<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Hallo friends:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>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.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>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".</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>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...)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>It seems to me that a related possible winning
strategy, which could be positioned as not inimical to anyone's
interest, is to <EM>change the way we keep score</EM>: to work toward a
situation where the environmental effects of our actions are not "off balance
sheet" but are in fact <EM>mandated</EM> 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!).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>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 <EM>financial benefits</EM> (in particular) would accrue
- say via tax implications - from <EM>differential, salutary </EM>environmental
actions. What tickles me about this is that it seems as though... but I
ramble... </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>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...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Respectfully submitted,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Winston</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>