Point of crisis... Changing the rules...

[Bernd Weber]

Dear Winston,

fine that you brought this up. It must be brought up again and again
as long as it is not solved.

I had the association, what you mean is closely related to questions
which are and have been discussed under the slogan "The tragedy of
the commons". Sending out an internet crawler with this slogan
strenghened this impression. Perhaps you want to try this also.

Bernhard


-----
weberb at gmx.at, on 29.06.2002 at 17:09:24 (GMT/UT + 02:00)
My anti-virus precautions:
1) attached to this e-mail : No file
2) All attached files are mentioned by name in the line above this
one. Please do not open any other attachment!
3) Please send text documents in RichTextFormat/*.rtf, if possible.
This also facilitates communication between mac- and ms-worlds.
-------------------------------------------------
Bernd Weber
-------------------------------------------------
C.P. 1462, Beira, Sofala, MOZAMBIQUE
fone: +258-3-32 98 59, cellfone:+258-82-43 79 77
----
Gumpendorfer Straße 88b/18, AT-1060 Wien AUSTRIA
fone:  00431 596 86 57, e-mail: weberb at gmx.at
----
Wenn Du meine elektronische Diskussionsgruppe abonnieren möchtest,
1. gehe auf Seite http://groups.yahoo.com/group/berndweber/join
-ODER-
2. sende eine E-Mail an berndweber-subscribe at yahoogroups.de
----
Inscricao no grupo de discussao "Sistemas organizacionais":
Escrever um email para o endereco <sis-org-subscribe at eGroups.com>



On Fri, 28 Jun 2002 09:03:01 -0400, Winston Kinch wrote:
   Hallo friends:

Whether we are at a "point" of crisis, or  approaching one, or are
already sliding down the hill, is moot.  But  as some of you have
pointed out, we do have the choice of how we  respond.

Something that has been rambling around in my  mind recently is the
old saying which goes something like "if you don't like the  game,
change the rules".

My sense is that even well meaning  projects/programs like "The
Natural Step" - which attempt to educate and cajole  corporate
leadership into more "responsible" or "sustainable" or " restorative"
behaviours - will fail as presently constituted because they do not
pay  attention to this axiom. And although I have only read excerpts
so far, it seems  likely that "Natural Capitalism" may also be guilty
of this omission  since it appears to approach the issue of valuation
of natural capital but then  bypass it in favor of programs like
"radical resource productivity improvement"  (I'm currently reading
Korten's "When Corporations rule the World" so maybe I'll  find all
the answers there - but I doubt it...)

It seems to me that a related possible winning  strategy, which could
be positioned as not inimical to anyone's  interest, is to change the
way we keep score: to work toward a  situation where the
environmental effects of our actions are not "off balance  sheet" but
are in fact mandated on the books of corporations and  play a direct
part in determining the bottom line - which in turn  determines
behaviour (put another way, I can imagine a "novum organum" in which
debits and credits reach beyond the proverbial wall and window to
include the  whole outdoors!).

I can further imagine a transitional world in which  both "old" and
"extended" sets of books are required (the old both/and) and  where
significant financial benefits (in particular) would accrue  - say
via tax implications - from differential, salutary environmental
actions. What tickles me about this is that it seems as though... but
I  ramble...

Friends, I know this is not new stuff. But I wonder  if any of you
has pondered it as a way forward or might point me to recent
writings/work/organizations active in the arena...

Respectfully submitted, Winston

*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
Visit:

http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html