May 8, 2012, United Nations- It’s called ABNJ, which stands for Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction, and it makes up 64% of the surface of the world’s oceans. Yet, this part of the planet has no protection from the massive destruction by private interest fishing operations. At the UN today, a Program on Global Sustainable Fisheries Management and Biodiversity in ABNJ was introduced to protect the biodiversity of this area, which some consider to be the last global “commons” on Earth.

Organized by the Global Ocean Forum, the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), about 30 experts from those groups as well as UNEP, the World Bank, World Wildlife Fund, Conservation International, International Sustainable Seafood Foundation, and The Nature Conservancy gathered to share the details of a new program that will devote $44 million dollars to manage the long-term health of this frontier which is depreciating rapidly. Throughout history, it’s been “every man for himself” out there beyond the watchful eyes of citizens, giving way to total anarchy dominated by highly sophisticated $10 billion dollar/year fishing operations equal to 6.3 million tons caught per year.

While land degradation is visible, ocean degradation is invisible and this makes the task of protecting our high seas particularly challenging, as the area is unmonitored. The effect of loss of biodiversity in the open ocean, however, is very much felt in the decline of fisheries in coastal waters.

In the decade following the adoption of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, fishing on the high seas became a major international problem. The Convention gave all states the freedom to fish without regulations on the high seas, but coastal states, to which the Law of the Sea conferred exclusive economic rights including the right to fish within 200 miles off their shores, began to complain that fleets fishing on the high seas were reducing catches in their domestic waters.

The problem centered on fish populations that “straddle” the boundaries of countries’ 200-mile exclusive economic zones (EEZs), such as cod off Canada’s eastern coast and pollock in the Bering Sea, and highly migratory species like tuna and swordfish, which move between EEZs and the high seas.

By the early 1990s, most stocks of commercially valued fish were running low, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). As catches became smaller, coastal states complained that the industrial-scale fishing operations on the high seas were undermining their efforts to conserve and revitalize fish stocks.

There is a history of violence between fishing vessels and coastal states, most notable during the “cod wars” of the 1970s. Several countries, including Britain and Norway, sent naval ships to protect fishing fleets on the high seas. Spanish fishers clashed with British and French drift netters in what came to be known as the “tuna wars.” Before the UN Agreement on Straddling and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks was finalized in October 1995, several coastal states had fired shots at foreign fleets. In the northern Atlantic, Canada seized and confiscated a Spanish boat fishing in international waters just beyond the Canadian 200-mile limit.

At the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development in Rio, known as the first Earth Summit, governments called on the United Nations to find ways to conserve fish stocks and prevent international conflicts over fishing on the high seas.

The coastal states most concerned during the negotiations about the impact of high seas fishing on their domestic harvest included Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chile, Iceland and New Zealand, complaining that only six countries were responsible for 90 per cent of deep sea fishing: Russia, Japan, Spain, Poland, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan province of China. The United States also caught a significant amount of fish, especially tuna, and China soon became a major fishing nation.

Companies began to use refrigerated factory trawlers or “mother ships” that allowed fleets to travel vast distances from the home country and to stay at sea for longer periods without having to return to shore. What quickly became a human rights issue, these fleets undermined the livelihoods of local fishers, depriving poor people in coastal areas of a primary source of sustenance.

On the table for Rio+20 next month, though not without conflict, is an end to government fishing subsidies, considered to be as damaging as fossil fuel subsidies. No agreement has been reached here, nor has a proposed phase-out of all deep-sea bottom-trawl fishing on the high seas by 2015. This is called for on the basis that no deep-sea bottom trawl vessels or fleets have demonstrated that they can fish deep-sea species sustainably and prevent damage to deep-sea ecosystems.

Also at the negotiating table is a call for labeling, and for seafood buyers and retailers to only buy and sell fish from deep-sea fisheries that have clearly demonstrated no harm to deep-sea ecosystems.

Today, as global fish stocks decline, seafood becomes an increasingly expensive item for the rich and a rarity for the poor. With the world population expected to reach 8.2 billion by 2030, the planet will have to feed an additional 1.5 billion people, 90 percent of whom will be living in developing countries many of whom depend on local fisheries.

Find out more about GEF/FAO Program on Global Sustainable Fisheries Management and Biodiversity Conservation in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction here, and other issues on the negotiating table for Rio+20 here.

By chance, Christiana’s brother, José María Figueres, past President of Costa Rica (1994–1998), was passing through the raucous crowd with me and Peter Boyd, President of Carbon War Room, an organization founded by Richard Branson and others to harness the power of entrepreneurs to implement market-driven solutions to climate change. We encountered human rights leader Mary Robinson, the seventh President and first female President of Ireland (1990–1997) on her way to the COP 17 conference center, who congratulated the protesters for their passion and support. After all, it is the residents of Planet Earth whom the negotiators are fighting for behind closed doors.

This was the first of many uplifting encounters here in Durban, where thousands of innovators, entrepreneurs, business leaders and government officials are earnestly exploring new ways to create commerce while showing new respect for our planet, and for one another. As an American from the least popular country here at COP 17, it has been a humbling experience. I’ve had to answer a lot of questions like, “Are you sleeping?” It’s evident we are missing the boat when it comes to capitalizing on the emergence of new business opportunities with the rest of the world. How many Americans really want to sit back collecting unemployment and watch the world go by? Though I came here to look closer at the injustice of climate change, it was hard at first not to notice the clean tech deal flows, funds and jobs going to other countries here, and find even that unfair. Have Americans let fossil fuel lobbying, media brainwashing, right-wing fanaticism, subsidy corruption and campaign financing keep us out of the game? That, however, is another story.

Populations, of all species, afflicted by climate change and other environmental ailments are most certainly at the wrong place at the wrong time in history. Injustice runs rampant on this planet of finite resources: resource hoarding, dynamic physical forces and the destruction of so much by so few. Homo sapiens don’t have a balance with nature and we suffer from that, and so do the other species that call this planet home. Disparities among peoples, genders, generations, geographies and species can’t be fixed at COP 17.

But here, you find a lot of very smart people who want to give it a go. The common denominator we all share is the will to survive. Nobody is arguing that we need clean air and water, healthy food and a safe place to live—and most now agree on access to clean energy. Taking that further, most experts agree to the urgent need for a new, low-carbon economy with green infrastructures, more innovative thinking, technology transparency, project implementation, conservation, economic stimulus and funding mechanisms to correct our course. Like the winners and losers in a carbon economy, there will be winners and losers in the low-carbon economy. Some people will get rich. But, overall, fewer will get sick.

At COP 17, you don’t find people who won’t acknowledge that atmospheric carbon overloading is cooking us and causing all kinds of other problems. Those people must have stayed home. Embarrassingly, many of them are in the U.S.A. We try not to think about them, though the need for better communication in science is a hot topic. Groups toss around ideas like positive vs. negative messaging, how much information is too much or too little. What’s the public tipping point for doom and gloom, and how do you combat ignorance? You could hold up five fingers to some people and they’d only see four no matter what you say. They might even see three. It’s exasperating, but we need to move beyond that and work together with all those people who see what’s in front of them—science. There’s a sense of community here at COP 17 about moving on from the believer/non-believer argument to focus on fair and equitable solutions to a stressed-out planet.

I don’t see much promise at COP 17 for the winners of the industrial revolution to pay the losers for their trouble anytime soon. It is evident the one resource we have not depleted is the kindness of the human heart. Governments, foundations and businesses are springing forward to make sure this new, low-carbon economy creates prosperity among the most vulnerable people on Earth.

About Martha Shaw

Martha Shaw is a contributing writer for CSRwire covering clean technology and other topics. Martha has been named an Adweek Creative All Star and is the winner of international awards in communications. She is a member of the Climate Literacy Network, Fellow of the Explorers Club, board member of NYSES and CEO of Earth Advertising.

This commentary is written by a valued member of the CSRwire contributing writers’ community and expresses this author’s views alone.

Readers: Can the Durban climate talks flip the switch from talk to action? Weigh in on Talkback!

Abigail Borah, a student from Middlebury College interrupted lead U.S. negotiator Todd Stern’s concluding plenary speech on Thursday, pinpointing members of the U.S. Congress for impeding the progress of the summit. She also made a passionate plea to her government leaders to join the rest of the world in a fair and binding treaty.

Claiming that she was speaking on behalf of her country, Borah said that the negotiators themselves “cannot speak on behalf of the United States of America” because “the obstructionist Congress has shackled a just agreement and delayed ambition for far too long.”

Borah was ejected after completing her speech to voracious rounds of applause from the entire plenary of global leaders.

Ready for Change

Her actions, however aggressive, reflect the growing feeling of injustice among educated American youth who feel that their leaders have turned a blind eye to the facts at the expense of their own future on this planet. Afraid that each step of inaction will force them to suffer the worsening climate challenges that previous generations have been unable or unwilling to address, they are resorting to disruption.

Their list of complains isn’t restricted to inaction.

They also hold the U.S. responsible for foul play and claim that a few outspoken and misdirected Congress members, who continue to successfully hijack negotiations, are blocking progress. This has put off urgent pollution reduction targets until the year 2020, jeopardizing billions.

(Lack of) Public Activism

Some of them also believe that the American public is not outspoken enough. Mind you, these are kids seem to have done their homework: Overwhelmingly conclusive research shows that waiting until 2020 to begin aggressive emissions reduction will likely cause irreversible damage and suffering to the world they will inherit, including destruction of air and water, more severe weather patterns, worsening droughts, devastation to American communities, and a dismal outlook for the American economy.

“2020 is too late to wait,” urged Borah.

Earlier in the week, the head of the European Parliament’s delegation to the summit Jo Leinen expressed his frustration by the stalemate, also referred to by another official as a “ping-pong game” between the U.S. and China that is unacceptable and intolerable.

Leinen, who chairs the European Parliament’s environmental committee, noted that China had for the first time indicated that it might be willing to take on binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions – but only after 2020. However, he did not see any such commitment from the U.S. “The one is not yet ready, and the other is not willing,” Leinen said.

On Borrowed Time

Todd Stern, U.S. special envoy for climate change, argues that “the Cancun commitments, and the ones made at Copenhagen (in 2009) cover 80 percent of global emissions and while they are not legally binding, they are politically and morally binding.”

Yet, the U.S. youth at COP17 claim that they are inheriting a big mess.

“An impossible burden is being put upon us,” says MJ Shiao, who is 26 years old and is a member of the youth delegation SustainUS. He thinks the U.S. operates on fear-driven politics rather than science and solutions.

“They are borrowing time at the expense of my generation. If we don’t peak our emissions in the next five years, what are we supposed to do? The main thing is that we just want to have a fighting chance by the time we are in positions of leadership.”

Canadian youth also made their presence felt at COP17 with several getting ejected earlier this week as Canada’s Environment Minister Peter Kent delivered his opening address. Just as Kent began his speech, six stood and turned away from the Minister revealing the message “Turn your back on Canada” prominently displayed on their shirts. These young people have challenged their leaders’ negotiation strategies, the close relationship between Canada’s climate policy and dirty fossil fuels, and the lobbying to lower fuel quality regulations to allow the expansion of the Alberta tar sands.

At COP 17, climate injustice is being addressed from all sides, including gender, race, geography, poverty, and the rights of nature itself.

The world’s youth are recognizing the magnification within their lifetime of all of the above, which is denying them the kind of world that has been enjoyed by those making — or not making — the decisions.

There might be hope. COP president, South African International Relations Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane assured that COP 17 would involve younger delegations. Already, more than 150 of them have been accredited. “The decisions we make today will not affect us, you will inherit that legacy,” she emphasized.

And the nearly 200 countries at COP17 have reached a deadline to broker a deal on how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Connie Hedegaard, European climate change commissioner, says that countries unwilling to make commitments for the years to come are taking on ‘an almost unbearable responsibility’ for consequences that are sure to prove catastrophic.

Readers: Will the U.S. youth’s activism be enough to nudge the status quo?

The 19th annual meeting of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD-19) opened with hopes countries will agree on policy decisions that will significantly improve the safe use of chemicals, management of waste, safety in mining, efficiency of transport and reduction of the world’s consumption of Earth’s materials. Annual CSD meetings seek to promote more sustainable use of Earth’s resources. Sha Zukang, Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, warned of the consequences of unsustainable consumption and production on the world’s ecosystems. Member States are being urged to agree on a plan to promote more efficient and safer use of chemicals and waste.

“We need to change our consumption and production patterns so that our economies proceed on sustainable paths, and so that we are able to address key global challenges like climate change, water and other resource scarcities, and environmental degradation,” said Mr. Sha Zukang.

“Globally, unsustainable consumption and production threatens to exceed the carrying capacity of life support systems,” Mr. Sha told the 53-member body. “This imbalance is obvious – whether measured by greenhouse gas concentrations, by the number of endangered species, by rates of deforestation, or by decreases in fish stocks.”

Mr. Sha expressed his hope the CSD will launch an ambitious framework to support countries’ and other actors’ move towards sustainable consumption and production, adding that such an initiative would send the right message and generate positive momentum towards a successful outcome at next year’s UN Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in June 2012.

He noted a 10-year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and Production (10YFP on SCP) would promote development that is within the carrying capacity of ecosystems and contribute to progress on the three pillars of sustainable development – social, economic and environmental.

“Much more can and must be done across the globe to pursue inclusive and environmentally sound economic growth. We must accelerate our efforts to advance sustainable development and to meet our commitments to future generations,” said Mr. Sha, who also serves as Secretary-General of the conference set to take place in Rio de Janeiro in 2012, known as Rio+20.

Dan Shepard, a United Nations information officer for UN Department for Public Information (UNDPI) commented, “If this commission can agree on a 10-year program, this will guide countries and individuals to help create an ecosystem that will reduce waste. I think that countries know what needs to be done. At CSD-19, they will be discussing how they can do it on a collective basis. I think the decisions that come from this meeting will form the vital building blocks for the Rio+20 conference.”

Joan Kirby, a representative from a non-governmental organization to CSD-19, commented, “The best thing would be agreements between the developed and developing world. The divide persists.”

Close to 1,000 representatives from governments, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other parts of civil society are attending the Commission’s two-week meeting, which is the lead-in to Rio+20.

Rio+20 will mark the 20th anniversary of the adoption of Agenda 21, the blueprint for sustainable development that was agreed to at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio.

About Martha Shaw

Martha Shaw is a contributing writer for CSRwire covering clean technology and other topics. Martha has been named an Adweek Creative All Star and is the winner of international awards in communications. She is a member of the Climate Literacy Network, Fellow of the Explorers Club, board member of NYSES and CEO of Earth Advertising.

New York – Apr. 20 – If Earth had an ad budget, it would hire Earth Advertising, or at least that was my assumption when I invented the agency in 1999, originally eFlicks Media. “Earth needs a good ad agency,” Walter Cronkite had suggested to me way back.

Here on the eve of Earth Day, there is tremendous pressure to share what it’s been like over the past 13 years since Earth Advertising hatched in Soundtrack Studios. It’s been up and down. The fisheries went down, the trash went up. Water down. Temperature up. Species down. Chemicals up.

But, Earth Day is a day of celebration, not mourning. Although not the kind of celebrating we’re used to. Celebrating without plastic balloons, stirrers, straws, cups, bottles, bags, plates, forks, spoons and other harmful substances. We can celebrate by refusing single use disposable plastic on Earth Day. I know I’ve given up all these addictions, including on special occasions. Believe me, I fall off the wagon. But I get right back on. You can even take a pledge. Go to http://plasticpollutioncoalition.org/support/pledge/

I digress. If Earth did have a budget for an ad campaign clearly nobody would ever agree on which agency to hire anyway. And should it be positive or negative? With the help of Stuart Ross, an advisor to Earth Advertising, we brainstorm the idea via social media. His ideas arrive by simple text, “What if there was an RFP?” I text him back that I love it. “Help Wanted. Mid-sized terrestrial planet seeking immediate advertising support.”

Objective? Long-term sustainable relationship with inhabitants.

Most Valuable Available Asset? Unlimited intellectual capital.

Single Most Limiting Factor? Natural resources.

Single Biggest Challenge? Old habits.

Metrics for Success? Cleaner atmosphere. Fresher water. Healthier people. Abundant fisheries. Fertile land. Swimmable oceans. Peaceful co-existence.

Single Most Important Message? Help Wanted.

What Are You Asking Your Audience to Do? Think.

As the world turns its attention to Rio+20, the 20-year anniversary of the first global Earth Summit, an RFP from Earth is a novel idea. World leaders need our community’s help right now. They need a collective RFP. On May 1st, green business leaders will gather in NYC for a side event to share lessons learned by the some of the world’s most visionary eco-preneurs. We’ll showcase some of of your imaginative RFPs from Earth.

Submit your creative ideas today for a 2-page RFP from Earth to rfp@earthadvertising.com. Now let’s go celebrate Earth Day.

Follow us on twitter @earthadv
As first seen on CSRwire 4/20/2012
Our Blog:
http://www.earthadvertising.com/blog

News alert! Think of a campaign you’ve seen that really reorganized your thinking in terms of your relationship with nature. The nominations for the 2012 EthicMark®Award for Advertising “that Uplifts the Human Spirit and Society” are due by May 7. Visit http://business.nd.edu/marketing/EthicMark_award/

Other important news:
Don’t miss “To the Arctic” by our bright and talented friends at Macgillivray Freeman Films http://www.macgillivrayfreemanfilms.com/site/

Submit your entries to “The Blue Ocean Film Festival” by April 30, 2012. http://www.blueoceanfilmfestival.org/filmcompetition.html and mark your calendars September 24-30 in Monterey.

Look for my stories during the lead up to Rio +20 at http://www.CSRwire.com

Mark your calendar for the World Energy Forum, Dubai, October 22-24, including an earthshaking concert on its eve. This may become the most historical event in energy history, as a guest of the green Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum. He and the President of the World Energy Forum, Dr. Harold Oh (see invitation http://www.wef21.org/?q=node/245 ) will host world leaders, heads of states, energy ministers, business leaders, mayors, policy makers, scientists, economists, ngo directors, and innovators, in a monumental World Energy Forum to honor the UN’s 2012 year for “Sustainable Energy for All.” Inquire about interesting opportunities for you at what the industry is calling the “Davos of energy” at info@earthadvertising.com.

NEW YORK, Sep. 22 /CSRwire/- Courage may hold the most hope for mankind as we face a future wrought with complex problems of all kinds that can appear insurmountable. This is the underlying theme of the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) 2011, concluding in New York City today. Over 1200 global leaders and concerned citizens from government, business, communities, and not-for-profits, gathered at CGI 2011 this week to tackle the most pressing issues of our time, focusing on commitments to support job creation, fuel a green economy, promote sustainable consumption and, last but not least, bring social justice to women and girls.

What role does courage play in saving the world? CGI 2011 “Conversations on Courage” stresses how we cannot solve the problems of the world using the same kind of thinking that has caused them. It takes courage to think differently, stand up, speak out, set aside grudges, sacrifice profits, overturn customs and traditions, retool systems, and change habits that are deeply entrenched in culture. Inherent in courageous acts is the risk of losing what is near and dear to us personally, for the better good. Yet, courage is the one inexhaustible resource readily available to everyone.

Inspired by a who’s who of world leaders including President Barack Obama who appeared yesterday, Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) 2011 “Conversations on Courage” urges its member attendees to support social heroes and brave deeds in their industries and in their communities. Each member makes a Commitment to Action to address a major local or global challenge with the help of CGI.

Today, on the 149th anniversary of Lincoln’s announcement of the Emancipation Proclamation, MTV’s college network has launched ‘mtvU’s Against Our Will’, a project to empower America’s college students to stop modern day slavery in the U.S. In partnership with Polaris Project, GEMS, and Free the Slaves, the campaign will raise awareness about sex and labor slavery, encourage activism, reduce demand for products and services linked to slavery, and promote volunteerism in support of trafficking survivors and at-risk youth.

Another new global partnership has been announced by Archbishop Desmond Tutu to end tens of millions of forced child marriages that deny young girls of education and freedoms. The Elders, the Ford Foundation, the Nike Foundation, and the NoVo Foundation have committed to jointly establish ‘Girls Not Brides: The Global Partnership to End Child Marriage’ and see it grow to a membership of at least 150 organizations running programs in at least 20 countries by December 2012.

PepsiCo, the World Food Programme (WFP), and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) have committed to develop an innovative market-based solution to economic, food, and nutritional insecurity in Ethiopia.

United Nations Foundation, in collaboration with public and private partners, has committed to launch a new US-based campaign to expand access to vaccines for children in the developing world.

Grassroot Soccer (GRS) has committed to scaling Skillz Street, a program that will positively impact 12,500 girls in southern Africa to address gender-specific challenges and HIV prevention through non-competitive soccer.

Samasource, a social enterprise known for its innovative solutions to bring jobs to 1500 women, youth, and refugees across the globe, has committed to extend its reach to America.

eBay Foundation has committed to launch The Opportunity Project, a global initiative designed to support and help scale market-based approaches to providing economic opportunity in vulnerable communities.

Walmart has committed to develop a marketplace on the company’s e-commerce site to link women-owned businesses around the world to consumers.

Darden has committed to helping rebuild troubled fisheries through the creation of an alliance of companies, NGO’s and other groups to support targeted fishery improvement projects (FIPs).

Waste action groups and corporations have instituted programs to reclaim waste, addressing the fact that every second, over 50 tons of trash is deposited in landfill, oceans, and streambeds worldwide. The Ocean Recovery Alliance announced progress on its 2010 CGI commitments to report, rate and map floating trash, and a call for corporate reporting of plastic use and management policies.

International Justice Mission (IJM), in collaboration with public and private partners, has committed to increase the quantity and quality of Public Justice System-initiated anti-trafficking operations in a metropolitan sex trafficking hub in Southeast Asia.

Apne Aap Women Worldwide and the Rose Collar Foundation has committed to provide intensive and holistic support to ten women in prostitution, transforming their lives and the lives of women in their communities by providing access to sustainable livelihoods and breaking the cycle of exploitation.

A complete list of these acts of courage by topic and region will continue to be posted here.

The topic of courage persisted throughout the week, and what courage means in modern day society when we are defending our whole species as much as our own families.

There may be no better example of the courage to act on one’s convictions than Aung San Suu Kyi, General Secretary of the National League for Democracy, who was imprisoned or under house arrest for a combined 15 years since she returned to Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, in 1988. At CGI on Wednesday, television host, Charlie Rose, moderated a conversation between Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Suu Kyi. “All journeys are made step by step,” said Suu Kyi via satellite. “To be quite honest, I didn’t think when I first started out in the movement for democracy, I’d have to devote my whole life to it.” Desmond Tutu concluded the interview by calling for a ‘mutual admiration’ society.

Since CGI was founded in 2005, members have made nearly 2000 commitments that have improved the lives of nearly 300 million people in more than 180 countries.

With hundreds of billions in media spent each year in hopes that we’ll consume more, how much media would it take for us to consume less?

Much of the discussion last week at the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD-19) focused on sustainable consumption and production, the reduction of waste, and the barrier that hazardous chemicals in products pose to recycling and disposing of refuse.

The household hazardous waste that we dispose of daily into our environment, including drain cleaners, antifreeze, poisons, pesticides, rodentcides, and the thousands of products we use to maintain our “beauty,” our toys, our lawns, and our homes are killing us. Yet, many of these products will be in greater demand as developing countries create wealth.

Some advertisers envision a future where everyone in the world can have shinier hair, whiter teeth, Febreeze, electric toothbrushes, and houses that are cleaner than clean. Economic growth in developing countries represents an opportunity to move marketing dollars toward more consumers.

One thing that everyone seemed to agree upon last week at CSD-19 was that consumption and waste is out of control, and destroying our own species as well as all the other ones. It was mentioned in one session that what we need most is a mass media campaign to change our attitude toward consumption. But, in the U.S.A. alone, we are bombarded by about $400 billion dollars in advertising a year, give or take a few hundred billion dollars. This investment is cleverly programmed, and psychologically crafted, to invade every nick and cranny of our lives and our identity, in the hopes that we will consume more.

How much would a counter media campaign cost? Who would pay for a campaign encouraging us to consume less? Can we ever get back to the good old days when we use fly swatters instead of sprays, and scrub dirt by hand rather than dissolve it with chemicals? Unlikely.

I am reminded of one of the best campaigns I can remember. It was from Canada. Buy Nothing Day.

Another topic last week was not about the abundance of hazardous waste and chemicals in our environment, but about the abundance of hazardous chemicals in our bodies. See video Body Burden. It is part of Safe Planet, a smart and innovative UN-initiated project in which celebrities, scientists, educators, and professionals from all walks of life, get their blood tested for toxic content. It’s actually easier to map out the chemical concentrations around the world through blood sampling than through soil, water and air testing. Another obstacle, some people pointed out, is that the chemical companies have paid representatives at the UN helping to create policy.

Some administrators are not keen to create a chemical scare, and this is understandable for many reasons. One reason sited was that women might choose not to breast feed their babies if they knew what was in their milk. There is “no research” to prove what products can lead to disease. And there is nobody to fund the research either. Coincidence?

So, what will a green economy look like? Some envision a world where more women would be in charge of the resources, consumers would begin to pay the true price of the products we discard, and companies would have to present a full life cycle plan for every item at their expense. More money would be spent on education than on advertising, wars, and useless stuff we don’t need.

Groups talked about how fast our electronics become obsolete. So do our weapons, our cars, our planes and the color of our nail polish. In terms of health, even that has become dependent on artificial sustenance with a huge waste footprint. Through modern medicine, we can live long enough now to consume exponentially more than our ancestors.

Making sense of it all is what kept the CSD-19 delegates up day and night. They are committed to creating a framework that will guide the world toward a green economy, the Land of Oz. But, who will fund a campaign that encourages us to “buy green, buy less or buy local” so we can build a sustainable green supply chain? Many of the delegates say they are counting on mankind to have a consciousness shift.

We’re the first to commend companies in any industry that adopt environmentally responsible practices. That’s why we celebrated when the virgin-tree paper mill companies began to use their wood scrap as biomass to supply some of their highly intensive energy needs. However, a creative, well-funded campaign is misleading the public to believe that this puts them at parity in terms of carbon footprint and environmental responsibility, with recycled paper. This is simply not true. The campaign goes to further to claim that virgin-tree paper is the preferred “green” choice over recycled paper.

This kind of propaganda only serves to undermine demand for authentic post-consumer recycled paper, confuse consumers, and impede the progress being made to capture and reuse paper pulp from the waste stream. “Greenwashing” threatens to take a toll on our planet, and all the living things who call our Earth home. What we need is a robust paper reclamation movement, not an expansion of tree farms that are replacing natural environments and destroying ecosystems at an alarming rate.

It is true that trees can be a renewable resource where reforestation is practiced, and the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) stamp helps to ensure that trees harvested for paper are done so according to guidelines. But, one of the major worries about tree farming is the reduction of biodiversity, critical to a healthy ecosystem. About 16% of the world’s paper pulp comes from trees raised specifically for pulp. Another 9% or so comes from old growth, first generation, forests. Most of the rest of the pulp comes from multi-generation forests. Today, only X% of paper pulp comes from reclaimed paper.

It’s time we began to pay the true cost of virgin-tree derived paper. The millions of dollars being spent to greenwash a well-meaning public would be better spent on retooling our paper mills to accept pulp from the “urban forest.” We need to divert paper from the waste stream. The biodiversity of our forests is being sacrificed to paper-filled landfills where chemicals from paper seep into our soil, and methane is released into our atmosphere. Perhaps a handfill of paper executives and stockholder are getting rich off the campaign, but it’s at our expense. The cost is born by our eco-system, by our water and our air and our soil, and by future generations.

Learn the truth about paper at Environmental Paper: http://environmentalpaper.org/

Over the course of the prep meetings earlier this year, and during CSD-19 this week, it became more clear to me why women need to have more control over the Earth’s resources and the new technologies that can help to provide clean water, clean energy, clean air, and clean agriculture. With more power and training in the hands of women, particularly in developing countries, there will be more jobs for women, healthier communities, more education for girls, and population stabilization. With so much data that proves that women have a better track record for paying back micro-loans (even at higher rates), for protecting resources, and for investing money in their families and communities, it makes sense that empowering women is critical to the Rio+20 mission.

On May 4th, the Democracy and Gender Equality Roundtable was held by UN Women, simultaneous to CSD-19. I was struck by the statistics that show how unrepresented women are in managerial roles in all walks of life, from board rooms to government positions. Worse than I thought actually. Without a seat at the table, women can have no voice. Some of the developing countries where families rule, presented another glitch. In these countries, when women are put in positions of power, it is often as a surrogate of their husbands and fathers. Questions were asked. Is this better or worse?

I was reminded of the t-shirt worn by my friend, Jody Weiss, CEO of Peacemaker “Cause-metics” that reads, “I want my million bucks.” The slogan refers to a factoid she offered that over the course of one’s lifetime, women in the same job make about $1 million dollars less than a comparable man. And Trish Karter, of Dancing Deer Bakery, standing on her head to show how upside down the proportion of women to men on boards is, and why turning this around can make a big difference in the world. One look at the speaker list at energy and oil conferences tells us where the power lies. As an affirmative action baby myself, I know I wouldn’t have gotten my first job as a research diver for the State of California if there wasn’t a quota to fill. But, as an ice diver, I was just as qualified as the male applicants. They just had never considered a woman before. I wondered about where I’d be? In the back office typing memos for my boss?

On Thursday, May 5, I was invited by Osprey Orielle Lake to a Forum hosted by her Women’s Earth and Climate Caucus, a gem of a side event beyond the walls of the United Nations, out there past the row of flags where women are collaborating to gain traction around climate change and other environmental issues. Which, incidentally, adversely affect women and children more than men. The Forum focused on global topics around water and food security, with presenters from NGOs and businesses, including my friend Ann Goodman, Executive Director of Women’s Network for a Sustainable Future (WNSF), Joji Carino of Tebtebba Indigenous Peoples’ International Centre, Donna Goodman, Director of Earth Child Institute, Anita Wenden of International Peace Research Association, and Bridget Burns, Program Director of WEDO – Women’s Environment and Development Organization. This group of impressive women shared stories and strategies for adapting to and mitigating climate change.

From there, I was cordially invited to a WEDO reception on Lexington Avenue, and some of us walked there together on what I would call an empowerment high. For me, WEDO was like discovering a treasure trove of international mentors and luminaries. Among other things, these highly educated and talented women have been working for twenty years to ensure that the environmental activities at the UN, benefit by a woman’s touch, or stronghold. Throughout the 1990’s WEDO played a key leadership role to ensure that gender was included in the outcomes of major UN conferences. In 2006, it was recognized with the Champions of the Earth award by UNEP and in 2010, WEDO received the Advocacy Award from the National Council for Research on Women. Their 20th anniversary conference will coincide with Rio+20.

As the event wound down, Elizabeth “Liz” Thompson arrived, the Co-Coordinator of Rio+20. I can say I slept a little easier that night, knowing the Earth was in better hands than I thought.

Because the CSD-19 is concentrating on a global green economy, sustainable consumption and production, and related issues, there is more focus on business than ever before.

I was able to catch up with Felix Dodds, Executive Director of the Stakeholder Forum. It was a good opportunity to get to the bottom of one topic that has been on my mind lately. That is, how the pioneers, leaders, local enterprises and entrepreneurs of triple bottom line businesses could be included in the process, as the Member States struggle to facilitate a new global green economy. I asked Felix how how green business leaders might help lead the world closer to a global green economy, the goal of Rio+20 in June 2012.

“I think we need to make it more attractive for companies to become involved as we look at the issues through the different lenses of energy, water, agriculture and food security, and cities,” said Felix Dodds. “There are lots of good positive examples where companies are bringing new ideas to the challenges we face.”

“It’s very difficult to represent global businesses in their many different forms. Note that many global organizations that do exist tend to represent multinational corporations. Entrepreneurs and small and medium sized businesses are less represented without an obvious place to have a voice. But, the approach of the UN is not to exclude the others.”

As background, The Working Group at the CSD-19 which represents business, is called Business and Industry. It is comprised presently of three organizations: International Chamber of Commerce International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), International Counceil of Chemical Associations (ICCA) and the United State Council for International Business.

For Rio+20, the UN has cast a wider net. Originally under the direction of Chad Holliday, Chairman of the Board of Bank of America, a group called BASD 2012 was created as a coordinating partner for business, a temporary coalition of business organizations to ensure that the voice of business is heard in Rio. BASD 2012 is a joint initiative of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBSD) and the United Nations Global Compact (UNGC).

So, how can other organizations, like the business supporters and partners of the American Sustainable Business Council, for instance have a voice in the negotiations?

The importance of capturing the triple bottom line vision and perspectives, experiences, ideas, innovations, and policy recommendations of pioneering green business leaders would be an essential contribution to the Earth Summit 2012. The Summit serves as an important opportunity and rallying point for the world community to accelerate and scale-up the transition to a low-carbon, more resource efficient and ecosystem-conserving global green economy. This Guardian article captures both the potential opportunity and possible pitfalls that the Summit represents.

At this juncture, the usual global multinationals, through the various industry associations mentioned, are poised to provide the dominant business perspective and input to the Summit on their vision and recommendations for a transition to the global green economy. What is sorely missing are the lessons and the perspectives of pioneering green business leaders and entrepreneurs who have shown early vision, leadership and commitment to transforming the sustainability of industrial processes:

These companies need to voice and demonstrate that their sustainable ‘green’ business models can drive both the bottom line through consumer demand and the ‘top’ line
through innovation, new markets and new business opportunities.

Felix Dodds suggested that new groups should be welcome to join the dialogue, and noted that The Stakeholder Forum was founded to help stakeholders stay informed and become involved in processes such as Rio+20 do (www.earthsummit2012.org ).

As the Commission on Sustainable Development works laboriously for two weeks on a framework and set of principles for a green economy, they are blazing new trails through unknown territory, and are bound to face some resistance from some well-funded entities that might be resistant, because of legitimate restraints in our present system, to letting go of business as usual. It’s going to take all hands on deck, and perhaps a major consciousness shift among both consumers and business. An eco-system in which 20% of the people consume 80% of the resources will collapse quickly. This may be the biggest challenge man has faced in evolution.

In wrapping up our conversation, I asked Felix Dodds, who just published his new book Biodiversity-and Ecosystem Insecurity: A Planet in Peril, what a green economy would look like. “I think that no one understands the green economy yet,” said Mr. Dodds. “There are many components and we must put our heads together.” So, there we have it. A call to action, a call to “create a vision” of what a fair and just economy could look like, and what it will take to build it.