At an event entitled “Biomimicry + the Regenerative Economy” held in New York City last week, experts Amy Larkin and Katherine Collins share lessons business can learn from nature.
Author: Raz Godelnik
A growing number of millennials are living with their parents. This is good news, right? Millennials seem to adopt a more responsible economic behavior, avoiding the same reckless financial decisions that got so many people in trouble only a few years ago. Well, not so fast. The reports on this trend widely present it as a problem rather than an opportunity. Why? Because by not buying houses, millennials are hurting the real estate recovery and a weak housing market has been a burden on the U.S. economic growth.
Some questions the legitimacy or fairness of Uber’s business tactics, especially given the fact that it operates in many places within a “grey area” of the law. Yet, behind these arguments lie even more fundamental questions: Is Uber still considered part of the sharing economy? Is it exploitative? And if you answer ‘yes’ to both questions, what does it say about the sharing economy?
Walgreens is now considering moving the company’s headquarters to Switzerland to lower its tax bill. How does this jive with the company’s sustainability claims?
The Cradle to Cradle Products Innovation Institute recently commissioned Trucost, a leading global environmental data and insight company, to determine the value of C2C certification for companies. The result is a 145-page report in which Trucost presents its analysis of 10 C2C-certified products from different companies (and industries), including Aveda, Desso, Ecover, PUMA, Shaw Industries, Steelcase and Van Houtum.
Three years after taking over the leadership of Apple, Tim Cook is still struggling to make his own mark in the company, but he may prove to be a leader in CSR.
Last week at the Sustainable Brands conference in San Diego, gDiapers CEO, Jason Graham-Nye said: “I think sustainability is like fight club. The first rule of fight club is don’t talk about fight club. The first rule of sustainability is the word is so dead.”
While obviously Uber seems to meet the definition of disruptive innovation as most people understand this concept, it would be interesting to see if Uber actually meets the criteria for disruptive innovation defined by the person who actually coined and popularized the term – Prof. Clayton M. Christensen.
Earlier this month Thomas Friedman wrote on the New York Times about two very different groups trying to shape the economic environment worldwide. The first was “Davos men”–the “transnational, cosmopolitan elite drawn from high-tech, finance, multinationals, academics and NGOs,” who regularly attend the Davos World Economic Forum. The second group was the “square people”–according to Friedman, it includes mostly young people, who are aspiring to a higher standard of living and more liberty, seeking either reform or revolution in their country (depending on their existing government) and “demanding a new social contract.”
If you look at studies exploring consumer attitudes, you find that consumers indeed seem to be more conscious about sustainability and are more willing to incorporate it into their decision-making process. Yet, when it comes to actual behavior, (almost) all of these good intentions disappear somehow, and sustainability or corporate responsibility doesn’t seem to make much of a difference for most consumers. Hence my question is: Why is it that whenever we find ourselves at the store or the supermarket we forget all the good intentions we had back home?
A couple of weeks ago, H&M released its 2013 sustainability report. We took a look inside to find out whether the company is serious about making fashion sustainable.
“If a positive can be found, it’s that Rana Plaza has been a turning point – the 21st Century equivalent of New York’s 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist factory fire which killed 146 but led to a unionized, safe garment industry,” Dolly Jones wrote on Vogue earlier this month.
A recent report from Americans for Tax Fairness estimates that Walmart workers relying on public assistance programs due to low wages cost American taxpayers $6.2 billion a year. Another interesting figure presented in the report was that Walmart has captured 18 percent of the SNAP (food stamps program) market. It got me thinking that if a substantial number of Walmart’s employees in the U.S. (1.3 million in total) receive food stamps, then the company actually profits twice from paying low-wages.
Technology is definitely key in CfA’s work helping government become more engaging, user-friendly and effective, but I believe that there’s also a secret sauce that makes it work – empathy.
Presented earlier this month, Aros, which is described as a “truly brilliant air conditioner,” is the result of an ongoing collaboration between General Electric and Quirky. What makes Aros interesting is not just the fact that it is the first “brilliant” AC and how it advances the vision of Internet of Things, but also what it means in terms of the relationships between the new collaborative, open economy and the more traditional one.