FROM THE PUBLISHER
For now, proponents of sustainability anxiously wait while China, India, Europe, and the United States engage in a bizarre game of chicken to see who will jump first to implement a massive sustainability pro- grams and adopt rigorous green business standards.
Stirring Giants
There’s nothing like international travel to stimulate questions about the changing global marketplace. After returning from a business trip to Europe, I’ve been pondering the dynamics of the world economic stage. In Europe, business leaders are abuzz
with fears of asymmetrical competition resulting from polluting, price dumping, and counterfeiting practices currently employed by countries like China and Vietnam, which essentially obliterate the level playing fi eld upon which “clean’”companies contend. These types of “unfair” business practices
are forcing western executives to search for new approaches that are relevant and applicable in our ever-changing interna- tional economic climate. Gone are the days of unquestioned, unilateral Western domina- tion. Countries like China and India, which comprise over 40% of the world’s population are key authors of modern-day rules of play. As a result of a relentless concentration on
GDP growth and unprecedented economic investment, China has surpassed Japan as the second largest economy in the world. India, hotly pursuing China’s explosive rate of growth, is expected to overtake Japan’s economic size within 24 months. With the volume of fi nancial and human capital com- manded by the two countries, it’s clear that any new world order will be defi ned by their
10 GreenBuilder October 2010
business, social, and environmental practices. Based on simple analyses of the planet’s resource limitations, it’s clear that the only way that humans have a chance at long-term survival is for China and India to fully buy into sustainability and resource effi ciency. But when it comes to these two highly complex countries, it’s diffi cult to predict the fi nancial and ecological outlook for our global future. Can two countries that have harbored
decades of strategic distrust overcome ex- treme confl icts of interest, reconcile boarder disagreements, and develop a cooperative rules-based system that is appropriate for the 21st century? Yet, there are some important environ-
mental factors that make me question the fea- sibility of peaceful relations between the two countries. First, China and India both rely on African oil supplies. As oil resources diminish, we can anticipate a cutthroat contest to access and control Sudanese oil and Burmese gas. Second, China essentially controls India’s
water supply, which fl ows from rivers with Tibetan headwaters. India currently harbors realistic fears that China will dam the rivers and divert their primary water sources. But, in the age-old game of global diplo-
macy, it’s said that all disagreements can be resolved for the right price. $60 billion in annual trade between China and India goes a long way to tame egos in the fi ght for Asian supremacy. This substantial fi gure might just entice manufacturing-based China and services-based India to fi nd common ground. As far as sustainability goes though, the
strategies employed by both countries are confusing. While European and American business leaders fret about Chinese business- es’ polluting practices, the Chinese govern- ment has developed massive, game-changing investments, including $34.6 billion to develop renewable energy plants (wind and geother-
mal) and $15 billion to develop electric cars. These investments, and others, will enhance China’s level of sustainability and amplify its ability to control the international economy. The United States will have diffi culty compet- ing if China chooses to dominate the electric car sector. For now, proponents of sustainability wait
while China, India, Europe, and the U.S. engage in a bizarre game of chicken to see who will jump fi rst to implement a massive sustain- ability programs and adopt rigorous green business standards. According to Todd Stern, lead U.S. negotia-
tor in international climate talks, “climate change poses far too serious a threat to treat as a matter of voluntarism; we need mandatory national laws and regulations.” But if we can’t create rules on a national basis that viably address sustainability, how will we ever create an international treaty that includes compli- ance provisions and incentives that compel countries to meet their commitments? The most productive thing that the United
States can do is take a lead in determining the ‘new normal’ of economic and environmental international policy. We have the opportunity to make real change. It’s time to exert our in- fl uence on the world stage while we still hold a leadership position. It’s time to display valor and bravery. It’s time to make history, rather than just letting it simply pass us by. Please share your thoughts with me about
sustainable change at sara@greenbuilermag. com or join me on Twitter at SaraGBM. GB
Sara Gutterman
sara@greenbuildermag.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52