Tuesday, June 2, 2009
In the opening session of the Cornell Global Forum on Sustainability, held at the Museum of Natural History in New York City, presenters made a compelling case for disruptive, rather than incremental, advances in sustainability, globally and in the U.S.
Stuart Hart, the S. C. Johnson Chair in Sustainable Global Enterprise at the Johnson School, set the agenda for the global forum by introducing his concept of the "Great Convergence," sometimes referred to as the "Green Leap." The idea is to bring disruptive, clean-technology enterprises to the 4.5 billion people at the base of the pyramid, the world's poor living in the developing world. Hart suggested that the base of the pyramid is the perfect place to "incubate the green technologies that struggle to come in at the top of the pyramid."
Most new technologies do, in fact, enter the market at the top of the pyramid, he says, because that's where the money is. Yet, with solar energy as an example, it's clear that these technologies must come to market with a premium price, compete with existing "old" technologies, and eventually hit a "hard stopping place, before hitting the mass scale out," Hart says.
The alternative, Hart says, is to incubate clean technology innovations at the bottom of the pyramid. "As you get traction, you can migrate it up, adding features and increasing the price," he says. "It's a reverse logic."
H. Fisk Johnson, chairman and CEO of S. C. Johnson and Son, Inc., took the podium after Hart, and offered examples from his own experience of the barriers clean technologies face at the top of the pyramid, where we in the developed world reside. After many months of work, Johnson says he remains unsuccessful in installing wind-generated power in his own backyard. "The hurdles are amazing," he said, coming from zoning ordinances, the local conventional power provider, and liability concerns of the company selling the wind generator.
Incremental solutions—doing a little more of what we do already or doing it a little better—will not work before the human population uses up the earth's resources, Johnson says. What's required are disruptive solutions and disruptive leadership, by three different groups: businesses, consumers, and government.
His example of disruptive business leadership is an unlikely one: Wal-Mart. Concentrated laundry detergent had been in use in Asia for many years. It reduces numerous environmental impacts, including cost of transporting the product, the amount of material used to make containers, and the size of used containers that eventually make it to recycling facilities and landfills. Yet no single American manufacturer was willing to be the first to offer the concentrated product, fearing a loss of shelf space and market share. When Wal-Mart took leadership, essentially requiring all manufacturers to switch to concentrated detergent, the change finally occurred.
Consumers in the U.S. lag considerably behind those in China, for instance, in their willingness to accept "disruptive" alternatives that will slow environmental degradation. In China, Johnson's company sells cleaning products in a trigger bottle, and offers refills in a plastic pouch. Chinese consumers are happy to cut open the pouch and refill their trigger bottles, while paying less for the pouch than for a new trigger bottle. Not so, for U.S. consumers, Johnson says.
"A large number of U.S. consumers don't like the inconvenience," Johnson says. "This example illustrates that environmental considerations are not top-of-mind for consumers here."
Finally, Johnson suggests that disruptive leadership by our government is essential. "Government must provide organization around critical priorities," he said. "Diffuse priorities spawn incrementalism."
In closing, Johnson provided an example from a recent session he attended, where a state governor introduced his "greening" plan. When Johnson asked the governor how he planned to get consumers engaged in his plan, the governor responded, "The people know what to do." Yet much of Johnson's experience as head of S. C. Johnson belies that assumption.
"A plan is not leadership," Johnson says. "It's getting people to act on that plan."
Stuart Hart, the S. C. Johnson Chair in Sustainable Global Enterprise at the Johnson School, set the agenda for the global forum by introducing his concept of the "Great Convergence," sometimes referred to as the "Green Leap." The idea is to bring disruptive, clean-technology enterprises to the 4.5 billion people at the base of the pyramid, the world's poor living in the developing world. Hart suggested that the base of the pyramid is the perfect place to "incubate the green technologies that struggle to come in at the top of the pyramid."
Most new technologies do, in fact, enter the market at the top of the pyramid, he says, because that's where the money is. Yet, with solar energy as an example, it's clear that these technologies must come to market with a premium price, compete with existing "old" technologies, and eventually hit a "hard stopping place, before hitting the mass scale out," Hart says.
The alternative, Hart says, is to incubate clean technology innovations at the bottom of the pyramid. "As you get traction, you can migrate it up, adding features and increasing the price," he says. "It's a reverse logic."
H. Fisk Johnson, chairman and CEO of S. C. Johnson and Son, Inc., took the podium after Hart, and offered examples from his own experience of the barriers clean technologies face at the top of the pyramid, where we in the developed world reside. After many months of work, Johnson says he remains unsuccessful in installing wind-generated power in his own backyard. "The hurdles are amazing," he said, coming from zoning ordinances, the local conventional power provider, and liability concerns of the company selling the wind generator.
Incremental solutions—doing a little more of what we do already or doing it a little better—will not work before the human population uses up the earth's resources, Johnson says. What's required are disruptive solutions and disruptive leadership, by three different groups: businesses, consumers, and government.
His example of disruptive business leadership is an unlikely one: Wal-Mart. Concentrated laundry detergent had been in use in Asia for many years. It reduces numerous environmental impacts, including cost of transporting the product, the amount of material used to make containers, and the size of used containers that eventually make it to recycling facilities and landfills. Yet no single American manufacturer was willing to be the first to offer the concentrated product, fearing a loss of shelf space and market share. When Wal-Mart took leadership, essentially requiring all manufacturers to switch to concentrated detergent, the change finally occurred.
Consumers in the U.S. lag considerably behind those in China, for instance, in their willingness to accept "disruptive" alternatives that will slow environmental degradation. In China, Johnson's company sells cleaning products in a trigger bottle, and offers refills in a plastic pouch. Chinese consumers are happy to cut open the pouch and refill their trigger bottles, while paying less for the pouch than for a new trigger bottle. Not so, for U.S. consumers, Johnson says.
"A large number of U.S. consumers don't like the inconvenience," Johnson says. "This example illustrates that environmental considerations are not top-of-mind for consumers here."
Finally, Johnson suggests that disruptive leadership by our government is essential. "Government must provide organization around critical priorities," he said. "Diffuse priorities spawn incrementalism."
In closing, Johnson provided an example from a recent session he attended, where a state governor introduced his "greening" plan. When Johnson asked the governor how he planned to get consumers engaged in his plan, the governor responded, "The people know what to do." Yet much of Johnson's experience as head of S. C. Johnson belies that assumption.
"A plan is not leadership," Johnson says. "It's getting people to act on that plan."
# posted by Shannon Dortch @ 4:16 AM 
Post a Comment