Last month, 50,000 delegates gathered in Rio failed but to achieve anything very significant. This week, a much smaller scale event is taking place in Oxford, once again focussing on overcoming global challenges. ReSource 2012 (with the rather curiously-named internet domain www.reversethefuture.org) has brought together 250 ‘great thinkers and leaders’ to debate the thorny issues of how available resources can be used to provide a good quality of life for the 9 billion or so inhabitants of planet Earth expected by the middle of the century.
Sustainable development is a much over-used and under-explained term, but it can serve as a shorthand for the theme of this event. Too often (as for Rio+20 and other UN-organised events) conferences are dominated by NGOs and policymakers, seeking to set the agenda for the world’s citizens and businesses. The Oxford conference instead includes a number of business leaders as well as economists, other academics, politicians and a smattering of public figures (Bill Clinton and James Cameron are among those talking). The event is hosted by the University, the Smith School of Enterprise and Environment and the Rothschild Foundation. Sir David King, former government chief scientist, is the co-director of the event and director of the Smith School.
Senior business people speaking at the event include the chairman of Nestlé, Peter Brabeck, the chairman and CEO of Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc, John Brock and Paul Conway, vice chairman of Cargill. They and others from the worlds of manufacturing and commerce are responsible for delivering profits to their shareholders while promoting their position as good corporate citizens. Arguably, this is something which any well-run business should be doing (after all, who wants to upset potential customers?) but the current Corporate Social Responsibility trend has added a further dimension to this.
In any case, it would appear that these businessmen are fully signed up to the CSR and sustainability agendas, which would certainly be a prerequisite for an invitation to this high-level event. Indeed, some in the business community seem to be taking the lead in promoting sustainable development rather than reacting to outside pressure.
The UK CBI (Confederation of British Industry), for example, has a team of seven working on energy and climate change, which lie at the heart of the entire sustainability enterprise, and appear to be enthusiastic supporters of government action, rather than reluctant followers, as is usually the case when policy adds costs and complexities for business. Their efforts are in turn led by an 18-strong Energy and Climate Change Board. According to the website, “As well as showing ambition and leadership on these issues within the business community, its members aim to work with the government to set the right conditions to attract investment in low-carbon solutions and drive consumer demand for sustainable products.”
In fact, the global elite – including many of the world’s richest people – are generally signed up to the cause of sustainable development. Bill Gates, to his credit, has taken what might be regarded as a more conventional approach to philanthropy, by focussing resources to solve specific pressing problems. Each project is thoroughly assessed by experts as it would be in the private sector, and clear, ambitious goals are set. The nutritional status and health of many people in the developing world are likely to be significantly improved in years to come because of this programme.
However, other philanthropists have taken the route of founding institutes attached to prestigious universities, to engage in research rather than undertake practical projects. The Smith School in Oxford was itself created with a benefaction from the Martin Smith Foundation, he being an Oxford physics graduate turned investment banker. “The School has the aim of ‘normalizing’ green consciousness: It will promote environmental study as part of mainstream degree programmes, teaching students of core disciplines such as business, economics, politics, law, geography, as well as environmental science, that environmental problems are relevant to all disciplines.”
James Martin, a highly successful entrepreneur in the field of automated software development, endowed the James Martin 21st Century school in Oxford with $100 million. Five years later, it doubled in size, with an additional $50 million from Dr Martin and matching funds from elsewhere, becoming the Oxford Martin School. This week, the school launched Feeding the world without costing the earth. Last month also saw the publication of Action on population and consumption, produced by a group chaired by the Martin school’s Prof Charles Godfray (also a speaker at the present conference).
One of the highest profile benefactors in this sector has been Jeremy Grantham, founder of the international investment partnership GMO. The Grantham Foundation for the Protection of the Environment set up the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the LSE, led by Lord Stern. The forthright line it takes on the perils of climate change seem to be in line with those of its founder.
According to reports from the conference from the Guardian’s sustainable business blog, Grantham appears to be more of a pessimist than most. In his view, “the carrying capacity of the planet is likely to be less than 5 billion”, “climate instability...will cause a ruinous drop in food production” and “almost all climate scientists recognise the problem [of climate change] is worse than they are saying”.
On the other hand, it is interesting (and perhaps reassuring) to learn that this sort of view is by no means universal in the business community. Unilever’s CFO, Jean-Marc Huet, also talking at the conference said that investors were not interested in sustainability: “Even though Unilever is a leader in building social, ethical and environmental measures into the heart of its business, investors couldn’t be less interested.”
Overall, it seems difficult to draw any conclusions from this conference. Unlike Rio, it is not intended to arrive at some grand plan which all countries sign up to, but will doubtless put out some conclusions about what is needed to ‘save the planet’. But real action needs not just business leaders, academics and policymakers to agree, it also needs the support of a majority of citizens, since it is their lives which are affected. For now, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the sustainability agenda is to a large extent being driven by global elites, without much popular support.
The Scientific Alliance
St John’s Innovation Centre
Cowley Road
Cambridge CB22 4LX
_______________________________