It is important to cut through the simple oppositionism of economy versus ecology.
Pavan Sukhdev, head of the UNEP’s Green Economy Initiative, argues that the greening of economies is a new engine for growth, employment and the reduction of persistent poverty.
He has put numbers on it. It is possible to demonstrate that a wetlands outside Kampala is creating more value in water treatment for the city, than converting it to agricultural land. Pavan provides a powerful economic argument for preserving natural capital.
He is pretty funny, too. At the Opera House last week, he showed a slide of Mars to make the obvious point: “no biosphere…no economy”. He also presented a satellite photo of trawler fleets intensively clustered on the edges of a marine reserve of the Pacific US coast. “The fish don’t read the regulations”.
The Economics of Biodiversity (TEEB) reports are at:
http://www.teebweb.org
A career banker, Pavan Sukhdev is on sabbatical from the Deutsche Bank for two years to conduct his environmental projects. More please.
Ideas for knowing what to do...
Knowing is not the same as doing. That’s Rule Number 18 from Alan M. Webber’s recent book, Rules of Thumb.[1] Webber was the founding editor/owner of Fast Company, the hip business magazine he established after a long stint at the much more staid Harvard Business Review. Rules of Thumb lists 52 business insights, all written in Webber’s engaging journalistic style and peppered with great stories about how to make sense of the tumultuous world in which we live.
Of Rule 18#, Webber says: “There are two ways of knowing. One comes from the head. It’s the kind of knowing that comes from reading and thinking – it’s the kind of theorising that experts excel at. The other way of knowing comes from doing. Unlike the first form of knowing, which starts in the head and stays there, this form of knowing starts in the hands and moves up to the head and then back down again in a knowing-doing loop.” (Webber: p86)
I think we can assume that ‘hands’, in this case, means real human experience; the kind of thing we tend to devalue if we privilege theoretical over empirical forms of knowing.
Of course, both are important. And when it comes to leadership, both are necessary.
Choosing between competing ideas, promoting one person over another, investing in new systems and technologies – what evidence do you trust most and why? Is there a ‘right’ decision? Theoretical knowing can sometimes let us down when complex decision-making is required; and too much reactive ‘doing’ can stir up more mud, robbing us of the space and time needed to see deeper patterns and connections.
Read More »