7gen Bloc

Game Plan Update

Set Font Size:
A | A | A
Article Tools
Print  Email Share This
del.icio.us del.icio.us Digg This! digg reddit reddit facebook facebook newsvine newsvine
By Inspired Protagonist - July 10, 2009

Gund Institute for Ecological EconomicsIt was truly an honor and a privilege to have so many amazing, bright, and dedicated people join us at Seventh Generation to spend the last three days working "to develop a detailed and pragmatic game plan for how to transition to a sustainable US economy and society." The results of our conversation will take a little time to distill and disseminate and will be published in a special January 2010 issue of Solutions magazine, which our summit partner, the Gund Institute, is launching next month. Beyond the discussions, the most exciting outcome of the event for me is the work that will continue beyond the Summit to ensure that the many wonderful ideas we generated are put into action.

Here are just a few highlights of some of the conversation as reported, in part, by our local newspaper, the Burlington Free Press.

Kansan, agricultural visionary and Land Institute founder Wes Jackson raised questions about how to transition US agriculture from annual to perennial crops. Perennials use far less inputs (pesticides and fertilizer) and as a result require significantly less energy. They also prevent soil erosion, capture and store more CO2 and leave our soils in a vastly healthier state. Wes presented a 50 year plan to transition all U.S. farmland to a sustainable state.

Will Raap, founder of Burlington-based Gardener's Supply Company, championed "third-path" societies -- such as Vermont and Costa Rica -- as templates for change. The Central American country's decision to disband its military about 50 years ago, he said, helped lay the foundations for universal health care, education, and a broader definition of what served as a "commons."

American military planners -- while not forecasting a dissolution of the armed forces -- are redefining some fundamental national interest goals, said David Orr, who teaches environmental studies and politics at Oberlin College and the University of Vermont. "They now see climate change as a national security issue; they see a dependence on fossil fuels as a national security issue."

Larry Susskind, a professor of Urban and Environmental Planning at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, challenged everyone to use language more precisely, and to be cautious about framing our dialogue within structures that will only ensure more of the same failed thinking. Susskind also warned that simple majorities, even in ostensibly democratic nations, too easily sway policies in favor of corporations.

The real challenge, Susskind said, lies in building consensus among people with widely dissimilar views. "I'm a little worried that you agree with each other a little too much," he told the roomful of Green advocates.

Hunter Lovins, co-founder of the Rocky Mountain Institute, author with Paul Hawken of Natural Capitalism,and now with Natural Capital Solutions, declared that both the environmental and sustainability movements have failed and that more urgent and radical measures are required. "How do we prepare for the crisis we know will come, the climate crisis is now, it's here today."

Her perspective was shared by Gar Alperovitz, from the University of Maryland. Gar was thrilled to be in the midst of a group that was willing to propose radically increasing short term capital gains rates, incentivizing cooperative ownership, and exploring "national economic planning" to ensure a more just and sustainable economy.

Richard Heinberg, from the Institute for Global Communications declared that, "Growth (population, resource consumption) can't continue forever, we simply can't produce enough energy. We've already hit peak oil, it was on 7/11/08 when oil hit $147 a barrel. To move toward a sustainable, resilience economy we must re-localize.

Thomas Dietz, from Michigan State University noted that, "We face all the challenges of the 19th & 20th century (war, poverty, etc.) plus global climate change. In 1810 a member of the House of Representatives had 50,000 constituents to represent, today's it's 700,000. What does that do to our system of democracy? What kind of government will be required to face today's challenges?"

Comments