If you were walking down the road in a pair of new shoes and you saw a toddler drowning in a pond, I'm pretty sure you'd jump in and try to save it, no matter what the cost.

Yet within the last 24 hours, I bet you've bought a coffee, a chocolate bar, or something else that you  didn't need. In the last 24 hours 500 kids died of measles. The vaccine costs 50p. So what's the difference?

Peter Singer's new book, The Life You Can Save,looks to answer that question. In it, Singer, a philospher by trade, argues that our response to the challenges of poverty are not just insufficient they are ethically indefensible.

The essence of his arguments follows like this:

1. Suffering & death from lack of food, shelter and medical care are bad.
2. If it is in your power to prevent something bad happening, without sacrificing something nearly as important, it is wrong not to do so.
3. By donating to aid agencies, you can prevent suffering and death from a lack of food, shelter and medical care, without sacrificing anything nearly as important.

Conclusion: If you do not donate to aid agencies you are doing something wrong.

Stripped down like this, Singer's argument seems pretty crude. But he dedicates a good proportion of the book to debunking the myths and misconceptions that are often wheeled out by those that are too tight, selfish and/or lazy to ever consider giving to aid agencies. Of particular interest to Futerra, as behaviour change geeks, is his examination of the natural human hesitancy to give to others (particularly those you don't know). Singer identifies a number of factors:

• the lack of an identifiable victim
• parochialism
• futility
• diffusion of responsibility
• sense of fairness (a person giving a proportion of their income cannot help being aware of others with a lot more cash who are not!).

Futerra has had to tackle many of these reactions over the years on different projects, you'll find that a number of The Rules deal with exactly these reactions. 

If you define the "rich" as those who have an income above the average of Portugal, then there are 850 million rich people in the world. If each of us gave £120 per year, that would total £100 billion, which according to the United Nations, would easily be enough for us to achieve the Millennium Development Goals.

So Singer wants us to get giving. You can go to his website: www.thelifeyoucansave.com , and make a pledge to give a certain percentage of your income to charity. You choose who you give to and the site provides tools for you to compare which charities most efficiently use your donation.

Singer provides a really persuasive argument for everyone becoming part of the solution to ending extreme poverty and its symptoms across the world. 

Yes, hard to believe it I know but Futerra is now well over eight years old (despite our official birthday party only being last week, like Her Majesty the Queen we opt for flexible dating so we can hedge our bets around workload, official engagements, village hall openings etc). So, for the purposes of some form of posterity here's eight highlights of the last 100 months or so, one for each year of our existence...

1. Filming with Keira Knightley: We are now so old we even predate the lovely Keira's stratospheric rise to stardom, which, so we like to think, is undoubtedly almost entirely attributable to her starring role in our Shakespearean climate change short 'The Seasons Alter' which we shot in January 2002 (OK, OK, 'Bend it like Beckham' was her real big break...but we can fantasise). Watch the Hollywood A-lister wrap her pouting lips around some of the Bard's most powerful language on Youtube here. 

2. Developing the UK's first National Climate Change Communications Strategy: In the heady days of 2004 this was no mean challenge and the work we delivered ultimately arguably spawned a whole new approach to environmental communication and engagement for attitude and behaviour change as provoked by our 'Rules of the Game' and 'New Rules, New Game' publications. This foundation work eventually gave birth to 'Act on CO2' the main Government climate change campaign still rolling out today.

3. Taking 'Sustainability Communications' to the world: In 2005 we partnered with UNEP to produce the most popular document we've ever been involved in, with 100's of 1000's of copies now distributed or downloaded internationally. Check it out here.

4. A Springboard for Small Business: Now in it's fifth year, and not without controversy, we're proud of the work we've done in co-creating this awards programme to encourage an entrepreneurial and creative response to climate change - an approach which is all the more relevant given our current dual economic and climate changes. Many winners and millions of pounds later Shell Springboard has really made a difference...now if we could just influence the parent company in the same way...

5. Sustainability is more than just 'green': Our work for the UK Government's Department for International Development is part of our portfolio of projects that really gets us excited, several of the Futerra team have African roots and connections so using our skills to wrestle with climate change in the context of alleviating poverty and tackling water and sanitation issues is fundamental to our mission! Read our 'Degrees of Seperation' report to see how we creatively linked the UK, poverty and climate change...

6. It's good to talk: BT is perhaps Futerra's longest standing client and over the years we have produced a number of really interesting projects with them, from thought leadership publications like the 'Little Book' series on sustainability, through to the 'Better Business Choices' game. BT is a consistent market leader on sustainability and welove their approach to creative engagement of decision-makers and opinion-formers, staff and customers.

7. The Team: Futerra is nothing without it's people. We are a business built on brilliant brains tackling the most creative and effective ways to put some wax on the tracks towards sustainability - to make it, in the words of our founding mission, 'so desirable it becomes normal'. We have been consistently blessed by a lovely, rowdy, passionate, professional, intelligent, persuasive, inspiring and wonderful team who work beyond the call of duty, for projects and causes they believe in with wit, wisdom, patience and perseverance. These are the folk who have come up with such gems as 'Swishing' and 'Low Carbon Travel', who make Futerra parties the consistently marvellous shindigs they are and long may it continue!

8.The Future: Why on earth do we do all this stuff anyway? Eight years ago we were seen as freaky and niche at best, now the work we do is becoming ever more mainstream. Our name is even (crudely!) derived from 'Fu-Terra' meaning 'Future-Earth'. We want to help create a better world, visions of a positive future that motivate and inspire, create salience around where we could be headed and what the rewards might be..it's this that gets us up and out of bed every morning, and more and more people are joining us...

Want to change the world? This is what humans have always done! We now have the knowledge and awareness to understand the powerful potential and opportunity we are presented with - to design and create an ecologically secure, equitable and ethical world...or to squander this chance in favour of the status quo. We're reinventing the notion of 'progress'. Who's up for joining us in the next eight years?!

Our friends at the Arab Media for Environment and Development (AMFED) have just launched their new website: www.amfed-media.org.

Written by journalists for journalists, it's a great hub for news and views on development communication from the Arab world. Go take a look!

Great new blog from Seth, with a video clip that shows social proof in action. As he rightly points out, it's the 3rd guy that makes it a movement. The first bloke is the real pioneer, the one people are laughing at.

The second fella gets a few more people talking 'another nutter' you can imagine them saying, but secretly they want to be up there dancing too.

The third guy makes it alright for anyone else to come up and join in. 

I think on sustainability, we've got loads of number 1 and 2's, what we need is more 'third guy' people to join in.

Read Seth's post here. 

Way back in the halcyon days of 2007 renewable energy pioneers Ecotricity welcomed Gordon Brown into office with a big advert featuring a green Union Jack...it was a great idea and a powerful symbol for the need for greater activism in getting Britain going green. Such a good idea in fact that it seems to have reappeared!

French nuclear specialists EDF have co-opted the green Union Jack idea as part of their sponsorship of the 2012 Olympics, as well as commandeering a whole bunch of other concepts...their 'Team Swap' sounds remarkably similar to 'Swishing' and 'Cadge-IT'...now where can they have got those ideas from?!

; )

Over the last few days the number of cyclists in London has soared, all down to the balmy weather and tube strike no doubt. You see them swarm, like moths around stationery traffic at the lights.

I'm a bit of a veteran cycler, having been riding London's streets for 4 years now. When people find out I cycle, their first response is 'that's really dangerous, I wouldn't do that'. Truth is I've had 2 near misses, one my fault, one a driver's fault. It's really not that dangerous as long as you keep your wits about you.

Over the last few days, with all these enthusiastic newbies on the streets, the number of near misses I've seen has gone up as fast as trust in government has fallen. So here’s the start of the Rules of the Game: City Cycling. 

1. Assume no-one knows you're there

This goes for pedestrians, joggers, mums with prams, cars, buses, trucks and motorbikes. Assuming they've seen you is tempting fate and sod's law by insulting their mums - you're doomed.

2. Wait 'till you've seen the whites of their eyes and smile

When a car's looking to pull out of a road you're cycling past, technically you have right of way. But technical details don't matter much when they are protected by 2 tons of steel and you by a few layers of cotton. Before you ride past them, wait until they've seen you, then flash them your best smile. Who knows, they might be hot.

3.  The magic gap

Occasionally, on a slightly narrow two way street, the traffic on your side can become stationary, waiting behind parked cars because for the oncoming traffic to pass. If you can get past the cars in your lane safely on the inside you can nip through the magic gap that’s been left by the driver to move round the parked car. Why is it magic, because that’s the feeling you get when you whip past all the traffic and on into an empty lane all for you!

More of my rules to follow, what are yours?

Ed just walked into the office in his ‘Normal for Norfolk’ t-shirt, and it got me thinking. About local produce.

Now, although Ed is without doubt a tasty, wholesome, low carbon chap, I’m referring more to local, seasonal food than the ‘Bungay brethren’.

Initially the preserve (no pun intended) of farmer-folk, local, seasonal food is well and truly back on the menu. We owe much of the raised appetite for knowledge of where our food comes from to Hugh, Jamie and the TV chef gang, who do a great job of communicating its threats and benefits with equally graphic enthusiasm (piles of salty, fatty mess vs piles of vibrant veg steaming beneath a juicy organic partridge). And it’s not all about mouth water…

Around 19% of the UK’s total greenhouse gas emissions are associated with our food and drink, and Defra reckons the food we eat in the UK clocks up an astounding 30 billion km a year. That’s the equivalent of sending our meals round the earth 750,000 times, and produces the same amount of carbon as two coal-powered fire stations.

So, to help persuade us to ‘eliminate the unseasonal’, our Friends at Do the Green Thing have chronicled the violent story of Ninjin - a man who couldn't stomach how people were turning to imported veg. He has a gun. He has a mission: to eliminate all instances of unseasonal vegetable consumption. By any means necessary.

Feast you eyes on this (p.s. some vegetables were harmed and eaten in this film):

Three years ago I was invited to speak at a conference in Chicago called 'The Artworld is Flat' all about art and activism. Perhaps unsurprisingly given my personal position on flying (see www.lowcarbontravel.com for ample evidence!) I politely declined the invitation, but offered to take the money they would have coughed up for my hotel and air fare and instead make a film for them, with the option of a teleconference phone-in for post-presentation Q&A. Happily they went for it and the resulting film, which you can watch on Youtube here (note how fat and pasty I was in 2006!), went down very well and arguably sent a powerful message about the need to travel (or not) to attend these events.

We then also ran a 'virtual workshop' for the British Council in New Zealand (again watchable on Youtube here) proving we could share insight and expertise from one side of the planet to the other without tearing up the atmosphere carbon-wise in the process!

So I was really heartened to see this trend possibly catching on when I received an email from the Ashden Directory (they bring together environmentalism and the performing arts) this morning. They wanted to attend an important conference 'Earth Matters on Stage' at the University of Oregon but like Futerra didn't want to fly! So they made a film and then hosted a staellite conference discussion. Brilliant. One of the commentators featured was my old mate Dan Gretton of arts and education campaigning gurus Platform and you can watch Dan's typically thoughtful contribution here

Last night's Channel 4 programme "I'm Running Sainsbury's" was a great example of how companys are starting to realise the power of engaging employees on business strategy. An internal competition is set-up to allow their general population to come up with the next "Big Idea". The employees are invited to pitch their concepts to a panel of execs - and if it passes the boardroom test, they are given resource to pilot their plan to improve the supermarket giant. They must project manage and oversee their idea through to implementation.

Its a huge development opportunity - not only for those that make it through to the pilot stage, but for everyone encouraged to bring their ideas from the shop floor. We've seen this kind of programme with our own clients - including Bloomberg and United Utilities, both of whom initiated sustainability programmes by getting ideas from their staff and subsequently giving them full support to develop solutions. Many other clients have champions schemes - which empower employees from across the organisation to be play a huge role in changing the way the business operates.

I met with a comms manager from one big City firm recently, where I was told that the only true way to achieve behaviour change in a high performing company was through top-down messaging via line managers. With challenges like a global economic crisis and climate change, smart companies are realising that their biggest asset is actually their employees - and that the best ideas come from within - regardless of where they may sit on the corporate ladder.

It's birthdays all round this month, with Futerra celebrating our 8th birthday (where did those 3000 days go?!) and our very good buddies down under at Republic of Everyone are just turning one! Fighting the Australian ethical communications corner RoE have already delivered a really cracking campaign with their 'Stop Whaling' initiative 'Tails for Whales' having gone truly global, and deservedly so for it's beuatifully brilliant simplicity...

Their more recent work includes a novel label for a new 'Skinny Blonde' beer graced by a buxom female whose bikini evaporates when the beer is at the correctly chilled temperature...an innovative, differentiating creative solution perhaps best described as 'very Australian'. Which reminded me of the Mormon-baiting brewery in Utah which brewed a 'Polygamy Porter' beer, the strap-line for which was inevitably 'Why have just one?'

; )

It was another busy soiree at Green Monday last night, where I was hosting the regular 'Green Communications' table debate. Thanks to all those who attended the session - Julie's Bicycle, Coca-Cola, Microsoft and Tesco amongst the business attendees around the table for the usual lively discussion.  The theme 'How to sell green ideas, press releases & concepts into the media' was introduced using a case study of Futerra's work for the Co-Operative Bank's 'Plan Bee' campaign, that used several diverse themes (a hard-nosed pesticide action theme, a 'beauty without bees' theme that focused on the importance of bee products in cosmetics and a 'Great British Bee' theme to appeal to a wide range of media from broadsheets, through female glossies to tabloid red tops).

One of the key challenges to emerge from debate was how to position yourself with integrity and confidence. Tesco's dilemmas were highlighted over their 'Flights for lights' ad, although sometimes bad publicity can help galvanise internal debate. The point was also raised that Tesco find it difficult to get coverage for positive stories (such as their £25M investment in CHP) yet 'cock-ups' like the flights ad kicked off a storm! There was a feeling that the hostility of the media environment could lead to 'greenhushing' (the opposite of greenwashing) whereby companies DON'T talk about their credible environmental initiatives because of the fear of being lambasted.

It was felt that the context was vital in this regard and embodied by the plastic bag debate that had dominated the panel discussion earlier in the evening...who cares about a 'bag for life' when this is such a minimal part of the carbon footprint of your shopping? It's potent, visible symbolism was acknowledged however...the suggestion that a headline 'Tesco powers it's stores on shit' (well, chicken manure maybe) might work to get media cut-through was undermined somewhat by it's potential brand damage!

The debate then romped into format territory with both Microsoft and Julie's Bicycle sharing difficulties around communicating the merits of lower carbon digital downloads of music and software relative to their CD/CD-ROM counterparts. Should both the music & computer industries be 'choice-editing' their content to remove more energy/material intensive formats? After all, vinyl has been almost entirely 'choice-edited' from consumer music options?

Microsoft actually charges more for a download at present as if it was discounted it could instantly destroy their partner retail and distribution networks! It was noted that a similar thing could happen to the video/DVD/music retailers like HMV. Were they potentially ending up as the car industry, resisting inevitable change and then imploding as a result? This raised the dilemma - when do you communicate to lead a market change, as opposed to trying to stop it or having to react furiously quickly once that change becomes irresistable?

Julie's Bicycle then offered up their 'IG' (Industry Green) label as an example of a trusted, credible, industry brand that indicated that the CD product emitted less than 400g of carbon. In blind vs informed choiuces consumers always preferred the 'IG' labelled prodcut (which comes in a cardboard sleeve not a plastic jewel case). This addressed the concern, that unlike different brands of crisps with different carbon footprints, consumers were unlikley to choose a Metallica CD over a Spice Girls CD because it had a lower carbon footprint!

We concluded discussions wrestling with the communications challenge of dematerialised products. Whilst better for the environment and inherently lower in carbon, the worry was that consumer perception of value is still dependent on the 'size of the box'. As the publishing and film industries quake that their formats are next in line following the rout of the music industry by illegal downloading and file-sharing, how can we communicate the fact that just because a product is dematerialised doesn't make it free! An increasing perception amongst younger consumers in particular...

Roll on next month when the topic will be:

"Communicating sustainability for product and service innovation"

Expect more of the same roving debate!

A classic example of how NOT to do your PR is evidenced by this little gem on the Guardian's Ethical Living Blog. Neals' Yard Remedies committed to a 'You ask, they answer' engagement with the Guardian's online blogging community, a bold, brave and challenging move as those of us who have been on the sharp end of their ire can testify! (See my somewhat ill-fated 'Frucool' efforts for some entertaining feedback).

However when the questioning around the efficacy of homeopathy got tricky, they just simply refused to answer and declined further comment! Which reminded me of the telephone technique of Tory MP Julie Kirkbride when quizzed by a journalist about her 'unique home arrangements' (her and her MP husband designating different hosues as their main residences to maximise expenses claims)...she simply hung up the phone! Thus creating a self-inflicted indictment of herself. If you can't stand the PR heat it's probably best to not even go into the kitchen in the first place. A lesson Neal's Yard will no doubt be ruing right now... 

From 9 life lessons from rock climbing by Matthew Childs'. It's a great explanation of why using fear as a motivator is really not a good idea.

Rule #6 Fear Sucks

"Fear sucks, because it means you're not focusing on what you're doing. You're concentrating on the consequences of failing at what you're doing. Because any given move should require all your concentration...to execute it effectively."

Don't need to say any more...

Check it ou here.

Also, listen to the Ray Anderson talk on sustainability, the best explanation of the Ekins equation I've ever heard.  

...the usual frothing reaction to supposed stealth eco-tax on rubbish got me griping again on the Guardian Ethiocal Living blog this morning. Read the column online here.

Those of you that follow the Futerra blog will be aware of the long running ‘discussion’ (I would like to call it a battle but as the conversations are so polite that would exaggerate the conflict) we have been having with Dell about recycling our old computers. While it has been very good tempered and amiable (they have now collected our WEEE for free) it was interesting to see them publishing a report which showed the UK as the worst recyclers in Europe.

In fairness I can well believe it but I couldn’t help feeling a touch of irony after our attempts to dispose of our electrical equipment responsibly. Is this low recycling rate the fault of the public or those responsible for collecting WEEE? For home owners it should be quite straight forward but I think many suppliers are playing a compliance game, doing only as much as they are required to do by the law and no more.

There are real bonus points to be won for companies that go above and beyond to help customers understand their choices and deal with WEEE effectively.  

To cut to the heart of the issue I believe that the problem lies with the WEEE directive itself. A fault that was even recognised in a conversation I had with one of its administrators last year.

The basic mechanism of the WEEE directive is to charge anyone importing electrical goods into the UK a small amount per item. This then goes into a fund which helps with the final disposal costs of electronic goods. What it fails to do is reward any manufacturer that tries to improve the longevity or recyclability of their product or reduce its environmental impact. This removes any incentive (other than consumer driven ones) for manufactures to engage with cradle to cradle or eco design, part upgrades or any other innovation that is more sustainable but has an associated cost.

It took a  long time to even get the WEEE directive in place and any amendments are a long way off  so for the time being I must agree with Tony Juniper that , ‘the lack of awareness is a serious issue’.

The Miss Earth green beauty pageant claims to be serious about protecting Mother Earth in a swimsuit and high heels.

Are you GREEN,Glam and  Gorgeous?

I'd like to give some smart comment or intellectual reportage but to be honest I'm lost for words.

I received this speech in an email today and thought 'wow' so here it is for the sharing...

The Unforgettable Commencement
Address by Paul Hawken to the Class of 2009, University of Portland, May 3, 2009

When I was invited to give this speech, I was asked if I could give a simple short talk that was "direct, naked, taut, honest, passionate, lean, shivering, startling, and graceful." Boy, no pressure there. But let's begin with the startling part. Hey, Class of 2009: you are going to have to figure out what it means to be a human being on earth at a time when every living system is declining, and the rate of decline is accelerating. Kind of a mind-boggling situation... but not one peer-reviewed paper published in the last thirty years can refute that statement. Basically, the earth needs a new operating system, you are the programmers, and we need it within a few decades. This planet came with a set of operating instructions, but we seem to have misplaced them. Important rules like don't poison the water, soil, or air, and don't let the earth get overcrowded, and don't touch the thermostat have been broken. Buckminster Fuller said that spaceship earth was so ingeniously designed that no one has a clue that we are on one, flying through the universe at a million miles per hour, with no need for seatbelts, lots of room in coach, and really good food, but all that is changing.

There is invisible writing on the back of the diploma you will receive, and in case you didn't bring lemon juice to decode it, I can tell you what it says: YOU ARE BRILLIANT, AND THE EARTH IS HIRING. The earth couldn't afford to send any recruiters or limos to your school. It sent you rain, sunsets, ripe cherries, night blooming jasmine, and that unbelievably cute person you are dating. Take the hint. And here's the deal: Forget that this task of planet-saving is not possible in the time required. Don't be put off by people who know what is not possible. Do what needs to be done, and check to see if it was impossible only after you are done.

When asked if I am pessimistic or optimistic about the future, my answer is always the same: If you look at the science about what is happening on earth and aren't pessimistic, you don't understand data.

But if you meet the people who are working to restore this earth and the lives of the poor, and you aren't optimistic, you haven't got a pulse. What I see everywhere in the world are ordinary people willing to confront despair, power, and incalculable odds in order to restore some semblance of grace, justice, and beauty to this world. The poet Adrienne Rich wrote, "So much has been destroyed I have cast my lot with those who, age after age, perversely, with no extraordinary power, reconstitute the world." There could be no better description.

Humanity is coalescing. It is reconstituting the world, and the action is taking place in schoolrooms, farms, jungles, villages, campuses, companies, refugee camps, deserts, fisheries, and slums. You join a multitude of caring people. No one knows how many groups and organizations are working on the most salient issues of our day: climate change, poverty, deforestation, peace, water, hunger, conservation, human rights, and more. This is the largest movement the world has ever seen. Rather than control, it seeks connection. Rather than dominance, it strives to disperse concentrations of power. Like Mercy Corps, it works behind the scenes and gets the job done. Large as it is, no one knows the true size of this movement. It provides hope, support, and meaning to billions of people in the world. Its clout resides in idea, not in force. It is made up of teachers, children, peasants, businesspeople, rappers, organic farmers, nuns, artists, government workers, fisher-folk, engineers, students, incorrigible writers, weeping Muslims, concerned mothers, poets, doctors without borders, grieving Christians, street musicians, the President of the United States of America, and as the writer David James Duncan would say, the Creator, the One who loves us all in such a huge way.

There is a rabbinical teaching that says if the world is ending and the Messiah arrives, first plant a tree, and then see if the story is true. Inspiration is not garnered from the litanies of what may befall us; it resides in humanity's willingness to restore, redress, reform, rebuild, recover, re-imagine, and reconsider. "One day you finally knew what you had to do, and began, though the voices around you kept shouting their bad advice," is Mary Oliver's description of moving away from the profane toward a deep sense of connectedness to the living world.

Millions of people are working on behalf of strangers, even if the evening news is usually about the death of strangers. This kindness of strangers has religious, even mythic origins, and very specific eighteenth-century roots. Abolitionists were the first people to create a national and global movement to defend the rights of those they did not know. Until that time, no group had filed a grievance except on behalf of itself. The founders of this movement were largely unknown Granville Clark, Thomas Clarkson, Josiah Wedgwood and their goal was ridiculous on the face of it: at that time three out of four people in the world were enslaved. Enslaving each other was what human beings had done for ages. And the abolitionist movement was greeted with incredulity. Conservative spokesmen ridiculed the abolitionists as liberals, progressives, do-gooders, meddlers, and activists. They were told they would ruin the economy and drive England into poverty. But for the first time in history a group of people organized themselves to help people they would
never know, from whom they would never receive direct or indirect benefit. And today tens of millions of people do this every day. It is called the world of non-profits, civil society, schools, social entrepreneurship, and non-governmental organizations, of companies who place social and environmental justice at the top of their strategic goals. The scope and scale of this effort is unparalleled in history.

The living world is not "out there" somewhere, but in your heart. What do we know about life? In the words of biologist Janine Benyus, life creates the conditions that are conducive to life. I can think of no better motto for a future economy. We have tens of thousands of abandoned homes without people and tens of thousands of abandoned people without homes. We have failed bankers advising failed regulators on how to save failed assets. Think about this: we are the only species on this planet without full employment. Brilliant. We have an economy that tells us that it is cheaper to destroy earth in real time than to renew, restore, and sustain it. You can print money to bail out a bank but you can't print life to bail out a planet. At present we are stealing the future, selling it in the present, and calling it gross domestic product. We can just as easily have an economy that is based on healing the future instead of stealing it. We can either create assets for the future or take the assets of the future. One is called restoration and the other exploitation. And whenever we exploit the earth we exploit people and cause untold suffering. Working for the earth is not a way to get rich, it is a way to be rich.

The first living cell came into being nearly 40 million centuries ago, and its direct descendants are in all of our bloodstreams. Literally you are breathing molecules this very second that were inhaled by Moses, Mother Teresa, and Bono. We are vastly interconnected. Our fates are inseparable. We are here because the dream of every cell is to become two cells. In each of you are one quadrillion cells, 90 percent of which are not human cells. Your body is a community, and without those other microorganisms you would perish in hours. Each human cell has 400 billion molecules conducting millions of processes between trillions of atoms. The total cellular activity in one human body is staggering: one septillion actions at any one moment, a one with twenty-four zeros after it. In a millisecond, our body has undergone ten times more processes than there are stars in the universe exactly what Charles Darwin foretold when he said science would discover that each living creature was a "little universe formed of a host of self-propagating organisms, inconceivably minute and as numerous as the stars of heaven."

So I have two questions for you all: First, can you feel your body?

Stop for a moment. Feel your body. One septillion activities going on simultaneously, and your body does this so well you are free to ignore it, and wonder instead when this speech will end. Second question: who is in charge of your body? Who is managing those molecules? Hopefully not a political party.

Life is creating the conditions that are conducive to life inside you, just as in all of nature. What I want you to imagine is that collectively humanity is evincing a deep innate wisdom in coming together to heal the wounds and insults of the past.

Ralph Waldo Emerson once asked what we would do if the stars only came out once every thousand years. No one would sleep that night, of course. The world would become religious overnight. We would be ecstatic, delirious, made rapturous by the glory of God. Instead the stars come out every night, and we watch television. This extraordinary time when we are globally aware of each other and the multiple dangers that threaten civilization has never happened, not in a thousand years, not in ten thousand years. Each of us is as complex and beautiful as all the stars in the universe. We have done great things and we have gone way off course in terms of honouring creation. You are graduating to the most amazing, challenging, stupefying challenge ever bequested to any generation. The generations before you failed. They didn't stay up all night. They got distracted and lost sight of the fact that life is a miracle every moment of your existence. Nature beckons you to be on her side. You couldn't ask for a better boss. The most unrealistic person in the world is the cynic, not the dreamer. Hopefulness only makes sense when it doesn't make sense to be hopeful. This is your century. Take it and run as if your life depends on it.

www.paulhawken.com

The recent expenses scandal has been a fascinating insight into human nature and the complex series of unwritten rules that allow us to interact as groups. And, being the behaviour change geeks that we are, it's worth a quick and dirty blog post.

The public outrage (admittedly expertly stoked by the media) seems natural, especially considering the 'economic climate', and seems to be one of those rare moments that brings us together as a nation - like the World Cup or Princess Di but with more duck ponds and moats.

But what drives the outrage beyond concepts of 'fairness' and 'what's right'? Well, trust seems to be the buzzword of the moment (way back in April it was applied to the banking crisis) and trust is indeed crucial. Faith in reciprocity and consistency in others allows us to co-operate, to evolve complex, interdependent social structures, it's the basis for trade and the economy and most human interaction.

Trust is so crucial to the way that society operates that, in the past, untrustworthy people were branded or exiled or shunned or worse. So the 'string em up' brigade are behaving as expected and, in doing so, protecting the sanctity of trust.

But how did the MPs get it so wrong? The most cogent analysis I've heard so far came from Dan Ariely (a behavioural economist) on the Today programme yesterday. [Listen to the ten minute interview here and put his book on your Summer reading list]

Evan Davis has a good write up of the conversation on his blog but in short: MPs aren't any worse than the rest of us - they just operated within a system where the established social norm was to claim expenses as much possible. Taken out of the Westminster context this behaviour is seen as socailly deviant - hence the outrage.

And the failure of MPs to see that what they were doing was wrong? Well, as we know, we adapt our attitudes to be consistent with our behaviour (failed to land a job we wanted? - 'well I never really wanted it anyway.' Split up with a partner? - 'we weren't right for each other and he had really ugly toes' etc etc).

So what have we learned? In the interview Evan Davis asks Ariely if MPs failed the test, he responds

"We gave them a test to see if they're human and we discovered that they are.'

[Photo credit: kevinegperry, flickr]