¡Hola mundo!

Te damos la bienvenida a Blogs EOI. Este es tu primer artículo. Edítalo o bórralo… ¡y comienza a publicar!

Comments Off on ¡Hola mundo! / 22 Oct 2013 por mavisasare
IMSD /

Mixing my two favorite subjects: Social Entrepreneurship and Psychology

Motivation has always been my favorite subject. I remember myself as a psychology student in university going crazy about any project with the word motivation in it. And not only I loved the idea, the concept and the possible implications of using it right, I also loved the most important author about motivation that has ever existed: Abraham Maslow. Seriously, look at him, don´t you love him too?

Maslow was a psychologist born in the United Stated in 1908 and he is considered one of the fathers of a very important change in psychology as a discipline by changing the way this science saw and studied the human mind. We can say he was the father of Humanistic Psychology, a shift in this discipline that stopped seeing humans as, in his own words, “a bag of symptoms” to focus in the positive things humans have. The positive qualities of humans are infinite, and are those that move the world in a positive direction. One of his most famous sentences, and one of my favorites, described the new change of psychology like this: “It is as if Freud supplied us the sick half of psychology and we must now fill it out with the healthy half”.

Maslow´s most important theory was based in a human characteristic that I consider very, very close to what social entrepreneurs have: self actualization. What does this weird term means? Self actualization is a human´s strong desire to realize his or her potential to the last extent. A self-actualizing person will tend to have the drive to focus in the problems that are outside him or her, not in their own problems. But my favorite description of a self actualized human comes when we start listing the characteristics of this person. According to Maslow, self-actualizing people share the following qualities:

• Truth: honest, reality, beauty, pure, clean and unadulterated completeness
• Goodness: rightness, desirability, uprightness, benevolence, honesty
• Beauty: rightness, form, aliveness, simplicity, richness, wholeness, perfection, completion,
• Wholeness: unity, integration, tendency to oneness, interconnectedness, simplicity, organization, structure, order, not dissociated, synergy
• Dichotomy-transcendence: acceptance, resolution, integration, polarities, opposites, contradictions
• Aliveness: process, not-deadness, spontaneity, self-regulation, full-functioning
• Unique: idiosyncrasy, individuality, non comparability, novelty
• Perfection: nothing superfluous, nothing lacking, everything in its right place, just-rightness, suitability, justice
• Necessity: inevitability: it must be just that way, not changed in any slightest way
• Completion: ending, justice, fulfillment
• Justice: fairness, suitability, disinterestedness, non partiality,
• Order: lawfulness, rightness, perfectly arranged
• Simplicity: nakedness, abstract, essential skeletal, bluntness
• Richness: differentiation, complexity, intricacy, totality
• Effortlessness: ease; lack of strain, striving, or difficulty
• Playfulness: fun, joy, amusement
• Self-sufficiency: autonomy, independence, self-determining

Does this sound familiar? To me Maslow was describing what we now call a social entrepreneur. Ok, ok, maybe if you are reading this and you consider yourself a social entrepreneur you are thinking that nobody can be THAT perfect, but at least you try to fulfill all this characteristics, don´t you? Do you feel like you know what he was talking about?

So, what is the path to become a self actualized person according to Maslow? The answer is motivation. To be moved by your own needs, to scale on the list of needs that one person have until all of them have been fulfilled. Maslow created a pyramid that explained very well the human needs, organizing those needs in a hierarchy that showed how difficult it is to care about the next step of needs if you have not covered the previous one. He created the famous Maslow´s hierarchy of needs that explains human motivation like no other theory has ever been able to do.

If we look at the pyramid, we will find that in order to become a self actualized person you need to have covered your physiological needs and then to feel secure and loved. After you have covered those three steps, you need to believe in yourself and have a strong self esteem. When you have covered those (hard) steps, you will be able to achieve self actualization.

Looking at the first four steps, it is easy to understand why there are not many self actualized persons in the world, and therefore so few social entrepreneurs. Our global society has more than 4 billion people who are not even able to fulfill the fist layer (not in vane we call them the Bottom of the Pyramid), the rest of the human population that can at least eat and drink properly, struggle everyday with employment, health, violence and of course the last layer before self actualization: self esteem. Esteem is the illness of the rich, one of the biggest problems in the, so called, developed countries. In a society based in consumerism, esteem has become a major barrier. It is not easy to believe in yourself when every day you are bombed with publicity telling you that your skin is not soft enough, your body is not perfect enough, your car is not fast enough or your phone is not cool enough so you go out and buy. It is a hard world to achieve self-actualization.

But still it´s never been easier. It is the first time in the history of humanity when there is a high percentage of people on earth that feel safe and love themselves. There is every day more and more people getting closer to self actualization. There are so many innovative and genius ideas every day, we are more connected and collaborative that ever. Humanity and the global society have never felt so united in the history of our specie. I feel like I find every day people that have achieved self actualization that are at the same time helping me and others to achieve it. Somehow, I feel that humanity is starting to touch the last layer that Maslow defined as the top of our expectations and is finally starting to work harder to help others to fulfill their needs. The era of social entrepreneurship is here to stay.

Finally we are creating a network of collaboration, a positive vibe that we are calling social entrepreneurship. We are starting to believe in humans, trying to put our eyes in all the good things we have instead of the bad, in all the amazing human characteristics that make us capable of changing this mess. I am sure Maslow is very happy today, Freud is finally in the past.

Comments Off on Mixing my two favorite subjects: Social Entrepreneurship and Psychology / 30 May 2013 por Paloma Andres Urrutia
IMSD /

9 billion good reasons to invest in Social Entrepreneurship

Blog post for the subject Social Entrepreneurship

Whatever was sustainable on a planet of 6 billion people, will no longer be sustainable on a planet of 9 billion people. A quick read through the newspaper headlines and we can see that society is facing some serious challenges in all areas of sustainable development; economic recessions and unemployment; climate change and resource depletion; social inequity and poverty.

While these issues can represent threats to some businesses, to others they represent opportunity – the opportunity to solve one of these societal challenges and make a profit. This mission, to do good and be useful to society while also earning a living is at the heart of what it means to be a social entrepreneur. The key to social entrepreneurship is therefore the alignment of business to one of these societal challenges.

While the alignment of business to ‘making the world a better place’ sounds all well and good, does it actually make good business sense? Is social entrepreneurship worth the investment when compared to traditional business models? I think the answer is yes. Yes because social entrepreneurship models still satisfies a fundamental principle of business, that is, delivering value in exchange for a return.

However, the fundamental principle that is different about social entrepreneurship models is that the type and scope of this value concept has shifted. It has shifted towards a value concept that is increasingly in demand. A value concept that is increasingly in demand because of the increasing pressures of a globalized and growing society in the 21^st century. A society still struggling to work out the formula for how to do ‘less with more’. For example, how can we feed 9 billion people without destroying the planet? How can we reduce social inequity while reducing our greenhouse gas emissions? It is in such challenges where we find the drive to create innovative new business models which move from creating value for a few, to creating value for many.

Therefore, unlike other current business markets, a promising reason to invest in the social entrepreneurship market is because there will continue to be an increased opportunity for social entrepreneurs – so while it is common today to read of successful social entrepreneurs, already out there defining new meaningful ways to business, the good news is that there is (unfortunately) a huge market of social, environmental and economic challenges still waiting to be solved. With governments increasingly overwhelmed by the mounting numbers of societal challenges, the time has never been better to invest in social entrepreneurship as a means to bridge the gap.

One organization, B Lab, a non-profit that certifies these purpose-driven companies alone reports to have registered 30,000 of these social entrepreneur based companies which together represents some $40 billion in revenue.

Another statistical reason to invest in social entrepreneurship is a simple one. If we “consider each individual as a mine of gems of inestimable value”, given that we will soon be 9 billion people, from a resource analysis perspective, this represents an increasing resource of “mines” filled with valuable innovative ideas. In other words, while in some arenas the growing population represents a threat, in the social entrepreneurship arena, the more people the better, and the more potential we have to generate innovative society-changing ideas.

However, social entrepreneurship is more than just a good idea. I remember one day when I was in Australia and going home after university with a friend. We were contemplating what we were going to after we finished our studies. After a moment of silence, I exclaimed “I just want to come up with a good idea!” – a moment later, my friend and I burst out in laughter at the simplicity and obviousness of this statement – I didn’t say I want to come up with an amazing idea or an excellent idea, just a plain old garden-variety good idea! Today, I look back on this statement with even more insight into the world of social innovation, understanding that even having an amazing idea is not enough. The point I am making here is that like with any investment, to invest wisely in social entrepreneurship means more than just investing in idea generation.

So what should a savvy social entrepreneur investor look for? Well, savvy investors should look for social enterprises that balances idea generation with implementability of the following:

1. Urgency – how urgently does the target market need this idea implemented?
2. Capacity – does the enterprise have the resources (i.e team work) to implement the idea?
3. Capability – does the enterprise have the skills to implement the idea?
4. Passion – and finally and perhaps most importantly – does the enterprise have the passion to implement the idea, even in the face of obstacles?

Finally, there is one more good collaborative reason why we should invest in social entrepreneurship. With the rise of technology and co-working spaces (such as the HUB) which allows individuals the ability connect to other like-minded individuals, the barriers to implementability are quickly being broken down. More and more people are discovering that there is no business like social business and there is 9 billion good reasons to invest in social entrepreneurship.

Comments Off on 9 billion good reasons to invest in Social Entrepreneurship / 29 May 2013 por Daniel Salter
IMSD /

Social Entrepreneurs: these Unreasonable People

Many things have been already said about Social Entrepreneurship, and what fascinates me the most are the characteristics of a Social Entrepreneur.

First of all, the Social Entrepreneur distinguish him/herself from traditional entrepreneurs because he/she is not motivated by the possibility of making money or being better than their competitors. The Social Entrepreneur is passion-driven. He/she recognizes the issues in the world and, propelled by emotion, tries to find alternatives to addressing the issue about which he/she is most passionate.

The Social Entrepreneur has the ability to create solutions that other people considered as impossible. He/she is capable of finding practical and usually simple solutions to social and environmental issues which may represent immense challenges. The solutions are so simple that can be easily replicated, but the social entrepreneur is not worried about it. He/she is incredibly ambitious, not about money or status (or self-ambition), but about being a transformative force. As a result, the social entrepreneur is opened to sharing best practices in order to provoke reforms or revolutions in dysfunctional systems and industries.

The Social Entrepreneur sees profit in unprofitable activities. This is because he/she is not pursuing just a financial profit. He/she is looking for another kind of profit which has been defined as blended value which focus on creation of not only financial, but mainly social and environmental values.

For the reason that the Social Entrepreneur is seeking alternatives to maximize SROI (Social Return on Investment), he/she may be obsessed about measuring the sometimes unmeasurable impacts of his/her solutions. The Social Entrepreneur knows that great impacts are very strong in mobilizing other change-markers. Considering the fact that he/she aims to scale up his/her venture in order to promote more change, it is really important to measure progress. As the social capitalism advances, more and more Social Entrepreneurs are now looking for and developing new forms to measure social and environmental impacts.

It was John Elkington though, who provided me with the most perfect description: a Social Entrepreneur implements a new approach and finds an innovative solution to a social problem which other people considered as unsolvable. A Social Entrepreneur doesn’t take the world for granted, but doesn’t take No for an answer either. A Social Entrepreneurs may be called crazy. A Social Entrepreneur may be defined as unreasonable.

In the words of the Irish playwright and co-founder of the London School of Economics:

Comments Off on Social Entrepreneurs: these Unreasonable People / 29 May 2013 por Andrea Mara Hanai
IMSD /

Motivation, a Key Element of Success for Social Entrepreneurship

Over the past weeks I have been hearing in my classes, about the weight that social entrepreneurs have in the world today, and its great impact today on society. For this reason I decided to write a few lines to describe one of the most important elements of this new way of doing business.

The true social entrepreneurs do not seek that the results are related to profits, this new way of doing business is focused on outcomes and impacts focus on the society. For those who are linked to these initiatives, Motivation is fundamental element, in my opinion is crucial because today we need more efforts and actions, which aim to strengthen the society and make globally this new way of doing business.

When we speak of motivation related to social entrepreneurs, we talk about the ability of the leaders of these initiatives in order to promote these ideas from two different perspectives, which is related to the Ideological and the one linked to the Human.

Before describing these two ideas, I want to remark, that in my opinion the ideal concept of motivation, from the point of view of social entrepreneurs is:

The potential that a person has to have a positive effect on others, based on an idea, to promote spreading a lead, where the goal is, to achieve all the resources and power needed, to develop the cause

The first idea is that every entrepreneur has a purpose, a reason that moves them, or an idea to develop and implement to achieve a personal goal, this is an unconditional principle of entrepreneurship. Is the direction in which we want to promote the ideas.

Social entrepreneurs are now a global trend, and the reasons for this are so diverse, but the important thing is that now a lot of expectations are linked to this new trend. For years entrepreneurs were seen as those that could start a business and make it a major undertaking, magnitudes and especially excellent economic performance.  But now entrepreneurs also have a new side, The social. The development of better conditions for society, where the ideology plays a key role in these times is the objective of this new way of doing business. This is why initiatives must be linked to an idea, to create them, promote them and turn them into tangible realities

Once these ideas are created by its developers, a second phase is vital to guarantee their survival. How much can we promote the idea among groups that take an interest in these initiatives?  This is where the entrepreneur must also prove itself, because it’s time to create and promote the tribe (followers), and once the tribe is made the most important step of all, motivate them to always follow them.

What does this mean?

The meaning is that motivation plays a critical role in the formation of teams of high performance, one in which they can achieve the goals. However, the idea that comes with greater force at the time of this writing is that without motivation nothing is possible, and I think that this is not a reflection only mine; probably you have it as well.

I dare say that if we want to consolidate this global trend and make it a global reality, we must ensure that our ideas will be related to ideals, so as recognize and motivate the people who help us develop our initiatives, because without them (Ideas and People) nothing will be possible, and our chances of failure increase significantly.

The collective efforts make the difference, and for this, motivation will always be a key element of success for Social Entrepreneurship.

 

Comments Off on Motivation, a Key Element of Success for Social Entrepreneurship / 26 May 2013 por Carlos Omar Garcia Pascual
IMSD /

ILVA, the Italian environmental disaster

ILVA is a steel producer company founded by Riva family in 1905 in Taranto, South of Italy.

Today it is one of the biggest steel plant in Western Europe, it employees 12.000 employees and makes profit of billions of euros.

 

Despite several warning from the local environmental authority (ARPA), ILVA never renewed the filters, the machinery and never increased the safety measures and since more than 20 years the company is dumping thousands of tons of toxic substances in the air and in the water, polluting one of the biggest touristic city of the region.

The emissions of cancer-causing chemicals, like dioxins, benzoapyrene, etc. are poisoning the fishes and the land around Taranto and the value of the total ecosystem damage is estimated around 6B  €.

Environmentalists and civic activists have been trying to force the courts to clean up the mill since at least 1982. The company is also involved in juridical trials since several years, but the political interests and the corruption are not allowing a smooth and transparent solution of this urgent case.

Last November judges ordered the seizure of steel and semi-finished products (2M tons of steel under police evaluation, value 1B euro).

Several managers and ILVA President went under house arrest with the accuse of “crimes ranging from criminal association to causing an environmental disaster to extortion”, but despite of this the company is still operating and polluting.

 

The impact on the environment and on the people

The impact of such a negative business practice is extremely negative and the people living nearby Taranto and the environment are the most affected by such shameful activities.

Some of the negative impacts:

* Increase by 12% of lung tumors

* Increase by 306% of respiratory diseases

* Increase of child mortality

* 11500 people died between 2003 and 2009 (1650 per year)

* Poisoning of fishes

* Pollution of water and land around Taranto

* Toxic milk and cheese

* Toxic dust in the air and in the houses nearby the steel plant

Where EIA and SEA?

In 2010 the Ministero dell’Ambiente, del Territorio e del Mare, during the AIA process (Autorizzazione Integrata Ambientale) received a letter from the company about the current situation of the polluted land and about the need to clean up the area from the hazardous waste and toxic substances.  Despite the obvious situation and the need to close the steel plant, force the company to renew the filters and increase the safety measures, the 11th of May 2010 the Region Puglia, after the EIA (VIA, Valutazione Impatto Ambientale), approved the project “Discarica per rifiuti speciali non pericolosi prodotti dallo stabilimento Ilva di Taranto e dalle aziende partecipate presenti nel territorio della provincia in area Cava Mater Gratiae, in agro di Statte” (implementation purification plant for special non-toxic waste), a project presented in 2004.

EIA, Environmental Impact Assessment, represents one of the greatest tool for the evaluation of the human impact on the environment and requires decision makers to consider the potential environmental impact of their decisions and projects. The main objective is to achieve a sustainable development and protect the environment, the biodiversity and human health.

In the ILVA case the application of the EIA methodology has not been not able to change the situation, stop those irresponsible business practices and mitigate the negative impact of such a negative action on the environment.

It is quite obvious the local environmental governance is affected by lobbies and improper practices aimed to influence the institutions. The national government is also helping the company with generous subsidies while the factory works as “votes factory” for local politicians.

In conclusion the ILVA case is just on of the example of the problems of the Italian economy: a company not able to create an alternative to its old heavy industry, to innovate and invest.

It is also clear that having the EIA managed at a regional level could represent a limit for a transparent and sustainable oriented process.

 

Comments Off on ILVA, the Italian environmental disaster / 26 May 2013 por Veronica Recanati
IMSD /

Eurovegas and SEA

The case of Eurovegas in Spain has a deep political issue but in this post I will try to analyse the case with the environmental impact assessment (EIA) and the strategic environmental assessment (SEA) tools and to see the most appropriate. Eurovegas is a big real-estate project with the goal to build 12 hotels, 3 golf courses, 6 casinos and 1 sportive centre. The surface on which this project is allocated measures 1.231 hectares.



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Eurovegas is still a tense issue because there is a political issue and an important number of voices against this project. The project should start this year its first phase and it is expected that the construction of the project will end in 2025. I have not found the environmental impact assessment of this project on the Web even according to several laws there is an obligation[1]:

–  Ley 27/2006, de 18 de julio, por la que se regulan los derechos de acceso a la información, de participación pública y de acceso a la justicia en materia de medio ambiente (según el Convenio de Aarhus de Naciones Unidas; e incorporando las Directivas de la UE 2003/4/CE y 2003/35/CE)

–  Real Decreto Legislativo 1302/1986, de 28 de junio, de evaluación de impacto ambiental

–  Ley 2/2002, de 19 de junio, de evaluación ambiental de la Comunidad de Madrid

In this case, associations and platforms did the EIA and published it on the Web. This assessment is not official but give a good idea of what it is necessary to take into consideration[2]. They followed the law 2/2002 of Comunidad de Madrid.

The construction of this project will increase the emission of CO2 not only by the construction and the Eurovegas itself but also with the tourism travelling by air. Electricity will increase; this platform evaluates this increase equal to the consumption of a city of 676.000 inhabitants. The waste will increase eight times and if we think about the golf camps, water would also increase drastically. There is a risk of light contamination, which could affect animals of the zone and the population around this casino.

In Spain the EIA is more based on environment aspects more than social but regarding the social impact there is a possibility that the law bans smoking insight of public space will be remove in the casino. This action would have an impact on health; at the same time of the risk of alcohol and game addiction should also be taking into account. For the promoters of this project, the main argument is the creation of employment and it could be a positive impact but if the SEA would have been taken, the argument of jobs could be put in doubt. Below I will explain why. These few examples are directly linked to the EIA through analyse the baseline and the impacts and assess them. In this case, there is no clear best alternative perhaps a better sustainable construction (with renewable energy, etc) but I didn’t find any information.

What happens know if we would have taken the SEA according to its objectives[3]:

1. Encourage environmental and sustainability integration (including biophysical, social, institutional and economic aspects), setting enabling conditions to nest future development proposals;

2. Add-value to decision-making, discussing opportunities and risks of development options and turning problems into opportunities;

3. Change minds and create a strategic culture in decision-making, promoting institutional cooperation and dialogues, avoiding conflicts.

If the decision-makers and promoters have thought in a strategic way perhaps they could have seen some risks to build a project like Eurovegas in this area. Except all the risks that are mentioned in the EIA, there are risks before to imagine how to build it. For example, if we take a big picture the European crisis and the repercussions on the financing. This question is still open. The second one is the airport of Madrid. It is already overexploited, so what happens with the millions of tourists they expect to come to Madrid. Here the question of mobility is raised. Even they talk about to use of the airport of Ciudad Real (an inactive airport) but this alternative should also be assessed through SEA. Now the question of water, Spain has a big issue with water, so golf courses would have directly an impact of this issue because they consume a high quantity of water. The question of transparency and citizenship participation is raised. Conflicts exist among the political and civil society but it seems that dialogue is avoiding. Related to the argument of employment, 240.000 jobs will be created. Of course, it is a big number but according to the Guardian[4] this amount is reached in 18 years when the all project will be ended. What are 240.000 jobs in 10 years when in Spain now there are 6.000.000 unemployed people? And what kind of jobs they will be. Finally, the European Commission[5] has refused a prolongation for the fulfilment of the contamination limits in Madrid. They don’t have implemented strict measures to fulfil the objectives and the city could have financial sanctions. This question of contamination and the difficulty to tackle could be another indirect risk with Eurovegas.

This case of Eurovegas shows that SEA is fundamental to assess what are the key issues and the context. Moreover, they help the decision-makers to know if a project is necessary and will have more positive impact than negative. However, SEA and EIA are complementary and give more answers than taking one of them.

Eurovegas would be designed like in this picture

 

3 comentarios / 25 May 2013 por Stephanie Barrial
IMSD /

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) & the Italian context

The importance of the evaluation of the human activities impact on the environment has became more and more important in the last decades and it is at the center of any sustainable development conversations.

Issues like depletion of natural resources, contamination, biodiversity loss and pollution represent important factors to be considering while planning any new construction project.

EIA, environmental impact assessment is one of the tools for project assessment and it is a methodology to evaluate the effects on the environment of a specific project. The EIA final mission is to integrating the environmental concerns in the decision making processes for a sustainable development.

EIA is today implemented in more than 100 countries and as Bartlett confirmed (1988) “EIA is one of the more successful policy innovations of the twentieth century”.

Despite the central and effective role of this strong policy instrument, worldwide implemented, there some limitations to be considered.

EIA, is sometimes perceived in a wrong way, more as a barrier instead of useful tool aimed to avoid the human activities negative impact on the environment and it is also seen as a permission to build/do/act instead of a good orientation for a sustainable development project.

Another EIA restrictions is related to “timing”, the environmental issues are in fact considered just at end of the decision-making process, when the planning and the strategic decisions are already made. EIA approach then certainly improves the execution of specific actions and integrates the social, economic, environmental aspects into the project activities, but is not able to influence the whole process, mitigate or prevent certain effects because the strategic part has been already done.

SEA, the strategic environmental assessment could represent the solution to these limitations and completes the EIA. Both of them are therefore necessary and important while planning and executing projects.

According to Beinat (1999) “SEA ensures the environmental aspects are fully addressed at the earliest appropriate stage of the planning process”. SEA is therefore about risk management, risks prevention and it is a more flexible, vision oriented and newer tool than EIA (legislated into community country law only in 2001).

Despite the importance of SEA as tool that allows the integration of the environmental concerns in policy and planning processes and source of environmental information during the whole decision making process, there are some limitations too.

– Uncertainty: SEA covers large areas and several countries and the data availability and collection could represent a limitation

– Lack of case studies and experiences due to the recent legislations

– Reliability: Sometimes it is a procedure used by politicians to show their “false” commitment to the environment :

“SEA appears to be a new procedure scheduled to prevent environmental damages from decisions on programmes, plans and policies made by decision makers, in other words, the politicians. This is another fake tool at their hands in order to violate all the environmental objections, by pretending that they are interested in the environment, but at the end are interested in their own goods… The new SEA procedure will generate the same political “noise” towards environmental consideration… while at the end it will become another “green” wrap up paper for their environmental violation.” Kleinschmidt and Wagner (1998)

 

The EIA & SEA Italian context

The current Italian legal framework regarding EIA (VIA, Valutazione Impatto Ambientale) and SEA (VAS, Valutazione Strategica Ambientale) is quite complicated and the heavy bureaucracy of the whole system represents a limit for a proper development and progress in this area.

The European Directive has partially been implemented but a lack of transparency is still slowing down the process.

Regarding SEA, the implementation of the Directive at a national level has been postponed several times. The reasons could be addressed to a lack of political commitment and to the delay of considering the importance of the environmental concerns.

As a consequence each regions has developed their own SEA and EIA regulations but a “best practice” guideline is recommended in order to really benefit from these powerful tools.

 

References

Beinat (1999), Geographical information systems and environmental impact assessment. UNIGIS Module, Faculty of Economics, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.

Gazzola, Caramasci, Implementing SEA in Italy. The Case of the Emilia Romagna Region

Richard K. Morgan (2012): Environmental impact assessment: the state of the art, Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

Telfer, T.C., Atkin, H. and Corner, R.A. 2009. Review of environmental impact assessment and monitoring in aquaculture in Europe and North America. In FAO. Environmental impact assessment and monitoring in aquaculture. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper, Rome, FAO

Volker Kleinschmidt, Wagner (1998), Strategic environmental assessment in Europe : Fourth European Workshop on Environmental Impact Assessment

 

1 comentario / 25 May 2013 por Veronica Recanati
IMSD /

Social innovation: an innovative solution for a social problem

Thanks to the class of social entrepreneurship, a new “world” has been opened for me. I become fascinated by the motivation and the ideas beyond the decisions of these Changemakers.  For example, how it is amazing to use rats as an innovative tool to detect landmines, or give the opportunity to blind people through their high sensitivity with their hand to detect early tumours on breast. These two ideas are so basic, effective, simple and just amazing.

Pinche aquí para ver el vídeo

This is why I am starting to love this world because with great ideas, entrepreneurs reach to make a social change or have a real impact.

Therefore, the ingredients of social innovation that Maria Zapata, Ashoka, gave us should be the way to do business:

Social Innovation has two halves of the equation completely interdependent : A replicable new idea for changing the pattern by which society deals with an important area of human need on a national level. And an innovator to make it happens.

• In addition to being different, an idea must be authentic to the entrepreneur’s experience

• It must be “pattern-changing” – Redefining issues, changing beliefs, setting goals, and applying new resources to recast a deep social pattern

• The idea itself has to be replicable, meaning that it has to lend itself to spread, repetition, adaptation, and eventually a life of its own after the founding entrepreneur has introduced it, proven its value.

Social entrepreneurship is for me a fresh air because it gives examples of win-win situation for all the stakeholders of the project with a real impact. I share the idea that the fundamental components are innovation and motivation:

• Innovation not only related to the materiel or tangible or technologic, but related to a simple as innovative idea.

• Motivation is the basis; the first motivation is not to get profit but to resolve a problem that you care. Insights and empathy are the characteristics of the social entrepreneurs and in my opinion we need more of them in our society if we want to see real changes.

However, I think it is important to make the difference between social innovation and social business (again it was very inspiring this difference in which Maria Zapata insists). Social innovation or entrepreneurship is the innovative aspect of what you use to resolve a problem and how to implement and spread it. Social business is necessary because the aim is doing business in an alternative way.

Finally,  in this new world there are so many innovative tools or oranisation like Crow funding platform to support your initiative as an entrepreneur or citizen. Everybody with insights and true motivation could start a project.

So it is time to think out of the box and act!

 

 

Comments Off on Social innovation: an innovative solution for a social problem / 25 May 2013 por Stephanie Barrial
IMSD /

The SEA behind the Brazilian Sugarcane Agroecological Zoning

Since its introduction by the Portuguese, in the 16th century, sugarcane production in Brazil has contributed to country’s economic development in the same way that its expansion history has been marked by intensive internal debates and controversies. In the beginning, it was indigenous and later African peoples slavery (up until the 19th century) dispute, then in the 1970’s disagreements were motivated by massive subsidies from the military regime. More recently, discussions have been focusing on temporary cutters working conditions, on ground burnings, on deforestation of native vegetation, and on excessive water usage.

Brazilian government’s intention to enhance bioethanol and biofuel technology exports has brought the arguments to the international arena. In October, 2007 Jean Zeagler, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, heated up the quarrel by pronouncing that “It is a crime against humanity to convert agricultural productive soil into soil which produces food stuff that will be burned into biofuel.” In response to the accusation, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva stated that “the real crime against humanity would be to just cast aside biofuels and push countries struggling with food and energy shortages towards dependency and insecurity”.

The Brazilian government then, advised by many international organizations, commissioned a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) which aimed to putting the bioethanol polemics to rest. Performed by a national multidisciplinary team, the SEA conclusions were published in 2009 in a document entitled Sugarcane Agroecological Zoning: To Expand Production, Preserve Life, and Ensure a Future (also known as ZAE Cana).

According to the Federal Government, the document “is one of the most detailed studies worldwide and the most structured in the country under social, environmental and economic perspectives, and enforces the importance of planning and strategic conduction in its development so as to make Brazil a leading energy producing nation, which respects biodiversity.”. The ZAE Cana is also the base to a bill referred by Federal Government to the Congress “that will restrict the lands permissible for sugarcane farming and processing.”

Sustaining the traditional controversies around the sector, the ZAE Cana was celebrated by many people and institutions, and severely criticized by many more. With the purpose of providing both sides with more material to discuss, the present analysis examines the ZAE Cana by comparing its content to the suggestions of two International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA) papers dedicated to SEA on the sugarcane sector:

I.            “Sustainability Assessment of Brazilian Sugarcane Ethanol” which comprises a comprehensive list of benefits and concerns about the sugarcane ethanol production.

II.            “Sustainability indicators: planning ethanol by SEA” which suggests five Critical Decision Factors (CDF) or Conditions for Strategic Decision (CSD) which define the most significant impacts that should be addressed in a SEA on the sugarcane bioethanol production:

1) Land Use and Food Security

The ZAE Cana prohibits the construction or expansion of sugarcane farms and production plants in any area of native vegetation, or in the Amazon, or Pantanal (Brazilian Wetlands), or Upper Paraguay River Basin regions. However, it doesn’t mention other important biome, the Cerrado (Brazilian Savanna).

In terms of food security, the ZAE Cana establishes that the substitution of areas occupied by other cultures or livestock production by sugarcane must be authorized by the Ministry of Agriculture which should take into consideration the impact of such substitution to Brazilian food security. On the other hand, the potential relocation of those other cultures and cattle to areas which are prohibited to sugarcane production was not discussed. In addition, it doesn’t consider the major role of Brazilian food exports in contributing to international food security.

2) Environmental Services

The ZAE Cana restricts the sugarcane production to areas which do not require of full irrigation, and areas with slopes less than 12%. The first topic just partially addresses the issue of high water consumption, since it does not include technological requirements to diminish the high water consumption for washing sugarcane. The topography issue relates to the mechanized harvesting of sugarcane which cannot occur in more inclined lands. Mechanized harvesting prevents producers’ clearance of ground by fire which implies not only environmental risks to flora and fauna but also contributes to soil degradation.

The zoning does not tackle the risk of plagues in large areas of land occupied by one monoculture, neither the impacts of using genetically modified organisms (GMOs). On the positive side, it takes into account that “comparatively, the sugarcane crops causes less damages for soil, uses less pesticides and herbicides than other typical Brazilian crops (soy, corn, orange, and eucalyptus).”

3) Socioenvironmental Benefits

The ZAE Cana foresees the enhancement of local permanent workforce employment due to the substitution of the manual harvesting by the mechanized one. It implies education and training to capacitate the workforce in the utilization of new technologies. The expected results are income generation along the year (not only during harvesting period), improving communities’ economic stability.

On the negative side, the zoning does not refer to some social concerns related to the sugarcane sector, such as the frequently verified gender issues and informal employment.

4) Land Ownership and Instruments of Control

The ZAE Cana acknowledges that small and medium sized sugarcane producers will have to organize themselves into cooperatives, so that they will be able to implement the mechanized harvesting. Nevertheless, it doesn’t deal with the concerns about the amendment of the land market, the potential increase in land concentration, and the competition with family farming.

The document states that the zoning implementation must apply induction and control mechanisms as a result of a new regulatory framework which should count on the support of the whole society. It also stipulates that Federal Government should provide regional and local governments with tools to monitor the proper application of the new law.

5) Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases

The expansion of the bioethanol production in Brazil contributes to an energy balance which is more favorable than carbon fossil fuels. Moreover, the increasing electricity co-generation from sugarcane bagasse positively influences Brazilian energy security, reducing country’s dependence on fossil fuel thermo electrical energy, which is responsible for large amounts of GHG emissions. However, the most significant contribution to greenhouse gases emissions of the ZAE Cana is related to the reduction of fires as a result of the mechanized harvesting.

The conclusion from this analysis is that, even though the ZAE Cana represents a remarkable advance in the international biofuel debate, because of the several lacunas in the final document, it may not fulfill its objective to put the bioethanol polemics to rest. In order to accomplish this herculean task, Brazilian Federal Government should undertake a proportionally colossal mission and promote an unified zoning strategy to all of its agricultural sector. It has also to base this zoning in a comprehensive and sound Strategic Environmental Assessment.

 

Comments Off on The SEA behind the Brazilian Sugarcane Agroecological Zoning / 24 May 2013 por Andrea Mara Hanai
IMSD /