Buddhism and Sustainability

I was asked to sit on a panel at a local Buddhist group -- a teacher was out of town, so the students put together this panel on Buddhism and the environment. One person spoke about composting and buying organic, while another (a professor of ecology) spoke about ecology vs environmentalism and the pursuit of truth through science. Both topics link nicely to Buddhism.

After all that inspirational stuff, my topic was ..... business. But actually, sustainable business links to Buddhism too. I shared a couple of ways that my current schooling and consulting in sustainable business relate to my Buddhist practice. In fact, I appreciated the opportunity to explore and integrate my ideas about this.

My views are somewhat in flux, but for now, here are my thoughts on the intersection of Buddhism, environmentalism, and business:

Buddhism and Sustainability

I am studying Sustainable Business. The word “sustainable” or “sustainability” is not easy to define, but the concept can be understood fairly easily: The current way that we use the Earth’s resources to meet human needs is not wise and cannot continue in the same manner for much longer. We are using things up too quickly, destroying habitats and other species in the process. We need something more harmonious that will serve long into the future.

“Sustainable development” is commonly defined as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” (Brundtland Report, 1987). It encompasses the way we make and use money, the way we handle the Earth’s resources, and the way we build our society and human relationships. There are other terms for “sustainability” also— “resilience” or “harmony,” for example.

Sustainable businesses are concerned with the “triple bottom line”—meaning that they endeavor to add environmental and social value in addition to making a financial profit. We say it as, People, planet, profit. The three legs of sustainable business.

But what does sustainable business have to do with Buddhism? There are probably many connections; I’d like to discuss two that are meaningful for me, one practical and one more idealistic.

Starting with the practical, we can use the cornerstone Buddhist principle of acknowledging and dealing with reality. At this time, all but a very small number of the world’s economies are essentially capitalist. And of the world’s 100 largest economic entities, around 50 are countries and around 50 are companies. If we are to transform our methods of meeting human needs, business must be included.

Sometimes in environmental or social justice circles, an assumption is made that business is evil. Phrases like “the corporate empire” or “global corporate hegemony” are said casually, implying that business is always a problem, and it is best to ignore it, resist it, or otherwise work outside of it.

But is this true?

A further assumption is that business is totally different from Nature, which is naturally mutualistic, synergistic, and harmonious.

But is this true? Conservation biologist and long-time Buddhist practitioner Michael Soule points out that we need to include everything in our view of Nature:

“There’s a false romanticism in contemporary Buddhism, […] which is the denial of nature’s dark, violent side. Buddhists may want to perceive balance, harmony, and nonviolence in ecosystems because such a view would seem to justify nonviolence in human communities. But murder and infanticide are common in mammals [and other creatures]. Should this be a model for human behavior? Just because it’s natural doesn’t mean it’s a good idea, even though it may be adaptive in an evolutionary sense. [The point is,] when you look at nature from a Buddhist point of view, you have to accept the whole package, not just look at the things you like about nature, its beauty and grace, and forget the rest.”

Bringing business into the picture, we can notice that the world is economically interdependent just as surely as it is ecologically interdependent. To a greater degree than ever before in history, my welfare is connected to that of other people in distant countries. Including business in our field of practice is a way of taking responsibility for our economic interdependence.

This includes our consumer buying decisions, but it also includes the practice of business itself. Can business have a heart?

• Interface Flooring Systems has a goal called Mission Zero: Eliminating any negative impact of its operations on the environment by 2020. Since 1996, it has decreased its waste to landfill by 70%. Employee bonuses are linked to environmental improvement.
  
• Nau clothing gives 5% of its sales (not profits) to charities, as well as designing its products with their entire life cycle in mind to minimize environmental impact. The company website includes a blog written by employees about practicing sustainability.
  
• REI redesigned the way it gives product information to customers, potentially reducing its use of paper by 37,000 pounds per year. (A single action by business can have a large impact compared to our individual conservation efforts).
  
• David Green figured out a new method of doing simple cataract surgery in India, as well as a new way to manufacture intraocular lenses. The lenses from his company, Aurolab, cost $4 apiece, compared to other companies’ prices of $100. He then devised a tiered pricing model for his hospitals whereby wealthier patients pay a higher price and subsidize 65%-100% of the surgery cost for poorer patients, so that now more than 200,000 cataract operations are performed per year in India, compared to just 5,000 before he arrived. He calls this “compassionate capitalism.” (David Green meditates, by the way).

None of this is to justify or condone the very real damage that has been done by global business or the stunningly uncompassionate actions companies have taken. There is plenty of ignorance and greed in the business world.

The point is that we can choose to work toward a better way. There is nothing wrong with using the water, land, and minerals of the Earth to support human life. (There is no need to feel guilty about eating, taking a shower, or whatever). What matters is how we do it. Are we going to pursue hoarding, grasping, and disrespectful taking, or are we going to treat the resources around us as gifts, sources of joy, and opportunities for practice and insight?

This leads to the second, more idealistic, connection I see between business, environmentalism, and Buddhism.

There is a verse in the Dhammapada – verse 283 (in “The Path,” Magga), Gil Fronsdal's translation – that is humorously environmental on the surface, but also points toward the challenges we face with global business.

Cut down the forest [of desire], not [real] trees.
From the forest [of desire], fear is born.
Having cut down both the forest and the underbrush,
Monks, be deforested [of desire].

Notes on page 134-135 of Gil’s translation:

"This verse seems to contain a number of word plays and so is difficult to translate. For example, it plays on the two meanings of vana, “forest” and “desire.” The commentaries explain that once, when the Buddha told his monks to cut down the vana, they started to clear the forest. He then had to clarify that he meant to “cut down the forest of desire, not the forest of trees.” […] The verse might also be punning between nibbanaa (“free of forest”) and nibbana (Nirvana)."

One reason our current business practices are unsustainable is that they are born from a thick forest of desire. We generate and buy more and more “stuff,” which we then have to protect. We fear losing what we have, even though it seems not to be making us happy. As the Dhammapada verse states, indulging our desires creates fear. When you read the newspaper, and especially the business section, most of it is about desire and fear.

The companies mentioned previously are not “Buddhist companies” (whatever that would be!). They are part of the growing population of companies, non-profits, and other groups dedicated to practicing sustainable and responsible business. In a sense, these companies “swim against the stream” — the stream of the conventional single bottom line that only cares about short-term financial profit.

But is it enough? A triple bottom line is still a bottom line. It’s still about competing in a marketplace, selling goods, and paying salaries. Only a handful of businesses are daring to venture beyond recognized models.

Some are. There is a non-profit in Portland Oregon called SCRAP (the School & Community Reuse Action Project). They operate a retail store selling art and creative materials that are donated in an effort to keep them out of the landfill. Although SCRAP is doing retail, their inventory is donated — an interesting merging of dana (generosity/donations) and capitalism. Other examples include community repair/reconstruction shops, blood donation, common pool resources, social entrepreneurship, micro lending, time banks, shared computer processing power, and Fair Trade practices.

But for those companies still practicing the bottom line, I see it as a process. Moving from a single bottom line to a triple bottom line is not enough to save the planet, but in taking that step, businesses transform themselves into something new. And that new entity becomes capable of imagining other steps to take, which then leads to another transformation. We don’t have to see the end point from here. We can trust the process of expanding the consciousness of business to bring about transformative change. It is enough to see a little bit more interconnection and to have a little bit more ethical behavior this year than last year. Each tree of desire that we cut down saves several real trees.

I work as a sustainable business consultant, helping people in companies make their products and business practices more harmonious and humane. Some are just starting to wake up, while others already have quite a broad conscience. This work brings me face to face with my own desires, aversions, and delusions. In my lifetime, I don’t expect to see world peace or a full economic transformation come to fruition, but I do know that I will see more and more deeply into my own mind as I work with other people aspiring to comprehend the economic Indra’s Net that we live in.

When the forest of desire is cut down everywhere, we will have no further worries about the real trees that grow on Earth.