Personal Benefits

Has the Increase of Human Knowledge given us Wisdom? Let’s start the dialogue

Posted on February 19, 2015 by abrahamwien18

11/25/14

By Paul L. Jones, Founder,
Director, Financial Advisory Services for Emerald Skyline Corporation

Muhammad Ali is quoted as saying: “The man who views the world at 50 the same as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.”

It makes sense that as we experience life, we learn from our experiences which changes our view of the world – we call it many things – like growing up or becoming mature. Throughout each of the stages of our lives, we experience life differently which causes us to act differently. Those changes can be infused from our personal lives through the loss of a loved one, the survival of a major illness, the overcoming of addictions or the recovery from a bad marriage or relationship. Or they may be through our education and career, through the rise and fall of a business, the lessons of a new course of study, the influence of colleagues and clients. And they may be spiritual – developing a deeper relationship with our God – however we conceive Him/Her to be, and what becomes important in the service of God and humanity. Ideally, we mature through all of these experiences and we move into Wisdom.

Wisdom is defined as “the quality of having experience, knowledge and good judgment; the quality of being wise; the soundness of an action or decision with regard to the application of experience, knowledge and good judgment; or the body of knowledge and principles that develops within a specified society or period.”

The process of maturation in an individual can be viewed as the evolution of a person. And just as a person evolves, so does society: humanity as a species is dramatically different now than it was just 30 years ago – pre-internet, pre-smart phone, pre-nanotechnology, pre so many things that have changed how we experience and view the world.

In fact, the pace of human advancement has been accelerating throughout time. you can select many gauges by which to measure progress and change, patents for instance; but, there is one yard stick that I think gives us the greatest insight into the pace of change which is R. Buckminster Fuller’s Knowledge Doubling Curve which he introduced in his 1982 book, Critical Path.

A futurist and inventor, Fuller estimated that if we took all the knowledge that mankind had accumulated at the time of AD One, or One CE (Common Era), as equal to one unit of information, which took hum curve ans nearly 198,000 years to accumulate, and used that as the benchmark; the amount of human knowledge would take another 1,500 years to double. With the introduction of the printing press, the pace of growth in human knowledge started to accelerate with another doubling occurring in about 250 years. By 1900 (around 150 years), human knowledge had doubled again. By the end of World War II, knowledge was doubling every 25 years. At the time Critical Path was published, Fuller estimated that human knowledge was doubling every 18 months. Now, Human knowledge is estimated to double every 13 months. With the internet and other advances in human communication and data storage, IBM predicts that human knowledge is soon to double every 12 hours.

This growth in human knowledge has lead to great advancements in the quality of life for much of humanity with scientific and technological advancements leading to improved hygiene, literacy, agricultural production, mass production, and medicine.

Further, these advancements lead to the first real increase in global per capita GDP which has been estimated to average $158 per annum (adjusted to 2013 dollars) from pre-history until the Industrial Revolution. (According to a 1998 academic paper entitled “Estimates of World GDP, One Million BC to Present” by J. Bradford De Long of the UC Berkeley Department of Economics, GDP per capital started escalating around AD 1600 with consistent growth occurring after 1800).

The growth of knowledge and information accelerated in the 18^th and 19^thCenturies with a doubling of human knowledge translated into improved opportunities for a better life: People were empowered with knowledge which lead to the end of the feudal system and the introduction of democracy in politics, social structures and economics.

With the pace of human knowledge and the changes that it brings to our daily lives increasing exponentially, the natural reaction is to hold onto the bar and try to slow down the ride – like we do in a roller coaster or a vehicle traveling faster than is comfortable….

All this information and knowledge and experience should also lead to wisdom, right?

Unfortunately, however, billions of people – including many of our political, religious and social leaders – still live as if they were in the Middle Ages.

The changes have made our lives better in many ways – but they have come with a price. The following diagram from Wiki-books on “Economic History” is a diagram of societal development: hunter/gatherer, pastoralist/horticulturalist, agrarian, industrial, and post-industrial. It also ties each stage of development to the important consequences of societal development, namely: surplus, denser populations, specialization, technology and inequality (As a dramatic example of this inequality, the Toilet Board Coalition just reported that over one billion people live with no alternative to open defecation while 2.5 billion people in the world do not have access to proper sanitation which is in stark contrast to the standard of living experienced in the First World.) See: http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2014/nov/19/world-toilet-day-business-coalition-open-defecation?CMP=new_1194

(http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Economic_History)

As noted in an October 2012 article by Samuel Arbesman in BBC Future, “our lives are governed by centuries of advances that haven’t been random….there’s a pattern that reveals how our knowledge has changed over time….”

Understanding this pattern, Mr. Arbesman states, “helps us to understand something fundamental to our success as a species.”

In technology, Gordon Moore, a retired chemist and physicist who was a co-creator of the Intel Corporation, wrote a paper in 1965 entitled, Cramming More Components onto Integrated Circuits. In this short paper, Moore predicted that the number of possible components that can be placed on a single circuit for a fixed cost would double every year. This thesis, based on just four data points, has been proven true and is known as “Moore’s Law.”

If you generalize Moore’s Law from integrated circuits and chips to information technology, it explains extremely regular changes in technology over the past few centuries.

A primary reason that everything from the growth in knowledge to the advances in science and technology follows this pattern is related to the concept of cumulative knowledge. All advances are built on the information available already. Like this article is based on the information and research that has been done by many people and is available now on the internet.

Mr. Arbresman continues:

” So, while exponential growth is not a self-fulfilling proposition, there is feedback, which leads to a sort of technological imperative: as there is more technological or scientific knowledge on which to grow, new technologies increase the speed at which they grow. But why does this continue to happen? Technological or scientific change doesn’t happen automatically; people are needed to create new ideas and concepts. The answer is that in addition to knowledge accumulation, we need to understand another factor that’s important to knowledge progression: population growth.”

In an August 1993 academic article published in The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Michael Kremer presents the case that the growth in knowledge and technology is directly linked to population growth and that technological growth is proportional to population growth.

There are now over seven billion humans on this earth – which both fuels innovation, the growth of knowledge, scientific discovery and technology while also causing an extreme demand on natural capital – the stock of finite resources which includes geology, soil, air, water and all living things from which humans use to sustain life.

Now, the question is – with 200,000 years of history and all this data, information and knowledge, have we grown wise?

What would Ali think? What do you think?

To be continued…..

Why the Invisible Hand Works

Posted on February 19, 2015February 19, 2015 by abrahamwien18

7/23/14

By Paul L. Jones, Founder,
Director, Financial Advisory Services for Emerald Skyline Corporation

This post has been over two weeks in the writing. Yes, two weeks. For me, the anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration of Independence has always been a source for inspiration as the principles on which the United States of America is based continue to be a source of pride and reflection as well as a call to action.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

By these words, the Continental Congress established a moral standard that became the cornerstone of the US Constitution – our contract with each other that establishes the basis for our governance.

Of course, we have not realized these goals and they continue to be a guideline for our actions – as individuals and as a country. It is the mutual respect of our individual Rights that enables this pact among men and women to provide the freedom Americans enjoy.

In the same year the British-American Colonies declared their independence from England by establishing a new standard for the governance of a nation-state, Adam Smith published his A Wealth of Nations which provided the basis for modern free market economics. This was serendipity for sure.

As discussed in an earlier post, Smith introduced the concept of the Invisible Hand wherein he states that the market had an “automatic mechanism that allocated resources with great efficiency.”

It is difficult to realize how radical this concept was in 1776. Prior to the formation of the United States with an economy based on a free market, the allocation of labor was established either by tradition wherein the son was expected to follow in the trade of the father, or by command whereby an autocratic ruler (e.g., a king, pharaoh, emperor, etc.) dictates the economic activity to be pursued and the allocation of labor. In this way, humanity made sure there were enough farmers, carpenters, bakers, fishermen.

In describing the Invisible Hand, Smith says: “it is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages.”

Accordingly, the Invisible hand facilitates the interdependence of human workers while maintaining their independence. The precarious nature of human survival – and the ability of individuals to enjoy the unalienable Rights the Founding Fathers so bravely declared – would be exposed if the invisible hand had not worked.

It works because we are both independent and interdependent.

I, like most Americans, was raised to believe that America was built by rugged individuals who were as driven and as hardened as John Galt, Francisco d”Anconia, Hank Reardon and Dagny Taggart in Atlas Shrugged, the 1957 novel written by Ayn Rand.

The American history that I was taught told me that it was the titans of industry that built this country alone and the rest of us were along for the ride. Just like the characters in Ayn Rand’s famous novel, this is a myth and a fiction. To quote John Donne from Meditation #17 written in 1623:

“No man is an Island; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main.”

It seems that in the propagation of the myth of the rugged individualist, we have forgotten that we are all in this together….America became an economic force because it had rich and abundant natural resources, a governmental model that promoted trade, an ever-expanding labor force by immigrants drawn from every nation on earth, scientific advances that led to the industrial revolution among other contributing factors.

Especially in this post-industrialized era of specialization when each of us have one primary trade or profession from which we earn a living. I would not have my breakfast if not for the farmer, the trucker, the grocer, the clerk and all the people who facilitate the production, processing, shipping and distribution of the food I ate. The market works because there is both a seller and a buyer. Without a buyer (market), no enterprise can survive.

America is built on our interdependence as well as our independence. I have thought about this seeming paradox. Here is what I have concluded: We are independent in what we offer the world as God has endowed each of us with a unique set of talents and capabilities which we then refine through education and experience to become skills and proficiencies that sustain us. But, we are interdependent in what we need or take from the world.

We each are an individual with a unique life, values, talents, capabilities, perspectives, relationships, but like a drop of water in the ocean or a snowflake in a snow drift, we quickly join with other droplets or flakes and become greater, and better, than we could alone. Individual contribution and group synergy form the basis for the modern business enterprise, the sports team, the nation-state and most human endeavors.

Therefore, the basis for all civilized human interaction has to be respect for our human dignity and our personal right to our identity, our ideas, and the fruits of our labor.

As stated above: the Invisible Hand works because we are both independent and interdependent. So, as we celebrate our independence, it is right and good that we also celebrate our interdependence – an American tradition since 1945.

Original Declaration of INTERdependence

By Will Durant, 1945

Human progress having reached a high level through respect for liberty and dignity of men, it has become desirable to re-affirm these evident truths:

The differences of race, color and creed are natural, and that diverse groups, institutions and ideas are stimulating factors in the development of man;
That to promote harmony in diversity is a responsible task of religion and statesmanship;
That since no individual can express the whole truth, it is essential to treat with understanding and good will those whose views differ from our own;
That, by the testimony of history, intolerance is the door to violence, brutality, and dictatorship; and
That the realization of human interdependence and solidarity is the best guard of civilization.

Therefore, we solemnly resolve, and invite everyone to join in united action,

To uphold and promote human fellowship through mutual consideration and respect;
To champion human dignity and decency, and to safeguard those without distinction of race or color or creed;
To strive in concert with others to discourage all animosities arising from these differences, and to unite all groups in the fair play of civilized life.

Rooted in freedom, children of the same Divine Father, sharing everywhere a common human blood, we declare again that all men are brothers, and that mutual tolerance is the price of liberty.

On Questioning Assumptions/Making an Immediate Impact

Posted on February 19, 2015 by abrahamwien18

By Paul L. Jones, Founder,
Director, Financial Advisory Services for Emerald Skyline Corporation

The nature of our education system is for us to believe that once we learn a topic or draw a conclusion on an issue, we move on to the next subject and never look in the rear view mirror except to use that knowledge to advance in the next course, subject or project. It is easy to fall into this routine, but life and reality do not fit neatly into this sequential thinking process.

For too many people, we have drawn a conclusion on a topic at one point in our lives and never revisit it with an open mind and the benefit of more time and knowledge and wisdom which leads to false beliefs and poor decisions but, the British philosopher and Nobel Laureate, Bertrand Russell, advises us: “In all affairs, it’s a healthy thing now and then to hand a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted.”

Of course, we know this is the case with making the existing building stock sustainable. A common pre-conception is that it costs a lot of money to reduce a property’s impact on the environment and improve the operating performance of a commercial building. Yes, replacing inefficient lighting and HVAC systems, adding solar panels, installing a green roof and changing the windows and/or skin of a building are definitely investments that will save money, but there are many ways to achieve savings without a major investment. YOU CAN MAKE AN IMMEDIATE IMPACT NOW.

Jennifer McConkey, Operations & Sustainability Director at Principal Global Investors, reports in a recently published White Paper: “It seems clear that running efficient building operations, sometimes with no-cost and low-cost improvements, can be the quickest way to implement sustainability into your properties or property investments. Operations can provide the foundation for ‘green’ no matter how old the building.”

An article in the 6/10/2014 issue of EDC (Environmental Design & Construction) Magazine reports, “Implementing green building practices will help reduce environmental problems caused by building construction, use and demolition, as well as the manufacturing of building materials. It also has tangible economic and public health benefits such as lower operating costs and improved occupant health and comfort.”

So, we know that commercial properties consume approximately 20% of the total energy used by the United States. We also know that commercial buildings consume a large portion of water, produce greenhouse gas emissions and generate significant waste. Further, we know that building owners and managers will seek to reduce energy and water consumption as well as greenhouse gas emissions and waste that is taken to a landfill (or the ocean). But, we also know, owners and managers are budget conscious and want to time replacements with the deterioration or functional obsolescence of their systems and equipment. So, what can an owner, manager or tenant do?

Plenty. For ways to start your road toward sustainability and improved operating performance, Jennifer McConkey of Principal Global and BAMCO courtesy of EDC gives us the following free or low cost ideas:

Adjust the thermostat to be one degree higher during the cooling season and one degree lower during the heating season;
Leaving the lighting in vacant spaces off except during use or installing occupancy sensors which “ensures that even occupied spaces are lit when there is a person the room, further reducing energy consumption;”
Establish a pro-active HVAC systems and building envelope maintenance programs. Ms. McConkey reports that “something as simple as replacing worn door seals can cost around $100 per doo, but lead to thousands of dollars in annual savings;”
As lightbulbs are replaced, use LED bulbs to help reduce energy consumption;
Install VFD (Variable Frequency Drive) on pumps and water features which minimizes energy use during low demand times;
Use native or drought-tolerant plants and landscaping;
Implement a recycling program (be sure to check local recycling and waste reduction guidelines for materials that are eligible to recycle); and
Use sustainable cleaning products and building materials for any tenant improvements or repairs.

Ms. McConkey’s White Paper can be found at the following link: www.principalglobal.com/us/download.aspx?id=96043

The EDC post can be found at the following link: http://www.edcmag.com/blogs/14-edc-blog/post/95677-building-green-5-ways-to-reduce-your-impact-on-the-environment

Remember, reduce, reuse and recycle.

Seek to make a difference! Be well and be blessed, Paul

Green Is the New Black: Levi’s, Nike Among Marketers Pushing Sustainability

Posted on January 29, 2015 by abrahamwien18

View the original article here

Responding to a consumer behavior shift By Joan Voight

Levi’s boasts of designer jeans made out of used plastic bottles. Nike tempts runners with knitted sneakers that it claims cut manufacturing waste by 88 percent. These products may be the tip of a marketing iceberg, as new research shows a growing pool of global consumers are demanding that mainstream brands be sustainable.

“It’s not about offering a niche green product,” said Jonathan Kirby, vp of global men’s design for Levi Strauss. “We’re working to build sustainability into everything—from the cotton fields to our supply chain, to our stores, to our designs across product lines.”

Case in point: Each pair of Levi’s Waste<Less collection of jeans, launched in Spring 2012, is made from about eight recycled plastic bottles, Kirby said.

Nike takes a similar approach with the FlyKnit shoes it debuted last year, which are marketed as a high-tech advancement using yarn instead of leather uppers for a better fit and a reduction in waste. “FlyKnit is a great example of our innovation and commitment to products and services that are better for athletes, our planet and our investors,” said a company rep. “We’ve seen a strong response from runners and it’s safe to say it’s going to be a big [sales] year for FlyKnit.”

Numbers confirm that shoppers are increasingly seeing green. More than a third of global consumers, including 40 percent of millennials, view style, status and environmentalism as intertwined, per a 2013 survey by brand consultancy BBMG. These consumers love shopping and overwhelmingly desire responsible consumption. “For them, sustainability has changed from being ‘the right thing to do’ to being ‘the cool thing to do,’” said Raphael Bemporad, BBMG’s chief strategy officer.

Target is tapping into the trend with its “Sustainable Product Standard,” unveiled earlier this month. Household cleaners, beauty and baby products that pass the standard will be advertised with the “Choose Well” designation and get unique product placement, said a company rep. “This new standard is a first step toward sustainable innovation in our full product assortment,” she said.

In contrast, consumer goods companies like Unilever, Johnson & Johnson and Procter & Gamble are playing catch-up, with green initiatives focused mainly on the supply chain, said Bemporad.

J&J, for instance, recognizes 34 of its consumer items as sustainable through an in-house “Earthwards” evaluation, which includes R&D, marketing and the supply chain. The plan is for “marketing to leverage Earthwards’ claims for brands, such as Neutrogena and Johnson’s, in ways that relate to the products’ core benefits,” said Paulette Frank, vp of sustainability for Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies. “We’re still learning how to communicate and engage with consumers on our product sustainability improvements,” she added.

But the CPG giants risk becoming outdated as green design and marketing become the new normal in their categories. “It’s the ratchet effect,” said Nigel Hollis, chief global analyst at brand consultancy Millward Brown. “Look at the way Method spurred Clorox to launch the Green Works products. Once one brand in a category incorporates sustainability in a way that benefits the consumer at a fair price, it is tough for competitors not to respond in kind.”

Improving Indoor Air Quality the Easy Way

Posted on January 29, 2015 by abrahamwien18

Environmental Leader, 5/2/2014
View the original article here

The natural first step most building managers take when they suspect that their building is causing health problems is to find the root cause and remove, replace or fix the problem. However, there are often more direct and less costly ways to attack poor indoor air quality, LEED trade magazine EDC reports.

Among these ways:

Use fewer chemicals. Cleaning chemicals, whether green or not, impact the indoor environment and using less will, naturally, lessen the impact. Janitors and other cleaning staff are wont to mix more chemical with water than necessary, according to EDC. This can be eliminated by installing an automatic dilution system.
Using greener chemicals can help, too. Look for products that have been independently tested and bear ecolabels such as UL’s Ecologo or the EPA’s Design for the Environment program. These are a better bet for those wanting to buy VOC-free or low environmental-impact chemicals.
Check vacuum cleaners. Vacuum filters are the one piece of equipment that can most contribute to indoor air quality improvement. By selecting advanced filtration filters and changing them regularly — twice a year is usually adequate — you can make drastic improvements.
Train workers on green cleaning. Many custodial workers don’t use environmentally friendly products in the right way. Implementing a training plan or sending workers to a green cleaning training program can overcome this problem.
Educate building users. Educating all those who use the building on the best ways to improve indoor air quality is the best way of making sure all building users are playing their part.

The global revenue for the indoor air quality monitoring and management market, driven by new building standards and regulations as well as a rebounding economy, will grow 80 percent to $5.6 billion by 2020, according to a forecast from Navigant Research released earlier this week.

The developed markets for indoor air quality-related HVAC markets remain sluggish — a holdover from the 2009 global recession. However, the North American market will become more robust this year. Europe will follow a similar trend but will not begin to recover until late 2014, the report says.

The Alphabet Soup of Transparency Tools

Posted on January 29, 2015 by abrahamwien18

How do EPDs, HPDs, and PTDs fit into LCA?

By Christopher Curtland , Buidlings, 3/17/2014
View the original article here

Green certification shouldn’t feel like a game of Scrabble, but if you pursue certain tools, you’ll score a bonus in sustainability.

There are a growing number of acronyms in the industry, so it’s important you don’t get them jumbled. Learn how Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs), Product Transparency Declarations (PTDs), and Health Product Declarations (HPDs) differ.

Lifecycle assessment (LCA) is factored into all three, and they could help you achieve LEED status or other designations.

Declarations of Disclosure

EPDs, HPDs, and PTDs were developed by SCS Global Services to effectively promote transparency, accuracy, scientific credibility, and comparability across several interior products.

While there is some overlap among the tools in terms of ingredient disclosure, they vary in how they report the impact of those ingredients on lifecycle, occupant health, and other criteria.

EPDs are summary reports of product-related environmental impacts based on a cradle-to-grave lifecycle assessment. HPDs are disclosures of product content and potential health hazards from chemicals of concern.

“There are two types of EPDs – basic for those seeking LEED v4 credits, and ‘full transparency’ EPDs that provide more comprehensive information based on advanced LCA,” says Stowe Beam, managing director of SCS’s division of environmental certification services. “HPDs enable companies to communicate the safety of potentially hazardous chemicals.”

PTDs are for products that undergo a health hazard assessment. They go a step beyond HPDs by disclosing intentionally added ingredients, including heavy metals. They acknowledge materials on six authoritative lists (see below) and indicate whether the ingredient level triggers an exposure warning notification based on the content.

“It’s a marriage between ingredient and exposure disclosure,” says Dean Thomson, president of the Resilient Floor Covering Institute. “PTDs also detail recycled content and VOC emissions.”

How to Use Them to Your Advantage

Think of these tools as nutritional labels for interiors products. They are all voluntary, so if a manufacturer has pursued them, you can feel confident in their commitment to sustainability.

Instead of using these designations as the basis for an apples-to-oranges comparison, they’re more apt for comparing Red Delicious to Granny Smith. The tools may seem the same at first glance, but their differences outweigh the similarities.

Ingredients and Health Risks

PTDs reference several hazardous materials identified by these six authorities:
International Agency on the Research of Cancer Terminology
National Toxicology Program
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
California Proposition 65
EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory
REACH Substances of Very High Concern

After digesting the alphabet soup of disclosure, ask yourself three key questions:

How is the product being sourced and delivered? Shipping a sustainable product overseas likely defeats its purpose.

How will the product be used? Cleaning solutions, wear and tear, room temperature, and moisture can significantly affect a product’s performance.

What happens at end-of-life? If a manufacturer offers recycling and disposal services, that’s a bonus. You don’t want the product to end up in a landfill.

And remember, these tools are meant to make your life easier, not harder.

“EPDs, PTDs, and HPDs present a product’s ecological impact in a way that is

easy to comprehend,” explains Dave Kitts, vice president of environment at flooring manufacturer Mannington. “Lifecycle assessments are very detailed and granular. They have a scientific feel and are hard to understand. These tools standardize environmental information for an average reader.”

Chris Curtland is assistant editor of BUILDINGS.

A Commitment to Action: Taking Recycling to the Next Level in the United States

Posted on January 29, 2015 by abrahamwien18

January 13, 2014

Elisabeth Comere
Director, Environmental and Government Affairs
View the original article here

When asked why recycling is so important, my response is simple: it is integral to business. Recycling is a fundamental requirement to uphold competitiveness and reputation as responsible and innovative companies.

For decades, companies and their respective trade associations have invested in various recycling initiatives aimed at recovering their own used packaging and printed paper products. While initially such efforts reaped measurable recovery benefits, very little progress has been made in the past 10 years. We, too, have seen firsthand the benefits of a carton-specific voluntary approach through our own efforts and that of the Carton Council. However, future carton recovery progress relies on addressing the infrastructure, promotional, and harmonization needs that affect the recovery of all packaging and printed paper materials.

Discussion is ongoing among brand owners, packaging manufacturers and other “producers” regarding how to substantially increase material recovery and recycling in the United States via cross-sector collaboration. While it has not led to much action to date, the forums for discussion have kept the conversation alive and have succeeded in elevating the knowledge and awareness level of all stakeholders through the process. The dialogue exposed the risks of inaction as well as the opportunities inherent in a robust recovery system.

Discussions have also led to extensive research conducted by multiple organizations to develop an understanding of the nuances that impact recovery success. AMERIPEN, for instance, has collected data and developed findings regarding what works best to dramatically improve recovery in cities across the US. AMERIPEN’s study combined with other research efforts have laid the groundwork by defining what needs to be done. It is now clearly understood that effective recovery requires a comprehensive set of best practices – optimized infrastructure, effective promotion and education, incentives, policies aimed at boosting recycling participation, and sustainable program funding. Implementing best practices in all of these areas is unreasonable to ask of local governments and is more than any one material sector can bring about on their own.

Forums like Alcoa’s Action to Accelerate Recycling and AMERIPEN have primed stakeholders for collaboration bringing the right people to the table and raising the right questions to facilitate action.

The New Ask

Industry is now rallying around a new call to action: create an organized coalition(s) of private and public sector representatives to create a scalable but phased systems approach to recycling. Building upon past learnings, this approach will leverage pooled resources and use a combination of tools to strategically address priority opportunities as opposed to a series of discreet pilot programs and projects.

Experimentation in Coalition Building

To support the move from talk to collaborative action, my company is launching projects in Tennessee and North Carolina that will target communities with customized action plans addressing multiple barriers to materials recovery performance. Depending on a community’s existing infrastructure and resources, we have identified the policies, practices and investment focus areas that will yield the greatest impact on recovery. Examples include recycling mandates or ordinances for variable-rate waste collection pricing, a transition to single-stream, roll-cart recovery systems, investment in optimizing processing facilities, working with state government to align policy and grant funding with local needs, and so on. We have estimated a total increase in recovery of over 220,000 tons if best practices and a robust outreach and education campaign are brought to bear on recycling programs across Tennessee.

We see our role in this experiment as the catalyst for collaboration. We are now building informal coalitions in Tennessee and North Carolina with key industry and government stakeholders to bring these system improvements to fruition. This experiment is testing a series of approaches on the ground to see what works at the local level allowing for replication elsewhere on a greater scale.

Aiming Higher: The SERDC Coalition

We now want to move forward with regional campaigns for collaborative voluntary producer initiatives – campaigns that build upon the learnings from state-by-state activities and stress best practices in packaging recovery to overcome funding constraints, infrastructure gaps and barriers to policy adoption.

In support of this idea, we took part in the Southeast Recycling Development Council’s (SERDC) Paper & Packaging Symposium this month in Atlanta. Involving over 100 participants, SERDC issued a straightforward call to action: Work together to recover more recyclables, of better quality, and quickly.

A common discussion thread was what distinguishes the SERDC initiative from past efforts and how that will bring about success. Key differences are that SERDC is an established organization of state government and industry partners and other key stakeholders – the influencers are already at the table. Research to inform priorities for the region has been conducted and the group is ready to move on building the organizational mechanism to transition from research to action.

SERDC recovery initiative partners intend to explore the optimum levels of engagement of public and private resources, expertise and funding. Given growing consumer expectations and the threat of government regulation, the risk of inaction surpasses the rationale for a laissez-faire approach. We all have a stake in the outcome of recycling performance in this country and will achieve more by combining forces than through disparate action. We call on you to commit to participating in SERDC’s coalition.

Elisabeth Comere is the director of environment and government affairs for Tetra Pak in North America, the world leader in packaging and food processing solutions. She joined the company in 2006 as Environment Manager for Europe where she helped define and drive Tetra Pak’s environmental strategy. She joined the North American operations in 2010, focusing on advancing Tetra Pak’s commitment to sustainability in the US and Canada, and she is active in various industry and customer packaging and sustainability initiatives. Elisabeth previously served as a political adviser to a member of the European Parliament in Brussels, Belgium, and headed the environment department of the Food & Drink Industry group in Europe.

Survey: Doctors Key in Promoting Positive Impacts of Healthy Building Design, Construction & Maintenance

Posted on January 14, 2015January 14, 2015 by abrahamwien18

June 27, 2014
Original post here

The critical connection between a healthy building environment and patient health is often missed by the one group of professionals who may matter most – physicians, according to a new SmartMarket report by McGraw Hill Construction sponsored by the American Institute of Architects (AIA), United Technologies Corp. and other partners.

“It’s becoming clear from this initial research that doctors and other health professionals must engage with architects and the design community in a major way if we are to be successful in improving public health through design,” said AIA CEO Robert Ivy, FAIA. “We look forward to furthering that dialogue with physicians and to helping support additional research into this critical public health issue.”

The survey results were announced at the opening session American Institute of Architects Annual Convention.
The report, “The Drive Toward Healthier Buildings: The Market Drivers and Impact of Building Design on Occupant Health, Well-Being and Productivity,” finds that though 18 percent of homeowners say that doctors are their primary source for information on healthy home products and decisions, only 53 percent of pediatricians, 32 percent of family doctors/general practitioners and 40 percent of psychiatrists believe that buildings even impact patient health. Only 15 percent report receiving any information on this connection, but the results also reveal that a key challenge is not just getting information to them but gaining their attention in ways that would alter their perspective, with nearly a quarter (22 percent) reporting that more information would likely not change what they do today. You can access the full report.

The study suggests that getting more information to this group is essential to help create demand for more healthy building design and construction, given the limited understanding that physicians demonstrate of building health impacts. Physician awareness and recommendation of more fundamental healthy building design and construction practices that connect with the health risks of most concern to public health—lack of exercise, chronic stress, poor diet and obesity—could help create the market demand needed to drive investment, but only if physicians expand their engagement with these issues.

Today, the only issue the medical practitioners agree is a link between buildings and health is around mold and mildew, but that is only one of a plethora of factors in building decisions that could impact health.
“Most homeowners rely on family members and friends or colleagues to influence their choices of healthy products and practices, with very few seeking advice from builders, remodelers, contractors and architects who know most about how these decisions affect the occupant. As the construction industry increases its engagement in healthy building, this represents an opportunity for industry professionals to assist clients make decisions in order to positively impact their health,” said Harvey M. Bernstein, F.ASCE, LEED AP, vice president, Industry Insights and Alliances for McGraw Hill Construction.

The report also finds that, contrary to the position held by physicians, the general public is aware of the link between buildings and people’s health.
• 63 percent of homeowners believe products and practices they use at home affect their health, with the majority (50 percent) pointing to impact on allergies, followed by asthma/respiratory illnesses (32 percent) and headaches/migraines (30 percent).
• 90 percent of homeowners believe school buildings affect student health/productivity, and 95 percent believe hospital buildings and operations affect patient/staff health and productivity.
Human resource executives also recognize the link between buildings and health, with its top emphasis on spaces that encourage social interaction. Sixty-six percent of their companies consider spaces for social interaction when making leasing decisions today, and even more (75 percent) expect it will be considered in the future. Yet, the architect community is not as attuned to this need, with creating spaces for social integration being eighth in a list of key factors. This gap suggests the industry needs to be more sensitive to this issue given how the millennial and subsequent generations work, learn and interact and thus, improve their productivity.

The report reflects a landmark research project that is the first to span across five key stakeholders that influence the prevalence of healthy design and construction practices in buildings, including the physicians noted above, construction industry professionals in the residential and non-residential sectors, owner HR executives and homeowners. The breadth of the study is essential in critical gaps between stakeholder responses that are preventing the design and construction industry from fully capitalizing on the specific healthy building investments sought by other stakeholders.
The report reveals the increasing attention industry professionals and owners are placing on health in design and construction plans—as well as some of the needs the industry has to increase these efforts.

According to the study:
• All firms are reporting increases in addressing occupant health in design and construction decisions—59 percent of owners, with architects leading other players in adoption of healthy practices.
• Firms that are doing more green building work are also more attuned to health issues.
• Owners need more data and greater public awareness of the health impacts of products, practices and buildings holistically in order to support additional healthy building investments. Those are reported as the top drivers at 40 percent and 48 percent of owners, respectively.

“Green buildings have real, proven health benefits including improved employee productivity, lower health care costs and reduced absenteeism,” said John Mandyck, chief sustainability officer, UTC Building & Industrial Systems. “This study shows that human resource professionals and building owners see the benefit of investing in a healthier physical work environment — in fact, 66 percent of those who measured occupant well-being saw an improvement after moving to a green building.”

The report cites the need for further investigation into the specific benefits of different design, construction and product decisions, in order to overcome obstacles to investments in these areas that influence health and wellbeing.
The study is comprised of five separate market research surveys, all benchmarking at the 95 percent confidence level—(1) survey of architects, contractors and owners in nonresidential construction; (2) survey of residential builders, architects, remodelers and interior designers; (3) survey of U.S. homeowners; (4) survey of human resource executives at U.S. firms; and (5) survey of medical professionals, including general practitioners, pediatricians and psychologists/psychiatrists. Each survey captures the unique perspective of these stakeholders in terms of their awareness of healthy building impact, use of healthy building products and practices and drivers for them to prioritize health factors in future building decisions. More detailed findings on insights from all these groups are in the report.
“The Drive Toward Healthier Buildings: The Market Drivers and Impact of Building Design on Occupant Health, Well-Being and Productivity SmartMarket” Report was produced by McGraw Hill Construction in partnership with the American Institute of Architects and other premier research partners: United Technologies, CB Richard Ellis and the U.S. Green Building Council. Other support for the project was provided by the project’s two supporting research partners—the American Society of Interior Designers and Delos—and contributing partners Armstrong Ceilings Systems and Armstrong Commercial Flooring, Dewberry, Integral Group, Sloan Valve Company, Urban Land Institute, U.S. Green Building Council—Northern California Chapter, Webcor and the World Green Building Council.