So the maxim goes. It's an inspiring call with a general sense of a better future implied within. We look to vague maxims like this for inspiration and the market derives from such phrases notions of economic models that are rapidly becoming redundant as we face a planetary crisis.
Consumption was once the colloquial term for tuberculosis, an almost certain killer in the 19th and early 20th centuries. We are now facing another form of ‘consumption’ with evidence of plastics in the deepest parts of the oceans and global warming which the scientific community indicates needs to be addressed radically and urgently. It is more pervasive than ‘Victorian’ consumption and potentially far more deadly, involving many species in addition to our own.
The simple imperative of economic priorities around human prosperity, cannot subordinate the well-being of the biosphere. The patterns of consumption that line the pockets of the unethically acquisitive often sacrifice a greater goal: the sustainability of where we live, for ourselves and other species. In my coaching career, I have spent many hours with leaders examining the nature of ethics, corporate responsibility and a far more personal imperative, a sense of legacy. Often these issues, all value driven, can seem in conflict with one another when the bottom-line imperatives are considered by boards, cost accountants and others. Reconciling our leaders to the fact that a sustainable planet involves new value sets, that are not incompatible with wealth generation can be an uphill struggle, as people often seek out coaches in the first place because they tend to do what they have always done but are looking to explore possible different approaches.
The central tenet here is the personal responsibility of everyone. This starts with those who seek to generate and acquire wealth through the products and services they provide and their delivery. Issues of how sustainable the activity is, its carbon footprint, the impact on species, the ethical treatment of workforces both here and abroad, the decision to keep operations local or cut costs through ‘offshoring’ and arguably, just how much wealth should one person acquire. Then there’s the end consumer, with issues of the credentials of the goods and services purchased. Again, how sustainable, recyclable, ethically produced are they? In terms of products, how reliable, repairable and upgradable are the items concerned and are we prepared to pay a little more in order to achieve something that lasts and is produced responsibly.
We need to consider global markets: is it worth, for example, containering so many goods across from a China we are becoming dangerously reliant upon when they can be produced locally but cost a little more, given wage differentials?
Yes, sustainability is a complex debate none of us can shirk. We need to examine our attitudes to a ‘throwaway society’. How much are we prepared to fairly pay workers overseas, do you leave car engines idling while stationary, add another layer rather than turning the heating up and just how many clothes or other paraphernalia do you need in your life to feel good about yourself? It requires an insight to recognise that the products you buy today, bin tomorrow, may directly or indirectly account for the loss of species, the exploitation of humans and animals elsewhere, even fire and flood!
This thinking requires an engagement and a level of public information and knowledge that enables people to start to make the right decisions. It matters that Volkswagen and others are true about the emissions from their vehicles, the same is true about every product. There is a challenge ahead, as we struggle to even get food labelling accurate for those with serious allergies or to protect our kids from obesity. Our inability to link cause and effect, to take personal responsibility and for governments and others to generate the information citizens need, is a major challenge ahead and a crucial part of the ecological agenda. Without it, the responsible fly blind, the irresponsible cannot be challenged or educated and the greedy ride roughshod over us all. And yet there is much to be hopeful for as we go forward. Greta Thunberg’s campaigning has received global recognition. We saw great action over CFCs in the 70s and 80s with evidence of the ozone layer now repairing itself. Many species have been in reintroduced as conservation and rewilding programs develop. But we still need to wake up in order to not suffer the consequences of a failed responsibility: more death, disease, famine and market generated international conflict as we unleash our own four horsemen while simultaneously uploading the latest post-apocalyptic film on Netflix! In all of the misery of Coronavirus, a much bigger agenda is at large and simply cannot be neglected by what is in the immediate foreground of our awareness. Indeed, decades of ‘kicking the can’ of creating a sustainable, protected planet down the road in favour of whatever is staring us in the face has got us to this sad position. This November the UK hosts the COP26 world summit on climate change. It is to be hoped that Mr Johnson and vested minions do not hijack this agenda and give us ‘world beating’ hyperbole, fops and palliatives instead of truly radical measures for change. Post Brexit, one way to express our new ‘freedom’ is to lead the world in seriously addressing these challenges. It would be great for people, other species, the environment and ultimately, for business.
