When Environmental Regulations Fail Us

The vast majority of the world’s scientists have formed a consensus that human activity, including use of fossil fuels, is warming the planet at an alarming rate. There have been many calls to take action, big and small, to address this distress signal from mother earth. Environmental regulations vary from country to country, even state to state, but nevertheless are the most important aspect in even beginning to address the problems that we face in protecting our natural world. One of the biggest meetings to try to have the world’s leaders on the same page is coming up next month in Copenhagen. This is the big one; all the little things that individual countries are doing culminate in this gathering on the world stage to put the best minds together and find solutions. However, economic concerns threaten to trump any chance at real progress in curbing global warming.

Lack of environmental regulations, or protection of our way of life in the face of natural disasters of catastrophic proportions, is at the heart of the matter. The American way of life, indeed the way of life of the entire developed world, is dependent upon cheap fossil fuels. And the way of life that we’ve built since the middle of the 20^th century, is that of a suburban way of life. It is all interconnected; our dependence on oil is in large part due to our inability to even think about organizing our lives and our economy in a more sustainable way. A lifestyle centered on the automobile; from the rise of Levittown to the development of the interstate highway system, is our blessing and our curse.

There is no better example of either ignoring environmental regulations or lack of them, and our pursuit of maintaining this lifestyle, than the Alberta Tar Sands. This excerpt from a National Geographic article on the Tar or Oil Sands shows the lengths that our society will go to keep the lifeblood of the economy going, while exacting a terrible environmental toll: “Nowhere on Earth is more earth being moved these days than in the Athabasca Valley. To extract each barrel of oil from a surface mine, the industry must first cut down the forest, then remove an average of two tons of peat and dirt that lie above the oil sands layer, then two tons of the sand itself. It must heat several barrels of water to strip the bitumen from the sand and upgrade it, and afterward it discharges contaminated water into tailings ponds like the one near Mildred Lake” (Kunzig, 2009). As the world moves toward stricter international environmental regulations, the Oil Sands have been identified as “the largest contributor to the rise of greenhouse gas emissions in Canada” (Environment Canada, 2009). If any significant legislation or regulations come out of the Copenhagen meetings, there is no way that Canada, or the world, could meet emission reduction goals with the specter of the Oil Sands threatening the environment every day.

Of course there are abundant examples all over the world of companies and governments ignoring or weakening environmental regulations. It is mostly done to protect economic interests, which in turn protects our way of life. Perhaps what needs to come out of the meetings in Copenhagen is not just regulations that give us a fighting chance at slowing global warming, but also plans to re-order the economies of the developed world in a sustainable way. These are extremely difficult decisions, but if we do not change our ways, some day Mother Nature will force it upon us.

Natural Resources and Lifestyles: Assessing the Impact

The debate on how natural resources should be apportioned is old and contentious. There are arguments from all sides in all forms; from businesses to tourists; workers to politicians; no one seems to agree on anything, including whether our precious resources are finite or not. As with so much that involves science, there is a tremendous amount of uncertainty as to how to assess the need for regulation, decentralization, use and exploitation of natural resources. Coming to any semblance of agreement on such issues is arguably one of the greatest challenges of our times.

Different regions of the world seem to have very different ideas on the issue of privatization of resources. In Bolivia, President Evo Morales has started an “Agrarian Revolution” where land is distributed to poor, indigenous farmers to help rebuild the rural economy from the bottom up, part of a larger social democratic movement that has swept much of Latin America. Meanwhile, in California, private banks have gained control of precious water resources, and, with no public oversight, can distribute the water as they please, even selling it to the city of Los Angeles. However, the question of whether private interests should even own the rights to water is hotly contested. Wenonah Hauter, director of “Water for All Campaign” makes the case for the public good when she states, “Under corporate control, the bottom line will always be about price and profit, not the public interest. Access to clean and affordable water is a right that every American should be granted. The bank’s giveaway scheme corrupts our democratic process."(Public citizen, 2003).

Lifestyles are often affected by the control and distribution of natural resources; and it is not always nature that is affected, but human resources as well. North American tourists flock to Mexican and South American resorts for beautiful beaches and cheap travel deals; however, these resorts, owned by multinational corporations, are often not subject to laws pertaining to the health and safety of the citizens of nearby towns. In fact, these corporations often choose these communities specifically because they do not have significant regulations that would prevent them from making as much money as they can. Add to that the scandalously low wages that are paid to the local resort workers and you have a double-edged sword; tourists accustomed to paying for cheap hotels and meals would not come if prices were raised, which would be one way to pay the workers fairly (assuming that the corporations would use the monies in this way, which is unlikely). All the while the corporations pillage the local community of its resources, both natural and human.

Arguably the most controversial of instances in exploitation of natural resources can be found in the petroleum industry. We have seen the first of modern day resource wars with the battle over control of the oil fields of the globe, whether it is the Middle East, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, or the Tar Sands of Alberta, Canada. Just the act of extraction in the Tar Sands alone is one of the most egregious environmental disasters we are likely to witness in our lifetime. Access to cheap, plentiful oil is the engine that drives the economies of the western world. Former Vice President Cheney famously stated that “the American way of life is non-negotiable”; in other words, we will take what we need to keep our way of life. Well, Mr. Vice President, this means that the American way of life is also non-sustainable. We know that natural resources like fossil fuel are finite, so it is only a matter of time before they run out. Will we as a society adjust to this difficult reality?

More matriarchy, less patriarchy

Like rain water collecting on a single pitiful leaf,

Or the first snow visiting its white burden on a delicate branch,

Nature groans under the weight of her own subjugation,

So it is with my heartsick tale of humanity,

A million souls before me, cry out,

Pleading for reprieve from the avarice possessing their fellows,

They tear at my ventricle, a lifeline woefully lacking in heft,

Too numerous, they,

Perhaps only a mother’s touch,

Indeed a mother’s reign,

Can stanch the tears and bloodshed,

For it is nature that beckons mothers,

And motherhood, with its immeasurable fortitude,

The wherewithal,

That gives me pause to consider

Another hopeful day

Recovery through public works

As governments all over the world are negatively affected by the economic meltdown, some are still looking to the future to stimulate the economy, with investment in large-scale infrastructure projects taking center stage. The Chinese premier is in Berlin to secure an agreement with the Germans to partner in construction projects in China as part of a 586 billion stimulus package, highlighted by the Maglev railway project. In Spain, new high speed trains are making inroads into the dominance of air travel in that country, and more projects linking major cities are on the way. Spain’s president specifically pinpointed infrastructure projects as the heart of an “anti-recession surge in public spending” (Guardian, 1/16/09, pg. 6).

Even public opinion with regard to how these projects are funded is making splashy headlines across the pond. An article in The Guardian UK with the headline “Poll shows public want taxes that will hurt the rich” cites polling showing 70% of respondents agreeing that “those at the top don’t pay a fair share towards investment in public services” (1/9/09, pg. 14).

Meanwhile on the home front, congress passes an 850 billion economic recovery package with only 5% to go to infrastructure projects – approximately 25% of what the experts are saying is needed. And Republicans, despite losing more seats in the house and senate in the 2008 election, cry that the solution is even more tax cuts for business and the rich, which is of course their answer to everything these days.

Conservative policies have been shown to be abject failures. We give corporations huge tax breaks, and they still move jobs overseas for cheaper labor and hide profits in overseas tax havens. Exxon makes a record 45.2 billion in profits in 2008 despite 4th quarter earnings tanking, and even they acknowledge that this was due in large part to crude’s triple digit price for much of the year. Conservatives have had their chance to practice unfettered, unregulated capitalism for AT LEAST the last eight years and it has driven the U.S. economy over a cliff. Only an FDR-style rescue will save us now. Of course, when FDR is mentioned the conservative argument is that the New Deal didn’t work. Putting aside the fact that the WPA put millions of people to work when it was desperately needed, the liberal counter argument should be, “FDR didn’t go far enough!!!” In fact, it was a Republican administration, that of Dwight Eisenhower, that implemented the highest top tax rates this country has ever seen and presided over the construction of our interstate highway system through the Federal Aid-Highway Act, 90% of which was federally funded.

It doesn’t take Obama’s crack team of economic advisors to figure out how these projects saw the light of day. Do we have the political and societal will to demand that the system be changed to address the needs of the majority? Or will we continue down the abyss that is crony capitalism combined with regressive taxation. I predict that this conservative attempt to obstruct the rebuilding of America through public works will fail, because more and more people will be hurting and the political winds will move farther left, out of necessity. Government will save capitalism from itself, again, sooner or later. Hopefully for us it will be sooner.

References
Exxon Mobile sets record with 45.2 billion profit http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090130/ap_on_bi_ge/earns_exxon_mobil
High Corporation Tax Rate is Misleading
http://www.smartmoney.com/investing/economy/high-corporate-tax-rate-is-misleading-22463/
Tax plutocrats to restrain their pay
http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/olin_center/corporate_governance/MediaMentions/02-13-07_DailyReport.pdf
Famous socialist presidents – Eisenhower, Wilson, Ford
http://faithfulprogressive.blogspot.com/2008/10/famous-socialist-presidents-eisenhower.html
Red, White and Blue Highways – The Story of the U.S. Interstate
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/interstate1.html

Leadership Styles

In a few short weeks, we will observe the inauguration of a new President. I thought it might be instructive to reflect on what types of leaders we have seen over the last several decades, and which category or categories President-elect Obama might belong to in that respect. The following is a paper I wrote a few months ago on leadership styles.

From Quiet to Charismatic
Leadership Styles and How They Influence Our World

At various times in my life, I have found myself in positions of leadership. In fact, reflecting on leadership for me traces back to childhood and adolescence. I was class president in the fifth grade. A few years later I was the quarterback of my eighth grade football team. In high school I became sports editor of the newspaper. Each time, the leadership mantle found me, as opposed to my seeking it. It is my experience that often the responsibility of leadership is thrust upon the natural leader; they simply have to be prepared when the opportunity arises.

During my ten year stint with an educational publisher, I worked my way up to International Sales Manager. It was in this job that I had the massive fortune to work under a remarkable leader. Ed had served in the Marines in Vietnam; was at the forefront of Procter and Gamble’s brand management theory; managed a radio station in California; and was an actor on stage and screen. Perhaps his biggest strength, besides genuine caring for his co-workers and subordinates, was his time management skills. He combined both of these strengths in what I refer to as his “coffee time in the bullpen.” His first order of business each morning was to take his coffee into our customer service area and visit with the entire team. He would talk with them about work-related and non work-related issues. It was a time to bond, to evaluate, to ease concerns. This is where I discovered how effective great leadership skills can be, and how those with conspicuous gifts to lead, influence and reflect the direction of a society.

“A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: we did it ourselves. “ -Lao Tzu

More than at any time in recent memory, this year’s presidential election has me thinking about leaders and styles of leadership. No reasonable person could look at the current situation in the United States and not conclude that there has been a clear lack of leadership in recent years. However, of those competing to lead the nation out of this period of uncertainty and crisis of confidence, what types of leaders do we have to choose from? I wish to analyze four types of leaders here, and will attempt to link various leaders of the past and present to each leadership style, or multiples styles if applicable.

Thoughts and actions, as opposed to strength of personality, characterize the methods of the Quiet Leader. This leader takes great care to be inclusive and evaluate all ideas and opinions, and creates an atmosphere of warmth and sincerity while steadfastly adhering to the task at hand. They will often deflect attention and praise away from themselves, and strongly encourage others to come up with their own ideas. In many instances, no one knows that this person is an organizational leader. Joseph Badarraco, professor of Business Ethics at Harvard Business School, remarks of the Quiet Leader, “If you look behind lots of great heroic leaders, you find them doing lots of quiet, patient work themselves.” For me, two words best describe the Quiet Leader – encouraging and modest. It is difficult to find a Quiet Leader among the most prominent of recent memory, but I submit that President Jimmy Carter is probably closest to the aforementioned description. Watching his Fireside Address of February 2, 1977, I am impressed by his informal posture and style of dress (his sweater was unfairly ridiculed), signaling his desire to make citizens feel that he was at once hopeful, serious, and perhaps, one of them.

Transformational or Visionary Leadership starts with the development of a vision, a view of the future that will electrify and convert followers. This vision may be developed by the leader or a team, but the leader’s charge is to champion the idea. This requires a strong commitment to sell the vision. Very often, new ideas take time to be embraced, as they are often radical, or appear to be, before careful analysis is undertaken. A Visionary Leader is often taking a risk in placing their ideas into the public forum for scrutiny and debate. They must be prepared not only to sell their vision, but also to defend it. Perhaps the last American leader as visionary was John F. Kennedy. In viewing and listening to several of Kennedy’s speeches, one thing is obvious – this was a leader with clear ideas of what he wanted to see the country accomplish and courage of his convictions. Virtually every speech he gave contained the language of hope, renewal, sacrifice and a positive vision for the future. This was established from the outset in his inaugural address, when he remarked, “Together let us explore the stars, conquer the deserts, eradicate disease, tap the ocean depths, and encourage the arts and commerce.” Or better still, in his address at Rice University on the nation’s space efforts, he said “We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard.” He also acknowledged that space exploration “is an act of faith and vision” and that “it will be done before the end of this decade” and of course it was. Most would agree that this man was a visionary.

One word usually comes to mind first when we think of Charismatic Leaders – charm. Undeniably bold and dynamic personalities dominate the ranks of this brand of chieftain. They project their image forcefully and display unbridled passion for their cause and their followers. These leaders are expert at sizing up an individual or the mood of their audience. At times, however, these individuals can believe more in themselves than their followers. This is where a Cult of Personality may develop. Defined as “arising when a country’s leader uses mass media to create a heroic public image through unquestioning flattery and praise.” I would place George W. Bush and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez in this category, among current world leaders, both as charismatic and in creating a personality cult. Chavez is greatly admired in his country and region for his populist, anti-capitalist message. Foreign journalists complain of the “ubiquitousness” of Chavez; murals and posters of the President everywhere and frequent appearances on television capturing the attention and imagination of the people. Since Chavez is a democratically elected leader, one could argue that his is a benevolent personality cult, unlike the one created by Joseph Stalin in the Soviet Union, which has been characterized as a fascist dictatorship.

Characteristics of a Servant leader include personal growth through serving others, transformative power, collaborative effort and a nurturing spirit. This last trait, nurturing, evokes the great teachers of the world, from Jesus to Gandhi. When the teacher encourages, they observe personal growth in others. Robert Greenleaf coined the phrase “servant leadership” in his 1970 essay “The Servant as Leader” and observed “the servant leader is servant-first…it begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead.” Presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain could be considered servant leaders; Obama for his community organizing and teaching constitutional law, and McCain for his military service.
In reviewing my choices of leadership types on which to focus, something definitive was fleshed out in my research; it is that all of the leaders mentioned here could fit into any of the categories (though one could vociferously argue that a few of them are purely one-dimensional). Another interesting finding is that some categories overlap or complement each other. I discovered that leaders who could be identified as quiet could also be labeled as servants. However, the most obvious connection is that of the visionary and the charismatic; with few exceptions, this seems to hold true throughout the ages.

John F. Kennedy said “For man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life.” Nearly 50 years later, today’s leaders have these truths at their mercy. Regardless of who wins the coming election, the new leader’s traits, strengths and weaknesses will influence the direction the country, and indeed the world, takes for years to come.

References
Badarraco, J. (2002) The Quiet Leader – and how to be one, Retrieved October 20, 2008 from http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/2766.html
Carroll, R. (2007, December 21), Continent just gets in a word edgeways. The Guardian UK, pp.8
Carter, J., Jimmy Carter Library and Museum, Retrieved October 20, 2008 from http://www.jimmycarterlibrary.org/documents/
Definition of Cult of Personality, Encyclopedia Britannica online, Retrieved October 21, 2008 from http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/146119/cult-of-personality
Greenleaf, R., The Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership, Retrieved October 21, 2008 from http://www.greenleaf.org/whatissl/index.html
Kennedy, J., Speeches of John F. Kennedy. Retrieved October 19, 2008 from http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Archives/Reference+Desk/Speeches/