Green Business
Mark Tercek , CEO of The Nature Conservancy, who has continued his focus on ecosystem services or attributing economic value to nature…
Q: Do you really believe that businesses can thrive by investing in nature?
I have tremendous respect for the environmental movement and all that it has accomplished over the past half-century. We are very fortunate to have a strong base of passionate supporters. But to achieve our mission, we need to improve our approach and attract even more people and resources to our cause. One way to accomplish this goal is to make nature relevant to more people. Undisturbed, nature provides us clean water and air, fertile soil, timber to build homes and support industry, and protection from floods and other natural hazards. I believe this approach can result in some very positive outcomes for the environmental movement. First, it will help us build more support and secure new partnerships for conservation. Second, it will unlock new sources of funding. Third, and perhaps most importantly, it will improve the dialogue between environmentalists and the rest of society. You can conserve the environment and not be at odds with economic progress.
Q: Can you provide an example of success between commercial and environmental interests?
Yes! Water scarcity and quality are already serious global problems. As we look ahead, climate change, population growth, and the rise of the global middle class will translate into increased demand for natural resources, especially fresh water. At The Nature Conservancy, we are encouraged when we help regional water users understand that environmentally conscious investments in protecting their water supplies can also be very economically attractive. In Quito, Ecuador, for example, TNC team learned that plans for an expensive new water filtration plant were about to be launched. After evaluating the situation, we contacted the municipal water authority, the local brewery, and the Coca-Cola bottler and ultimately proposed a different approach. Instead of building an expensive facility to clean water later, we proposed rather straightforward changes in ranching and farming practices upstream that would keep water clean downstream, thereby saving money and the environment.
Q: As conflicting time horizons and investment cycles are in many ways at the core of the division between environmentalism and business, how do we move business to think beyond a five-year time horizon?
In business, there is a lot of emphasis on quarterly results (an efficient metrics for many business drivers), but that should not be at the expense of long-term strategies. Many highly respected companies like Amazon, Google, and Apple are clearly focused on quarterly results alongside bold and longer-term investments. And it seems to me that all prudent business leaders can understand the benefits of a long-term point of view. Still, there is a need for regulatory policy to motivate the business community to take actions that might not at first evolve solely through market mechanics.
Q: So, what advice do you have for the environmental community for building true working relationships with those business leaders, instead of viewing business interests as the enemy?
In my view, the key to building productive relationships with business, government and broader audiences in general is for environmentalists to put themselves in other people’s shoes. Not everyone has the innate love of nature that drives many of us in the environmental community. We should focus on showing people “what’s in it for them”—how nature makes their lives better, protects their health, improves their business’s bottom line, creates jobs, and gets our economy moving. By stressing the value of nature, we can stop lecturing people and instead connect with them around shared values and concerns.
Q: How do we further encourage business, governments, and individuals across the globe to place appropriate values on natural capital and environmental services to reap the true bounty and potential of nature’s fortune?
First, we need more scientific data to back up environmental theories. We have compelling ideas, but business managers, engineers, government officials, and others who are responsible for making infrastructure decisions need solid data on the benefits of investing in natural solutions alongside, or in place of, traditional (manmade) infrastructure approaches. Second, I think we should continue to improve the dialogue between environmentalists and the rest of society. Third, government action is critical. We need smart environmental policies and regulations that bolster voluntary initiatives. Lately, this key player has been missing in action. Our leaders must move past partisan gridlock and recognise the important role of nature in our nation’s prosperity. A climate of respectful dialogue on issues of the environment needs to be encouraged. Since I now see business leaders at the table, scientists and environmental advocates are stepping up. There’s reason for optimism.
Leave a comment