From Impact to Input

Edwards' The Sustainable Revolution provides an overview of sustainability movements, a spectrum including the private sector, the public sector, and public-private partnerships (so to speak.) It is interesting that Max Dunn started kicked off his post utilizing the term DRY. I had thought he was making a Ruby on Rails Computer Programming reference, where DRY stands for Don't Repeat Yourself. At first glance, it may seem as if all the organizations are trying to reinvent the wheel. Each organization is repeating the others efforts. Each organization has its own vision for sustainability and holding stakeholders accountable. Some may question as to why a centralized body of sustainability does not exist? Would it not make it easier if there was a one size fits all approach? However ironic this sounds, collaborative competition may be the best solution.

One of my favorite quotes comes from George Box, "Every model is wrong, but some are useful." I venture to say that ALL these sustainable models are wrong. But many of these sustainable models are useful. Each has a certain nuance that we can learn from.

I myself am partial to the free market oriented efforts. IMHO, the free market is the best venue to explore and implement sustainability, granted that the market is actually free to do its work. From my understanding, much of the leaps of the sustainability movement occurred in the market place, rather than government bureaucracy, i.e. Biomimicry Principles, Permaculture, and A Biocentric Perspective. I am not too fond of LEED, since it relies on the governmental machine for its execution.

Progressing through the chapters, a theme arises. In the first half, it focuses on IMPACT. How does an an individuals or organizations actions affect other individuals? Affect the planet? And to a further extent, affect the economy?

However, the second half focuses on INPUT. What is nature providing that we have yet to harness? What can individuals do to participate? The nuance between INPUT and IMPACT is slight, but IMHO, quite important to distinguish. IMPACT is results oriented, whereas INPUT is process oriented.

I would like to take an opportunity to critique/reformulate the three E's of Economy (Profits), Environment(for the Next Generation), and Equity(What individuals get out of the system) utilizing the IMPACT/INPUT framework. The way the book frames the three E's, the focus is on IMPACT. Who are the stakeholders of the 3 E's? What do we hope to gain on the bottom line? What do we hope to gain on the triple/integrative bottom line? Implicitly, focusing on IMPACT is a very results oriented approach. There is nothing wrong with that.

However, equally, if not more important is the process, the INPUT. Who are the change agents of the 3 E's? What do we INPUT at the top line? What do we hope to INPUT on the triple/integrative top line? Implicitly, focusing on INPUT is a very process oriented approach.

I know these are broad questions, and which seek detailed answers. I hope to delve into these questions in subsequent readings.