La vita e bella - with trash
Nearly a year ago I wrote about how the terminology we use abstracts from the fact that there are living and sentient human beings doing 'supply chain' work. Listening to a recent podcast it dawned on me that language can be just as useful to gloss over the seriousness and impact of scientific facts. And the resulting necessary actions. Climate Change vs Climate Emergency? Green energy vs renewable energy vs clean energy? Hence, some more thinking about the role of language.
Mind the Gap
The supply chain. It has been accepted a long-time ago: supply chain is a risk. Or better: a RISK in capital letters. But also a word that sounds impersonal. Very akin to a factory being a cogwheel in a much larger clockwork. And while the definition of the term does list ‘people’, the focus is very clearly on the idea of it all being a neat system of seamless interactions.
We all can see it happening before our eyes: Despite the Paris Climate Agreement to a climate trajectory of ‘well bellow’ 2 degrees (hence where the 1.5C number stems from) – the trajectory is not anywhere near that number. The Inevitable Policy Response (IPR) is the response by governments and legislators around the globe in taking action – hence enacting laws – in line with the 1.5 Degree climate goals.
The term sustainability is applied as the responsibility of enterprises for their impacts on society. In this context sustainability is about the integration of social, environmental, ethical, human rights, consumer concerns and financial performance into business operations and strategy in collaboration with stakeholders, with the aim of: Identifying, preventing and mitigating any possible adverse impacts of business’ actions on the environment and society while maximizing societal benefit.