information on trends in ecosystem goods and services, their condition and value, their contribution to human development, and pressures affecting them.
• Ecosystem scenarios and tradeoffs.
  The MA will present a range of plausible scenarios for how the quantity and quality of ecosystem goods and services may change in coming decades in different regions of the world.  It will assess the tradeoffs among various goods and services and identify opportunities to increase the aggregate benefits that ecosystems provide.
• Response options.
  The MA will identify policy, institutional, or technological changes that could improve the management of ecosystems, thereby increasing their contributions to development and maintaining their long-term sustainability.

During 2000, the institutions represented on the MA Steering Committee and Advisory Group are seeking endorsement for the creation of the MA for the potential users of the Assessment’s findings, including the ecosystem-related Conventions, UN Agencies, national governments, private sector and NGOs. They will also be seeking financial support for the MA, which will be similar in cost to other international science assessments such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Global International Waters Assessment. Once there is a clear statement of demand from the various users and financial resources are secured, the new governance Board will be established to guide the Assessment. The first meeting of this new Board is expected in mid-2000. Meetings to establish the detailed technical design for the Assessment will take place following the first meeting of the new Board.

Finally, several of the institutions represented on the Steering Committee are working to raise awareness of the need for sound ecosystem management both to meet human needs and to support sustainable development.  During 1999, WRI, UNDP,UNEP, and the World Bank, in collaboration with FAO, WCMC, the International Food Policy Research Institute, and others are undertaking a Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems (PAGE).  The results will be released in May 2000 and published in World Resources 2000-2001.  The Government of Norway, in collaboration with UNEP, also held a conference in September, 1999 on the “Ecosystem Approach for Sustainable Use of Biodiversity.”  And UNEP, the World Bank, and the United States have recently released a report, entitled Protecting our Planet, Securing our Future, that calls for an integrated assessment along the lines of the Millennium Assessment.  These and other activities should help to ensure a growing international focus on issues related to the sound management of ecosystems at the turn of the millennium.

Contact: For further information, see the Millennium Assessment Website:  http://www.millenniumassessment.org

The final version of the Earth Charter was approved and released by the Earth Charter Commission at a meeting in Paris in March, 2000.  The document is now being circulated throughout the world as a “peoples’ treaty” in an effort to promote awareness and commitment to Earth Charter values and sustainable patterns of development.  The Earth Charter Commission will seek endorsement of the Earth Charter by the United Nations General Assembly in 2002, which is the tenth anniversary of the Rio Summit. 

The sixteen principles have been grouped under four major headings, as follows:

 I.  Respect and Care for the Community of Life

• 1. Respect Earth in all its diversity.
• 2. Care for the community of life with understanding, compassion, and love.
• 3. Build democratic societies that are just, participatory, sustainable, and peaceful.
• 4. Secure Earth’s bounty and beauty for present and future generations.

II.  Ecological Integrity

• 5. Protect and restore the integrity of Earth’s ecological systems, with special concern for biological diversity and the natural processes that sustain life.
• 6. Prevent harm as the best method of environmental protection and when knowledge is limited, apply a precautionary approach.
• 7. Adopt patterns of production, consumption, and reproduction that safeguard Earth’s regenerative capacities, human rights, and community well-being.
• 8. Advance the study of ecological sustainability and promote the open exchange and wide application of the knowledge acquired.

III.  Social and Economic Justice

• 9.  Eradicate poverty as an ethical, social, and environmental imperative.
• 10. Ensure that economic activities and institutions at all levels promote human development in an equitable and sustainable manner.
• 11. Affirm gender equality and equity as `prerequisites to sustainable development and ensure universal access to education, health care, and economic opportunity.
• 12. Uphold the right of all, without discrimination, to a natural and social environment supportive of human dignity, bodily health, and spiritual well-being, with special attention to the rights of indigenous peoples and minorities.

IV.  Democracy, Nonviolence, and Peace

• 13. Strengthen democratic institutions at all levels, and provide transparency and accountability in governance, inclusive participation in decision making, and access to justice.
• 14. Integrate into formal education and lifelong learning the knowledge, values, ans skills needed for a sustainable way of life.
• 15. Treat all living beings with respect and consideration.
• 16. Promote a culture of tolerance, nonviolence, and peace.

Contact: For further information, see the Earth Charter website at http://www.earthcharter.org

The latest annual report of the Building and Fire Research Laboratory of the National Institute of Standards and Technology notes that, beyond regulated carbon emissions, the “green movement” is sweeping the building industry.  All major building product companies, building designers, and building operators need measurement methods, test methods, fundamental data, and life-cycle environmental and economic analysis tools to objectively promote their approaches and products to achieve sustainability. 

To meet these needs, BFRL staff will apply their expertise in refrigeration systems, thermal insulation, building integrated photovoltaic systems, indoor air quality, and life-cycle economic and environmental analysis methods to support the widespread use of sustainablity and assist them in achieving carbon reduction goals. A wide range of data, measurement methods, test methods, simulation models, and analysis tools will be developed.  These include Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability (BEES); performance data on flammable and natural refrigerants; artificial intelligence-aided design procedures for refrigeration heat exchangers; new apparatuses/test methods/standard materials for advanced thermal insulation/low temperature insulation; validated design models for building integrated photo-voltaic systems; and contaminant-based design procedures for indoor air quality.

Contact: For further information, contact Dr. George E. Kelly, Chief, Building Environment Divisions (tel: 301-975-5851)

The American Nuclear Society has published a brochure outlining the ways in which nuclear science and technology contribute to sustainable development through improvements in health and the quality of life.  The brochure briefly describes the varied applications of nuclear science and technology, such as nuclear medicine, food preservation and safety, industrial materials and processes, basic scientific research, environmental studies, and essentially carbon-free generation of electrical power.

Contact: For further information, contact the American Nuclear Society (telephone: 708-352-661; fax:  708-352-0499; email: outreach@ans.org website: www.ans.org

The Forum on Religion and Ecology (FORE) arose out of a series of ten conferences on the world’s religions and ecology held at the Harvard University Center for the Study of World Religions (CSWR) from May, 1996 to July, 1988. The series explored the diverse manner in which religious traditions view nature and construct symbol systems and ritual practices relating humans to nature. The papers from these conferences are being published by CSWR and Harvard University Press.

Three culminating conferences in the autumn of 1998 brought the world’s religious traditions into dialogue with four other key disciplines concerned with the environment: science, economics, education, and public policy. At the request of the U.N. Environment Programme (UNEP), a press conference and symposium reporting the findings of the conferences was held at the United Nations in October, 1998. The ongoing Forum on Religion and Ecology was announced at this press conference. The following day the American Museum of Natural History hosted a conference that highlighted the need for religious involvement in environmental issues.

The Forum recognizes that the engagement of the world’s religions is critical to effective environmental policies for two reasons: first, the religions provide direction for developing mutually enhancing human-earth relations and second, they present distinctive ethics of respect for nature. FORE thus proposes that, in order to envision long-term resolutions to current environmental problems, religious spokespersons must be able to identify the resources of their traditions and engage in dialogue with individuals in other environmental fields who are addressing these problems.

The Forum’s main goal is to establish religion and ecology as an academic area of study and research in universities and colleges as well as in seminaries and other religiously affiliated institutions. In pursuit of this goal, FORE is continuing its publishing projects, organizing scholarly conferences, and expanding its network of international scholars.

To promote its educational objectives, FORE is identifying curricular resources, disseminating print and video materials, hosting workshops for teachers, and developing an innovative web site.  To foster the intersection of religious traditions with other disciplines engaged in environmental studies, FORE’s web site will be situated under the Harvard University Committee on the Environment at environment.harvard.edu/religion.  FORE thus seeks to play a vital role in placing religious voices in dialogue with other religions as well as with scientists, economists, educators, ethicists, and policy advocates.

Contact: For further information, contact: Forum on Religion and Ecology, Department of Religion, Buckness University, Lewisburg, PA 17837 (Tel: 570-577-1205; fax: 570-577-1064; e-mail: grim@bucknell.edu ; mtucker@bucknell.edu : website: http://environment.harvard.edu/religion

Maryland Governor Parris Glendening has defined “Smart Transportation” as “a more balanced and responsible policy that provides our citizens and future generations with genuine travel choices,” and “Smart Growth” as “a way to set priorities that will ensure the efficient use of transportation dollars, provide support to our established communities, and discourage costly sprawl development.”

The program includes:

(A) Investing in Existing Communities by:                     

• Tripling the State’s investments in neighborhood conservation programs, preserving historic districts, revitalizing streets, and improving sidewalks;                     
• Building sound walls to protect the livability of older established neighborhoods;                     
• Working with local officials to target areas for revitalization projects;                     
• Providing a catalyst for private investment, rehabilitation and beautification efforts; and              
• Coordinating investments with other state and local government efforts.

(B) Providing Alternatives to Driving by:                     

• Making transit user-friendly by coordinating schedules, transfers and fares and by developing a one-fare card that, in the future will work on all Maryland transit systems:                     
• Increasing express bus service for long-distance commuters and developing new suburb-to suburb  bus routes;                     
• Expanding transit in rural areas through local grants;                     
• Building park-and-ride lots for transit riders and car-poolers; and                     
• Helping employers set up telework programs.

(C) Keeping traffic moving by:                     

Finding solutions that make the transportation system work more effectively with less additional expensive infrastructure, including:                     

• providing on-line, real-time traffic information to citizens;                     
• Clearing accidents quickly by using highway cameras;                     
• Upgrading and redesigning intersections;                     
• Improving coordination of traffic signal timing;                     
• Building roundabouts;                     
• Extending turn lanes; and                     
• Improving traffic flow by limiting new highway access points.

(D) Putting State Land to Good Use by:                     

• Providing incentive funds to attract private development around transit stations;                 
• Creating opportunities to use undeveloped industrial sites and put them back on the tax rolls:               
• Using state land to make recreation areas and hiker-biker trails available to all Maryland citizens.
• Contact: For more information, call 410-865-1288.

In an effort to provide federal purchasers and other interested parties with information on current environmental purchasing practices, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has released a report entitled,  Private Sector Pioneers: How Companies Are Incorporating Environmentally Preferable Purchasing.  The reports highlights the efforts of the following 18 companies to “buy green:” Ben &Jerry’s, Warner Bros., Public Service Electric and Gas, Collins&Aikman, Volvo, Herman Miller, IBM, The Body Shop, McDonald’s Corporation, Perrigo Company, Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc., Patagonia, Tokyo Gas, Sony, NEC, Dell Engineering, Inc., Canon, and Sun Microsystems.

Besides expanding the market of green products, many of the companies in the report are preventing tremendous amounts of pollution and saving millions of dollars as a result of adding the environment to their purchasing equation.

• DaimlerChrysler saved almost $45 million and prevented 110,580 tons of pollution in 1997.  Most of these savings resulted from careful screening and tracking of all chemical purchases to eliminate excess purchases; substituting less hazardous chemicals when possible, which significantly decreased disposal costs; reducing the number of plastic resins purchased, which reduced costs and increased in-house recycling opportunities; and investing in energy-saving measures.            
• Anheuser-Busch’s purchase of energy-efficient chillers for its SeaWorld of Florida theme park is saving more than 1.5 million kilowatt-hours and about $100,000 in energy costs annually.  The company is expecting to save an additional  $40 million a year as a result of its purchase and installation of bio-energy recovery systems.

The report is a product of EPA’s Environmentally Preferable Purchasing (EPP) Program, a program designed to assist federal purchasers in minimizing environmental burdens through their purchasing decisions.  The EPP Program encourages purchasers to consider a variety of environmental factors associated with products and services, including: energy efficiency; recycled content; water efficiency; resource conservation; waste prevention; renewable material percentages; adverse affects to workers, animals, plants, air, water, and soil; toxic material content; packaging; and transportation.

Contact: To receive a copy of Private Sector Pioneers, contact EPA’s Pollution Prevention Clearinghouse at 202-260-1023 or visit the Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Program’s web site at www.epa.gov/oppintr/epp

The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) Expert Group Meeting on Assessment of Investment Projects for Sustainable Development was held in January, 2000 in Paris, France.  The meeting was sponsored by the UNEP Division of Technology, Industry, and Economics (DTIE), based in Paris; and DTIE’s International Environmental Technology Centre (IETC) in in Osaka.  DTIE Director Jacqueline Aloisi de Larderel chaired the meeting, assisted by a facilitator.  The objective of the meeting was to identify ways of improving information on sustainable development financial decision-makers.

The meeting was attended by a wide range of financial community entities, including venture capital firms, environmental energy accountants, insurance industry, and multilateral development banks.  Will Kirksey of the Civil Engineering Research Foundation (CERF) was the only attendee representing a non-profit organization conducting energy/environmental programs and conducting technology verifications.  Most of the attendees were European, although the US was represented by two venture capital firms, and independent power producer, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The meeting was subdivided into three investment topics: Companies, Projects, and Technologies.  The majority of the attendees were primarily interested in defining the degree to which sustainability was an objective of companies; that is, how could they characterize those companies as a basis of investment; how could they convince more companies of the advantages, from a financial basis, of adopting sustainability; and how could they attract more investors to those companies or to “sustainability funds.” Concept papers were presented on technology information sources and financial mechanisms.  During the meeting some common objectives were defined which will help the finance sector and UNEP work cooperatively to achieve sustainable development solutions.  One of the key actions identified was for UNEP to engage the cooperation of international financial institutions, aid agencies, development banks and export credit agencies to ensure that solutions are appropriate for developing countries.  Other proposed actions include the development of a common nomenclature and clarification of the essential information required by investors.

UNEP will continue to develop its partnering work and will be publishing an inventory of green funds, developing a catalogue of rating agencies, working to develop a sustainability rating index and establishing a list of funding sources available to developing countries for environmentally sound investments.  These are among the priorities for UNEP in responding to the needs identified during the Paris meeting.

Contact: For further information, contact Will Kirksey of CERF (Tel: 202-842-0555; fax: 202-789-5345; e-mail: wkirksey@cerf.org)

Charles D. McCrea, Chief Operating Officer of the Environmental Careers Organization (ECO), briefed the Forum at its February, 2000 meeting on the efforts of ECO to build leadership capacity in the environmental field. 

Founded in 1972, ECO is a national, nonprofit training and education organization committed to the development of environmental professionals. Since its establishment, ECO has placed more than 7,500 undergraduate and recent college graduates into paid environmental internships. These internships offer learning experiences through a wide range of projects sponsored by federal, state, and local government agencies, corporations, and nonprofit organizations. 

ECO Online, an Internet site for resources and information about environmental careers,  provides visitors with information about ECO programs, the opportunity to apply on-line to any of the currently listed internship openings, and  links to other job opportunities and environmental career resources. 

For over fifteen years, ECO has sponsored the National Environmental Career Conference (NECC), attracting over 1500 attendees annually.  The Conference is comprised of educational sessions and a career fair focusing on all types of environmental careers.  The NECC offers the opportunity to listen to and meet with environmental professionals discussing current employment trends and opportunities in the environment. 

ECO’s publications include The Complete Guide to Environmental Careers in the Twenty-first Century (Island Press, 1998) revised and updated to reflect the sweeping changes that have transformed the environmental career would over the last five years.

ECO considers that an integral part of its success is the Organization’s Diversity Initiative. The Diversity Initiative is ECO’s effort to increase multi-cultural diversity and the presence of underrepresented groups in the environmental field.  Through paid internships, grant-funded programs, leadership training and other career development opportunities, ECO has introduced thousands of people from underrepresented populations to environmental careers. 

ECO’s Environmental Leadership Programs include the Sustainable Leadership Communities Program (SCLP) and the Tufts Environmental Leadership Program.  ECO has worked with Tufts University for the past three years to recruit mid-career professionals from underrepresented groups for its graduate environmental degree program.  SCLP is a California initiative, supported in part by funding from the Irvine Foundation, to match SCLP graduate fellows and undergraduate interns with innovative projects that promote ecological sustainability, economic vitality and social justice - the goals of the sustainable communities movement.  ECO is exploring the possibility of expanding this initiative to other regions of the country. 

Contact: Charles McCrea, Chief Operating Officer, ECO, (Tel: 617-426-4375; fax: 617-423-0998; e-mail: cmccrea@eco.org; ECO Online: www.eco.org)

Earth at Risk is an environmental dialogue between religion, and science, edited by Donald B. Conroy and Rodney L. Petersen.  The articles in this volume are focused on the challenge of rethinking Christian theology in relation to a just and sustainable society.  Although based within a Christian context, Earth at Risk includes representative voices from Jewish, Muslim, and secular perspectives, as well as from the scientific and environmental communities, including distinguished physicist and theologian Ian Barbour, the 1999 winner of the Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion.

The main thematic sections include: Science in Dialogue with Religion; Religion Caring for Creation; Sustainable Community and Environmental Justice; and Strategies for Education, Ministry, and Building Sustainable Communities.

This collection brings together a broad spectrum of authors from diverse backgrounds and perspectives, including Susan Power Bratton, Richard J. Clifford, Richard J. Clugston, Paula Gonzalez, Roger S. Gottlieb, Ian Hutchinson, Charles J. Puccia, Larry Rasmussen, Michal Fox Smart, George Tinker, Timothy Weiskel, and Ian Barbour.

Donald B. Conroy (Washington, DC) Is president of the North American Coalition on Religion and Ecology.  Rodney L. Petersen (Newton Centre, MA) is the executive director of the Boston Theological Institute and an adjunct professor in its member schools.

Contact: Humanity Books, Amherst, NY (Tel: 800-421-0351)

The World Bank and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) have unveiled a joint initiative to put business ethics at the heart of a new Internet-based educational project in the developing world. The joint program on Business Ethics and Corporate Responsibility, which will be carried out via the Internet, aims to educate government officials and businesses worldwide about the experiences of of 120 of the world’s leading companies ranging from Merck and Aracruz Celulose to 3M and Ford. The effort was to begin in May with training for government and business leaders, academics, and journalists from Southeast Europe.

“Bolstering the ties between companies and the communities in which they operate is crucial if economic and social development are to really succeed,” World Bank President James D. Wolfensohn said in launching the new initiative at the World Economic Forum. “This initiative will enable the Bank to build on its anti-corruption work by sharing a platform for our casework and courses in the field.

”The new initiative is part of a broader partnership between the WBCSD Foundation and the World Bank to develop a common educational outreach program on corporate social responsibility and business ethics. The two organizations aim to reach out with their messages through WBCSD’s Virtual University, a consortium initiative involving major corporations and academic institutions.  This online effort will help the WBCSD underline its ongoing work on corporate social responsibility. WBCSD President Bjorn Stigson announced the release of a report offering a twelve-point navigator to guide companies through the social challenges and dilemmas facing them in the new millennium.

Professor Jan-Olaf Willums, president of the WBCSD Foundation, will chair the joint program.

Contact: Michael R. Sanio, Private Sector/ Partnerships, Global Environment Facility Secretariat, (Tel: 202-458-0263; fax: 202-522-3240; e-mail: msanio@worldbank.org
For more on the virtual university, visit: www.wbcsd.ch/vuniversity/index.htm

Designing a Report on the State of the Nation’s Ecosystems was developed by experts from government, industry, environmental organizations, and universities working under the auspices of the H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics, and the Environment.  The report presents a suite of measures that show the condition and use of the Nation’s natural resources. 

The Heinz Center regards the report as a prototype, intended to elicit comments, criticism and suggestions on the project’s initial approach and preliminary findings.  In 2001, The Heinz Center plans to issue an expanded report covering all ecosystems of the United States. Some of the key findings of the report follow:

Data and Information: Appropriate data are lacking for about forty percent of the measures identified for inclusion in the report.  For these, only site-specific or regional data, rather than national data, are available, or information over time is not available.  Data availability for measures dealing with food and fiber production is generally good, but there are significant gaps for most other groups of measures.

System Dimensions: The report covers ecological conditions on about half of the US land area -forests cover about 35 percent of the US and croplands about 20 percent - and a coastal and marine area larger than the continental United States.  Forest acreage declined slightly within the past few decades.  Total cropland acreage has remained fairly stable over the same time.

Human Use:

• Food and Fiber: Over the past 50 years, the quantity of crops harvested in the United States has more than doubled, the amount of fish landed in US ports has doubled, and the amount of timber cut has nearly doubled.  Much of the increase in fish catch has occurred in Alaska since the late 1980s.  Increases in timber harvest have been more gradual, with increases seen largely on private lands and in the South.  Crop harvest has also grown steadily.

System Condition:                  

• Productivity: Crop yield per acre has grown steadily over the past 50 years. For forests, more wood grows than is harvested each year, and growth per acre is higher today than in the 1950s. There are insufficient data to make statements about changes in coastal productivity.
• Soil and Nutrients: The percentage of cropland with highly erosion-prone soil conditions decreased from 30 percent in 1982 to 24 percent in 1992.  In most states, undesirably high soil acidity is found in about one-fourth of all soils tested. Little consistent information is available regarding other key soil properties.  Irrigated acreage has grown by 25 percent since 1969, while the amount of water applied per acre has dropped by 25 percent
• Contaminants: About one-fourth of the more than 1,400 plant communities or “associations” found in US forests occur frequently enough, or on few enough acres, to be considered at risk. About 30 percent are “secure” or “apparently secure.”  Consistent data are not available on the acreage of old-growth forest or the number of very large trees.  Overall forest mortality has remained fairly stable over the past 50 years, never exceeding 1 percent per year.  Acreage burned by wildfire in recent decades has been far below the levels of earlier this century, but it has increased in the past few years.
• Native Species: Most grassland birds and upland game birds in the central United States (where croplands predominate) are “apparently secure,” with some populations declining and others increasing. Most forest birds of prey (e.g. hawks, owls), all birds (other than raptors) preferring mature forest, and all birds preferring forest edges are “apparently secure,” and more species are increasing in number than are decreasing. The number of seabird populations that are stable or increasing exceeds the number in decline. All 10 sea turtle populations found in US waters are classified as “at risk;” four of these are stable or increasing. One-third of the 300 commercially fished stocks whose status is known are over-fished or approaching and over- fished condition.

Contact: Copies of the report may be obtained by contacting Robin O’Malley, Project Manager, at the Heinz Center (Tel: 202-737-6307; fax: 202-737-6410; website: www.heinzctr.org) The report is also available online at www.us-ecosystems.org

For the third consecutive year, the WFEO ComTech  presented an engineering panel at the UN Commission on Sustainable Development (UNCSD).  The May 1st ComTech panel was entitled Sustainable Agricultural and Natural Resource Management Engineering Practices.  Presenters were Dr. Vincent F. Braits and Dr. James W. Jones; two case studies were also presented by the Moderator, Dr. Fedro Zazueta.

Dr. Braits, Professor and Head, Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Purdue University, presented a case study on Microirrigation as a Sustainable Agriculture Production Practice.  His presentation included background on the technology and the applications for microirrigation.  His case studies were from Israel, Spain, India, and China.

Dr. James W. Jones, Distinguished Professor, Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department, University of Florida, Gainsville, spoke on Weather Data Collection and Climate Prediction in Management of Agricultural Production Systems.  He explained the El Nino/La Nina indicators on climate and prediction modeling in terms of how the data is used in the US, as well as in other countries. 

Dr. Zazueta presented two case studies: the Small Scale Biogas Production and the Broad Bed Maker. The biogas study showed two methane production designs, one in Mexico and the other in Vietnam.  Both allow for the use of methane as an energy source for in-home cooking and lighting. The Broad Bed Maker is a plow that enables a farmer to plant two croppings a year.  This technology was designed by Mohammed A. Jabbar and M.A. Mohamed Saleem of the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 

In other news, Dr. Joseph Delfino represented ComTech at the Second World Water Forum at The Hague, March 17-22, 2000. His purpose in attending was to learn more about the development of the World Water Vision, a 25-year plan to increase public awareness of water issues, ultimately placing water on the agenda as a key political issue at the global level as well as at regional levels.  WFEO, through communication with Jim Poirot, President of ComTech, had been asked to provide an engineering component by Ismail Serageldin of the World Bank and Chairman, World Commission on Water for the 21st Century, and by William Cosgrove, Director, World Water Vision Unit.

The Second World Water Forum addressed the following themes: Water for People (issues related to water supply and sanitation). Water for People (issues related to water supply and sanitation), Water for Food (issues related to irrigated as well as rain-fed agriculture), Water and Nature (issues related to freshwater ecosystem management), Water-Education-Training (issues related to water education and training), Water in Rivers, Hydro-power, Sovereignty, Trans-boundary Water Transfers, Tourism and Recreation, and Rainwater Harvesting.  Reports were also presented by regional working groups from throughout the world. 

Contact: Jane Alspach, AAES (Tel: 202-296-2237; fax:  202-296-1151; e-mail: jalspach@aaes.org)

The RAND Science and Technology Policy Institute has published Technology Forces at Work: Profiles of Environmental Research and Development at DuPont, Intel, Monsanto, and Xerox.  The authors are Susan Resetar with Beth E. Lachman, Robert Lempert and Monica M. Pinto.

The report attempts to provide information and increase policy-makers’ understanding by illuminating emerging environmental technology R&D trends in a limited number of environmental sectors. It addresses how research-intensive companies are rethinking investments in environmental technologies; where these companies are likely to invest, where they will not invest, and where the opportunities for public-private partnerships are; and what federal policies the case-study companies would like to see to promote investments in environmental research and technology.

RAND selected four companies identified as being among the leaders in quality R&D processes and the treatment of environmental issues: DuPont, Monsanto, Intel, and Xerox, representing the chemicals, biotechnology, and electronics sectors, respectively. These are industries experiencing different rates of change and confronting different kinds of environmental challenges. They are large, multinational manufacturing organizations with significant R&D investments, focusing specifically on users of environmental technologies for whom technological innovation is clearly important.

The following are a few highlights of the case studies, showing how these companies treat environmental technology investments:

DuPont: Looking to Solve its Customers’ Environmental Problems.  Environmental technology R&D planning at DuPont has moved away from a cost containment perspective to one that focuses on market-driven opportunities and sustainability by anticipating and solving customers’ environmental needs and providing products that meet environmental standards or are considered environmentally preferable. DuPont classifies its investments in environmental technologies into sustainable or environmentally preferable products and services; yield improvement, which includes co-product development and zero-waste technology: reuse and recycle; and control and abatement. Approximately 95 percent of all DuPont R&D investments have at least a modest environmental aspect; 65 percent have a large environmental aspect; and 15 percent are exclusively environmental.

Intel: Prevention to Enable Rapid Change.  Intel is known for introducing a rapid series of incremental product improvements. As a consequence, product and process design occur simultaneously. Intel invests in pollution-prevention technologies with the goal of reducing emissions below those that require an environmental permit.  This approach is intended to save money by avoiding the administrative expenses of obtaining permits. The approach also avoids the loss of opportunities to generate revenue because of delays to manufacturing process changes. Intel also invests in process technologies to improve water conservation, for both ultra-pure and waste water because of community concerns.  Other technology areas include chemical use reduction and solid-waste conservation. 

Monsanto: Substituting Information for Material and Energy Resources.  Monsanto began investing in biology-based product research in the early 1970s. At that time, chemistry was king at Monsanto, and research focused on chemical solutions to crop management and process improvements.  To transform itself, the company turned to university scientists and acquired or allied with small biotechnology companies, seed companies, pharmaceutical companies, and others to build the expertise and capability required to develop a host of biotechnology-based products in agriculture, pharmaceuticals and animal health.  It seeks to “do more with less,” which is described as adding value without using more material and energy resources.

Xerox: Toward an Industrial Ecology, Closing Material and Energy Flows.  Product-related technologies in the areas of energy efficiency, chemical and physical emissions, natural resource conservation, and waste management receive approximately equal amounts of investment at Xerox. Customer requirements and Xerox’s own asset-recycle management initiative, which re-manufactures and reuses copiers and other equipment, directly link these environmental investments to the bottom line.  Xerox estimates show the company is avoiding hundreds of millions of dollars in cost because of its environmental initiatives.  Because equipment is reused, savings in virgin material and energy are also achieved.

Contact: RAND (Tel: 310-451-7002; fax: 310-451-6915; website: www.rand.org)