Category Archives: The Nature Conservancy

greenpeace gets mattel to cut off deforesting supplier — what happens now?

Barbie, It's Over

Editor’s Note: This post references the work of The Nature Conservancy, where I work. However, it is in no way intended to represent the organization in any way. These are my own thoughts and opinions.

The next time someone tells you that social media is a waste of time and can’t change anything, point them in the direction of Greenpeace’s campaign against Mattel. Launched last Tuesday, the environmental activist group’s “Barbie, It’s Over” campaign targeted Mattel for using paper products that, according to Greenpeace tests, contained pulp from Indonesian rainforests. The public pressure from Greenpeace already prompted Mattel to cut off sub-supplier Sinar Mas/APP (Asia Pulp and Paper), which is seen as the primary culprit in the rainforest pulp sourcing problem:

“We have directed our packaging suppliers to stop sourcing pulp from Sinar Mas/APP as we investigate the deforestation allegations,” Mattel said. “Additionally, we have asked our packaging suppliers to clarify how they are addressing the broader issue in their own supply chains.”

For its part, Greenpeace rejected the statement calling on Mattel to adopt “a comprehensive policy to deal with the issue.”

What happened last week is good news for Indonesian forests and for the environment, but it is far from the end of the story. In fact, the real work of cleaning up Mattel’s act is just beginning and most likely Greenpeace won’t be involved at all.

The key issue here is “supply chain.” Greenpeace doesn’t want Mattel to just stop using rainforest pulp in their Barbie boxes, they want the company to clean up and monitor its entire supply chain. In some cases, this might mean Mattel has to drop suppliers all together, but more often it means getting suppliers to clean up their act.

In the end, it’s not really Mattel and Barbie Greenpeace is after, it’s Asia Pulp and Paper.

So hopefully what happens next is that Mattel responds to the pressure by bringing in a big non-governmental organization (NGO) like The Nature Conservancy, WWF, or TFT to help the company green its supply chain. These NGOs have scientists, economists and other resources that Greenpeace doesn’t have to help companies clean up their supply chains and ensure they’re sourcing materials from sustainable companies.

This is how the environmental community works: Greenpeace and other activist organizations put pressure on big companies to change their ways, which then turn to larger “business friendly” organizations to help them implement change. This works because Greenpeace can bring the heat and the large NGOs can bring the expertise to make change actually happen. In most cases, you need both sides of the coin to make meaningful change happen.

For the most part, this works quite well. For example, when Greenpeace pressured Nestle over its use of unsustainable palm oil, Nestle made a commitment to work with TFT to “help Nestlé to build responsible supply chains by identifying and addressing embedded social and environmental issues.” Similarly, when Greenpeace and others pressured McDonald’s and Cargill over Amazon deforestation for soy production, Cargill turned to The Nature Conservancy to implement the Responsible Soy Project to help halt forest destruction there.

Similar results came from Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth Reports on deforestation from cattle ranching in Brazil. Following those reports, The Nature Conservancy began working with the Brazilian beef industry after years of reaching out to the sector with limited success.

However, there can be two unfortunate (and unrelated) side effects to this model.

One, if companies react to the pressure by simply cutting off suppliers and “red-lining” areas, significant change won’t happen. For instance, if WalMart says it won’t get beef from the Amazon anymore because of deforestation, they’ll simply move to other supply chains that damage less high-profile, but still sensitive areas — like Brazil’s Cerrado — and claim victory.

When this happens, suppliers who source meat from the Amazon don’t whither up and die, they simply start selling their beef to other less scrupulous companies and countries. (For an excellent deconstruction of this conundrum, see this post on the Conservancy’s Cool Green Science blog by David Cleary, director of conservation strategies in South America.)

Two, big NGOs like The Nature Conservancy and WWF are often criticized by people in the environmental movement for working with the corporations Greenpeace and other activist organizations put pressure on to change. Some environmentalists see these NGOs as “being in bed” with big corporations or accuse them of greenwashing by working directly with corporations to bring about change. The reality is that without these NGOs, the Greenpeace campaigns wouldn’t succeed because pressure and heat go away — and in today’s 24 hour news cycle it goes away pretty quickly.

If there weren’t NGO experts these companies could turn to for help, it would actually be much easier for them to wait out the Greenpeace campaign, close off their Facebook comments and give the media 48 hours to find the next shiny thing.

testing out storify for the nature conservancy

We’re testing out Storify at The Nature Conservancy as a way to tell ongoing stories through dispatches from the field and directly from our science staff. As more of our science and policy folks get social-media savvy, collecting this type of information in one easy-to-read place with an actual narrative is going to be important.

Here, I’ve tried to not only capture the sequence of events, but also weave a core Conservancy message into the story — that leaving natural floodplains in tact is necessary to prevent catastrophic flood damage. You can see our fist Storify here:


hot friday link action: bin laden smoked weed addition

The Bin Laden/Obama memes flew fast and furiously this week. The subtle velociraptor version above happens to be my personal favorite. Time and The Atlantic have the rundown on some of the more popular memes this week.

In other Bin Laden news, he was apparently growing some pretty sick weed in his million dollar (or $460,000) compound right next to his cabbages and potatoes. But The Huffington Post assures us it was probably for medical purposes only.

SHOCKING! Fox News produced a misleading piece about climate change, weather and tornadoes, taking clips out of context and not including all the facts. The Wonk Room has the takedown, and The Nature Conservancy’s Sarene Marshall gives an inside view on what happened in Cool Green Science (see comments).

Starbucks or a hot meal? Coffee prices hit a 34-year high this week, meaning it’s going to cost you more to get that morning fix. Planet Green says heavy rains in South America, coupled with increased demand are driving up prices. I’m blaming the Trenta.

And finally, Clean up Your Mess! Daniel Higginbotham of Flying Machine Studios has a great eBook as website (or website as eBook) guide to visual design that is a must-read for anyone who cares about that sort of thing. Must-read for the awesome Aikido example he uses if for nothing else.

hot friday link action: killer’s kiss

Leave a reply

The excellent Open Culture adds Stanley Kubrick’s Killer’s Kiss to their Free Online Movies collection. The 67-minute film noir marks the true start of Kubrick’s film career.

Readability adds yet another link shortener to the mix for short-link hungry twitter users. Clicking on a rdd.me link opens articles in the Readability format, including a mobile-optimized version. As newspapers continue to jam adds into their content — I’m looking at you Washington Post– this type of service for news sharing will become more important. Readability can also provide revenue for writers and publishers.

Apple is looking to create a world without wires and a world without wires is a better world indeed. The magic gadget maker is working on a set of iDevices, starting with the next generation of iPods, that can be synced with iTunes over WiFi. The engineering is tough however. Speaking of Apple and wireless, Scoble calls AirPlay the most important protocol since RSS, even though it’s owned and controlled by Apple.

Venerable outdoor clothier and gear-maker L.L. Bean is getting hip. It just launched a new Tumblr account and is promoting a stylish new Signature collection aimed at the J.Crew/hipster set. Add in their new, everything ships for free policy, and L.L. Bean looks to be on the rise.

The U.S. needs wind power to reduce its emissions and stem climate change, but we don’t want to turn the American West into a wind factory. Good news: A new study from The Nature Conservancy shows that it’s possible to generate wind power for hundreds of millions of homes without disturbing natural lands. So let’s build some turbines up in this piece.

Speaking of The Nature Conservancy, we’re on Instagram now, so please check us out if your an Instagram user.

Notes on SXSW, Day 3: Change.org Gives Me an Epiphany

***Please note, this is a draft. I haven’t proofed it or included the appropriate links, but I wanted to get it up before I started my day. ***

When you come to a conference like SXSW Interactive, you expect to be exposed to an idea that’s going to not only change the way your think about your work, but directly impact a project you are working on right now, or are about to start. Yesterday, during a sparsely populated session in the Radisson of all places, Change.org CEO Ben Rattray delivered that session — or at least he did for me.

As a quick back story, The Nature Conservancy is currently working on a plan to raise awareness of what amounts to one of the biggest hits to Conservation in the history of the country. This hit comes courtesy of House-proposed budget cuts that would essentially zero-out funding for the conservation of Federal lands and waters. (You can read more about this issue here and find out how you can help here.)

These cuts have put the Conservancy, a consensus-driven, non-partisan, non-advocacy organization in the petition of needing to take a public stance on a high-profile issue and forced us to try to mobilize our member base. We literally have to go from 0-60 in a matter of weeks.

Our (or should I say my) knee-jerk reaction was, “Stand-up a Convio email your representative system and get it rolling as soon as possible.” After a few meetings with more informed colleagues, I quickly realized that this strategy is now a non-starter. National, email your representative campaigns simply don’t work anymore.

So where do we go from here?

That’s the issue I’ve been struggling with — that is until Rattray provided a way forward.

Change.org has come upon a brilliant concept that breaks down national issues (immigration reform, gay rights, human rights, fracking, etc.) into localized issues that can create the baseline for success moving forward on the national level. Here’s how it works:

The current national political climate makes it very difficult to pass legislation providing increased protecting for gays and lesbians right now. However, on a local level there are several stories — and several wins that can be had that will not only make a difference for people on the ground, but will also provide a framework for national change and national discussion now and down the road. As an example, Rattray notes that thee are currently 29 states that prohibit LGBT teachers in public schools. Teachers have been fired for their sexual orientation. Change.org has helped set up personal campaigns in these cases to help draw attention to the issue and pressure school boards and universities to overturn these firings. And they’ve met with a good deal of success.

These victories are easier to achieve than national campaigns, Rattray says, because they rely on a personal story that a majority of Americans can relate to. No one thinks that a record-setting soccer coach should be fired simply because she’s a lesbian, least of all her players who started a petition to have her job reinstated — and won. They also succeed because a school administrator who gets 250 emails responds with a personal phone call. A legislator who gets 250 emails thinks of it as a joke.

Now, back to my thinking on the Federal Lands funding fight. The results of cuts to funding for Federal lands are inherently a local issue. When these cuts occur it is going to effect the forests and rivers that we all use for hunting, fishing and hiking — the effects are felt locally. However, the decision makers are working at a national level. So, Rattray’s model isn’t a perfect fit here. However, if we can find some local champions to be our campaigners, actions and petitions can be localized and personal. The question remains: How will that scale up to national action?

The details need to be worked out, but I’m pretty sure we’re onto something here — and I’m really sure this is a better call-to-action than an anonymous email your member of Congress form.