Engaging the Change: Proposing a New Approach to Sustainability

Submit A Comment | View Comments

Pay employees/executives for performance, pay students for good grades, pay smokers for quitting and drivers for driving safely, via lowered insurance rates… a myriad of “pay for” strategies have taken hold in many sectors of the economy, based on the seemingly simple premise that people respond to direct, clearly spelled-out benefits. Give a patient a written prescription, and he will likely get it filled. Tell him to exercise more and eat less, and he likely will not – at least not for long.

Why not implement a straightforward action/response plan for green building? And how? The post below, adapted from an email sent to fellow green advocates a few days ago, is by Cindy Ojczyk, LEED AP, a Minneapolis-based environmental blogger and partner of green consulting company Verified Green.

What do remodelers think?

 

 

Perhaps we need to come up with a different approach to the whole sustainability issue than that of our predecessors.

I will start here with something I know well. I have a master’s degree in nutrition education. You can teach people all day about good strategies for long-term health, you can provide easy access tools (nutrition labels, FDA-regulated labels, insurance incentives, local gyms and healthy clubs, organic food…), but until they are in crisis, most people do not feel compelled to change their current behaviors to long-lasting actions that provide future gain.

What we are experiencing today in the Green world is no different than what the world of nutrition has been experiencing for the past 30 years. While people say they are concerned about their health and what they eat, how much they exercise, there is very little action to engage the change that is needed for long-term health.

There is a preponderance of research on human health and nutrition. There are ample tools and ample professionals that people can easily access to improve their health for long-term gain. Yet, we continue to look for the quick fix -- easy, “don’t bother me” answers such as diet pills, diet books, supplements, cereal fortified with oats, 30-minute infomercials selling magic machines to create six-pack abs…..

The question – if so much knowledge exists and so many tools have been developed, why are we in poorer health now than 30 years ago? Why are we more obese, less physically fit, more prone to asthma, more likely to experience cancer?

We will never solve the environmental sustainability issue until we solve the human nutrition issue. The earth will never be healthier until we understand what the obstacles are to personal health. Few people will have the fortitude to focus beyond themselves and focus on the earth.

As a scientist, I totally believe that the human body is no different than that of most animals – we became programmed through evolution to react to eminent danger with an adrenalin response – to fight or flee – to act or run.

How can we use this innate behavior to our benefit?

Let’s manipulate the system to create “fight/action” responses for the results we want.

  • In the state of California, the average portable beverage container is recycled at a rate of 80%. In the U.S., the average recycling rate is around 39%. The difference is that the California bottle bill creates a direct action/response – turn in container, get money back. 
  • In Minnesota, Xcel Energy and CEE's "Operation Insulation" program had a 40% response rate; that is, 40% of homeowners actually implemented the energy prescriptions written by the auditors. (The auditors gave the homeowners names of businesses they could contact to get the work done along with the prescription for the work that needed to be done). The current implementation rate of an energy audit prescription is 1-2%.
  • Many grocery stores offer a $0.05 or $0.10 per bag savings to induce people to bring their own bags. That's not much, but look at how many people bring their own reusable bags.
  • Schools that promote the collection of packaging, such as Box Tops for Education (General Mills), Kemps 5-cents milk bottle caps, pop tabs, Campbell Soup labels, make thousands of dollars per year from sponsoring companies! Parents actually take time to save these things because it is free and easy money.

How can we think about promoting sustainable behaviors differently than we currently do?

How can we get more people involved by engaging the fight/action response that they know well?

Cindy Ojczyk, LEED AP, is the environmental blogger for Press Publications and a partner at Verified Green, a collaborative consulting and training company that interacts with building professionals, product suppliers, and government entities to green the design and construction of new homes, remodels, and neighborhoods.

posted by Leah Thayer, senior editor, lthayer@hanleywood.com

    follow me on Twitter

     
     

    Comments (9 Total)

    • Posted by: JessieOtto | Time: 4:35 PM Thursday, July 09, 2009

      Good points by all. I have been following the green credit market in UK and see the struggles they have been having. Other then mandating green behavior, I think it starts from education. As a parent understanding all the pieces to a "green" home I am willing to consider even at a price increase because I want the best for my family. I believe more win-win type situations are going to be key. Not only is a tax credit is an incentive and promotes positive behavior - it also encourages others to follow suit.

      Report this as offensive

    • Posted by: shawnanelson | Time: 10:59 AM Thursday, July 09, 2009

      It appears that current incentives are targeted to the building enveloping and mechanical system. That makes sense since close to half of the energy used by a house is for heating and cooling. The next big area, and probably easier and less costly to incentivize, are fixtures, appliances, and water heaters, which account for the other half of energy used. Credits for LED, CFL, Tier 2&3 appliances, etc. would really help influence buyers decisions. These items are purchased more frequently and are usually less expensive than major upgrades. Stat source - Department of Energy

      Report this as offensive

    • Posted by: Anonymous | Time: 8:29 AM Thursday, July 09, 2009

      Now I am curious, what incentives can we encourage manufacturers, retailers, government... to create that will engage the public in easy actionable items that create big change. I mentioned the bottle bill that reduces packaging. Green building/remodeling is a big undertaking due to all the parts and pieces. The few incentives out there aren't pulling in the masses. What easy actionable things can we do to get the adrenaline going in the public and encourages big action? Cindy Ojczyk www.verifiedgreen.org

      Report this as offensive

    • Posted by: Anonymous | Time: 6:37 PM Wednesday, July 08, 2009

      Fear based change is always a loser (read the book Change or Die about the percentage of heart patients that change their habits out of fear of dying). Any time we want to help someone make meaningful changes we have to approach the issue from their personal perspective, not the perspective of others. Cindy's post is right on the mark!

      Report this as offensive

    • Posted by: Steve Taylor | Time: 4:25 PM Wednesday, July 08, 2009

      Incentives are the way we are constantly molded from childhood up. It is endemic to western culture. Think how hard the U.S. Armed forces train against that natural law in getting their members to obey orders even when it goes against their basic instincts to survive? (talk about incentive.)

      Report this as offensive

    • Posted by: Steve Taylor | Time: 4:24 PM Wednesday, July 08, 2009

      Incentive are the way we are constantly molded from childhood up. It is endemic to western culture. Think how hard the U.S. Armed forces train against that natural law in getting their members to obey orders even when it goes against their basic instincts to survive? (talk about incentive.)

      Report this as offensive

    • Posted by: Anonymous | Time: 3:11 PM Wednesday, July 08, 2009

      Cindy, So many of your comments hit home for me. The need for cleanliness in our bodies, our homes and environment is of value for our health, our security and our longevity. By placing value to the use or clean up is an exchange of energy with value. It's funny, at my son's fraternity quad, the school actually pays the homeless around town to clean up the beer cans. Everyone wins! I would be willing to pay an upcharge to dine smoke free because it is of value to me. . . . . would a smoker pay to smoke? HA! Good article, thanks.

      Report this as offensive

    • Posted by: shawnanelson | Time: 3:05 PM Wednesday, July 08, 2009

      Leah, thanks for posting this article. Cindy is real positive leader in the green/sustainable world. I enjoy reading her ideas and talking with her about how to actually accomplish sustainable goals. While she is passionate, she doesn’t demonize others for failing to act. Her approach here reflects a good sense that to change individual behavior, on a mass scale, we need to provide individual benefit. The utility rebates and energy tax credits are helping our industry, homeowners save money, and our planet. I hope that we have more win-win-win solutions. Shawn Nelson www.NewSpaces.com

      Report this as offensive

    • Posted by: Anonymous | Time: 7:02 AM Wednesday, July 08, 2009

      I seem to remember there were tax incentives for reuse of old homes and buildings, and for energy efficient houses/systems...way back in the 1970's? The tax breaks helped initiate a whole 2-3 decades of DIY folks renovating Victorian homes, reinvigorating cities and charming towns, and an interest in this thing called renewable energy. Without this restoration push from the 1970s and then the "home as luxury nest" push from the 1980's and 90's, we in the remodeling business would all be a lot poorer. A market was developed for us by folks like Martha Stewart and This Old House fans. Didn't Mr Reagan dismantle this tax code just like he did the solar panels on the White House? Diane Menke MyersConstructsInc www.myersconstructs.com

      Report this as offensive

    Comment on this Post

    Post your comment below. If you wish, enter a username and password though they are not required. Please read our Content Guidelines before posting.

     

    Enter the code shown in the image

    Username is optional

     

    Enter a password if you want a username

     
     

    About the Blogger

    Leah Thayer

    thumbnail image Leah was a senior editor for Remodeling magazine from 2004 until June 2010. She is a lifelong fan of small businesses and grew up in a builder family. Prior to joining Remodeling, she wrote for and/or edited extensively for professional audiences, focusing on business management, health care, and marketing. Email: leah.thayer@gmail.com. Twitter: @leahthayer