and congested places to live, work, and raise a family. Rural areas were also fraught with poverty and serious qualityof-life issues. By this time, agricultural soil fertility was decreasing and soil erosion was increasing, and not long after World War II ended, the new petroleum-based pesticides were touted as the linchpin of a productive agricultural system. Extensive air and water pollution was prolific and unfettered. During this period of increasingly apparent environmental troubles, a few ardent advocates organized and supported various causes including wilderness, wildlife, soil, water, forests, prairies, and pollution reduction. These early impassioned advocacy groups mostly acted independently of one another, championing their own single causes and finding only limited success influencing meaningful public policy changes that benefited their agendas.
In 1962, Rachel Carson’s book Silent Spring was published, and it became a lightning rod for the myriad of environmental concerns existing at that time. Her timely message, an indictment of the pesticide industry as a major polluter, fused many independent advocacy factions into a single, cohesive, and identifiable “modern environmental movement,” allowing this new societal cause to quickly develop into a formidable force for change. A new appreciation and respect for nature began appearing in the public mainstream as did an increasing concern for how American industrialization negatively affects the health of humans and of the natural world. New champions of nature called “environmentalists” began to take a respected place within academia, government, and non-profit organizations. Grassroots movements led by these environmentalists flourished, and their ideals were even incorporated into national platforms of political parties. The original Clean Air Act, the Environmental Policy Act, and a new federal bureau called the Environmental Protection Agency were among the tangible political results to surface in the early 1970s in the U.S. as a direct result of this robust environmental movement. The cause for reducing the harmful effects of business upon society and nature had now taken hold, and this commitment was illustrated by a number of regulatory attempts by federal and state government to slow down the industry’s seemingly indiscriminate efforts to increase its profits at the expense of environmental quality.
Historically, these environmentalists generally viewed leaders of the industry as self-serving, dishonest, and dangerous; they lobbied state and federal lawmakers to legislate environmental policies that coerced business to conform to the environmentalist agenda. Business leaders, in turn, viewed environmentalists as impractical extremists, whose unreasonable demands would raise the costs of goods and services, thereby putting many companies out of business, increase the U.S. unemployment rate, and lower the overall standard of living. Over the past 40 years, both sides have dug in their heels, resisted compromise, and operated within an evolving national environmental policy framework that has cost business and consumers billions of dollars per year but has not significantly mitigated the root problems. Despite many earnest attempts by legislators to craft effective U.S. environmental laws since the 1960s, we continue to systematically poison ourselves (albeit at a slower rate), lose domestic jobs, and dismantle many of our once-thriving local communities.
1.2Our Problems Continue
Since the 1960s, concerned U.S. citizens have generally looked to the government to remedy this deteriorating quality-of-life situation, but our public servants have not been up to the task. One endemic but seldom-cited hindrance is that our legislators and executive office holders are held accountable for their public service performance during relatively short terms of office and, not surprisingly, they routinely avoid tackling the core causes of problems that will provide the majority of benefits far into the future. Unfortunately in our political system, reactionary and shortsighted legislative action that generates headlines for name recognition and the next re-election campaign is more common. At the same time, Americans have tolerated this approach to environmental issues by politicians and, for the most part, have not demonstrated a mandate for effective systemic change in this regard. We will discuss more about the government’s role and responsibility in the sustainable business movement in Chapter 6.
In short, this insidious and protracted industrial tyranny shortens the lives of our citizens, undermines our economic stability, and continuously degrades the very natural systems upon which all life depends. Exacerbating the situation is an insufficient understanding and appreciation by most citizens of our reliance upon a healthy natural world and the myriad of vital services that come from it. Most of us still envision a mythical inexhaustible supply of raw materials from nature and her limitless capacity for absorbing all the toxic punches we can throw at her. Unfortunately, today we find most K-through-12 school systems lacking comprehensive and integrated environmental and social-based curricula, and this deficiency fuels our disassociation of human prosperity and natural world health. Most of us simply do not recognize the irreplaceable benefits provided by only a healthy and prolific natural environment, such as oxygen production, climate stabilization, water purification, flood control, soil fertility, materials for our products, and esthetic beauty. Anyone having difficulty grasping this concept could consider the single source of the oxygen in that last breath of air just inhaled: green plants.
When asked to describe our community, loosely defined as where we routinely get our needs met, we might include our town, neighborhood, or section of city where we work and live, but rarely do we consider the surrounding natural world in this context. Particularly for those of us living in urban settings, nature is commonly viewed as a peripheral and non-essential part of our existence that we occasionally visit, sometimes only out of necessity to get to a destination, other times by choice for some type of outdoor recreational activity such as camping, hiking, or boating. In the late 1940s, the exceptional visionary Aldo Leopold wrote in the last chapter of his book A Sand County Almanac that the natural course for humanity is to expand our concept of community (and ethics) to include “… soils, waters, plants, and animals ….” Our continuing failure to recognize the significance and value of a healthy natural world in our personal life and in business is myopic and dangerous. Since we tend to take care of only those things we value, our extended legacy of natural world destruction is not particularly surprising. Unfortunately, this prolonged oversight has placed future humanity in a seriously compromised situation.
Perhaps just as important, in addition to the lack of appreciation of the natural world by the average citizen, many environmental advocates have failed to recognize the importance of a vibrant and durable business sector to provide a high quality of life and a heritage of opportunity for future human generations. Aggravating the situation is the preponderance of business managers today who pursue the myopic quest to increase short-term profits, much to the detriment of longterm economic health and stability. A far too speculative mortgage market or the corporate takeover and subsequent dismantling of successful businesses are examples of this sort of near-sighted, self-centered behavior. For the past several decades, U.S. manufacturing companies have continually increased the amount of foreign-made components in order to reduce production costs, and consumers consistently chase down low-priced foreign goods at corporate “big box” retail stores with little or no consideration of the comprehensive effects this purchasing pattern has on their communities.
When more local dollars for goods and services leave a region than come into that region, the result is an insidiously negative trade deficit. When we patronize corporate restaurants, food producers, banks, fast-food chains, or clothing stores, we send much of our money to distant supply chains and profits to worldwide stockholders. This methodical loss of wealth sucks the lifeblood of jobs and financial capital from regions throughout the country. We unwittingly allow an economic pattern to continue where locally generated wealth continually exits in a region, unnecessarily. A better community-supporting option is to seek out the outstanding locally owned businesses within your community and patronize them frequently. In addition to enjoying establishments of unique local character, product, and personal service, more of your money spent at these businesses stays in your community to re-circulate. Studies suggest that out of every $100 spent at locally owned businesses, at least $25 more remains in the local economy when compared to businesses that are not locally owned.2
One of the easiest ways to begin to support local businesses while improving the value received is to patronize the variety of local restaurants available in a community. Often an interesting