Responsible Corporations? Honest Politicians? Where do I fit in?

Name:
Location: Syracuse, New York, United States

B.S. SUNY Environmental Science and Forestry in Environmental Policy - 2007 MPA Candidate Maxwell School at Syracuse University

Friday, April 27, 2007

FRONTLINE

Professor Bob Wilson provided me with this link to a PBS FRONTLINE special about the politics of global warming. In his words, "Its excellent". I agree.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hotpolitics/view/

Optimism about developing nations?

Case Closed: the Debate about Global Warming is Over
http://www.brookings.edu/views/papers/easterbrook/20060517.pdf

For anyone interested in climate policy this is definatly worth a read, particularly pages 8-11. If you are well-versed in climate science already the first eight pages will be a restatement of facts you already know, but the final pages addresses policy implications and implications of developing nations (China and India) in a way that seems optimistic.

Response to IPCC report

Extra Credit Assignment for...
GEO 356: Environmental Ideas and Policy
Professor Bob Wilson

The recently issued IPCC report regarding the impacts of climate change is worrisome at the very least. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is made up of the best climate scientists in the world; scientists by nature are generally level-headed individuals, not “doomsayers”. We can assume that these individuals are speaking conservatively when they discuss the profound impacts that a small change in temperature will have on our environment. To speak conservatively about something and still have the report come across as it did (worrisome) makes the issue even more upsetting/scary. As an environmentalist, environmental policy student, and future MPA student extremely familiar with the climate change debate I can not help but sense the urgency in these statements. I also can not help but sit at home, as I often do, thinking I hate the United States! No, no. I hate politics, specifically those of the environment; I hate republicans (who voted for Bush); I HATE GEORGE W. BUSH, specifically his anti-environment pro-energy agenda. I could go on and on about the things I hate – to summarize, after reading this and other reports I become angry and determined to be an agent of change. I recognize that we have three options: mitigation, adaptation, or to suffer. I am excited for the opportunity to attend the Maxwell School, to get involved in politics, and be that agent of change. I propose mitigation and adaptation, as well as making policies that reflect sustainable values. ...I want to be the agent of change and I don’t want to be personally (or as a nation or as a generation) responsible for the collapse of the human race.

Written in response to: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability—Summary for Policymakers (2007), found at: http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM6avr07.pdf

Thursday, April 26, 2007

Time: "Environmental Hazard"

In an article describing the difficulties had by Sanyo, a Japanese electronics maker who tried to “go green”, Time Magazine reports: “The economics of green products still does not make sense for many items” (Walsh 2007). When we speak of economics we refer to neoclassical economics where natural capital and waste are ignored as are taxes and subsidies. It is not that the economics does not make sense for these items, but instead it is that when other non-green items are subsidized by government the free market operates as one might expect: the lower priced item gets purchased. The perverse subsidies working in modern economies are unsustainable and must be eliminated.

Suggested Literature:
Perverse Subsidies: How tax dollars can undercut the environment and the economy, by Norman Myers and Jennifer Kent. Island Press, Washington DC: 2001.

The article referenced was found in the April 30, 2007 edition of Time Magazine in the Global Business section.

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

TV Segment on Community Supported Agriculture staring ME

WHTV Special Resports
Syracuse News Channel 5

Apr 25, 2007 - How much organic produce is in your refrigerator? These pesticide-free products are healthy for our families, but shipping melons from Chile to Syracuse uses a lot of fossil fuels, so they're not helping the planet much. But our Maureen Green found one local woman who is conducting her own form of 21st century sharecropping, growing crops, and saving mother earth at the same time. Click below to see her special report.

Video

Proxy Season 2007

I will be searching www.secinfo.com for additional shareholder resolutions regarding sustainability and other environmental issues. If you come into posession of one or more of these proxy statements, please leave a comment with the name of the corporation soliciting proxies and also the proposal number. Thank you for your help.

Follow Up - Comcast

I respectfully request that all shareholders of Comcast Corporation vote FOR this shareholder proposal. I have attempted to contact The United Methodist Church, the producer of Proposal 5: To require a sustainability report. I left a message with the Investment Team at 847-869-4550. I hope to gain an understanding of their rationale for this proposal as well as knowledge of any other corporations in which they are stakeholders.

This type of resolution is on the rise! For more information: Green Biz

Proxy Season 2007 - Comcast

Pages 20-22 of Comcast's Proxy Material
PROPOSAL 5: TO REQUIRE A SUSTAINABILITY REPORT

The following proposal and supporting statement were submitted by the General Board of Pension and Health Benefits of the United Methodist Church, 1201 Davis Street, Evanston, IL 60201-4118, which has advised us that it holds 658,209 shares of our common stock.

WHEREAS:

Investors increasingly seek disclosure of companies’ environmental and social practices in the belief that they impact shareholder value. Many investors believe companies that are good employers, environmental stewards, and corporate citizens are more likely to generate better financial returns, be more stable during turbulent economic and political conditions, and enjoy long-term business success.

Sustainability refers to endeavors that meet present needs without impairing the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. According to Dow Jones, “Corporate Sustainability is a business approach that creates long-term shareholder value by embracing opportunities and managing risks deriving from economic, environmental, and social developments. Corporate sustainability leaders achieve long-term
shareholder value by gearing their strategies and management to harness the market’s potential for sustainability products and services while at the same time successfully reducing and avoiding sustainability costs and risks.” (http://www.sustainability-index.com/htmle/sustainability/corpsustainability.html)

We believe that improved reporting on environmental, social, and governance issues will strengthen our company and the people it serves. Furthermore, we believe this information is necessary for making well-informed investment decisions as it speaks to the vision and stewardship of management and can have significant impacts on our company’s reputation and on shareholder value.

Globally, over 2,000 companies produce reports on sustainability issues (www.corporateregister.com). Several telecommunications companies have already produced sustainability or corporate responsibility reports, including AT&T and Verizon.

The GE 2006 Citizenship Report provides a compelling rationale for sustainability reporting: “Investors are increasingly interested in evaluating companies based on a broader set of criteria than just financial performance... The strength of reputation, trust in brand and governance, and the ability to perform as a good corporate citizen, all impact GE’s valuation and shape the perception of the Company’s worth. In fact, according to a recent study, 70% of institutional asset managers believe the Company’s citizenship factors will be part of mainstream analysis in the next 3 to 10 years... GE’s focus is on providing transparent communications relating to the Company’s citizenship performance.”

RESOLVED: Shareholders request that the Board of Directors issue a sustainability report to shareholders, at reasonable cost, and omitting proprietary information, by December 31, 2007.

Supporting Statement

The report should include Comcast’s definition of sustainability, as well as a company-wide review of policies, practices, and indicators related to measuring long-term social and environmental sustainability.

We recommend that Comcast use the Global Reporting Initiative’s Sustainability Reporting Guidelines (“The Guidelines”) to prepare the report. The Global Reporting Initiative (www.globalreporting.org) is an international organization with representatives from the business, environmental, human rights, and labor communities. Over 900 companies use or consult the Guidelines for sustainability reporting.

Company Response to Shareholder Proposal

We recognize the importance of social and environmental practices, as well as economic performance, to our shareholders. We are committed to being a good citizen in all communities in which we operate. Our Board believes that our current policies and practices concerning social, environmental and economic issues already address the concerns behind this proposal, and our current disclosure already provides shareholders with meaningful information regarding several of our activities in these areas.

Our social practices are evident in our community engagement. We are committed to improving the quality of life in local communities where our subscribers and employees live and work. We work with existing local organizations to positively impact each community we serve while using our resources to bring visibility to important local issues. In 2006, our charitable support exceeded $100 million. The Comcast Foundation provided more than $11.2 million in grants to more than 550 local non-profit organizations and other charitable partners across the country. In addition, more than $90 million of in-kind contributions (mostly in the form of televised public service announcements) and $2.0 million in corporate contributions were distributed to more than 180 organizations. To maximize our impact, we focus our community investment efforts in four important areas where we believe that we can make the most significant and measurable impact: youth leadership, volunteerism, diversity and literacy. For more information on our commitment to community investment, please review the “In the Community” section of our Web site at www.comcast.com.

We believe that our conduct and reputation are among our best assets. We are committed to the practice of good ethics and conduct among our officers, directors and employees. In that regard, we maintain our code of ethics and business conduct which represents the core of our business philosophy and values and which defines how the company conducts itself. All of our officers, directors and employees are expected to carefully read and adhere to the policies set forth in our code of ethics and business conduct, which we invite shareholders to review in the “Governance” section of our Web site at www.cmcsa.com or www.cmcsk.com. Our code of ethics and business conduct covers many sustainability issues, including such topics as Compliance with Laws, Privacy, Non-Discrimination, Equal Opportunity and Non-Harassment, Environment, Health and Safety and more.

Given the nature of our services-oriented businesses, as opposed to, for example, a manufacturing business, environmental practices do not play a significant role in our operations. Nonetheless, we are committed to conducting our businesses in compliance with all applicable environmental laws and regulations, and we strive to avoid adverse impact and injury to the environment and to the communities in which we conduct business. We believe in reducing greenhouse gases and are reviewing the use of fuel efficient vehicles, energy efficient emergency generators and energy efficient appliances and devices at our facilities. Our new corporate headquarters, which we plan to move into beginning in the fourth quarter of 2007, hopes to achieve a “Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design” certification from the U.S. Green Building Council.

The Board believes that our track record demonstrates that, wherever we operate, we work hard to be a good corporate citizen and to promote social, environmental and economic issues. Therefore, the Board believes that conducting a special review on social, environmental and economic issues and preparing a sustainability report for shareholders is unnecessary and would not be an effective use of our resources. The time and expense involved in preparing such a report would detract from our focus on our business and operations and would not be in the best interests of our shareholders.

FOR THESE REASONS, OUR BOARD UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS THAT SHAREHOLDERS VOTE “AGAINST” THIS PROPOSAL.

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Updates

The Wall Street Journal has not come for two days. It occurred to me this afternoon that my subscription has ended. I will renew it tomorrow and resume posting here as soon as possible. Meanwhile, I suggest picking up a copy of this months Vanity Fair magazine; it is their second green issue. I am slowly working through it and I have so far enjoyed it.

On page 52, Robert F. Kennedy Jr, president of the Waterkeeper Alliance, is quoted discussing American politics regarding the environment: "Kennedy says, 'It's time that America's traditionally Republican hunters, fishermen, and ranchers took stronger leadership roles in the conservation movement and recognized that the biggest threat to the wildlife, waterways, and landscapes they love is the White House policies that are transferring those assets to coproate cronies from the lumber, mining, and energy industries.'" Clearly he is referring to President Bush's rolling back of environmental regulations which I find pathetic and depressing.

On a different note, the segment about Community Supported Agriculture aired on News Channel 5 this evening. I was quite pleased with the way it turned out. To view it, please visit http://www.wtvh.com/

Monday, April 23, 2007

sustainable economy?

I have recently read and re-read State of the World 2006 published by The WorldWatch Institute. My current project draws my attention to Chapter 10: Transforming Corporations by Erik Assadourian. Here I would like to highlight my findings and open them up for discussion.
It is well known among environmentalists and economists that neoclassical economics does not account for natural capital nor does it account for externalities associated with production. Instead neoclassical economics is represented by a closed system of house holds and businesses. Unfortunately the economy is no so simple or predictable, there is exploitation of resources and much waste associated with production. Ecosystem degradation is an unaccounted-for byproduct of industrial societies. Today, as ecosystems decline business has become riskier and costlier; Assadourian reports “Key resources and ecosystem services, such as fresh water and climate regulation [are] less available” and he predicts “It will heighten regulatory oversight; it will alter customer and investor preferences; and it will jeopardize the availability of capital and insurance” (Assadourian 2006).
Few businesses have taken a proactive approach to protecting their interests and the interests of the Earth, however the majority of corporate America continue to operate in their own short-sighted self-interest. Corporations are now the dominant force in American business; it is necessary that they sign on to sustainability efforts to encourage and enable other, smaller businesses to follow the lead. Corporations must act in an ecologically sustainable manner; they must be willing to invest in long-term beneficial technologies and policies. Unfortunately corporations are apparently unwilling to do, even when it may prove advantageous to their bottom line. Assadourian argues that “Corporate responsibility is worth the investment” citing a study that demonstrates “a positive relationship between financial performance and social and environmental performance” (Assadourian 2006).
How do we price for environmental goods and services? How do we induce a bottom-up policy change? If some corporations have already begun to act responsibly and have been successful at doing so, how do we encourage others to do the same? How do we create breeding grounds and training grounds for environmentally responsible shareholders, employees, and executives? When many shareholders are short-term investors, how do we encourage costly investments for the future? These are just a couple of the many questions that one could pose after reading such a chapter.