“Stay local, grow local, buy local.” From t-shirts to bumper stickers, green messaging everywhere says that “local” is the way to go. Advocates of sustainability in all areas have touted “localization”–the use of local sources of energy and other resources–as a way to increase efficiency and reduce waste. “Locavores” advocate for food to be grown as close as possible to where it is consumed to reduce green house gas emissions. “Bioregionalists” seek to create ecological, political, and cultural regions where sustainable processes are kept within natural local boundaries. Green building initiatives encourage the use of locally grown forest wood in an effort to boost their sustainability objective. Even state governments are pushing localization through initiatives which effectively require local consumption of resources. New sustainability regulations aimed at protecting state resources, however, may violate the dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
The De-Localization Sustainability Initiative: Renewable Energy by Lana Chow
Posted by: rohlf@lclark.edu | April 6, 2011 Comments Off on The De-Localization Sustainability Initiative: Renewable Energy by Lana Chow |Bargain Sustainability: The Oregon State Legislature’s 2011 Sustainability Agenda by Chris Rifer
Posted by: rohlf@lclark.edu | April 6, 2011 Comments Off on Bargain Sustainability: The Oregon State Legislature’s 2011 Sustainability Agenda by Chris Rifer |Over the course of the past several legislative sessions, perhaps no legislature has been as aggressive in pursuing sustainability measures as the Oregon State Legislature. Among many others, just in the past half decade, Oregon has passed measures to allocate one-and-a-half percent of all public building costs to solar power development,[1] establish a statewide system for electronics recycling,[2] and allocate additional funds to the Department of Environmental Quality to reduce the flow of toxic chemicals in Oregon rivers and set up a monitoring program for the Willamette River.[3] Any review of the Legislature’s record over the past several years reveals one conclusion: when it comes to environmental issues, the Oregon Legislature has frequently been willing to put its money where its sustainable mouth is.
Catalyst for Change by Lana Chow
Posted by: rohlf@lclark.edu | April 6, 2011 Comments Off on Catalyst for Change by Lana Chow |It is no longer a dorky grandma’s practice to use reusable grocery bags. Shoppers of all ages and varied backgrounds are ditching the plastic and embracing the reusable bag trend. What causes a sustainability initiative to reach its tipping point–the point at which average people take notice and begin to act? The tipping point occurs when three strategies converge: the bottom-up, top-down, and legal approaches. The bottom-up approach is a grassroots method where citizens campaign to influence corporations’ actions or change laws. The top-down approach is where companies unilaterally decide to implement sustainability practices, in turn affecting large portions of society in their far-reaching markets. Finally, the legal approach may be reactionary or actionary, and implements laws to induce sustainable practices. Real change may require all three approaches. Depending on the circumstances and nature of the issue, one of the three will be in the best position to act as a catalyst. Once the most suitable approach establishes the necessary foundation, advocates may integrate the other two approaches with the first to achieve the tipping point.
Time for a Change: (Dis) Incentives for (Non) Renewable Energy in Idaho by Ken Webster
Posted by: rohlf@lclark.edu | April 6, 2011 Comments Off on Time for a Change: (Dis) Incentives for (Non) Renewable Energy in Idaho by Ken Webster |“We the inhabitants of earth, in order to continue to exist, must establish an energy portfolio that does not depend on fossil fuels as a primary source.” So might read our new global constitution, after we declare our independence from GHG emitting, carbon intense fuel sources. But, like the U.S. Constitution, our “green constitution” requires laws to effectuate its purpose. Those laws can take many different forms. They can be command and control regimes like the Clean Water Act. They can be strict prohibition statutes like the Endangered Species Act. The National Environmental Protection Act requires only that a certain process be followed. Our new green laws can create incentives or disincentives for certain business practices, or even how we live. Some states, like Oregon and Idaho, have attempted to promote green energy through tax credits.[1]
The Beef on Sustainability in the Cattle Industry by Marie Burcham
Posted by: rohlf@lclark.edu | March 30, 2011 Comments Off on The Beef on Sustainability in the Cattle Industry by Marie Burcham |Agriculture is one of the more important businesses in the United States – it’s the basis for not only food, but also fibers for cloth, fuel and valuable raw materials that go into products exported around the world. In the article Ecosystems, Sustainability, and Animal Agriculture, the authors define sustainable agriculture as “ecologically sound agriculture [that can be] narrowly defined as eternal agriculture, that is, agriculture that can be practiced continually for eternity.”[1] Though coal and oil are hot topics when it comes to unsustainable natural resources, the agricultural industry also has serious sustainability problems. The beef industry in particular is ecologically unsustainable because of its harm to the local and global environment. It’s also economically unsustainable because it relies on government farm subsidies of that keep the price of beef unnaturally low in the name of “cheap protein.”
FIJI Water Misrepresents its Sustainable Image by Mike Deskins
Posted by: rohlf@lclark.edu | March 30, 2011 Comments Off on FIJI Water Misrepresents its Sustainable Image by Mike Deskins |To many, a trip to the grocery store exemplifies the definition of an overwhelming experience. With entire aisles devoted to potato chips, frozen dinners, and beverages, the unfamiliar shopper faces many difficult decisions. While everyone would surely enjoy sampling bottled water from every natural spring across the planet, for various reasons, impracticalities surround this feat. In order to combat this dizzying adventure, consumers instead frequently select a favorite. But what factors influence this choice? For some, the bottle’s ergonomics may dictate the decision. After all, the bottle’s comfort in one’s hand is vital. Others may adopt a dollar-maximization approach and purchase the least expensive option. For one Southern California woman, it was a company’s dedication to reducing carbon emissions that influenced her decision.
Measuring Public Benefit Through Third Party Certifiers by Mike Deskins
Posted by: rohlf@lclark.edu | March 30, 2011 Comments Off on Measuring Public Benefit Through Third Party Certifiers by Mike Deskins |Perpetual argument surrounds the discussion for businesses to play an increased role in social and environmental agendas. While the bulk of commentators once suggested a shareholder profit-maximization approach, recent statutory enactments across the country suggest the emergence of a more utilitarian perspective, where businesses have a moral worth. These developments signify the notion that businesses can generate public benefit through responsible conduct, and that this concept is not mere idealistic discourse.
Realizing the Competitive Advantage of Environmental Brewing by Adam Adkin
Posted by: rohlf@lclark.edu | March 30, 2011 Comments Off on Realizing the Competitive Advantage of Environmental Brewing by Adam Adkin |The market for foods and beverages labeled “organic,” “sustainable,” and “environmentally friendly” has experienced dramatic growth over the past two decades. By bringing their dollars to this market, consumers have demonstrated that they are willing to pay a premium for goods that provide them with more than a full stomach.[i] This trend is not limited to the market for produce, but is also apparent in the craft beer market.
Power of the Consumers in the context of Genetic Sustainability by Tony Shiao
Posted by: rohlf@lclark.edu | March 30, 2011 Comments Off on Power of the Consumers in the context of Genetic Sustainability by Tony Shiao |Humans have been modifying crop plant genetics since the conception of irrigation and farming. Our ancestors have always artificially selected crops with faster production and higher yield. Recent advances in biotechnology allow us to splice genetic material directly into plant embryos and create artificial crop plants with immense complexity at an unprecedented rate. As wonderful as genetic engineering may be, the technique does come at a cost. Because genetically engineered plants do not go through the process of natural selection, their impacts on the natural ecosystem are highly unpredictable.[i] For example, a new strand of alfalfa that is toxic to insects may severely disrupt the natural ecosystem of a locality by eliminating a key species of insect; a new strand of rice that is resistant to weeds may be toxic to any other plants around it. These plants may provide us with higher productivity, but they do so at the cost of our environment.
Are transferable development credits the future of sustainable land use planning in rural Oregon? by Joshua Dailey
Posted by: rohlf@lclark.edu | March 30, 2011 Comments Off on Are transferable development credits the future of sustainable land use planning in rural Oregon? by Joshua Dailey |Development of rural land in Oregon provokes ongoing debate. Conservationists urge preservation for farm and forest use. While private property advocates and land owners continue to promote protection of the right to develop rural land to realize its economic potential. Conflicting interest groups have argued over the best way to compensate rural land owners for foregoing development, but acceptable compromises have proven elusive.[1] The sale of transferable development rights may be an acceptable compromise for both private property advocates and conservationists alike, and is in the initial stages of implementation in Oregon.[2] The ability to transfer development rights as an interest severable from real estate could provide an outlet for property owners to realize the value of their land while protecting open space and natural resources.[3] The exchange of Transfer Development Rights (TDRs) is a market based approach. The exchange allows the owners of land zoned for exclusive agricultural and forest use to sell their development rights to land owners in areas where development is conditionally permitted.[4]
