When major corporations issue press releases about their “Sustainability” programs and then talk about how much energy they saved using different light bulbs or reducing the amount of plastic they use in their bottles, I am duly impressed by their thriftiness, however, that is NOT sustainability. That is waste reduction.
Sustainability, in most every legitimate definition, is founded on the notion that you do not destroy or deplete a resource. In simplistic terms, do not kill the golden goose. It is not about saving money and cutting waste – both of which are laudable and good but not, I repeat, not “sustainability”.
I challenge you big corporation people to get serious. Create “sustainability” programs that represent the meaning of the word, not just focusing on light bulbs and carbon footprint. We need to do those other things too, but those are waste reduction. (Admittedly, a “Waste Reduction” program does not sound as sexy, as a “Sustainability Program”.) I also challenge you to sit down with the rest of world and come up with a clear definition of what sustainable sourcing is – I’m sorry, I just can’t buy it if each of you has your own, unique, definition.
Life is confusing enough without making up your own meaning of “sustainable”. It is well defined in the Oxford English Dictionary.
The planet is in serious trouble. I have 2 children and I’d like them to have a livable world. Hell, I’d like to have a livable world. I recently figured out that I have a good chance of living another 40 years – I don’t want the planet to look like the movie Blade Runner. Get real. Grab your gonads and make some hard decisions and make the world a better place. Design REAL sustainability programs and make real differences. Just think about what you want the world to look like in 2040 – because you may still be here.