Food for thought

Here is the link to a debate on the high food prices across the world.
There are countless reasons for the high prices: Climate change, Government policies, Lack of investment in agriculture, Low productivity and many more, but I feel we really need to develop a policy to check population growth across the world especially in highly populated regions of the world. I know it is politically incorrect to suggest this but bringing down population will help resolve a lot of issues not just runaway food prices.

Asian Green City Index

A study commissioned by Siemens and conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit has analysed the aims and achievements of 22 Asian cities with respect to environmental and climate protection. The Asian Green City Index has some key interesting insights:

• Singapore is Asia's greenest city by far. The city state stands out for its ambitious environmental targets and its efficiency in achieving them. 
• It is heartening to note that other cities are increasingly becoming aware about the importance of environmental protection and climate change issues.
• Bangalore has the lowest levels of CO2 emissions per capita- 30% of Bangalore's energy needs are met by renewable sources and 61% of the electricity generated is through hydropower. The city's low energy lifestyle (due to relatively low income) plays a big part in CO2 reductions. The impact is further reduced due to the city's economy being dominated by IT- related businesses rather than heavy industry. 
• Delhi with a population of 17.4 million, surprisingly has one of the lowest levels of CO2 emissions and generates the least amount of waste per capita of all the 22 cities surveyed. Delhi's average per capita income of $2000 is more than twice the national average but it is among the poorest in the Index. Perhaps that explains the low emissions and waste levels.  
• Bombay with a population of 12.7 million is the most densely populated city in the Index with a GDP per capita of about $2200. It is one of the least prosperous cities in the Index. No prizes for guessing that it performs well in energy and CO2. Given its size and population density, it fares well in terms of land use, buildings and water. The city benefits from a relatively high share of renewable energy at 21% for its electricity needs.   

Here is a link to the Study.

Taking that leap of faith

As humans it is in our nature to become accustomed and familiar with the well known; habit requires no special effort. It is better to stick with the known, at least it is more certain than what the substitute might be. Something new implies a gamble, a risk few people want to take. 
This is what I have encountered so far in my career as a sustainability consultant. Companies, who otherwise wax eloquently about encouraging innovation, creativity and risk taking balk visibly and dither over key decisions that imply a change. Everyone loves the benefits of change but the chance of failure spooks the most seasoned managers. True, change is difficult, time-consuming and costly but it is also necessary as it offers tremendous potential for improved performance and other goodies that follow.
This is one of the most important points that emerge out of the second annual Sustainability & Innovation Global Executive Study by MIT Sloan Management Review and The Boston Consulting Group. The Study offers an interesting insight into how different companies are approaching sustainability and in the process has identified two distinct groups of companies, the first, places sustainability high on its agenda seeing it as a core strategy imperative for long-term growth and the second views sustainability through a narrow lens and are cautious about going further than energy cost savings, material efficiency and risk mitigation. 
As companies try to respond to the challenges posed by sustainability, some try to approach the whole process in a vaguely superficial manner, at a minimum cost, exhorting managers to do their best with minimal or reduced resources. This gives a clear signal to managers and their reports down the value chain that they are not really expected to do anything other than the bare minimum. It is pretty simple to understand this, say for instance, if you want a new product to have a significant effect on the organization, you develop it as a special project with dedicated resources, it is the same with sustainability. 
The changes associated with incorporating sustainability within a company's DNA means change at a most fundamental level. In almost all cases managers simply refuse to understand that bringing about a change within a company implies that they have to change personally themselves. 
This is where engaging with every single employee makes a huge impact. Take Walmart's My Sustainability Plan, an internal program that encourages all Walmart employees to explore what sustainability means to each one individually, not necessarily from the business perspective, but from a personal point of view. This gets them to think about their personal priorities that range from leading a healthy lifestyle (that include eating healthy, exercising, giving up smoking to getting smarter about your energy consumption) to managing personal finances, getting involved in community activities and spending more time with loved ones. Once This understanding of what is good for sustainable living help employees connect to sustainability in the work place and eventually they are able to extend their understanding externally and get external stakeholders to buy into the sustainability agenda. 
So this is how it works:
- Engage with employees to help them understand the core values of sustainability and how it relates to their personal lives
- Encourage them to explore how they can then employ these core values in their day to day work environment
- Once they begin the process of integrating sustainability within their own work processes it becomes imperative for them to reach out and engage with external stakeholders to join the remaining dots.