Achieving Sustainability Means Changing the Behaviour of Large Multinational Corporations

We live in a world that is increasingly dominated by multinational corporations and global trade. And the actions and activities of these multinationals can, and does lead to, environmental catastrophes. Sometimes these can have impacts beyond national jurisdictions, e.g. the Deep Water Horizon disaster. In addition, some global companies behave in ways that have devastating global consequences, with the most high profile example of this being the casino antics of the financial and banking sector, but there are others of note, such as the telephone hacking scandal at the now defunct News of the Word newspaper (owned by .., yes another global corporation). All over the world, large companies are stripping the world of its natural resources, to fuel a society that is taking more of these resources than it is entitled to. Moreover, the western world is experiencing what is now called an obesity epidemic, with the food industry denying any responsibility for this, and spending billions of euros to resist changes (such as the traffic light food labelling system) that will help consumers to make more informed decisions.

So, is it time to move international law forward, from its current limited scope, to encompass more of the international consequences of business activities? Is it time to enshrine in international law, rights for the unborn – future generations – that will give them the opportunity to call to account, in an international court, those who today would place profit before humanity? Is it time to give other creatures that share our planet, more rights in international law? Is it time to create laws that will render those executives who continually place profit above human health and welfare, liable to criminal prosecution?

What nonsense is this you think! Well, it is exactly the type of nonsense, or care for human rights and for justice that led to the abolition of the slave trade, then of slavery itself. It is the type of nonsense that led to the concept of war crimes, and of the understanding that powerful people in governments can be called to account for their actions, in an international court. It is the type of nonsense that led to laws in the developed world than ban child labour, etc.

What is the difference between a socially acceptable business activity and an unacceptable one? The answer, sadly, is a law; not, you will notice, ethics or morals. Generally, it is not humanitarian or spiritual values that lead companies to stop behaving in damaging ways – it is law!

Let us be in no doubt, that if we want to begin to develop a sustainable civilisation, then we have to change the behaviour of large multinational companies, for they are a significant part of the problem. And one way we can begin to modify their behaviour is by creating international laws that balance the rights of companies to practice, with the rights of others. And then we must begin to replace exploitative values with humanitarian or spiritual ones. These are the first steps to reinventing capitalism. And there can be no objections to this from these companies. Can there? Well no objections if they do not want to be compared with the slave traders of the past, and the British companies that worked the drug trade in the 19^th century, and the employers that happily exploited children, all of whom did what they did in the name of the legitimate pursuit of profit.

If you think that the world can just go on as it has in the past, then you need to open your eyes. Just as national law, along with concepts of fairness and justice, have to move forward, then so does international law.  It might well be possible to continue as in the past, but the end result will not be a world worth living in. It is time to draw a line, and for ordinary people to stand up and say enough. Is it time to bring about a legal revolution in the way international business is conducted. We also need to change the nature of capitalism itself, and this is a matter I will be writing about in the future, for this change is already underway, but you will not find much trace of it in most companies, for they, like scientists, engineers and technologists, have become like Prometheus.

And if you have not noticed, once again in writing about sustainability, I find myself referring to behavioural change. So take note – it’s all about behaviour. If someone is talking about sustainability and is not including the words behavioural change, then there is a very high probability that they are not talking about sustainability. Most likely they are just engaging in delusions – there are a lot of deluded people in the world, for it seems as thought this is the way the human mind likes to operate (otherwise called the tale of the emperor’s new clothes, a story of collective denial and delusion).

Sustainability and Behavioural Change means Developing New Approaches to Science, Engineering and Technology

Scientists, engineers and technologists are trained to think in a certain way, a linear way … “they are not always encouraged to think outside the box, or to think in an open-minded, counter-intuitive way. They are programmed to think that rationality will always triumph.”

At the end of last weeks’ blog I said “most people in the world of science, engineering and technology have not got the vision, the imagination and the courage to walk this different path.” The different path I was referring to is sustainable agriculture based on behavioural change, in particular the behaviour of scientists, engineers and technologists. And the reason why they will not walk this new path is partly because humans are creatures of habit and they easily become like Prometheus, bound by invisible chains to the rock of the past. And, as a result, you will not find many scientists, engineers or technologists who asking the most fundamental of questions: Why is contemporary civilisation unsustainable? What is it about science, engineering and technology that contribute to this circumstance? What is it about scientists, engineers and technologists that make them blind to their contribution to the destruction of the natural world? How do we need to change in terms of values, thinking, and methods to enable, and be part of, a transition towards a sustainable civilisation?

The opening paragraph above is adapted from words that appeared in a (usually rather superficial) publication E&T Magazine, produced by a very traditional industrial era type organisation (The Institution of Engineering and Technology), representing a very conservative group of people (engineers), who are part of an orthodoxy that is based on collective beliefs and values (from the past) that blinds them to the damage that they have caused over many centuries. But of course, being blind, they do not see this, nor recognise that they are blind.

Scientists, engineers and technologists bear a heavy burden of responsibility for the unsustainable nature contemporary civilisation, although few realise this, so caught-up are they in their respective ideologies. An eminent applied mathematician and control engineer, the late Professor Howard Rosenbrock, FRS, was prepared to tackle this matter.

Howard Rosenbrock is well known in the fields of applied mathematics and engineering for his pioneering contributions to the development of control theory, control systems design, and the application of computers for the purpose of industrial control. However, there is an aspect of his work that many in science, engineering and technology would prefer to ignore, and this was his concern about the damaging consequences of the values underlying science, engineering, and technology. This life-long disquiet led him, in the latter stages of his career, to begin to lay the foundations for new approaches to science, engineering, and technology through the development of a method for developing skill enhancing or human-centred technologies, and an exploration of science based on purpose (be careful here – this does not mean what you think it means!).

Lest this work should go unnoticed and be relegated to obscurity, we will be saying some more about this in future blogs for it is fundamental to achieving sustainability. Also to be introduced is work that is developing a different approach to science, engineering and technology based on a human-centred philosophy, and the path to the development of this new approach begins in the most unusual of places. When I say unusual, I mean that it will be seen as unusual to the modern fragmented mind, caught-up in its scientific, engineering and technological delusions. It would not have been seen as unusual to the renaissance mind, to people like Leonardo. Have you ever wondered why there are no more people like this?

More Farming Fantasies!

The BBC Countryfile programme, in the edition transmitted on Sunday April 7 (2014), delivered another example of a person caught-up in delusions that GM crops have a part to play in the future of farming. This time it was a member of the British Royal Family. Very dangerous thinking, which will no doubt provide others caught-up in this delusion, with ammunition to further their belief in the importance of this technology.

Belief is the key word here, for I have yet to find any sound rational evidence that it has any importance. Its main contribution to agriculture seems mostly to be about people acquiring kudos and making a lot of money, at the risk of causing problems for future generations, while ignoring other approaches that do offer greater prospects for delivering on the need to respond to growing world population without destroying the natural world. I am referring here to such things as urban agriculture, permaculture, and behavioural and lifestyle changes. But as Rachael Carson pointed out in the early 1960s in her book Silent Spring, there are no big research grants for academic groups to be found in following these other paths – and to this I would also add, little scientific kudos, no Nobel prizes, no patents to be filed, and little in the way of personnel wealth to be acquired. And to those who would say “the world is thus”, I say no, “thus do you make the world”, and our children will curse you for it.

So I repeat my message that sustainability, sustainable agriculture in this particular case, is to be found in behavioural change and the quest for sustainability should be driven by this concept, from which novel scientific and technological thinking will, I can assure you, follow. But most people in the world of science, engineering and technology have not got the vision, the imagination and the courage to walk this different path. Advanced knowledge and stupid beliefs, this is the defining characteristic of many of these people! Say hello to these Prometheans, you will find them in Moments in Time.

Engineering – An Example of an Occupation in Need of Behavioural Change

Engineering is very important to society given that most of that which we rely upon in the modern world results from engineering endeavour. But there is another side to engineering, which, on the whole, many engineers do not want to discuss. For, not only are engineers partly responsible for all those things that make life comfortable, but also all the bad things that are destroying our world. And yet many engineers are seemingly blind to this fact, and also unwilling to engage in the intellectual development that would move them forward. They are literally, trapped in the past. They have become like Prometheus, chained to a rock, and the rock and the chains are invisible to most of them, thus when they read what is written here, not only will most of them not agree, but will do so with an emotion that should serve as a warning.

It is important therefore to ask: if the occupation of engineering is fit for purpose, given the circumstances that humanity faces in the early 21st century? There are also many other important questions to consider: What needs to be done to improve the standing of engineers in society? Are there some areas of activities where engineers should not be allowed to practice without special knowledge, competencies and certification? Is the current system of registration for Chartered Engineering status in need of major revision? How can standards be raised so that excellence rises above mediocrity? Is there a need for regulation founded in law?

The world has changed significantly since the 18th and 19th centuries, but apart from working with new technologies, it seems that minds have not moved on. Engineers tend to handle modern challenges and 21st century technologies, and interact with an increasingly technologically literate society, on the basis of 18th century beliefs and values. Increasingly many engineers are out of step with society. It is not therefore surprising that they are often held in such low regard, not only by other professions, but by society at large.

It is time for engineers to step into the 21st century, and to begin to reform themselves, to change their culture, to raise standards, to start behaving as true professionals rather than representatives of employers, and, above all, to stop engaging in collective delusions.

And the route to change starts by engineers accepting and acknowledging, and being open about, their failings. This will not happen however, as long as the Engineering Institutions continue to behave as though there is nothing wrong with engineering. Engineering Institutions in the UK are increasingly succumbing to the modern disease of style over substance and are over emphasising the importance of engineers and demonstrating a pride in their achievements that does not reflect the reality of the damage that engineers have also caused. These Institutions lack vision, provide no leadership, and fail to offer a role model and a benchmark for behaviour, being also themselves caught-up in collective delusions. These Institutions are also full of optimism, choosing to project an image that hides the reality of an occupation that many would not want to be associated with. Furthermore, like countless individual engineers, these Institutions also subscribe to the deficit hypothesis, perceiving not engineers to be the problem, but others, who, through some deficit, are unable to see how marvellous engineers are.

Engineering Institutions in the UK also seem to struggle to fully understand their purpose and role, and fail to demonstrate any in-depth understanding that they no longer have much in the way of unique selling points, with much of what they are able to offer now available free-of-charge as a result of a networked world. As a consequence, they turn to marketing hype, using terms such as thought leadership, to cover their emptiness, and engage is the pretence of being independent, even though their alignment with vested interests is plain for all to see. And many engineers are taken-in by this nonsense; such is their unquestioning acceptance of the world. And there is a word to describe all this – and that word is hubris.

That which the Engineering Institutions will not do must therefore be done by individuals. One of the interesting features of the modern age is that formal organisations no longer hold the power that they once did. Power is shifting downwards to individuals, and it is now time to use that power. Among my blogs you will find much information about several issues that are linked to fitness for purpose. This information should help people to better understand what is wrong.  But now also it is time to start moving on to considering the foundations for a very different type of engineering that is truly a profession. And the same comments also apply to scientists and technologists as well.

How to change the behaviour of those who have acquired the values and beliefs that keep these groups chained to the rock of the past is a difficult issue. In my book Moments in Time, the central character (an engineer) in the end, realises what he must do – behave differently. But what should that different behaviour be? What is the new paradigm? During the course of 2014 I plan to discuss some aspects of this. Slowly I am edging towards explaining, but first I have more to say, so, next week I will explore matters further.