|
32 ELR 10873 | Environmental Law Reporter | copyright © 2002 | All rights reserved Rio's Unfinished Business: American Enterprise and the Journey Toward Environmentally Sustainable GlobalizationWilliam L. Thomas[Editors' Note: In June 1992, at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro, the nations of the world formally endorsed the concept of sustainable development and agreed to a plan of action for achieving it. One of those nations was the United States. In August 2002, at the World Summit on Sustainable Development, these nations will gather in Johannesburg to review progress in the 10-year period since UNCED and to identify steps that need to be taken next. In anticipation of the Rio + 10 summit conference, Prof. John C. Dernbach is editing a book that assesses progress that the United States has made on sustainable development in the past 10 years and recommends next steps. The book, which is scheduled to be published by the Environmental Law Institute in July 2002, is comprised of chapters on various subjects by experts from around the country. This Article will appear as a chapter in that book. Further information on the book will be available at www.eli.org or by calling 1-800-433-5120 or 202-939-3844. Due to the length of the footnote material, endnotes will be used for this Article.] William L. Thomas practices environmental law with Pillsbury Winthrop L.L.P. in Washington, D.C. He chairs the American Bar Association (ABA) Section of Environment, Energy, and Resources (SEER) Committee on International Environmental Law and is a member of SEER's Climate Change and Sustainable Development Committee, as well as the Special Committee on Second Generation Issues. He is also a regular contributor to the Environmental Law Institute's Environmental Law Reporter International News & Analysis and serves on the Editorial Advisory Board of Corporate Environmental Strategy: The International Journal of Corporate Sustainability. Portions of this Article are based on his contributions to ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND ENFORCEMENT IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC RIM (Terri Mottershead ed., 2002). The author thanks Charles Bennett, Hilary Bradbury, Harris Gleckman, Burton Hamner, Andrew Hoffman, Riva Krut, Stephen Poltorzycki, Sanjay Sharma, Aseem Prakash, Vesela Veleva, and Meredith Whiting for their insights on various issues explored within. Others, but especially Mark Cohen, John Dernbach, Joseph Fiksel, Kurt Fischer, Frank Friedman, Norine Kennedy, Lester Lave, Richard MacLean, George Nagle, Richard Pastor, Edward Quevedo, Dennis Rondinelli, and Jack Stein provided helpful comments during the drafting process. Still others, but especially John Ehrenfeld, John Elkington, Marc Epstein, Daniel Esty, Stuart Hart, Nicholas Robinson, Nigel Roome, Edith Brown Weiss, and Allen White laid the foundation with their writing and research. A special debt is owed Ira Feldman, who graciously assisted the author in formulating the profiles in corporate sustainability in the Article. This Article is for them and all that are charting a sustainable course for America, with gratitude. [EDITOR'S NOTE: PART 2 OF 2. THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN SPLIT INTO MULTIPLE PARTS ON LEXIS TO ACCOMMODATE ITS LARGE SIZE. EACH PART CONTAINS THE SAME CITE.] Genencor International Corporate Responsibility demands that we take a global, long-range view of environment, social-equity and economic issues. Industry can no longer focus primarily on waste management and disposal of toxic by-products. To achieve business operations which are sustainable over the long-term, companies must shift focus from cleanup at the back end of the process stream to anticipating and preventing pollution at its source, to evaluating the impacts of the enterprise on the communities in which it operates. We believe that over the long term, sustainability is critically linked to our own business success and acting on these ideas will contribute to our company's future growth.289 While some companies are reticent to disclose their sustainability efforts for fear of attracting unwanted scrutiny,290 Genencor International is not among them. For chairman and CEO W. Thomas Mitchell, the philosophy and motives underlying his company's decision to embark on "a long-term path toward sustainability"291 are straight-forward: "We believe the key to the world's future growth and economic stability is sustainable development."292 Genencor's policy on sustainability reads as follows: Using our expertise in modern biotechnology, Genencor seeks to become a leader in sustainability. We will strive to emulate nature's elegance—respecting the interrelationships of living organisms and making the most of the resources we use. Through innovation and collaboration, we will protect the environment and promote the well-being of our employees and the world community. In the spirit of this intent, we will organize our work activities to improve continually in reducing the impact we have on the environment and to promote efficiency and fairness in our activities. We will meet legal and internal requirements, minimize pollution and preserve resources. These efforts will be widely communicated to employees as part of core corporate values. Progress will be monitored and communicated to our stakeholders; and we will use their input to improve our performance as corporate citizens. We understand that the long-term viability and progress of our business depends on our continuing to take responsibility for improving the environmental, social and economic conditions resulting from our commercial activities.293 Elaborating on the company's sustainability vision, Jeff Hogue, Genencor's Corporate EH&S Manager remarked that "the generally accepted conceptualization of sustainability [the three overlapping ovals of environment, economy, and social equity whose edges converge at one [32 ELR 10888] point and barely overlap] was not going to work for Genencor."294 At Genencor, he added: "We do not believe that any part of our business is outside of the environment or outside of society."295 Genencor's vision is such that "the business is in the center of society and society is in the center of the environment."296 Genencor was established in 1982 as a joint venture between Genentech Inc. and Corning Inc. It is a leading industrial biotechnology firm297 with over $ 300 million in revenues in 2001, selling more than 250 products for the health care and bioproducts markets across 80 countries, and holds over 3,400 owned and licensed patents and applications.298 The company's business model, including its approach to product development, is tightly aligned with its vision of the industrial biotechnology market and grounded on its understanding of sustainable development. Karl Sanford, Genencor's Vice President of Technology Development, explains: Industrial biotechnology is addressing significant unmet needs crucial to the sustainable development of our world—a world of 5 billion people and projected to grow to an estimated 9 billion over the next several decades. The challenge: how will we provide for so many more people and meet their needs for food, materials, health, and affluence? Within the context of global competitiveness, how will U.S. industry compete in a world where we must all do more with less? Biotechnology and industrial biotechnology in particular may provide powerful new alternatives to the traditional practices of the past.299 Another Genencor executive boldly predicted that "10 to 20 years from now we will look back and see that biotechnology has contributed as much to reaching industrial sustainability on our planet as it has to the battle against illnesses such as heart disease, cancer and Alzheimer's."300 Several of the company's strategic partnerships to develop new industrial biotechnologies, including alliances with DuPont, Eastman Chemical, and Procter & Gamble, are linked closely with its sustainability program.301 Related to these industrial applications are Genencor's efforts to develop processes that contribute to the so-called biobased economy. For example, in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Genencor is creating a process to convert biomass into ethanol. It received a $ 17 million grant from the DOE to develop less-expensive and quicker-working enzymes that convert biomass into bioethanol. New enzymes or biocatalysts can turn previously unusable biomass such as corn stover, wheat straw, and rice straw into sugars. Those sugars are then fermented to make ethanol transportation fuel, biodegradable plastics, and fine chemicals.302 Genencor's formal pursuit of sustainability dates back to August 1998 when the company first began to appreciate that classical environmental management techniques were insufficient to ensure competitive success, meet broader corporate responsibilities, and satisfy expectations of valued stakeholders.303 The company recognized that a classical EMS, or even a hybrid EH&S management system (EH&SMS), would not embrace the full range of issues it wished to address, given its corporate values. Genencor also wished to take a bold step forward and undertake a management systems approach that gave it a competitive advantage over its major competitors, some of which were based in Europe. The director of EH&S at Genencor, Beth Concoby, along with Jeff Hogue and their global EH&S team worked with outside experts to develop a sustainability management system (SMS) framework for the company. Genencor believed that this SMS approach would distinguish the company from its competition in terms of systems program objectives, and be more in line with the corporate values and culture of the company. The SMS incorporated the ISO 14001:1996 (E) framework, but included criteria and performance requirements drawn from EMAS, Agenda 21, and the initial-stage GRI reporting criteria. Genencor then established a Global Steering Committee to provide strategic leadership to the company in the development, implementation, and maintenance of its SMS, defining "sustainability" as "the pursuit of long-term viability and progress of our business while taking responsibility for improving the environmental, social and economic conditions resulting from [the] enterprise."304 There is considerable evidence that individual managerial and leadership values and managerial interpretations drive voluntary environmental practices in corporations.305 In the case of Genencor, the support of the CEO and senior management has been critical to the establishment and implementation of the sustainability program, as has the involvement and buy-in of employees.306 As chronicled in the company's recently released sustainability report, the company has thus far concentrated on five main sustainability goals: (1) develop comprehensive SMS at principal manufacturing and research sites around the world; (2) develop a Sustainability Product Assessment Index that "helps employees make responsible choices about products and processes" and assist it in making manufacturing and product decisions in line with its sustainability goals; (3) develop stakeholder dialogues; (4) continue its Product Stewardship Program, which assists customers and downstream users in safe management and handling of Genencor's products; and (5) develop a comprehensive set of corporate SMS metrics, tracked through a Sustainability Efficiency Rating Index, to gauge and report on efforts toward sustainability.307 In light of the realization that a traditional EMS or EH&SMS would not meet its needs, Genencor embraced broader and more challenging social equity, ethical, and responsibility issues.308 It began by conducting an inventory of activities that could potentially impact environmental, health, safety, and community concerns and then proceeded to develop a detailed lists of aspects for each site. The company then analyzed and weighted the aspects based on various criteria, e.g., whether senior management or corporate departments recognized the activity as a companywide goal or the activity was regulated.309 Genencor set objectives and goals to address significant aspects over time, including qualitative goals for each significant aspect category of each site's operations. Once this step was completed, the company established integrated action plans, or objectives, goals, strategies, and measures (OGSMs), to focus implementation efforts.310 The company's SMS is designed to manage all critical environmental, equity, and economic issues at facilities world-wide so as to provide environmental protection, social equityfor community members and stakeholders, and long-term economic success.311 Genencor seeks to address various environmental concerns at both the corporate and local site level with its integrated SMS approach, including: assurance of environmental compliance; achievement of [32 ELR 10889] energy reduction; pursuit of materials efficiency; contribution to preservation of natural systems; reductions in the use of "unnatural persistent substances," including hazardous chemicals; and supplier coaching to reduce their environmental impacts. In the area of social responsibility and equity, issues covered under the company's include: worker health and safety; child or forced labor; freedom of association and protection from discrimination; reasonable working hours and fair compensation; contribution to improved community conditions; active community outreach; and sustainability reporting and stakeholder involvement.312 Economic issues covered by the SMS include: cost reduction via natural resources stewardship; operational efficiency; and optimal raw materials use via materials substitution, waste reduction,313 and supply chain alignment.314 The site level focus currently centers around the following issues: environmental performance improvements, e.g., pollution prevention and recycling; resource efficiency, e.g., energy and water use reduction; community relations and awareness of company sustainability programs; volunteer initiatives to support local nonprofit groups; labor and employee practices and improvements in working conditions; contractor training and communications regarding all company environmental and safety management objectives and compliance matters; equity contributions for local regions and support of community values; and EH&S compliance and management.315 As described above, Genencor created a new management template, but it hardly started from scratch. Its advisors constructed templates based on the SMS approach designed to meet the performance requirements of several international standards and initiatives beyond the limited scope of ISO 14001.316 By extending its framework beyond ISO 14001, the company created management systems that are flexible and wide enough to address a broader range of concerns and concepts including: enhanced environmental performance and reporting (in keeping with the European Union Eco-Management and Audit Scheme; health and safety, i.e., areas covered by the British Health and Safety Standard); social equity, i.e., the elements of the Social Accountability Standard; indicator development and stakeholder reporting based on the GRI; and an integrated approach to sustainability based on The Natural Step.317 The Genencor SMS uses the ISO 14001 process of analyzing aspects, selecting significant aspects, and setting objectives and targets for improving performance each year. The metrics in the company's Sustainability Efficiency Index, which its uses to track progress toward sustainability, emphasize Genencor's focus on performance improvement and efficiency and include measurement of: water and energy use; raw materials use; packaging materials use and disposition; waste generation and disposition; wastewater discharge; air emissions; regulatory compliance; employee health and safety performance; community relations activities; employee commute parameters; production transport parameters; land use; sustainability savings; business air miles traveled; employee compensation and benefits; employee recruiting and retention; employee training and development; and employee equity/relations programs.318 At Genencor, sustainability is not a static process but rather a dynamic one in which the management system and application of The Natural Step promote continuous improvements.319 The process was less daunting than it might have been insofar as 10 of Genencor's facilities had already been registered to ISO 9000 and 2 of those to ISO 14001. The company appears well on its way to meeting its goal of having an SMS in place at its principal operating and research sites by the end of 2002. With the exception of its facility in Wuxi, China (which began building an SMS in 2002), Genencor has implemented SMSs at each of its manufacturing sites worldwide. The current SMS focus is on improving the system, sharing knowledge with other facilities, and considering whether value would be added by potential future SMS certification.320 Looking ahead, Genencor is seeking to improve its SMSs through the creation of "stakeholder boards" for each facility.321 Stakeholder boards will be comprised of regulators, members of neighborhoods surrounding each facility, and representatives from both local businesses and interested NGOs. According to Jeff Hogue, the company needs to "involve customers, communities and employees in the whole process—it cannot be just an EHS or site-driven system. We want to ask for and consider input [from stakeholders] and we are planning to use that information as part of our process for reevaluating our aspects."322 The company is also continuing to refine its SMS audit and continuous improvement process. Since 1994, the company has also been refining its Product Stewardship program, which is designed to give customers the information and support necessary to use Genencor products safely. The program involves education within the company's business units and support of customers through training materials, review of manufacturing processes, employee education, and assistance with environmental protocols and risk assessments. In addition, Genencor considers environmental, health, and safety in the development of new products or new uses for existing products.323 Genencor's executives believe successful implementation of sustainability efforts will serve as a "catalyst for innovation and creativity."324 Many management experts share this view, including deep sustainability thinkers like Prof. Sharma, Stuart Hart, and Joseph Fiksel, who contend that corporate sustainability, if properly directed, can serve as means to acquire new competencies, spur innovation (including creative destruction, i.e., disruptive innovation), and create business opportunities.325 Genencor seeks to harness this force through its Sustainability Product Assessment Index, which it uses to address the sustainability aspects of new products, commercial decisions, and day-to-day workplace decisions in keeping with The Natural Step.326 The company's Sustainability Efficiency Index uses the year 2001 as a baseline against which to measure future achievements. Time will tell whether the company possesses the will and management acumen to translate its words into deeds. Changing internal and external perceptions of social equity, the prospect of cost reductions and market share growth through innovation and positive brand recognition, and a variety of other factors are gradually but perceptibly prompting businesses to adopt strategies founded on sustainability principles. DuPont, IBM, Genencor, and other pioneering firms such as Bristol-Myers Squibb,327 Collins & Aikman,328 Dow Chemical,329 Ford Motor Company,330 [32 ELR 10890] General Motors,331 Interface,332 Patagonia,333 Procter & Gamble Company,334 and Weyerhaeuser335 are beginning to think and act globally but with sensitivity to local sustainable development concerns in pursuit of long-term profit.336 These firms stand in the vanguard. Recent surveys indicate many more companies may be headed down a similar path337 but as of yet there is scant evidence of a change in the overall business environment.338 As Tomorrow correspondent Lloyd Timberlake observed, 10 years after Rio "sustainable development is still a minority sport in the global business world."339 This is due in part to the fact that many companies do not yet incorporate EH&S issues in the formulation of business strategy. EH&S departments tend to be isolated within the firm and are treated as "cost centers" rather than as a potential source of revenue.340 Even companies that have sophisticated environmental programs, however, are struggling to define and operationalize sustainable development, particularly the social and economic development aspects of the concept.341 For U.S. companies (large, medium, and small), integrating sustainable development in their core strategies will mean something other than "business as usual."342 The WSSD and related forums and preparatory sessions will provide an opportunity to focus on the endeavor but accomplishing it will take time and change. The American landscape is not what it was before European colonization and the founding of the country over 200 years ago.343 The extent of environmental change has been immense and the pace of transformation rapid, owing to a confluence of factors including population growth, migration, technological change, industrialization, and international politics. The scale and intensity of change was especially profound during the 20th century.344 The nature of U.S. policy and politics has also shifted over the last few decades to encompass not only "natural resource issues" but also "environmental issues." We are gradually moving from: First-generation problems (e.g., public lands, irrigation, water rights, and park management) to second-generation problems (e.g., toxic waste, groundwater protection, and air pollution) to third-generation problems (e.g., global warming, thinning of the ozone layer, tropical deforestation, and acid rain).345 Gary Bryner aptly observed that "political conflict over environmental law and regulation has been so divisive and time-consuming that it has precluded the nation from moving towards the next generation of environmental laws that might incorporate the idea of sustainable development."346 While the United States should seek to overcome these tensions, its efforts should not stop there. Law and policy drivers play but a minor part in corporate decisions about sustainability, which tend to be based on economic, strategic, or philosophical grounds rather than legal or regulatory factors. Material progress toward sustainability will therefore have more to do with a broader set of course corrections by businesses, NGOs, consumers, the bar, academia, financiers and investors, insurers, governments, and the public than it will with targeted improvements to environmental protection and pollution control laws. There is much that could be done and more that might be recommended, but action along the following lines could make a positive difference. Progress toward sustainable development would be enhanced if Congress, along with executive branch agencies, would commit to concrete action.347 Lawmakers could start by adopting a new generation348 of reflexive,349 performance-driven350 environmental laws as part of a move toward a more integrated multimedia regulatory system.351 Market mechanisms such as tax incentives, investment credits, pollution banking, emissions trading, and information disclosure352 offer promise in this respect353 but should be bolstered by rigorous accountability measures to assure performance of environmental goals and adherence to commitments.354 Another means of moving forward would be to scale back or repeal laws that foster unsustainable development.355 Congress needs to provide clear legislative authority for federal and state programs that promote voluntary pollution prevention and eco-efficiency by business and industry.356 They should also explore delegation of greater responsibility to state and local governments that, as Prof. Dennis A. Rondinelli points out, are often in the best position to develop programs that appeal directly to corporate motivations.357 Local governments and municipalities can play a particularly important role in establishing and implementing programs tailored to the needs of small and medium sized businesses. Finally, lawmakers should make sufficient staff and resources available so that agencies can work flexibly with the private sector on sustainability initiatives.358 Multifaceted challenges demand multifaceted responses. Sustainable development is not simply an environmental issue for EPA and the Council on Environmental Quality but an issue with economic, environmental, and social aspects necessitating the collaboration of several other elements of the executive branch, including the U.S. Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, DOE, the Interior, Labor, Transportation, and others. Accordingly, if the United States wishes to promote corporate sustainability in the coming decade, it will need to coordinate policy efforts and actions within and across all levels of government.359 Government could contribute to greater business sustainability by establishing stronger economic incentives and rewards360 that encourage companies to move beyond compliance to find new and innovative ways to reduce pollution at the source and conserve resources through eco-efficiency, including the use of voluntary agreements361 or codes of conduct,362 EMS,363 LCA, environmental accounting, and other techniques364 described above.365 It should learn about what businesses are doing to be more sustainable, reinforce such efforts, and encourage other firms to follow suit.366 In addition, regulators should strive for better collaboration with business and other stakeholders to promote effective sustainability tools and techniques and disseminate information on best practices.367 As Professor Rondinelli thoughtfully observed, current environmental policies could be refined to foster greater sustainability by concentrating on three main areas: (1) legislative revisions [32 ELR 10891] in regulations that focus on (a) requiring a performance-based approach to environmental management that encourages EPA and state regulatory agencies to measure and reward environmental performance improvements in industry, (b) emphasizing a multimedia approach to environmental management that integrates pollution control and prevention measures to address ecological system issues more comprehensively, and (c) using more flexible place-based and facility-level regulatory controls to allow enterprises to find the most efficient and effective ways of meeting environmental requirements; (2) administrative revisions that place greater reliance on (a) testing and using market-based mechanisms for environmental management, (b) delegating more responsibility, authority, and resources to state and local environmental agencies to develop and use negotiated agreements with industry to improve environmental performance, (c) improving EPA's and the states' environmental information and data collection systems, (d) strengthening the scientific foundation of rulemaking and review, and (e) extending the use of cost- and risk-analyses in rulemaking and enforcement; and (3) program revisions that promote pollution prevention and eco-efficiency practices through voluntary EMS in industry by (a) expanding activities to identify efficient and effective pollution prevention and eco-efficiency practices,368 (b) expanding activities to test, verify, and commercialize pollution prevention and eco-efficiency technologies and processes, (c) strengthening public-private partnership programs for the development and adoption of EMS in industry, and (d) increasing government's roles in assisting the private sector to adopt pollution prevention and eco-efficiency technology and practices.369 Sustainability initiatives put forward by government should be backed by the staff and resources necessary to allow agencies to work flexibly with the private sector.370 Government can take other incremental actions to mainstream business sustainability. America has some of the most useful environmental data and information tools in the world yet significant gaps remain in our knowledge of and ability to measure both environmental performance and sustainability at the country and firm levels. Government should set aside resources for monitoring, the creation and gathering of data, and the design and implementation of sophisticated measurement systems, analytic methods, and statistical techniques so that policymakers and business leaders can gauge environmental performance and sustainability, weigh trade offs, set priorities, and make prudent decisions.371 Government needs to explore and, where appropriate, seize opportunities to promote sustainable development and sustainability practices such as pollution prevention, EMS, and environmental auditing in enforcement actions at both the state and federal level.372 Government could also play a productive role by addressing the concerns of companies that fear participation in voluntary programs sponsored by government agencies could lead to compliance actions, litigation, and public criticism.373 Government also needs to promote education efforts, expand labeling programs, and foster greater, more credible communication by companies with respect to the sustainability of enterprises, products, and services, thereby enabling consumers to make informed decisions.374 This effort should entail development of instruments to internalize environmental effects into market prices so that business and consumers can make more sustainable production and consumption decisions.375 Globalization is proving to be quite effective at generating wealth and promoting freedom and less good at addressing social needs, such as the preservation of peace, alleviation of poverty, and protection of the environment and human rights.376 Some though surely not all of these deficiencies could be corrected through enhancements to existing institutions such as the WTO and other corrective measures.377 Other current ills, including poverty, have as much if not more to do with armed conflict, oppressive and corrupt regimes, and weak states than with globalization.378 As the WBCSD points out, sustainable development is conditional upon democracy and the accepted rule of law; effective intellectual and physical property rights; reliability of contracts; lack of corruption; equitable trade terms and respect for comparative advantage; ordered competition among businesses; fair and transparent accounting standards; accountability and predictability of government interventions; investment in education and enabling technologies; and reform of taxation so that it funds collective investments rather than penalizes income.379 Recent studies, including that of the World Economic Forum's Global Leaders of Tomorrow Environmental Task Force, suggest that the higher the level of corruption in a country, the lower the level of environmental sustainability.380 Government can enhance the efficacy of business sustainability efforts by promoting stronger institutions and governance abroad,381 including efficient, honest administration, an independent judiciary, and adherence to the rule of law,382 as well as respect for human rights, protection of property rights,383 and the provision of health care and education.384 Government can also help to address concerns over the environmental, social, and technological implications of globalization. For instance, it can promote open markets for trade and investment, thereby creating wealth that properly directed may reduce poverty and foster environmental improvement,385 and then seek to ensure that dividends are poured back into the environments and societies from which profits were made. Agreements that restrict the flow of products and services on environmental grounds should be pursued only where they are consistent with domestic laws and policies and are aimed at clear threats to health or environment supported by credible scientific data.386 In developing positions on trade and environment issues, the government should use a transparent process that provides for involvement by business, the public, and other stakeholders.387 In international negotiations and treaty efforts, government should seek to balance the goals of sustainability and stress the linkages between these objectives in maintaining environmental, economic, and social progress.388 Moreover, it should ensure that its positions on global environmental issues are based on a science- and rules-based framework consistent with domestic law and policy.389 In implementing and evaluating activities related to sustainable development and Agenda 21, government should involve business, the public, and interested stakeholders.390 On sustainability issues with a cross-border or North American dimension, the United States should seek coordination and collaboration with Canada and Mexico.391 Government [32 ELR 10892] can also promote sustainable development by working with businesses and other investors to improve capacity and infrastructure in developing countries to achieve local environmental objectives and contribute to resolution of global environmental concerns.392 Government could create a stronger climate for business sustainability by supporting education of students, communities, and the public about sustainable development, including the interconnections between environment, economy, and social structures.393 When procuring goods and services, government could also demand information concerning the sustainability of companies and the products and services they offer, then factor that knowledge into purchasing decisions.394 The Public, Voters, and Consumers In the aggregate, individuals have the capacity to influence business behavior and strategy. As voters and citizens, they can promote sustainable development by working with legislators, government, and business to advance appropriate laws, regulation, and other policy measures.395 As consumers, they can demand information concerning the sustainability of companies and the products and services they offer, then factor that knowledge into both evaluations of corporate brand and purchasing decisions.396 If they were to exercise this power collectively and consistently, they could significantly alter the business sustainability calculus in short order. Environmental NGOs and Religious Institutions Environmental NGOs and religious institutions have many tools and techniques at their disposal to influence business sustainability. They can play a particularly constructive role by encouraging consumers to factor sustainable development criteria into purchases of goods and services and by helping educate them to make informed choices.397 If the United States is to make significant progress on its Agenda 21 commitments over the next decade, NGOs will also need to work closely with legislators, government, business, the public, and others to promote law, regulation, and other policy measures that encourage and reward business sustainability.398 NGOs can also assist businesses and accountants in communicating progress and related benefits of sustainable development activities to other stakeholders. Religious institutions and those that lead them can also help business and communities deal with the philosophical, ethical, and moral questions posed by sustainability in its various dimensions.399 Thus far, to the extent that businesses in the United States have mounted much of a push toward sustainable development, they have pursued such strategies largely as a matter of competitive advantage or social conscience. Legislation, regulation, and liability exposure have not been significant drivers. The business case could change over time as governments experiment more broadly with "next generation" environmental policies that seek to harness the market. In the meantime, lawyers can play a meaningful role by analyzing the implications of U.S. and international environmental law for business endeavors that contribute to sustainable development, and by counseling clients and/or employers on appropriate courses of action.400 Theywill also be called upon to advise lawmakers, business, and the public on ways to tailor policy and regulation to foster sustainable business practices.401 Attorneys are also in a unique position to contribute to the unfolding environmental policy dialogue on market- and information-based alternatives to traditional "command and control" measures and should therefore play an active role in this process. Finally, law firms could potentially benefit financially from sustainable practices and should evaluate their operations accordingly.402 Financiers, Investors, and Insurers The nexus between financial services, investment, and sustainable development is gradually becoming evident. Given their stake, financiers, investors, and insurers have an incentive to work with legislators, government, business, the public, and other stakeholders to promote law, regulation, and other policy measures that encourage and reward business sustainability. While financiers403 and insurers404 stand to profit by integrating sustainability considerations into core business activities, both bankers and investors could make the markets themselves more sustainable by analyzing and rewarding businesses that effectively and credibly translate the value of their sustainable development policies, systems, practices, and achievements.405 They can also assist businesses and accountants in communicating progress and the related benefits of sustainable development activities406 and should be encouraged to promote and use assessment tools and sustainability ratings.407 Multilateral lending organizations, export credit agencies, and other international financial institutions should integrate and give greater weight to environmental and social considerations in their core investment and lending business. Financiers can also reduce liability exposure and enhance sustainable development by taking proactive measures in the areas of personnel, loan documentation, loan workout situations and foreclosures, loan analysis and monitoring, customer relations, and fiduciary activities as part of a comprehensive risk management strategy.408 ISO 14001 and perhaps even nascent EMS policy initiatives such as EPA's Performance Track program can be used to secure competitive advantage through transactions with companies that demonstrate superior environmental performance.409 Banking products and services can also promote sustainable development where feasible and consistent with the institution's objectives and customer preferences.410 If early experiences in the European Union are any indication, financiers can also play a role in supporting sustainability efforts of small and medium sized businesses.411 Looking within their organizations, both financiers412 and insurance companies413 can contribute to sustainable development by adopting internal policies and controls to improve energy efficiency, minimize waste, promote recycling, and reduce the adverse impact of their institutions' physical operations on the environment. In doing so, they should communicate with investors and other stakeholders with respect to their sustainable development strategy, practices, and achievements through annual financial reports and/or through the publication of stand-alone sustainable development reports and other means.414 Insurers can also play a significant role in fostering business sustainability by helping insureds reduce [32 ELR 10893] their exposure to environmental risk, particularly those associated with climate change, through improved management techniques as well through the use of insurance products and services.415 American progress toward sustainable development will require investments in education, and specifically in knowledge, skills, and training. Teachers should include sustainable development in elementary and secondary education, undergraduate, and graduate school curricula, and incorporate it in research and development programs. The challenge is twofold: educate society so that it might comprehend the long-term environmental, social, and economic implications of its actions416; and train business leaders that can grasp, in addition to the basics of finance and marketing, the subtleties of competitive environmental strategy and sustainability. Over the long run, the United States needs to find ways to train business in sustainability; over the short run, it needs to train EH&S professionals to think like business people.417 Environmental and sustainability issues are creeping into MBA curricula418 but the current supply of such courses is insufficient to meet either need or demand.419 MBA program administrators and teachers should show students how to link sustainable development and social responsibility to the business bottom line and incorporate these areas into the core curriculum and research.420 Business will eventually need to grapple with whether and how best to engage in sustainable development if the United States is going to make material progress toward meeting the goals established at Rio. Over the last decade, but particularly over the last few years, American companies have become much more adept at using management tools, techniques, and strategies to limit their environmental footprint and reduce the likelihood of accidents, disputes, and enforcement actions. Some companies have begun to refine and broaden the scope of such efforts, targeting sustainability in the process. The focus over the next 10 years should be on how to mainstream the contributions of U.S. business and industry to sustainable development. Most companies could productively begin by defining sustainable development in terms that can be understood and applied within the firm, then incorporate that concept into corporate vision and strategy with respect to activities in the United States and abroad.421 Professor Hart wisely counsels CEOs to take "the entire planet as the context in which they do business" and ask whether "they are part of the solution to social and environmental problems or part of the problem."422 "Only," he adds, "when a company thinks in those terms can it begin to develop a vision of sustainability—a shaping logic that goes beyond today's internal, operational focus on greening to a more external, strategic focus on sustainable development."423 This definitional exercise should also entail the development of measurable indicators for evaluating sustainability at the level of the firm.424 Indeed, as Richard MacLean points out, the process of developing indicators and metrics can be valuable in defining where a company stands relative to the concept.425 Once a business has defined sustainability, it will be in a better position to bring the concept into the "core of the business"426 by aligning the organization, gaining the commitment of key players (including the Board of Directors, CEO, senior and middle management, and other employees in the business units),427 implementing effective EMS and SMS, and then striving for continuous improvements. Some companies may seek to channel sustainability programs to further innovation and achieve competitive advantage, but all should undertake specific steps, e.g., in the areas of eco-efficiency428 and social responsibility,429 then monitor, measure,430 and audit the success of those actions, whether they be operational advances, innovations in technologies, processes, or information sources, or improvements in product development and marketing.431 Business, building on recent advances, can also use full-cost accounting techniques,432 supply chain management, and sustainable architecture to maximize their performance.433 For most companies, the journey toward sustainability will also require changes in the nature of relationships with governments, communities, and environmental groups.434 For many, it could mean greater transparency, engagement, and collaboration, including the use of partnerships and alliances to promote effective sustainability tools and techniques and the dissemination of information on best practices.435 Particularly in light of the Enron debacle, businesses should be prepared to communicate with financiers, investors, employees, the government, the public, and other stakeholders with respect to their sustainable development strategy, practices, and achievements through annual financial reports and through the publication of stand-alone sustainable development reports and other means in language that the relevant constituencies, including financial analysts, can understand.436 Companies should also report on the sustainability of their operations, products, and services so that consumers and customers can make knowledgeable decisions.437 In addition, companies should educate employees and the public about the challenges and opportunities associated with sustainable development,438 and seek to form relationships with suppliers and subcontractors that share its standards and philosophy.439 While the greening process can create greater efficiencies and lower costs initially, the cost/benefit calculus often changes significantly once the "low hanging fruit" has been picked. Companies need to continually reevaluate their competitive environmental strategy and the marketplace for sustainable goods and services. Companies can only raise their costs if customers are willing to pay more or their workers and shareholders are willing to earn less.440 Can a company successfully pass sustainability costs through to consumers? Will employees take less home secure in the knowledge that their employer is "doing right" by the community in which they live? Historical surveys of consumer preference suggest some shoppers will pay more for greener products while many make selections based solely on price. At the end of the day, some firms may find it necessary to shift out of certain businesses to fulfill pledges to support sustainable development commitments.441 In such situations, as with others described above, sustainable or socially responsible business behaviors threaten to undermine the bottom line. Dealing with such strategic risks and financial uncertainty can be difficult but these are precisely the sort of tough issues CEOs will have to confront along the path to [32 ELR 10894] sustainability. These practical challenges also drive home the need for business and industry to work closely with lawmakers, governments, NGOs, and communities to refine environmental policies so that companies that pursue sustainability will not be placed at a competitive disadvantage vis-a-vis those that do not. Just as businesses must find new ways to communicate more effectively with society, consumers, financiers, and investors about sustainable development and the quantitative value of their sustainable business practices, firms must do the same to demonstrate such initiatives' qualitative value. Ten years after Rio, the world is watching business much more closely. Indeed, as Roger Martin points out, "globalization only heightens public anxiety over corporate conduct."442 While the "net impact of globalization on the supply of responsible corporate behavior has yet to be calculated," he correctly cautions: It is apparent that companies from countries with robust civil foundations will determine the outcome. If their practices average up civil foundations worldwide, globalization advocates will be vindicated in their belief that increased international economic activity can address some of the world's most difficult development problems. On the other hand, a corporate race to the bottom would succeed only in averaging down civil foundations and confirming the most lurid fears of globalization opponents.443 Depending upon the nature of their response, including their strategies for dealing with sustainable development, companies will be perceived as a major cause of, or solution to, the inequities of globalization.444 Recent surveys of global environmental and social reporting practices by major companies suggest that the number of firms producing a global environmental and/or social report is on the rise, though the content, style, and medium of reporting varies greatly from one firm to another, and the amount of data on parts of the company outside the "home country" tends to be low.445 Until there is greater consensus among the public and executives surrounding the application of sustainability in the business setting, companies will remain vulnerable to allegations of "greenwashing."446 For this reason, it is important not only that companies continue to promote a dialogue on the concept of sustainability and related indicators that can be used to measure and convey performance, but that they also factor the needs and expectations of stakeholders into the design and medium of external communications.447 Business can further sustainable development in other important ways as well. Working with governments and other investors, for example, companies can support improvements in governance and legal and policy infrastructure.448 Companies can also help communities develop capacity to address local environmental problems through targeted investments and management practices, as well as through the transfer of cleaner production techniques and technologies.449 In addition, business can contribute to the solution of global and transboundary environmental problems through use of compliance and "beyond compliance" strategies, including environmental and sustainability management systems tailored to address such phenomena450 and by adhering to stringent environmental standards wherever they operate.451 Looking to the longer term, companies can work with legislators and government agencies to adopt a new generation of environmental laws and regulations that emphasize sustainability and work with the grain of the market.452 Finally, by participating in the implementation and evaluation of international environmental activities relating to sustainable development and Agenda 21, including the WSSD, they can inform the dialogue and help identify solutions.453 Daring the Journey Toward Environmentally With the aid of modern technologies we possess the power to transform nature into wealth on a scale unparalleled in history.454 Although technology trajectories have varied widely around the world,455 the last century alone saw: (1) world population increase by a factor of 4; (2) urban proportion of world population increase by a factor of 13; (3) world economy increase by a factor of 14; (4) industrial output increase by a factor of 40; (5) energy use increase by a factor of 16; (6) carbon dioxide emissions increase by a factor of 7; (7) sulfur dioxide emissions increase by a factor of 13; (8) water use increase by a factor of 9; and (9) marine fish catch increase by a factor of 35.456 During that period, observes historian J.R. McNeill, "the general policy . . . was to try to make the most of resources, make Nature perform to the utmost, and hope for the best."457 If we are to avoid irreparable harm to the planet, we must adopt a more thoughtful approach in the 21st century. Business, in particular, must find new ways to put science and technology to work for the benefit of shareholders, society, and nature.458 Since Rio, some U.S. companies can point to significant progress toward sustainability, especially in areas such as eco-efficiency, EMS, communications with stakeholders, and transparency. Even in the case of some of the firms presently espousing sustainability, however, response has yet to catch up with rhetoric. For practical purposes, America's journey toward sustainable development has barely begun. Further progress will hinge on collaborative actions taken by an unlikely fellowship of business executives, legislators, governments, the public, NGOs, consumers, lawyers, financiers and investors, insurers, and educators. Movement toward sustainable development will also require cooperation with other countries (including collaboration with nations with income levels, political systems, cultures, and religious beliefs quite different from our own). For government it will involve not only deploying the resources necessary to deter misconduct and punish violators, but also employing a more creative range of sanctions to maximize environmental protection. Finally, progress toward sustainable development will require improvements to early generation regulatory approaches that build on historic successes yet create incentives for further technological innovation and broader application of competitive environmental, and sustainable, business strategies and methods. The goal for WSSD and beyond should be to mainstream the "best practices" of the sustainability pioneers.459 In order to meet this objective, businesses, government, and interested stakeholders will need to develop a sharper definition of sustainability (or develop another label altogether) so that executives, managers, and employees will understand what is expected of them and begin to make a more meaningful contribution.460 As this Article is being written, Americans are discovering, or in some cases, rediscovering, J.R.R. Tolkien's epic The Lord of the Rings. The first installment of the film version has already yielded over $ 300 million at the U.S. box office, while two volumes of the trilogy rank among the top 10 books on the bestseller list.461 It is a great adventure to be sure, which may partially explain the story's hold on the imaginations of readers and moviegoers alike. The tale also endures as a thoughtful meditation on the beauty of nature, the nature of technology, and man's interrelationship with the natural world.462 These themes resonate powerfully in the United States, which has long struggled to balance its environmental and economic aspirations. Early in The Fellowship of the Ring, Frodo, beginning to grasp the dangers of the Ring and the enormity of the task before him, says: "I wish it need not have happened in my time."463 The wizard Gandalf replies, somewhat reprovingly, "so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."464 This theme, of duty reluctantly shouldered, and rejection of comfortable illusion,465 is also relevant to the present discussion of America's contributions, and that of its enterprises, to sustainable development. The journey to environmentally sustainable globalization is not an easy one to chart or to undertake, which largely accounts for the country's limited progress since Rio.466 The inclination when confronted with a daunting task is to leave it to others or for another day.467 We owe it to those who will come after us, and to one another, to resist such temptations and rise to one of the crucial challenges of our time: forging an economy the earth can sustain indefinitely.468 Appendix 1 The Business Charter for Sustainable Development 1. Corporate priority To recognize environmental management as among the highest corporate priorities and as a key determinant to sustainable development; to establish policies, programmes and practices for conducting operations in an environmentally sound manner. 2. Integrated management To integrate these policies, programmes and practices fully into each business as an essential element of management in all its functions. 3. Process of improvement To continue to improve corporate policies, programmes and environmental performance, taking into account technical developments, scientific understanding, consumer needs and community expectations, with legal regulations as a starting point; and to apply the same environmental criteria internationally. 4. Employee education To educate, train and motivate employees to conduct their activities in an environmentally responsible manner. 5. Prior assessment To assess environmental impacts before starting a new activity or project and before decommissioning a facility or leaving a site. 6. Products and services To develop and provide products or services that have no undue environmental impact and are safe in their intended use, that are efficient in their consumption of energy and natural resources, and that can be recycled, reused, or disposed of safely. 7. Customer advice To advise, and where relevant educate, customers, distributors and the public in the safe use, transportation, storage and disposal of products provided; and to apply similar considerations to the provision of services. 8. Facilities and operations To develop, design and operate facilities and conduct activities taking into consideration the efficient use of energy and materials, the sustainable use of renewable resources, the minimisation of adverse environmental impact and waste generation, and the safe and responsible disposal of residual wastes. 9. Research To conduct or support research on the environmental impacts of raw materials, products, processes, emissions and wastes associated with the enterprise on the means of minimizing such adverse impacts. 10. Precautionary approach To modify the manufacture, marketing or use of products or services or the conduct of activities, consistent with scientific and technical understanding, to prevent serious or irreversible environmental degradation. 11. Contractors and suppliers To promote the adoption of these principles by contractors acting on behalf of the enterprise, encouraging and, where appropriate, requiring improvements in their practices to make them consistent with those of the enterprise; and to encourage the wider adoption of these principles by suppliers. 12. Emergency preparedness To develop and maintain, where significant hazards exist, emergency preparedness plans in conjunction with the emergency services, relevant authorities and the local community, recognizing potential transboundary impacts. 13. Transfer of technology To contribute to the transfer of environmentally sound technology and management methods throughout the industrial and public sectors. 14. Contributing to the common effort To contribute to the development of public policy and to business, governmental and intergovernmental programmes and educational initiatives that will enhance environmental awareness and protection. 15. Openness to concerns To foster openness and dialogue with employees and the public, anticipating and responding to their concerns about the potential hazards and impacts of operations, products, wastes or services, including those of transboundary or global significance. 16. Compliance and reporting To measure environmental performance; to conduct regular environmental audits and assessments of compliance with company requirements, legal requirements and these principles; and periodically to provide appropriate information to the Board of Directors, shareholders, employees, the authorities and the public. Source: The International Chamber of Commerce, Business Charter for Sustainable Development.1 Appendix 2 The Global Reporting Initiative Convened in 1997 by the Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies in partnership with the United Nations Environment Programme, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) is an international, multi-stakeholder effort to create a common framework for economic, environmental, and social reporting that will elevate sustainability reporting practices worldwide to a level equivalent to financial reporting. The GRI released draft voluntary Sustainability Reporting Guidelines on Economic, Environmental, and Social Performance in March of 1999, followed by a final, revised set in June of 2000.1 The GRI released a Draft Version of the 2002 Guidelines for public review and comment in April of 2002.2 To date, more than 100 companies worldwide have volunteered to apply them in their reports, including 20 firms from the United States. The GRI was formally inaugurated as a permanent, independent institution on April 4, 2002. Its Secretariat will be based in Amsterdam. The GRI Sustainability Reporting Guidelines aim to help organizations report information: . in a way that presents a clear picture of the human and ecological impact of business, to facilitate informed decisions about investments, purchases, and partnerships; . in a way that provides stakeholders with reliable information that is relevant to their needs and interests and that invites further stakeholder dialogue and enquiry; . in a way that provides a management tool to help the reporting organization evaluate and continuously improve its performance and progress; . in accordance with well-established, widely accepted external reporting principles, applied consistently from one reporting period to the next, to promote transparency and credibility; . in a format that is easy to understand and that facilitates comparison with reports by other organizations; in a way that complements, not replaces, other reporting standards, including financial; and . in a way that illuminates the relationship among the three linked elements of sustainability—economic (including but not limited to financial information), environmental, and social The Sustainability Reporting Guidelines encompass the three linked elements of sustainability as they apply to an organization—economic, environmental, and social. GRI reports must contain the following information: . a statement of the CEO or equivalent senior management person, describing key elements of the report . an overview of the reporting organization and the scope of the report to provide a context for understanding and evaluating information in subsequent sections . an executive summary, or succinct overview, of the report and key indicators . a statement of the organization's vision for the future and how that vision integrates economic, environmental, and social performance . an overview of the organization's governance structure and the management systems in place to implement its vision . quantitative and qualitative date on the organization's economic, environmental, and social performance. Appendix 3 The ISO 14000 Series The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) is a worldwide federation of national standards bodies.1 ISO develops voluntary technical standards intended to make the development, manufacture, and supply of products and services more efficient, safer, and cleaner. The work of ISO is carried out by experts on loan from the industrial, technical, and business sectors which have asked for the standards, as well as by others with relevant knowledge, e.g., representatives of government agencies and testing laboratories. The United States is a full voting member of ISO and is officially represented by the American National Standards Institute.2 The ISO 14000 series is a set of generic, internationally recognized standards for environmental management.3 The voluntary standards encompass environmental management systems and environmental management tools, such as environmental audits, environmental labeling, and environmental performance assessments, as well as life-cycle assessment and the use of specific terminology and definitions. The ISO 14000 standards aim to: (i) minimize barriers to trade resulting from disparate national standards; (ii) promote a common approach and language for environmental management; (iii) enhance organizations' ability to attain and measure improvements in environmental performance; (iv) place a uniform registration requirement on companies that need to meet the standard; and (v) reduce duplicative audits carried out by customers, regulators, companies, and registrars. ISO developed ISO 14001: 1996 Environmental Management Systems—Specification with Guidance for Use as a means to provide organizations of all sizes and types with the elements of an effective environmental management system (EMS). The core themes of ISO 14001 are: (i) environmental policy; (ii) planning; (iii) implementation and operation; (iv) checking and corrective action; and (v) management review.4 The requirements of the specification may be objectively audited for certification and/or self-declaration purposes.5 ISO 14001 registration experienced significant growth in 2001 worldwide. Japan, Sweden, and the United Kingdom led the way with the highest number of new certificates during the past year but North American registrations also grew by 66% during 2001, showing that implementation and third-party verification of internationally recognized EMSs are becomingmore common. There are now more than 35,800 registrations worldwide, and about 2,700 registrations in North America, of which 1,650 occurred in the United States, 820 in Canada, and over 250 in Mexico.6 Other Standards in the 14000 Series
Appendix 4 [SEE ILLUSTRATION IN ORIGINAL] Appendix 5 Attitudinal Stages Towards Sustainable Business
Drivers of Business Sustainability
Appendix 7 KEY PLAYERS IN SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS Federal . Council on Environmental Quality . Department of Agriculture . Department of Commerce . Department of Defense . Department of Energy1 . Department of Interior . Department of Labor . Department of State . Department of Transportation . Federal Network for Sustainability2 . National Association of Attorneys General . President's Council on Sustainable Development . U.S. Environmental Protection Agency3 State (with selected states listed for illustrative purposes) . California Environmental Protection Agency4 . Council of State Governments5 . Environmental Council of the States6 . Governor's Council for a Sustainable Florida7 . Minnesota Pollution Control Agency8 . Multi-State Working Group on Environmental Management Systems (MSWG)9 . New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection10 . North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources11 . Oregon Department of Environmental Quality12 . Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission13 . Vermont Agency for Natural Resources14 International Organization for Standardization (ISO) North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation15 Organization of American States16 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Social Accountability International17 United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development18 United Nations Division for Sustainable Development United Nations Environment Programme United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change United Nations Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO) MARKET19 Green Seal20 Trade Associations/Industry Networks Air & Waste Management Association21 The Auditing Roundtable22 Business Action for Sustainable Development23 Business and Industry Advisory Committee to the OECD Business for Social Responsibility24 The Business Roundtable Environment, Technology and the Economy Task Force25 Global Environmental Management Initiative, Sustainable Development Work Group26 Global Futures Foundation, Global Futures, and the Future 50027 Global Mining Initiative28 International Business Leaders Forum International Chamber of Commerce International Corporate Governance Network International Hotels Environment Initiative National Association for Environmental Management29 National Association of Environmental Professionals30 International Network for Environmental Management Pollution Prevention Roundtable Prince of Wales International Business Leaders Forum31 Sector-Specific Industry Associations (with selected associations listed for illustrative purposes) . American Chemistry Council32 . American Plastics Council33 . American Forest and Paper Association34 . American Petroleum Institute . American Portland Cement Alliance . Electronics Industry Alliance . International Council of Chemical Associations . International Council of Mining and Metals . International Council on Metals and the Environment . International Fertilizer Industry Association . Semiconductor Industry Association35 . Soap and Detergent Association . World Tourism Organization36 . World Travel and Tourism Council37 Social Venture Network38 U.S. Council of International Business Environmental Committee World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD)39 Competitors/SD Pioneers (with selected companies listed for illustrative purposes) Environmental Bankers Association40 Finance Institute for Global Sustainability41 Inter-American Development Bank42 North American Development Bank43 United Nations Environment Programme, Financial Institutions Initiative44 United Nations Environment Programme, Insurance Industry Initiative45 The World Bank46 Dow Jones Sustainability Indexes47 Global Reporting Initiative48 Innovest Eco Value '21(r) Rating Platform49 Investor Responsibility Research Center50 Kinder, Lydenburg, Domini & Co. Association of Chartered Certified Accountants United Nations Department of Economic andSocial Affairs, Division for Sustainable Development, Environmental Management Accounting Initiative51 Nongovernmental Organizations52 American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy ANPED—Northern Alliance for Sustainability53 The Aspen Institute54 Center for Environmental Innovation55 Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies (CERES)56 Council on Economic Priorities CSD NGO Steering Committee57 Earth Council58 Environmental Defense, Alliance for Environmental Innovation59 Forest Stewardship Council60 Foundation for Business and Society Foundation for International Environmental Law and Development61 Friends of the Earth62 GLOBE Foundation of Canada63 Green Globe Task Force64 Inform, Inc.65 International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development66 International Corporate Governance Network International Institute for Environment and Development67 International Institute for Sustainable Development68 International Society of Industrial Ecology IUCN: The World Conservation Union Leadership for Environment and Development69 Natural Resources Defense Council NGO Taskforce on Business and Industry70 Regional and International Networking Group (RING)71 Rocky Mountain Institute72 Royal Institute for International Affairs73 Schumacher UK74 Stockholm Environment Institute Tellus Institute for Resource and Environmental Studies, Business and Sustainability Group75 Transparency International76 World Environment Center77 World Resources Institute, Sustainable Enterprise Program and the Management Institute for Environment and Business78 WWF and World Wild Fund for Nature—International79 Business and the Environment (Aspen Publishers) Corporate Social Responsibility Newswire80 Forbes81 The Green Business Letter82 Green@Work83 In Business: The Magazine for Sustainable Enterprises and Communities84 Sustainable Business Investor-America85 Tomorrow Magazine and Tomorrow on the Web86 American Bar Association, Section of Environment, Energy & Resources, Section of International Law and Practice, and the Standing Committee on Environmental Law American Corporate Counsel Association American Society of International Law Center for International Environmental Law87 Centre for International Sustainable Development Law IUCN Commission on Environmental Law Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Foundation88 National Religious Partnership for the Environment Center for Neighborhood Technology89 Florida House Institute for Sustainable Development90 International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives91 International Council of Mayors International Union of Local Authorities92 The Local Government Commission93 National Association of Counties94 Public Technology, Inc.95 Stockholm Partnership for Sustainable Cities96 Sustainable Communities Network97 United States Conference of Mayors Urban Land Institute98 World Federation of United Cities99 Academia (with selected programs listed for illustrative purposes) Academy of Management, Organizations and the Natural Environment (ONE) Interest Group100 Boston University School of Management Bridges to Sustainability101 Carnegie Mellon University, Green Design Initiative102 Case Western Reserve University, Weatherhead Institute on Sustainable Enterprise Clark University, George Perkins Marsh Institute103 Columbia University, Center for International Earth Science Information Network104 Directory of Higher Education Environmental Programs105 George Washington University, School of Business and Public Management, and the Law School's Center on Sustainability and Regional Growth106 Global Learning and Observations to Benefit the Environment107 Greening of Industry Network108 International Institute for Management Development (IMD), Forum for Corporate Sustainability Management109 Loyola Marymount University College of Business Administration Lund University, International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics110 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, including the Center for Technology, Policy, and Industrial Development, the Program on Technology, Business, and the Environment, and the Alliance for Global Sustainability111 National Environmental Education and Training Foundation New York University, Stern School of Business112 Second Nature: Education for Sustainability113 University of Arizona, Arizona International College114 University of California, Berkeley, Haas School of Business, Consortium on Green Design and Manufacturing University of Huddersfield, Center for Corporate Environmental Management University of Massachusetts, Lowell Center for Sustainable Production University of Michigan, Corporate Environmental Management Program and Center for Sustainable Systems115 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Kenan-Flagler Business School, Center for Sustainable Enterprise University of Virginia, Darden Graduate School of Business Administration, Batten Institute, Environmental Management and Sustainable Business Initiative116 Vanderbilt University, Owen School of Management, Vanderbilt Center for Environmental Management Studies117 Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale School of Management, and Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy118 York University, Schulich School of Business, Sustainable Enterprise Academy119 289. GENENCOR INTERNATIONAL, INC., GENENCOR REPORTS PROGRESS TOWARDS SUSTAINABILITY 3 (2001), available at http://www.genencor.com/img/sustainability.pdf (last visited Feb. 26, 2002) [hereinafter 2001 GENENCOR SUSTAINABILITY REPORT]. 290. See The Power of Ten, GREEN BUS. LETTER, June 2001, at 1; April Streeter, Eco-Surf's Up, TOMORROW MAG., Mar./Apr. 2001, at 1, 8: The risks of sticking one's corporate neck out on environmental issues has resulted in many of the top-performing companies keeping their activities under wraps. This is understandable, given the number of companies that have been shot down by activists for promoting their green initiatives. 291. Id. at 5. Some have questioned whether sustainability is a "destination" or a "process." Genencor is of the latter view, asserting that "sustainability is a process—a journey and not a destination." Id. See also Realizing the Sustainable Development Premium, supra note 188, at 5, 18 ("sustainable development offers a direction, not a destination"). 292. Realizing the Sustainable Development Premium, supra note 188, at 3. 293. 2001 GENENCOR SUSTAINABILITY REPORT, supra note 289, at 8. 294. California Firms, supra note 169, at 8. 295. Id. at 10. 296. Id. 297. The company's goal is is to lead the way forward in industrial biotechnology. Biotechnology has important applications that extend far beyond the pharmaceutical sector and affect our daily lives in significant ways such as the weekly laundry, processing of textiles like blue-jeans, producing high fructose corn syrup for soft drinks, and producing fuel ethanol for cars. Karl Sanford, Testimony Before the U.S. House of Representatives, House Science Committee, Technology Subcommittee, Federal News Serv. (Sept. 17, 1998) [hereinafter Sanford Testimony]. 298. See Press Release, Genencor, Genencor Reports Fourth-Quarter and Year-End Financial Results (Feb. 5, 2002). The company employs more than 1,500 persons worldwide and operates 8 production facilities on 4 continents. The company's corporate headquarters are located in Palo Alto, California. Genencor maintains its business operations headquarters in Rochester, New York, and its European business operations and research and development headquarters in Leiden, in the Netherlands. The company's manufacturing sites are located in Argentina, Belgium, Finland (2), the United States (3), and China. Id. See also GENENCOR INTERNATIONAL, INC., ANNUAL REPORT (2000), available at http://www.genencor.com/annualreport/index.html (last visited Feb. 27, 2002). 299. Sanford Testimony, supra note 297. 300. Biotech Firms Are Growing More Profitable, GRAND RAPIDS BUS. J., Oct. 22, 2001, at B6 (quoting Jack Huttner, Genencor's Vice President of Communications and Public Affairs). 301. Genencor is collaborating with DuPont, for example, to develop a fermentation process for producing 1,3-propanediol (PDO), a precursor of polyester, from glucose. DuPont uses PDO for the production of a new type of polyester fiber that provides new functionality and an attractive environmental sustainability profile. The joint technical team used recombinant DNA technology and pathway engineering to design a microbe that will convert glucose derived from corn starch into the final product. Sanford Testimony, supra note 297. These breakthroughs are directly linked to Genencor's sustainability strategy. The company's initiative with Eastman Chemical, which involves extracting vitamin C from natural sources of glucose, is reported to be more environmentally sustainable than the current chemical method. Genencor Honors Iowa Senator Tom Harkin for His Leadership Role in Building a Biobased Economy, PR NEWSWIRE, July 21, 2001 [hereinafter Biobased Economy]. 302. Biobased Economy, supra note 301. With two corn belt facilities in the United States, Genencor is heavily committed to the development of technologies that use organic matter to produce fuel alternatives to petrochemicals: "Relying on biobased renewable carbon sources takes natural advantage of the U.S.'s strong position in agriculture and biotechnology and promotes a sustainable economy." Id. (quoting Carole Cobb, Senior Vice President of Supply for Genencor). 303. More specifically, Genencor appears to have adopted this approach in order to secure financial benefits, obtain or maintain favorable standing with investors and financiers, and position itself for participation in next generation regulatory programs. See 2001 GENENCOR SUSTAINABILITY REPORT, supra note 289, at 7. 304. Id. See Next Generation Environmental Management Techniques, supra note 167. 305. On the role of senior executives in a firm's evolution toward sustainability, and in shaping broader perspectives and expectations on corporate responsibility, see generally Odin Zackerman, Cultivating Leadership, Cultivating Collaboration: The Sustainability Imperative in Next Generation Environmental Work, paper presented at Environmental Stewardship: Rebuilding and Maintaining America's Resources, National Association of Environmental Professionals 27th Annual Conference, Dearborn, Mich. (June 23-26, 2002); WHITING & BENNETT, supra note 7, at 12; JANE NELSON ET AL., THE POWER TO CHANGE: MOBILISING BOARD LEADERSHIP TO DELIVER SUSTAINABLE VALUE TO MARKETS AND SOCIETY (The International Business Leaders Forum Mar. 2001); Jim Motavalli, Mobility Maverick, TOMORROW MAG., Dec. 2001, at 30 (profiling Ford CEO William Clay Ford Jr.); Lester R. Brown, Follow the Leader, TOMORROW MAG., Dec. 2001, at 88; Carolyn R. Egri & Susan Herman, Leadership in the North American Environmental Sector: Values, Leadership Styles, and Contexts of Environmental Leaders and Their Organizations, 43 ACAD. MGMT. J. 571 (2000); Sanjay Sharma, Managerial Interpretations and Organizational Context as Predictors of Corporate Choice of Environmental Strategy, 43 ACAD. MGMT. J. 681 (2000); L. Greenhalgh, Ford Motor Company's CEO Jac Nasser on Transformational Change, E-Business, and Environmental Responsibility, ACAD. MGMT. EXECUTIVE, Aug. 2000, at 46; L.M. Andersson & T.S. Bateman, Individual Environmental Initiative: Championing Natural Environmental Issues in U.S. Business Organizations, 43 ACAD. MGMT. J. 548 (2000); M. Cordano & I.H. Frieze, Pollution Reduction Preferences of U.S. Environmental Managers: Applying Ajzen's Theory of Planned Behavior, 43 ACAD. MGMT. J. 627 (2000); C.P. Egri & S. Herman, Leadership in the North American Environmental Sector: Values, Leadership Styles, and Contexts of Environmental Leaders and Their Organizations, 43 ACAD. MGMT. J. 571 (2000); J.L. Greeno, The Director as Environmental Steward, DIRECTORS & BOARDS, Autumn 1993, at 17. Twenty-two of 32 companies responding to a 2001 PricewaterhouseCoopers survey indicated that they incorporated "consideration of sustainable development in corporate strategy" as a means of taking steps to implement principles relating to the concepts of sustainable development, highlighting "the need for direction and commitment from the highest level of the organisation." MINING & MINERALS SUSTAINABILITY SURVEY, supra note 10, at 13. A recent survey of company members of the Global Environmental Management Initiative found that 75% have a major champion of sustainable development in their company. In most cases, this champion is the head of EH&S for the company. Six percent of the companies surveyed have a person in the organization with the words "sustainable development" in his or her title. EVANOFF & NAGLE, supra note 9. Many of the companies that have mounted significant sustainability campaigns, e.g., Patagonia and Interface, initiated such efforts primarily based on internal values. Therefore, as Professor Sharma aptly points out, one of the important questions in corporate sustainability is how institutions can enhance personal values toward more sustainable living and workplace practices. Correspondence with Sanjay Sharma, Associate Professor, Laurier School of Business and Economics, Wilfrid Laurier University (Feb. 28, 2002). In recognition of the key role played by senior business leaders, The World Economic Forum and The Prince of Wales International Business Leaders Forum created a Framework for Action that chief executives, chairmen, board directors, and executive management teams can use to develop a strategy for managing their company's impact on society and its relationships with stakeholders, whether under the rubric of corporate responsibility, sustainable development, or the triple-bottom-line. The Framework for Action may be found in GLOBAL CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP: THE LEADERSHIP CHALLENGE FOR CEOs AND BOARDS, supra note 201, at 4-9. 306. Genencor's Global Steering Committee develops corporatewide sustainability goals and policies, oversees sustainability management system implementation and integration of sustainability throughout the company, and develops the company's annual sustainability report. It also provides oversight in support of the company's policies on the use of products derived from genetically modified microorganisms, the Biological Diversity Convention, and community relations. 2001 GENENCOR SUSTAINABILITY REPORT, supra note 289, at 9. This is not to say, however, that Genencor's sustainability program is hierarchical. According to the 2001 Genencor Sustainability Report, each employee plays a "critical role in achieving the goal of sustainability—from reducing the use of materials to developing processes and products that will save energy and resources." Id. at 7. At the facility level, core sustainability teams comprised of employees from all main business functions are empowered to tailor the company's core definition of sustainability and sustainability policy to their sites and direct the implementation of the SMS. See id. at 9. 307. 2001 GENENCOR SUSTAINABILITY REPORT, supra note 289, at 10. 308. Id. at 3. 309. Id. at 13. 310. Id. at 14. 311. Jeff Hogue, Sustainability at Genencor, Presentation at Multi-State Working Group on Environmental Management Systems, Learning Together 2000, San Diego, Cal. (June 2000), at http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/pollprev/MSWG/2000/hogue/index.htm (last visited Feb. 26, 2002) [hereinafter Sustainability at Genencor]. 312. Id. The company also developed a community relations program at each of its major sites worldwide. These efforts involve community activities, charitable giving, volunteerism, and promotion of scientific education. See 2001 GENENCOR SUSTAINABILITY REPORT, supra note 289, at 6 and 9. 313. See Andrew King & Michael Lenox, Exploring the Locus of Profitable Pollution Reduction, 48 MGMT. SCI. 289 (2002). 314. Sustainability at Genencor, supra note 311. Genencor also endeavors to align its SMS with key business objectives at the site level, such as production planning, human resources goals, and financial planning. 2001 GENENCOR SUSTAINABILITY REPORT, supra note 289, at 9. 315. 2001 GENENCOR SUSTAINABILITY REPORT, supra note 289, at 13. 316. California Firms, supra note 169, at 8. 317. See 2001 GENENCOR SUSTAINABILITY REPORT, supra note 289, at 11, 12. 318. See id., at 18-19. 319. The company's SMS incorporates periodic assessment and management review. As part of this process, the company's Global Steering Committee and site management teams review progress toward meeting OGSMs. Id. at 14. The SMS assessment is characterized in company's the 2001 Sustainability Report as a "collaborative exercise which simultaneously checks SMS implementation and alignment of OGSMs with site business goals, and expands education while improving the implementation process itself." Id. As part of this assessment, site management reviews corporate and site-specific goals, as well as the inventory of aspects and significance determination, and adjusts objectives and goals for the next cycle on an as needed basis. Id. Site Core Teams then have an opportunity to create new and/or revise objectives, goals, strategies, and measures for the coming year as appropriate. Id. 320. Jeff Hogue, Correspondence with Ira Feldman (Feb. 18, 2002). Each SMS is designed so that sites can achieve external certification. 2001 GENENCOR SUSTAINABILITY REPORT, supra note 289, at 10. 321. The company considers the following to be its principal stakeholders: employees; investors; customers; contractors; suppliers; local communities (including both residential and commercial neighbors); regulators; the public; and NGOs. 2001 GENENCOR SUSTAINABILITY REPORT, supra note 289, at 16. In addition to publishing sustainability reports and soliciting input from its stakeholders, the company seeks to foster a stakeholder dialogue in four main ways: (1) employee dialogue via the SMS and Global Steering Committee; (2) a pilot Stakeholder Advisory Board based at corporate headquarters in Palo Alto; (3) supplier education and communications; and (4) consumer education and communications. Id. at 16-17. As part of its Supplier Education Program, Genencor asks suppliers to complete a comprehensive questionnaire eliciting information on a variety of sustainability issues. Id. at 17. 322. California Firms, supra note 169, at 10. 323. 2001 GENENCOR SUSTAINABILITY REPORT, supra note 289, at 18. 324. Id. at 7. 325. See Correspondence with Sanjay Sharma, Associate Professor, Laurier School of Business and Economics, Wilfrid Laurier University (Feb. 27, 2002); Frans A. Vollenbroek, Sustainable Development and the Challenge of Innovation, 10 J. CLEANER PRODUCTION 215 (2002). See generally Experts Are Divided Over the Business Case for Sustainability, BUS. & THE ENV'T (Cutter), Feb. 2002, at 9 ("There is not a single product anywhere that cannot have innovation related to it that will bring about sustainability.") (quoting Jim Thomas, Executive Director, Health, Safety, and Environment for Novartis Corp.); KARINA FUNK, SUSTAINABILITY AND PERFORMANCE: UNCOVERING OPPORTUNITIES FOR VALUE CREATION (Ernst & Young Center for Business Innovation 2001); THE BUSINESS CASE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, supra note 152, at 10; ROBERTS ET AL., supra note 201, at 5; Prahalad & Hart, supra note 81; Overview of Sustainability, supra note 9; Doering, supra note 201; Petra Christmann, Effects of "Best Practices" of Environmental Management on Cost Competitiveness: The Role of Complementary Assets, 43 ACAD. MGMT. J. 663 (2000); SIMON ZADEK, DOING GOOD AND DOING WELL: MAKING THE BUSINESS CASE FOR CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP (The Conference Board 2000); JOSEPH FIKSEL, SUSTAINABLE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE FROM SUSTAINABLE TECHNOLOGIES (Battelle Institute 1999), available at http://www.battelle.org/environment/lcm/sca.pdf (last visited Mar. 5, 2002); Stuart L. Hart & Mark B. Milstein, Global Sustainability and the Creative Destruction of Industries, 41 SLOAN MGMT. REV. 23 (1999); ROWLEDGE ET AL., supra note 114, at 37-38 (surveying case studies that illustrate ways sustainable development approaches can provide a range of benefits, including: reductions in operating costs; production and process improvements; reduced liability and risk; enhanced brand image; increased employee morale; increased opportunity for innovation; increased opportunity for revenue generation, including new products, markets, and businesses; better supply chain management; and deeper, more meaningful relationships with customers); Sanjay Sharma & H. Vredenburg, Proactive Corporate Environmental Strategy and the Development of Competitively Valuable Organizational Capabilities, 19 STRATEGIC MGMT. J. 729 (1998); CLAUDE FUSSLER & PETER JAMES, DRIVING ECO-INNOVATION: A BREAK-THROUGH DISCIPLINE FOR INNOVATION AND SUSTAINABILITY (1996); Stuart L. Hart, A Natural Resource-Based View of the Firm, 20 ACAD. MGMT. REV. 986 (1995). See also JANINE M. BENYUS, BIOMIMICRY: INNOVATION INSPIRED BY NATURE (1997). 326. The index tool examines the life cycle of the product and allows users to assess the impacts in the choice of raw materials, production conditions, as well as eventual use and disposalof products. See 2001 GENENCOR SUSTAINABILITY REPORT, supra note 289, at 15. 327. See Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Sustainability Website, at http://www.bms.com/static/ehs/index.html (last visited Jan. 22, 2001); ICC Environment and Sustainable Development, Company Showcase, at http://www.iccwbo.org/sdcharter/corp_init/company_showcase/bristol/bristol.asp (last visited Feb. 19, 2002); BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB COMPANY, ON THE PATH TOWARD SUSTAINABILITY: 2001 SUSTAINABILITY PROGRESS REPORT, available at http://www.bms.com/static/ehs/report/data/sust01.pdf (last visited Jan. 22, 2001). See generally SAM COMPANY, BIOGRAPHY OF BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB CO. (Oct. 2001), available at http://www.sam-group.com/SAM_pdf/SAM_comp_bio/2001/Leaders_world/CB_Bristol_MS_E.pdf (last visited Mar. 29, 2002). 328. See generally Lee Schilling, Remarks at World Resources Institute, Sustainable Enterprise Program, Fifth Annual Sustainable Enterprise Summit: The Next Top Line: Sustainability as a Business Driver (Dec. 2001); Mac Bridger, Environmental Innovation and Accountability at Collins & Aikman, CORP. ENVTL. STRATEGY, Spring 1998, at 27. 329. See Samuel L. Smolik, Vice President, Environment, Health and Safety, Dow Chemical Company, Remarks at On the Road to Johannesburg: Implementing Sustainability Across Global Operations, World Environment Center, New York City, N.Y. (Apr. 23, 2002); Samuel L. Smolik, Vice President of Environment, Health, & Safety, Dow Chemical Company, Living, Improved Daily, Remarks at Globe 2002, Vancouver, Canada (Mar. 13-15, 2002); Mike Parker, President and CEO, Dow Chemical Company, Sustainable Development: Moving Our Industry to a New Level of Performance and Respect, Remarks to the Society of Chemical Industry (SCI) in Portugal (Oct. 8, 2001), at http://www.wbcsd.ch/newscenter/library.htm#gl (last visited Jan. 18, 2002); Samuel L. Smolik, Vice President of Environment, Health & Safety, Dow Chemical Company, Environment, Health & Safety Improvement at Dow, Remarks at the National Goals Roundtable, College Station, Tex. (Aug. 1, 2001), available at http://www.dow.com/environment/reports/2001/20010801.html (last visited Jan. 22, 2001); DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY, PUBLIC REPORT 2000: THE BOTTOM LINE ON THE TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE, at http://www.dow.com/webapps/lit/litorder.asp?filepath=about/pdfs/noreg/233-00150. pdf&pdf=true (last visited Jan. 22, 2001). See generally SAM COMPANY, BIOGRAPHY OF DOW CHEMICAL CO. (Oct. 2001), available at http://www.sam-group.com/SAM_pdf/SAM_comp_bio/2001/Leaders_world/CB_Dow_E.pdf (last visited Mar. 29, 2002); Claudia M. Caruana, In Crisis Mode, TOMORROW MAG., Dec. 2001, at 72; EXPORTING ENVIRONMENTALISM, supra note 244 (describing the company's promotion of environmentalism in Mexico and Brazil); WHITE ET AL., supra note 128, at 83-86. 330. See William Clay Ford Jr., Remarks at the Ford Motor Company Annual Meeting of Stockholders (May 10, 2002); FORD MOTOR COMPANY, BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS AND SETTING THE COURSE: 2000 CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP REPORT, available at http://www.ford.com/en/ourCompany/communityAndCulture/buildingRelationships/printable2000Report.htm (last visited Jan. 22, 2001). Ford is also a pioneer in the use of ecologically harmonious architectural design. See generally Joseph Fiksel, The Emergence of a Sustainable Business Community, Presentation at CHEMRAWN IV, Boulder, Colo. (June 11-13, 2001) (on Ford's Rouge Plant in Dearborn, Michigan), at http://www.battelle.org/environment/lcm/chemrawn.pdf (last visited Mar. 5, 2002). 331. See John F. Smith Jr., Global Corporate Responsibility: One Company's View and Commitment, Remarks at the APEC CEO Conference, Shanghai, China (Oct. 19, 2001), at http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/sustainability/news_issues/speeches/smith_101901.html (last visited Jan. 17, 2002); Terry Cullum, Director, GM Global Design for Environment, Remarks before the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (June 21, 2001), at http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/sustainability/news_issues/speeches/cullum_iclei_062101.html (last visited Jan. 17, [32 ELR 10930] 2002); GENERAL MOTORS, 00-01 SUSTAINABILITY REPORT, available at http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/sustainability/reports/01/printable_report/gmsustain01.pdf (last visited Jan. 17, 2002); GENERAL MOTORS, STEPS TOWARD SUSTAINABILITY: 1999-2000 REPORT ON ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND SOCIAL PERFORMANCE, available at http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/sustainability/reports/00/index.html (last visited Jan. 17, 2002). 332. See Ray Anderson, Chairman, Interface, Inc., Mid-Course Correction, Remarks at Globe 2002, Vancouver, Canada (Mar. 13-15, 2002); INTERFACE, INC., ANNUAL REPORT 2000, available at http://www.interfaceinc.com/us/company/investor/annual/download/interface_2000annualreport.pdf (last visited Aug. 14, 2001); 1999 CERES REPORT FOR INTERFACE, INC. (CERES 2000), available at http://www.interfaceinc.com/us/company/sustainability/CERES1999.pdf (last visited Aug. 14, 2001); 1998 CERES REPORT FOR INTERFACE, INC. (CERES 1999), available at http://www.interfaceinc.com/us/company/sustainability/CERES1998.pdf (last visited Aug. 14, 2001); Interface, Inc., Practices Leading Toward Sustainability, at http://www.interfaceinc.com/us/company/sustainability/pletsus.asp (last visited Aug. 14, 2001); RAY ANDERSON, MID-COURSE CORRECTION: TOWARD A SUSTAINABLE ENTERPRISE: THE INTERFACE MODEL (Chelsea Green 1999); see generally Sustainability and Enterprise, supra note 10, at 197, 244-45; ROWLEDGE ET AL., supra note 114, at 123; Deborah Johansen, Interface, Inc.: Taking the Lead Toward Sustainability, CORP. ENVTL. STRATEGY, Spring 1998, at 47. A case study describing Interface, Inc.'s sustainability initiatives may be found in the WBCSD, On-Line Case Collection, at http://www.wbcsd.ch/casestud/interface/index.htm (last visited Mar. 5, 2002). 333. See generally Michaela Zint & Rob Frederick, Marketing and Advertising a "Deep Green" Company: The Case of Patagonia, Inc., J. CORP. CITIZENSHIP, Spring 2001, at 93; ROWLEDGE ET AL., supra note 114, at 95; Kelly McSpirit, Sustainable Consumption: Patagonia's Buy Less, But Buy Better, CORP. ENVTL. STRATEGY, Winter 1998, at 32; Harvey Hartman & Erika J. Haas, Patagonia Struggles to Reduce Its Impact on the Environment, TOTAL QUALITY ENVTL. MGMT., Autumn 1995, at 1. 334. See PROCTER & GAMBLE, 2001 SUSTAINABILITY REPORT (2001), available at http://www.pg.com/content/pdf/01_about_pg/corporate_citizenship/sustainability/reports/sustainability_report_2001.pdf (last visited Jan. 16, 2002); Carpenter, supra note 9. See generally SAM COMPANY, BIOGRAPHY OF PROCTER & GAMBLE CO. (2001), available at http://www.sam-group.com/SAM_pdf/SAM_comp_bio/2001/Leaders_world/CB_Procter_Gamble_E.pdf (last visited Mar. 29, 2002); Erwan Saouter & Peter White, Laundry Detergents: Cleaner Clothes and a Cleaner Environment, 9 CORP. ENVTL. STRATEGY 40 (2002); WHITING & BENNETT, supra note 7; J. Maxwell et al., Preventing Waste Beyond the Company Walls: P&G's Response to the Need for Environmental Quality, 3 POLLUTION PREVENTION REV. 317 (1993). 335. See Weyerhaeuser, Environmental Core Policy, at http://www.weyerhaeuser.com/citizenship/environment/environpolicy/environcorepolicy.asp (last visited Aug. 14, 2001); Weyerhaeuser, Health and Safety Risk Management Core Policy, at http://www.weyerhaeuser.com/citizenship/environment/aepr2000/about/healthSafetyRiskMPolicy00.htm (last visited Aug. 14, 2001); WEYERHAEUSER, 2000 WEYERHAEUSER ANNUAL REPORT, available at http://www.weyerhaeuser.com/annualreport/wyar00ccbn/request/wy2000AnnualReport.pdf; WEYERHAEUSER, 2000 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND SAFETY REPORT (2001), available at http://www.weyerhaeuser.com/citizenship/environment/aepr2000/highlights/overview.htm (last visited Aug. 14, 2001); WEYERHAEUSER, GROWING OUR FUTURE TOGETHER: WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY 2001-2002 CITIZENSHIP REPORT (2001), available at http://www.weyerhaeuser.com/citizenship/report/ (last visited Aug. 14, 2001). See generally Kenneth M. Karch, Getting Organizational Buy-In for Benchmarking: Environmental Management at Weyerhaeuser, TOTAL QUALITY ENVTL. MGMT., Spring 1994, at 297. 336. See WHITING & BENNETT, supra note 7, at 6 (finding that "hundreds of companies—perhaps a few thousand—have already initiated sustainability processes, frequently adopting their own individual understandings. Many other companies are observing the leaders' progress and actions but have not committed—at least not openly—to a course of action"). In a 1999 survey of 481 EH&S and other business executives in North America and Europe by Arthur D. Little, 95% of respondents considered sustainable development an important issue while 82% believed it offered business value. POLTORZYCKI & SHOPLEY, supra note 50, at 1. Generally, respondents believed sustainable development approaches would reinvigorate and expand the value of environmental activities, improve company reputations, and contribute to innovation and competitive advantage. Id. at 3. Interestingly, Poltorzycki and Shopley found little difference between the views of North American and European companies, with businesses on both continents perceiving business value and sustainable development to be strongly linked. Poltorzycki and Shopley also found, however, that respondents "clearly viewed European companies as taking sustainable development more seriously." Id. at 5. A survey of TNCs conducted four years earlier by UNCTAD found that 86% of respondents listed laws (actual and impending) and 90% listed market opportunities as the biggest influences in "their moving towards sustainability." FINANCING CHANGE, supra note 9, at 58-67 (quoting U.N. CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT SECRETARIAT, INCENTIVES AND DISINCENTIVES FOR THE ADOPTION OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT BY TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS (1995)). On the need to approach sustainable development as a "long-term" business leadership issue, see WHITING & BENNETT, supra note 7, at 6; Realizing the Sustainable Development Premium, supra note 188, at 5, 8: The challenge that companies face as they set these strategies is getting the pacing right. The strategy needs to provide momentum, but not draw too much of the company's energy away from meeting existing challenges and conditions. It needs to identify ways to balance short-term priorities with medium- and long-term priorities, achieving solid returns in all time periods. As companies look to the longer time horizons, of course, the population and resource trends thatdrive sustainability thinking become more acute. ROWLEDGE ET AL., supra note 114, at 37; Introduction: Sustainable Development and the Industrial Firm, supra note 62, at 1, 10-11; CANNIBALS WITH FORKS, supra note 146, at 246-74; FINANCING CHANGE, supra note 9, at 58-67; RECOMMENDATIONS, supra note 58, at 3. In addition to anecdotal and survey evidence regarding corporate environmental and sustainability practices, a review of information on selected databases, e.g., Kinder, Lydenberg & Domini Index or the Investor Responsibility Research Center database, indicates that the overall level of commitment to sustainability appears to be rising. Correspondence with Sanjay Sharma, Associate Professor, Laurier School of Business and Economics, Wilfrid Laurier University (Aug. 31, 2001). 337. At the 2002 World Economic Forum's Annual Meeting in New York, 36 CEOs of companies from around the world called on their peers to lead their companies to place corporate citizenship at the core of business strategy and to commit to make every effort "to enhance the positive multipliers of their activities and to minimise any negative impacts on people and the environment, everywhere they invest and operate, recognising that the frameworks adopted for being a responsible business must move beyond philanthropy and be integrated into core business strategy and practice." GLOBAL CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP: THE LEADERSHIP CHALLENGE FOR CEOs AND BOARDS, supra note 201, at 2 (the group of signatories included the CEOs of Coca-Cola, Fleetboston Global Bank, McDonald's, Merck & Co., and S.C. Johnson & Son). In a PricewaterhouseCoopers survey conducted in conjunction with the 2002 World Economic Forum, nearly 70% of CEOs said corporate social responsibility was "vital to profitability." PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS & WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM, 5TH ANNUAL GLOBAL CEO SURVEY: UNCERTAIN TIMES, ABUNDANT OPPORTUNITIES 2 (2002). As for the factors that influence a company's social reputation, 71% of CEOs identified "good environmental performance" while 86% cited "a healthy and safe working environment." Id. at 16. In their 2000 study of 45 leading organizations for The Conference Board, Corporate Environmental Governance: Benchmarks Toward World-Class Systems, David C. Lowy and Richard P. Wells found: (1) 38% of respondents issued a policy-level commitment to sustainable development in the past two years (though Lowy and Wells point out that as 53% organizations did not respond to the question many companies may not have established such a policy); (2) 86% of firms identified as "peer-identified leaders," i.e., firms survey respondents listed as world-class environmental leaders, include an explicit commitment to sustainable development in their organizations' core set of values or mission statement versus 30% of other study participants; (3) 30% of respondents reported they have started to track the triple bottom line of economic, social, and environmental performance; (4) 38% of peer-identified leaders have mechanisms in place to track their organization's economic, social, and environmental performance; and (5) generally, participating organizations planned to add management system elements or mechanisms addressing sustainable development. LOWY & WELLS, supra note 147. For additional insights into the factors motivating executives to address corporate responsibility, see CHARLES BENNETT, CEOs ON CITIZENSHIP (The Conference Board Executive Action Report No. 12, 2002) (summarizing findings from forthcoming Conference Board survey, The New Corporate Citizenship, and suggesting that just 1% of CEOs list environment and sustainable development as the most important factor in their companies' ability to create future business success through [32 ELR 10931] citizenship programs), available at http://www.conference-board.org/ea_reports/EA_12.pdf (last visited Mar. 5, 2002); Philanthropic Programs Need Extra Push to Pay Business Dividends, BUS. & THE ENV'T (Aspen), Mar. 2002, at 9. A survey of 32 mining and minerals organizations by PricewaterhouseCoopers revealed that 26 of 32 respondents have taken steps to implement principles relating to the concepts of sustainable development throughout the business. MINING & MINERALS SUSTAINABILITY SURVEY, supra note 10, at 8, 13. As this Article is written, PricewaterhouseCoopers is conducting a survey of Fortune 1000 firms to assess current views and practices on sustainable development. The survey is scheduled for completion during the summer of 2002. Correspondence with Andrew W. Savitz, Partner, PricewaterhouseCoopers (Apr. 10, 2002). A survey of member companies of the Global Environmental Management Initiative found that: (1) only 20% have a formal definition for sustainable development; (2) 41% have an environmental, health, and safety policy that mentions sustainability or sustainable development; and (3) of those lacking a reference to sustainability or sustainable development in their policy, 78% envision adding a reference to it in the future, with most planning to do so within two years. EVANOFF & NAGLE, supra note 9. See also Realizing the Sustainable Development Premium, supra note 188, at 5 ("During [1999 we saw] a 50[%] increase in strategic exploration of sustainable development among companies that aim to be 'smart followers'"); EPSTEIN, supra note 15, at 241 (study results indicate "remarkable number of companies have recognized the importance of the concept of sustainable development and are applying that concept in corporate planning"); Is the Triple Bottom Line on the CEO Agenda?, BUS. & THE ENV'T (Cutter), May 1998, at 9. Recent public polling data also demonstrates that a growing segment of the public and consumers expect business to achieve social and environmental goals while making profits and creating jobs. See GLOBAL PUBLIC OPINION ON GLOBALIZATION, supra note 69; ENVIRONICS INTERNATIONAL, CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY MONITOR (2001); Press Release, Environics International, Environics International, American Companies Face Growing Pressure to Deliver the Social Goods (Feb. 27, 2001) (finding that "over one in four Americans that own shares say that a company's record on its broader social responsibilities has influenced their decision to purchase or sell its shares"), available at http://www.environicsinternational.com/news_archives/CSR_shareholders.pdf (last visited Mar. 1, 2002); JOHN WEISER & SIMON ZADEK, CONVERSATIONS WITH DISBELIEVERS: PERSUADING COMPANIES TO ADDRESS SOCIAL CHALLENGES (The Conference Board 2000), available at http://www.conference-board.org/MembersOnly/members/pdf-files/ConvDisb.pdf (last visited Mar. 5, 2002); INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS LEADERS FORUM & BURSON-MARSTELLER, THE RESPONSIBLE CENTURY? (2000), available at http://www.pwblf.org/csr/csrwebassist.nsf/550d4b46b29f68a6852568660081f938/80256adc002b82048525690800506a5b/$ FILE/CSRart.pdf (last visited Mar. 7, 2002); ENVIRONICS INTERNATIONAL AND THE PRINCE OF WALES BUSINESS LEADERS FORUM IN COOPERATION WITH THE CONFERENCE BOARD, THE MILLENNIUM POLL ON CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (1999) (poll of 25,000 citizens from 25 countries across 6 continents; nearly 60% of survey respondents formed impressions of a company based on factors related to social or environmental responsibility, and 1 of every 5 consumers surveyed indicated they had either rewarded or punished companies in the previous year based on their perceived social performance); DAVID J. VIDAL, CONSUMER EXPECTATIONS AND THE SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY OF BUSINESS (The Conference Board 1999). See generally Chris Coulter, Director, CSR Monitor, Environics International Ltd., Global Public Opinion and the Changing Expectations of Companies, Remarks at Globe 2002, Vancouver, Canada (Mar. 13-15, 2002); World's Citizens Have Great Expectations for Corporate Social Responsibility, BUS. & THE ENV'T (Cutter), Nov. 1999, at 2. 338. Correspondence with Andrew Hoffman, Assistant Professor, Organizational Behavior Department, Boston University School of Management (July 23, 2001); Correspondence with Hilary Bradbury, Assistant Professor of Organizational Behavior and Associate Director of the Weatherhead Institute on Sustainable Enterprise, Weatherhead School of Management, Case Western Reserve University (Sept. 13, 2001); Correspondence with Sanjay Sharma, Associate Professor, Laurier School of Business and Economics, Wilfrid Laurier University (Sept. 13, 2001). 339. Lloyd Timberlake, A Piece of Cake, TOMORROW MAG., June 2001, at 10, 11. 340. See generally RICHARD MacLEAN ET AL., ORGANIZATIONS IN TRANSITION: PRELIMINARY REPORT OF EXISTING LITERATURE AND MODEL DEVELOPMENT 33-36, 49-57 (2002). 341. Timberlake points out: "On the eve of Rio's 10th anniversary, leading companies find themselves in an odd position. They're way ahead of most governments in terms of the pursuit of sustainability . . . They're also ahead of many nongovernmental organizations in terms of transparency and stakeholder dialogue." Timberlake, supra note 339, 12. See Stephan Schmidheiny, Is Business Part of the Problem—or the Solution?, INT'L HERALD TRIB., Apr. 12, 2001, at 11 (Special Advertising Supp.) (leading companies "have pursued eco-efficiency, improved communications with those who have a stake in their businesses, become more transparent about the environmental and social effects of their businesses, and have better defined and explained their social responsibilities"). 342. See CANNIBALS WITH FORKS, supra note 146, at 340. 343. For a recap of the last 65 million years, see TIM FLANNERY, THE ETERNAL FRONTIER: AN ECOLOGICAL HISTORY OF NORTH AMERICA AND ITS PEOPLES (2001). 344. See SOMETHING NEW UNDER THE SUN, supra note 100; ANDREW GOUDIE, THE HUMAN IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT (5th ed. 2000); EASTERBROOK, supra note 100. For a more recent take on this theme, see David Austin & Molly K. Macauley, Cutting Through Environmental Issues: Technology as a Double-Edged Sword, BROOKINGS REV., Winter 2001, at 24. 345. W. Douglas Costain & James P. Lester, The Evolution of Environmentalism, in ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS AND POLICY: THEORIES AND EVIDENCE 15, 35 (James P. Lester ed., 2d ed. 1995). 346. Gary C. Bryner, The United States: "Sorry—Not Our Problem," in IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: STRATEGIES AND INITIATIVES IN HIGH CONSUMPTION SOCIETIES 272, 276 (William M. Lafferty & James Meadowcroft eds., 2001). See id. at 301-02. 347. Correspondence with Sanjay Sharma, Associate Professor, Laurier School of Business and Economics, Wilfrid Laurier University (Sept. 13, 2001). The leadership of lawmakers and government officials will be critical in ensuring constructive application of the concept of sustainable development abroad as well as in spurring a more rapid response by business. See generally IRA FELDMAN, LOST IN TRANSLATION: THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL POLICY ON SUSTAINABILITY (forthcoming 2002); William C. Clark, America's National Interests in Promoting a Transition to Sustainability, in U.S. POLICY AND THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT: MEMOS TO THE PRESIDENT 183, 198 (Donald Kennedy & John K. Riggs eds., Aspen Institute 2000); PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE AMERICA: ADVANCING PROSPERITY, OPPORTUNITY, AND A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT FOR THE 21ST CENTURY 87-92 (May 1999) [hereinafter TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE AMERICA]; A NEW CONSENSUS FOR PROSPERITY, supra note 128 (calling on the United States to take "a leadership role in the development and implementation of global sustainable development policies, standards of conduct, and trade and foreign policies that further the achievement of sustainability"). The United States has fallen behind other nations in implementing Agenda 21 and has been ineffectual or weak on many other global environmental issues, including climate change and biodiversity. See Bryner, supra note 346, at 302; William C. Clark, America's National Interests in Promoting a Transition to Sustainability, in U.S. POLICY AND THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT: MEMOS TO THE PRESIDENT 183, 198 (Donald Kennedy & John K. Riggs eds., Aspen Institute 2000); Paul E. Hagen, The Green Diplomacy Gap, ENVTL. F., July/Aug. 2000, at 40. See also Kristin Schafer, Ratifying Global Toxics Treaties: The U.S. Must Provide Leadership, SAIS REV., Winter-Spring 2002, at 169. The WSSD, and the sustainable development agenda generally, offer the Bush Administration an opportunity for "re-engagement." See J. William Futrell & Linda Breggin, Re-engagement, ENVTL. F., July/Aug. 2000, at 40. 348. The United States has a highly developed system of environmental law, and while the outcomes of environmental policy are inherently difficult to measure, it is evident that environmental quality has improved in many respects over the last 30 years, particularly with respect to air pollution. See generally STEVEN HAYWARD & JULIE MAJERES, INDEX OF LEADING ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS (6th ed. Pacific Research Institute 2001), available at http://www.pacificresearch.org/pub/sab/enviro/01_enviroindex/index.html (last visited Feb. 5, 2002); COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY—THE WORLD WIDE WEB (1997). Some of this progress can be traced to specific regulatory programs. See generally SAMUELP. HAYS, A HISTORY OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS SINCE 1945 (2000); J. CLARENCE DAVIES & JAN MAZUREK, POLLUTION [32 ELR 10932] CONTROL IN THE UNITED STATES: EVALUATING THE SYSTEM (1998). As Richard Stewart points out, however, the current system has its detractors: [U.S. environmental programs] have been strongly criticized in recent years as overly legalistic, excessively costly, unduly rigid, and productive of conflict and litigation rather than cooperative problem solving. There is increasing recognition of the limits of the dominant "command and control" system of centralized regulation, and growing interest in the use of alternative approaches, including economic incentives for environmental protection. Richard Stewart, Environmental Law, in FUNDAMENTALS OF AMERICAN LAW 481-82 (Alan B. Morrison ed., 1996). Despite the general consensus that traditional methods of environmental regulation do not maximize efficiencies, significant differences persist as to the optimal blend of controls and incentives. The debate is no longer about whether regulatory innovation is called for, however, rather it is over the form such innovation should take. This is not the forum for a thorough assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of current U.S. environmental policy. Fortunately, there is an ample supply of scholarship on the subject. For a critique of current policy and suggestions for reform, see THE BUSINESS ROUNDTABLE, BLUEPRINT 2001: DRAFTING ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY FOR THE FUTURE (2001), available at http://www.brtable.org/pdf/496b.pdf (last visited Aug. 14, 2001) [hereinafter BLUEPRINT 2001]; AL IANNUZZI JR., INDUSTRY SELF-REGULATION AND VOLUNTARY ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE (2001); ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE: A REPORT ON THE NEXT GENERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY (Donald F. Kettl ed., 2001); NATIONAL ACADEMY OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, ENVIRONMENT.GOV: TRANSFORMING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY (2000) [hereinafter TRANSFORMING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION]; DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, RETHINKING U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION POLICY: MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES FOR A NEW ADMINISTRATION (PricewaterhouseCoopers Endowment for the Business of Government 2000) [hereinafter RETHINKING U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION POLICY]; TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE AMERICA, supra note 347; KARL HAUSKER, THE CONVERGENCE OF IDEAS ON IMPROVING THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SYSTEM 9 (Center for Strategic and International Studies 1999) (emphasizing the need for Congress to play a meaningful role in forging the next generation of environmental policies), available at http://www.csis.org/pubs/wr_EnvironPSintro.html (last visited Nov. 15, 2001); SUSTAINABLE AMERICA: AMERICA'S ENVIRONMENT IN THE 21ST CENTURY, supra note 128; ENTERPRISE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT (E4E), THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SYSTEM IN TRANSITION: TOWARD A MORE DESIRABLE FUTURE (1998) [hereinafter THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SYSTEM IN TRANSITION]; ECO-EFFICIENCY TASK FORCE REPORT, supra note 128; ASPEN INSTITUTE, THE ALTERNATIVE PATH: A CLEANER, CHEAPER WAY TO PROTECT AND ENHANCE THE ENVIRONMENT (1996), available at http://www.aspeninst.org/eee/environment_altpath.html (last visited Nov. 15, 2001) [hereinafter THE ALTERNATIVE PATH]; BENJAMIN GOLDMAN, SUSTAINABLE AMERICA: NEW PUBLIC POLICY FOR THE 21ST CENTURY (U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration 1995). For commentary on these proposals and other insightful analysis, see generally Rondinelli, A New Generation, supra note 117; Joel A. Mintz, Whither Environmental Reform?: Some Thoughts on a Recent AALS Debate, 31 ELR 10719 (June 2001); John Voorhees, The Changing Environmental Management Scene: Federal Policy Impacts the Private and Public Sectors, 31 ELR 10079 (Jan. 2001); Dennis D. Hirsch, Symposium Introduction: Second Generation Policy in the New Economy, 29 CAP. U.L. REV. 1 (2001); Daniel C. Esty, Next Generation Environmental Law: A Response to Richard Stewart, 29 CAP. U. L. REV. 183 (2001); E. Donald Elliott, Environmental Markets and Beyond: Three Modest Proposals for the Future of Environmental Law, 29 CAP. U. L. REV. 245 (2001); Richard MacLean & Frank B. Friedman, Green Arthritis, ENVTL. F., Nov./Dec. 2000, at 36; DANIEL A. FARBER, ECO-PRAGMATISM: MAKING SENSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL DECISIONS IN AN UNCERTAIN WORLD (1999); Daniel J. Fiorino, Rethinking Environmental Regulation: Perspectives on Law and Governance, 23 HARV. ENVTL. L. REV. 441 (1999); Jennifer Sullivan, Retooling for Second Generation Environmental Policy, ENVTL. PERSP. NEWSL. (Tellus Inst.), Nov. 2000, at 9, available at http://www.tellus.org/b&s/newsletters/nov%208-for%20web.pdf (last visited Feb. 2, 2002); DAVIES & MAZUREK, supra; SHELLEY METZENBAUM, MAKING MEASUREMENT MATTER: THE CHALLENGE AND PROMISE OF BUILDING A PERFORMANCE-FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SYSTEM (1998); Charles W. Powers & Marian R. Chertow, Industrial Ecology: Overcoming Policy Fragmentation, in THINKING ECOLOGICALLY, supra note 88, at 19; Neil Gunningham & Darren Sinclair, New Generation Environmental Policy: Environmental Management Systems and Regulatory Reform, 22 MELB. U. L. REV. 592 (1998); E. Donald Elliot, Toward Ecological Law and Policy, in THINKING ECOLOGICALLY, supra note 88, at 170; Pollution Control and Sustainable Industry, supra note 11, at 101; Robert Stavins & Bradley Whitehead, Market-Based Environmental Policies, in THINKING ECOLOGICALLY, supra note 88, at 105; Michael E. Porter, America's Green Strategy, SCI. AM., Apr. 1991, at 168; Bruce Ackerman & Richard B. Stewart, Reforming Environmental Law, 37 STAN. L. REV. 1333 (1985). 349. See Richard B. Stewart, A New Generation of Environmental Regulation?, 29 CAP. U. L. REV. 21, 127-43 (2001) (a "reflexive" regulatory model seeks to "promote the internalization of environmental norms by firms and other organizational actors as opposed to directly controlling their external conduct"); Eric Orts, Reflexive Environmental Law, 89 NW. U. L. REV. 1227 (1995). 350. See Monsma, supra note 91, at 1254, 1257-62 (U.S. EPA, "working with its state and regional partners, will need to shift resources to developing environmental performance criteria (i.e., environmental standards) that are needed to implement performance-based approaches."); ASPEN INSTITUTE, A CALL TO ACTION TO BUILD A PERFORMANCE-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (2000) [hereinafter A CALL TO ACTION], available at http://www.aspeninst.org/eee/pdfs/eeeperform.pdf (last visited Nov. 15, 2001); TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE AMERICA, supra note 347, at 36-39 and 48-49; HAUSKER, supra note 348, at 11; THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SYSTEM IN TRANSITION, supra note 348, at 25; METZENBAUM, supra note 348; A NEW CONSENSUS FOR PROSPERITY, supra note 128. 351. As Karl Hausker points out, the European Union has sought to avoid some of the drawbacks of the U.S. fragmented, single-media approaches to regulation by adopting the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Directive. Karl Hausker, Reinventing Environmental Regulation: The Only Path to a Sustainable Future, 29 ELR 10148, 10153 (Mar. 1999). "Over the next decade," Hausker suggests, "the IPPC will transform a significant portion of Europe's industrial environmental regulation to a system that issues permits based on a comprehensive evaluation of emissions to all media and establishes an emissions hierarchy to promote pollution prevention as the preferred option." Id. For further background and analysis concerning the IPPC Directive, see generally Next Generation Environmental Management Techniques, supra note 167; Ursula Schliessner, Integrated Product Policy: Where Is the EU Heading?, 10 EUR. ENVTL. L. REV. 113 (2001); INTEGRATED POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL: THE EC DIRECTIVE FROM A COMPARATIVE LEGAL AND ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVE (Chris Backes & Gerrit Betlem eds., 1999); Neil Emmott, IPPC and Beyond—Developing a Strategic Approach to Industry for European Environmental Policy, 1 J. ENVTL. POL'Y & PLAN. 77 (1999); Antoinette Long & Claudio Mereu, Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control: The Implementation of Directive 96/61/EEC, 8 EUR. ENVTL. L. REV. 180 (1999); Derek Smith, Integrated Product Policy, J. SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT DESIGN, Apr. 1997, at 7; A. Mehta & K. Hawkins, Integrated Pollution Control and Its Impact: Perspectives From Industry, 10 J. ENVTL. L. 61 (1998); NEW INSTRUMENTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY IN THE EU (Jonathan Golub ed., 1998). See also THE POLITICS OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT. THEORY, POLICY, AND PRACTICE WITHIN THE EUROPEAN UNION (Susan Baker et al. eds., 1997). 352. See generally David W. Case, The Law and Economics of Environmental Information as Regulation, 31 ELR 10773, 10775 (July 2001) (defining "informational regulation" as "rules requiring mandatory disclosure of information on environmental operations or performance of regulated entities to third parties, such as workers, consumers, shareholders, or the public in general."); Bradley C. Karkkainen, Information as Environmental Regulation: TRI and Performance Benchmarking, Precursor to a New Paradigm?, 89 GEO. L.J. 257 (2001); Mark A. Cohen, Information as a Policy Instrument in Protecting the Environment: What Have We Learned?, 31 ELR 10425 (Apr. 2001); William F. Pedersen, Regulation and Information Disclosure: Parallel Universes and Beyond, 25 HARV. ENVTL. L. REV. 151 (2001); Cass Sunstein, Information Regulation and Informational Standing: Akins and Beyond, 147 U. PA. L. REV. 613 (1999); HAUSKER, supra note 348, at 10; Madhu Khanna et al., Toxic Release Information: A Policy Tool for Environmental Protection, 36 J. ENVTL. ECON. & MGMT. 243 (1998) (examining investor reactions to the repeated public disclosure of environmental information about firms in the chemical industry and the effectiveness of this information as a decentralized mechanism for deterring pollution); THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SYSTEM IN TRANSITION, supra note 348, at 19-24; Sustainable Development as a Framework for National Governance, supra note 3, at 73-76; Paul R. Kleindorfer & Eric W. Orts, Informational Regulation of Environmental Risks, 18 RISK ANALYSIS 155 (1998); Tom Tietenberg, Disclosure Strategies for Pollution Control, 11 ENVTL. & RESOURCE ECON. 587 (1998); Shameek Konar & Mark A. Cohen, Information as Regulation: The Effect of Community Right-to-Know Laws on Toxic Emissions, 32 J. ENVTL. ECON. & MGMT. 109 (1997) (finding that firms with the largest stock price decline on the day after toxic release information became public subsequently reduced emissions more than their industry peers); Peter S. Menell, Structuring a Market-Oriented Federal Eco-Information Policy, 54 MD. L. REV. 1435 (1995); Richard C. Rich, "Indirect Regulation" of Environmental Hazards Through the Provision of Information to the Public: The Case of SARA, Title III, 21 POL'Y STUD. J. 16 (1993). 353. See Monsma, supra note 91, at 1252 (the "U.S. environmental management system inadvertently decelerates the emergence of a more global and sustainable environmental management framework"); Sustainable Development as a Framework for National Governance, supra note 3, at 68-85; ECO-EFFICIENCY TASK FORCE REPORT, supra note 128; A NEW CONSENSUS FOR PROSPERITY, supra note 128 (setting forth the goal of creating a "widely held ethic of stewardship that strongly encourages individuals, institutions, and corporations to take full responsibility for the economic, environmental, and social consequences of their actions"). 354. See HAUFLER, supra note 138; TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE AMERICA, supra note 347, at 49. 355. Sustainable Development as a Framework for National Governance, supra note 3, at 95. Subsidies and taxes should also be reexamined with an eye toward eliminating policy measures at cross-purposes with sustainable development. Interview with Burton Hamner, President, Hamner & Associates LLC (Sept. 4, 2001); THE BUSINESS CASE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, supra note 152, at 4. See Bryner, supra note 346, at 296-97; SUSTAINABILITY THROUGH THE MARKET, supra note 117, at 29-35; Claude Fussler, Shaping a Deal for the Johannesburg 2002 Summit, Remarks at the High Level Seminar on Globalisation, Sustainable Development and the EU's External Policies, Green Globe Task Force/World Wide Fund for Nature, Brussels (Oct. 22-23, 2001); William C. Clark, America's National Interests in Promoting a Transition to Sustainability, in U.S. POLICY AND THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT. MEMOS TO THE PRESIDENT 183, 198 (Donald Kennedy & John K. Riggs eds., Aspen Institute 2000); ASPEN INSTITUTE, THE STEWARDSHIP PATH TO SUSTAINABLE NATURAL SYSTEMS 24-27 (June 1999) [hereinafter THE STEWARDSHIP PATH], available at http://aspeninstitute.org/eee/pdfs/stewpath.pdf (last visited Nov. 15, 2001); DAVID MALIN ROODMAN, THE NATURAL WEALTH OF NATIONS: HARNESSING THE MARKET FOR THE ENVIRONMENT (1998); CANNIBALS WITH FORKS, supra note 146, at 349-51; ECO-EFFICIENCY TASK FORCE REPORT, supra note 128; A NEW CONSENSUS FOR PROSPERITY, supra note 128. The International Institute for Sustainable Development, Subsidy Watch, at http://iisdl.iisd.ca/subsidywatch/ (last visited Mar. 1, 2002), contains information on subsidies that affect the environment. 356. See Rondinelli, A New Generation, supra note 117; Rondinelli, Making Eco-Efficiency the Foundation of Environmental Policy Reform, supra note 117, at 37; Monsma, supra note 91, at 1254-55; Elliott P. Laws, Need Statutory Authority for Reform, ENVTL. F., Nov./Dec. 1999, at 51. Such concerns have hampered efforts such as U.S. EPA's Common Sense Initiative and Project XL. For an analysis of the Common Sense Initiative, see generally David W. Case, The EPA's Environmental Stewardship Initiative: Attempting to Revitalize a Floundering Regulatory Reform Agenda, 50 EMORY L.J. 1, 40-42 (2001) [hereinafter Case, EPA's Environmental Stewardship Initiative]. Project XL, which stands for "eXcellence and Leadership," is a national pilot program that allows state and local governments, businesses, and federal facilities to develop with EPA innovative strategies to test better or more cost-effective ways of achieving environmental and public health protection. In exchange, EPA will issue regulatory, program, policy, or procedural flexibility to conduct the experiment. XL pilot projects must meet certain criteria but are built around three key elements: (1) stronger environmental performance; (2) meaningful stakeholder involvement; and (3) flexibility in EPA regulations, policies, or procedures. See U.S. EPA, PROJECT XL: DIRECTORY OF REGULATORY, POLICY, AND TECHNOLOGY INNOVATIONS (2000), available at http://www.epa.gov/projectxl/volltoc.htm (last visited Feb. 2, 2002). For background and commentary on ProjectXL, see generally Carol Weissner, Innovation: Lessons Learned From EPA's Project XL and Three Minnesota Project XL Pilots, 32 ELR 10075 (Jan. 2002); Dennis D. Hirsch, Project XL and the Special Case: The EPA's Untold Success Story, 26 COLUM. J. ENVTL. L. 219 (2001); Allen Blackman & Janice Mazurek, The Cost of Developing Site-Specific Environmental Regulations: Evidence From EPA's Project XL, 27 ENVTL. MGMT. 109 (2001); Case, EPA's Environmental Stewardship Initiative, supra note 356, at 43-45; Rondinelli, A New Generation, supra note 117, at 10896-98; Lisa C. Lund, Project XL; Good for the Environment, Good for Business, Good for Communities, 30 ELR 10140 (Feb. 2000); Lisa C. Lund & Helga G. Butker, Project XL: Cheaper, Cleaner, and Smarter Ways to Protect the Environment, ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT., Spring 2000, at 75; C.J. Robertson & T.H. Jett, Pro-Environmental Support: The Environmental and Industrial Benefits of Project XL at Merck and Co., Inc., ORG. DYNAMICS, Autumn 1999, at 81; Benjamin S. Wechsler, Rethinking Reinvention: A Case Study of Project XL, 5 ENVTL. LAW. 255 (1998); Nancy S. Bryson & Richard J. Mannix, Reinventing Project XL, 7 ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT. 111 (1998); Cynthia G. Bethell, Learning by Doing: Project XL's Midcourse Correction, CORP. ENVTL. STRATEGY, Summer 1997, at 14; Rena I. Steinzor, Regulatory Reinvention and Project XL: Does the Emperor Have Any Clothes?, 26 ELR 10527 (October 1996); H.N. Apsan, Reinventing Environmental XL-ence, TOTAL QUALITY ENVTL. MGMT., Vol. 5, No. 1 (Aug. 1995), at 83. The issue of adequate legislative authorization for such programs is explored in: Bradford C. Mank, The Environmental Protection Agency's Project XL and Other Regulatory Reform Initiatives: The Need for Regulatory Authorization, 25 ECOLOGY L.Q. 1 (1998); Dennis D. Hirsch, Bill and Al's XL-ent Adventure: An Analysis of EPA's Legal Authority to Implement the Clinton Administration's Project XL, 1998 U. ILL. L. REV. 129 (1998); Thomas E. Caballero, Project XL: Making It Legal, Making It Work, 17 STAN. ENVTL. L.J. 399 (1998). 357. Rondinelli, A New Generation, supra note 117, at 10902. See Rondinelli, Making Eco-Efficiency the Foundation of Environmental Policy Reform, supra note 117, at 37. See also Bryner, supra note 346, at 299 ("In contrast to the lack of interest in sustainability in Congress, there is growing interest at the local, state, and regional level in sustainable communities that is at the heart of the real debate over sustainability in the United States."); BLUEPRINT 2001, supra note 348, at 17 ("Environmental concerns should be addressed at the level of government that corresponds most closely to the boundaries of the problem at hand."). James L. Kolar reviews Minnesota's Sustainable Development Initiative in Environmental Sustainability: Balancing Pollution Control With Economic Growth, ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT., Spring 1999, at 1. 358. See Rondinelli, Making Eco-Efficiency the Foundation of Environmental Policy Reform, supra note 117, at 41. 359. See BLUEPRINT 2001, supra note 348, at 12; Daniel C. Esty, Sustainable Development and Environmental Federalism, 3 WIDENER L. SYMP. J. 213, 224-28 (1998) ("To avoid unsustainable practices, regulatory structures must be in place at the level of government that corresponds to the size of the problem. That entails government intervention at the local, state, regional, federal, and international levels."); Sustainable Development as a Framework for National Governance, supra note 3, at 35-42; Donald A. Brown, Thinking Globally and Acting Locally: The Emergence of Global Environmental Problems and the Critical Need to Develop Sustainable Development Programs at State and Local Levels in the United States, 5 DICK. J. ENVTL. L. & POL'Y 175 (1996); THE ALTERNATIVE PATH, supra note 348; Ben Boer, Institutionalising Ecologically Sustainable Development: The Roles of National, State, and Local Governments in Translating Grand Strategy Into Action, 31 WILLAMETTE L. REV. 307 (1995); GOLDMAN, supra note 347. Early indications suggest the Bush Administration recognizes this imperative. See Sustainability Agenda for Bush Administration Headlines ELI Event, INT'L ENVTL. SYS. UPDATE (CEEM), Jan. 2002, at 3, 11. 360. See William C. Clark, America's National Interests in Promoting a Transition to Sustainability, in U.S. POLICY AND THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT: MEMOS TO THE PRESIDENT 183, 196-97 (Donald Kennedy & John K. Riggs eds., Aspen Institute 2000). Examples of carrots that might be employed by government include facilitywide permitting, one-stop multimedia permitting, consistent industrywide standards, permit streamlining, and compliance assistance. Rondinelli, A New Generation, supra note 117, at 10904. On the use of incentives in environmental law and policy, see generally Susan Moore, Business Incentives: Powerful Tools to Improve the Environment, ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT., Winter 1999, at 71; U.S. EPA, AIMING FOR EXCELLENCE: ACTIONS TO ENCOURAGE STEWARDSHIP AND ACCELERATE ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRESS (July 1999); GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT INITIATIVE, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BUSINESS INCENTIVES (1999); THOMAS STERNER, THE MARKET AND THE ENVIRONMENT: THE EFFECTIVENESS OF MARKET-BASED POLICY INSTRUMENTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REFORM (1999); David Monsma & Janice Mazurek, Building a Performance-Based Environmental Management System: EPA's Reinvention Efforts Revisited, 6 CORP. ENVTL. STRATEGY 233 (1999); THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SYSTEM IN TRANSITION, supra note 348, at 34-40; TERRY DAVIES & JAN MAZUREK, INDUSTRY INCENTIVES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT: EVALUATION OF U.S. FEDERAL INITIATIVES (1996); NATIONAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY COUNCIL, BRIDGE TO A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE: ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY STRATEGY i (1995) (calling for "a new generation of incentive-based policies and programs that stress performance, flexibility and accountability"); NATIONAL ACADEMY OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, THE ENVIRONMENT GOES TO MARKET: THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ECONOMIC INCENTIVES FOR POLLUTION CONTROL (1994). See alsoTERRY F. YOSIE & TIMOTHY D. HERBST, CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND SAFETY PRACTICES IN TRANSITION: MANAGEMENT SYSTEM RESPONSES TO CHANGING PUBLIC EXPECTATIONS, REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND INCENTIVES (Global Environmental Management Initiative Sept. 1996) (analyzing business views of various regulatory incentives). 361. On the use of voluntary agreements as a complement to regulation, see generally ALPHONSE IANNUZZI JR., INDUSTRY SELF-REGULATION AND VOLUNTARY ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE (2001); Megali A. Delmas & Ann K. Terlaak, A Framework for Voluntary Management Agreements, CAL. MGMT. REV., Spring 2001, at 44; ENVIRONMENTAL CONTRACTS—COMPARATIVE APPROACHES TO REGULATORY INNOVATION IN THE UNITED STATES AND EUROPE (Eric W. Orts & Kurt Deketalaere eds., 2000); Julio Videras & Anna Alberini, The Appeal of Voluntary Environmental Programs: Which Firms Participate and Why?, 18 CONTEMP. ECON. POL'Y 449 (2000); Monsma, supra note 91, at 1254-55; Monsma & Mazurek, supra note 360 (examining the European Union's experiences with voluntary agreements); Kathleen Segerson & Thomas J. Miceli, Voluntary Environmental Agreements: Good or Bad News for Environmental Protection, 36 J. ENVTL. ECON. & MGMT. 109 (1998) (suggesting that the overall impact on environmental quality of voluntary environmental agreements may be positive or negative depending on such factors as the allocation of bargaining power, the magnitude of the background threat, and the social cost of funds); Seema Arora & Timothy N. Cason, Why Do Firms Volunteer to Exceed Environmental Regulations?, 72 LAND ECON. 413 (1996). The April 2002 issue of the Journal of Cleaner Production is devoted to an examination of voluntary agreements, climate change, and industrial energy efficiency. See http://www.elsevier.com/gej-ng/10/25/42/52/34/show/toc.htt (last visited Apr. 30, 2002). 362. A useful model for purposes of comparison is the European Union's Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS), revised in 2001. Regulation (EC) No. 761/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of March 19, 2001, Allowing Voluntary Participation by Organizations in a Community Eco-Management and Audit Scheme, 2001 O.J. (L. 114/1), available at http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/emas/refdoc/regulation/01761_en.pdf (last visited Feb. 12, 2002). EMAS now incorporates the ISO 14001 EMS but also mandates environmental communication with stakeholders and employee involvement. See generally Ulrich Steger et al., The Experience of EMAS in Three European Countries: A Cultural and Competitive Analysis, 11 BUS. STRATEGY & THE ENV'T 32 (2002); Next Generation Environmental Management Techniques, supra note 167; Frank Witzold et al., EMAS and Regulatory Relief in Europe: Lessons From National Experience, 11 EUR. ENV'T 37 (2001); Marianne Kahler & Neil C. Rotheroe, Comparison of the British and German Approach Towards the European Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS), 6 ECO-MGMT. & AUDITING 115 (1999); Ruth Hillary, Pan-European Union Assessment of EMAS Implementation, 8 EUR. ENV'T 184 (1998). To date, there are 3,908 total registrations to EMAS. Uptake of European Management System Is Leveling Off, BUS. & THE ENV'T ISO 14000 UPDATE (Aspen), May 2002, at 3. For further background and guidance on EMAS as revised, see http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/emas/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 363. On the use of EMS in policy reform, see generally REGULATING FROM THE INSIDE: CAN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS ACHIEVE POLICY GOALS? (Cary Coglianese & Jennifer Nash, eds., 2001); John Voorhees, The Changing Environmental Management Scene: Federal Policy Impacts the Private and Public Sectors, 31 ELR 10079 (Jan. 2001); UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL & ENVIRONMENTAL LAW INSTITUTE IN COOPERATION WITH U.S. EPA AND THE MULTI-STATE WORKING GROUP ON ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, DRIVERS, DESIGNS, AND CONSEQUENCES OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS: RESEARCH FINDINGS TO DATE FROM THE NATIONAL DATABASE ON ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS (2001), available at http://www.eli.org/isopilots/NDEMS2000Compendium.pdf (last visited Nov. 1, 2001); Rondinelli, Making Eco-Efficiency the Foundation of Environmental Policy Reform, supra note 117, at 42-43; IRA FELDMAN, EMS AND PUBLIC POLICY: THE MAJOR COUNTRY REPORT (Jan. 2000) (prepared for the Government of Jamaica and USAID); A CALL TO ACTION, supra note 350; Keith Pezzoli, Environmental Management Systems (EMSs) and Regulatory Innovation, 36 CAL. W. L. REV. 335 (2000); UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL & ENVIRONMENTAL LAW INSTITUTE, NATIONAL DATABASE ON ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS: THE EFFECTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE OF FACILITIES (2000), available at http://www.eli.org/pdf/PR2__FINAL.pdf (last visited Nov. 1, 2001); RICHARD N. L. ANDREWS ET AL., THE NATIONAL DATABASE ON ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS (NDEMS): DATA MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH PROGRAM (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 1999), available at http://www.eli.org/pdf/Brookings.pdf (last visited Nov. 1, 2001); Paul Burnet, How Can EMSs and Regulatory Incentives Work for Everyone?, INT'L ENVTL. SYS. UPDATE (CEEM) Oct. 1999, at 12; UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL & ENVIRONMENTAL LAW INSTITUTE, NATIONAL DATABASE ON ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS: THE EFFECTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE OF ORGANIZATIONS (1999), available at http://www.ibiblio.org/villani/PUBREP1.DOC (last visited Nov. 1, 2001); John Voorhees, Global Environmental Solutions: Management Systems and Synchronicity, 28 STETSON L. REV. 1155 (1999); RICHARD N. L. ANDREWS ET AL., ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS: A SUSTAINABLE STRATEGY FOR A SUSTAINABLE WORLD? (1999), available at http://www.eli.org/pdf/gin99.pdf (last visited Nov. 1, 2001); Gunningham & Sinclair, supra note 348; THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SYSTEM IN TRANSITION, supra note 348, at 27. For insight into EPA's view of EMS and its implications for policy and enforcement, see U.S. EPA, ACTION PLAN FOR PROMOTING THE USE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS (2001), available at http://www.epa.gov/ems/emsactionplan.pdf (last visited Nov. 1, 2001); U.S. EPA, COMPLIANCE-FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM—ENFORCEMENT AGREEMENT GUIDANCE (National Enforcement Investigations Center revised Jan. 2000); U.S. EPA, Position Statement on Environmental Management Systems and ISO 14001 and a Request for Comments on the Nature of the Data to be Collected From Environmental Management System/ISO 14001 Pilots, 63 Fed Reg. 12094 (Mar. 12, 1998). EPA's Performance Track initiative could serve as a useful vehicle for promoting EMS and other sustainability practices. The National Environmental Performance Track is a voluntary program developed by EPA to encourage and reward companies that go beyond regulatory requirements. The Performance Track program is for facilities that have implemented an environmental management system, have a sustained record of compliance, and have committed to both improving environmental performance and to public outreach and performance reporting. Facilities that participate will be eligible to receive various benefits, including the use of the Performance Track logo and streamlined monitoring, reporting, and administrative requirements. See Susan McLaughlin & Paula Van Lare, National Performance Track: Environmental Results and MSWG Learning Together Workshop 2002, EMS Performance Results, Moving to Higher Environmental Performance Using EMS and Other Tools, Orlando, Fla. (June 3-4, 2002). See generally Daniel J. Fiorino, Performance Track Places Trust in the Carrot Over the Stick, ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT., Spring 2001, at 9; Performance Track Participants in the U.S. Start a Network, BUSINESS & THE ENV'T NEWSL. (Cutter), Aug. 2001, at 10; Performance Track Intrigues Academics, INT'L ENVTL. SYS. UPDATE (CEEM), Nov. 2000, at 3; Frank B. Friedman, Is It Going to the Right Station?, ENVTL. F., Nov./Dec. 1999, at 49; Monsma, supra note 91, at 1261-63; Jay Benforado, A Path to Greater Progress, ENVTL. F., Nov./Dec. 1999, at 48. For further information, see U.S. EPA, National Environmental Performance Track Homepage, at http://www.epa.gov/performancetrack/ (last visited Aug. 28, 2001). 364. Rondinelli, A New Generation, supra note 117, at 10898. See Rondinelli, Making Eco-Efficiency the Foundation of Environmental Policy Reform, supra note 117; BLUEPRINT 2001, supra note 348, at 13-15; ECO-EFFICIENCY: CREATING MORE VALUE WITH LESS IMPACT, supra note 152, at 24-25; Sustainability and Enterprise, supra note 10, at 197, 235-37; Richard B. Stewart, Economic Incentives for Environmental Protection: Opportunities and Obstacles, in ENVIRONMENTAL LAW, THE ECONOMY, AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 171 (Richard L. Revesz et al. eds., 2000) [hereinafter ENVIRONMENTAL LAW, THE ECONOMY, AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT]; Geoffrey Heal, Markets and Sustainability, in ENVIRONMENTAL LAW, THE ECONOMY, AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, supra, at 410; TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE AMERICA, supra note 347, at 46-53; THE STEWARDSHIP PATH, supra note 355, at 18-22; ECO-EFFICIENCY TASK FORCE REPORT, supra note 128; A NEW CONSENSUS FOR PROSPERITY, supra note 128. 365. Specifically, the Bush Administration should build on the foundation laid by the President's Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD) (see, e.g., TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE AMERICA, supra note 347; SUSTAINABLE AMERICA: AMERICA'S ENVIRONMENT IN THE 21ST CENTURY, supra note 128; THE ROAD TO SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: A SNAPSHOT OF ACTIVITIES, supra note 128; BUILDING ON CONSENSUS, supra note 128; PROCEEDINGS OF THE WORKSHOP ON EXTENDED PRODUCT RESPONSIBILITY, supra note 128; A NEW CONSENSUS FOR PROSPERITY, supra note 128; ECO-EFFICIENCY TASK FORCE REPORT, supra note 128), and explore whether, and how, to embrace the group's recommendations for particular policy changes and action to promote sustainable business practices. Copies of these and other PCSD reports are available at http://clinton4.nara.gov/PCSD/Publications/index.html (last visited Feb. 12, 2002). For background on the PCSD and commentary on its findings and recommendations, see generally Bryner, supra note 346, at 279-88, 296-302; Ruhl, supra note 11; TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE AMERICA, supra note 347, at 2-5; Kristina M. Tridico, Sustainable America in the Twenty-First Century: A Critique of President Clinton's Council on Sustainable Development, 14 J. NAT. RESOURCES & ENVTL. L. 205 (1998-1999); Jonathan Lash, The Process and People Behind the Report of the President's Council on Sustainable Development, 3 WIDENER L. SYMP. J. 456 (1998). 366. Rondinelli, A New Generation, supra note 117, at 10898; RETHINKING U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION POLICY, supra note 348, at 24-33. See TRANSFORMING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, supra note 348; THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SYSTEM IN TRANSITION, supra note 348, at 52. 367. See Rondinelli, A New Generation, supra note 117, at 10895, 10901-04 ("By building stronger collaboration between government and business to promote and disseminate pollution prevention and eco-efficiency practices, federal and state environmental protection agencies can move to a new level of activity for encouraging continuous environmental improvement"); BLUEPRINT 2001, supra note 348, at 4-5. 368. Take, for example, EPA's successful 33/50 program, designed to promote pollution prevention by creating performance goals and exchanging a voluntary reduction of emissions of 17 target chemicals by 50%. See generally U.S. EPA, 33/50 PROGRAM: THE FINAL RECORD (Mar. 1999); Madhu Khanna & Lisa A. Damon, EPA's 33/50 Program: Impact on Toxic Releases and Economic Performance of Firms, 37 J. ENVTL. ECON. & MGMT. 1 (1999) (showing that the program contributed to a statistically significant decline in toxic releases between 1991 and 1993, and that while the program had a statistically significant negative impact on the current return on investment of firms, its impact on the expected long run profitability of firms was positive); Michael Zatza & Shan Harhoub, The United States Environmental Protection Agency's 33/50 Program: The Anatomy of a Successful Voluntary Pollution Reduction Program, J. CLEANER PRODUCTION, Feb. 1999, at 17; Seema Arora & Timothy N. Carson, Why Do Firms Volunteer to Exceed Environmental Regulations? Understanding Participation in EPA's 33/50 Program, 72 LAND ECON. 413 (1996); Seema Arora & Timothy N. Cason, An Experiment in Voluntary Environmental Regulation: Participation in EPA's 33/50 Program, 28 J. ENVTL. ECON. & MGMT. 271 (1995). 369. Rondinelli, A New Generation, supra note 117, at 10901-02. 370. See Rondinelli, Making Eco-Efficiency the Foundation of Environmental Policy Reform, supra note 117, at 41. 371. See generally 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE INDEX, supra note 98, at 1, 12; 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY INDEX, supra note 97, at 2, 5, 24; Measuring Nations' Environmental Sustainability, supra note 217, at 12, 22. See also Daniel C. Esty, Why Measurement Matters, in ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT. THE GLOBAL REPORT 2001-2002, at 2, 9 (Daniel C. Esty & Peter Cornelius eds., 2002) (describing how better data and greater emphasis on statistical analysis might strengthen environmental problem solving in the policy and corporate worlds). 372. See generally WILLIAM L. THOMAS ET AL., CRAFTING SUPERIOR ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT SOLUTIONS (Environmental Law Institute 2000). 373. See Rondinelli, A New Generation, supra note 117, at 10897. 374. THE STEWARDSHIP PATH, supra note 355, at vii and 22-23 ("Consumers should have the information and values to make environmentally responsible decisions, and product prices should better reflect the natural resource impacts of purchases."). See TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE AMERICA, supra note 347, at 47, and 55-56 (calling for the creation of information resources to focus commercial activity on the delivery of service and value instead of the delivery of material or products). Consider, for example, the new European Union product eco-label, called the EU Flower. See http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/ecolabel/ (last visited Jan. 10, 2002). Both the EU Flower and the ISO 14000 labeling standards promote the design, production, marketing, and use of products that have a reduced environmental impact during their life cycles. 375. JEUCKEN, supra note 141, at 38. 376. See generally MEETING CHANGING EXPECTATIONS, supra note 7, at 4-6. 377. See, e.g., STEVE CHARNOVITZ, TRADE LAW AND GLOBAL GOVERNANCE (2002); Gaines, supra note 91, at 10335-46; Joseph S. Nye Jr., Globalization's Economic Deficit: How to Make International Institutions More Accountable, FOREIGN AFF., July/Aug. 2001, at 2. 378. See, e.g., SOROS, supra note 63, at 16. JONATHAN B. WIENER, TOWARD SUSTAINABLE GOVERNANCE (AEI-Brookings Policy Matters 00-8, June 2000). See also THE BUSINESS CASE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, supra note 152, at 3. 379. THE BUSINESS CASEFOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, supra note 152, at 4. See also Claude Fussler, Shaping a Deal for the Johannesburg 2002 Summit, Remarks at the High Level Seminar on Globalisation, Sustainable Development and the EU's External Policies, Green Globe Task Force/World Wide Fund for Nature, Brussels (Oct. 22-23, 2001). Or, as Adam Smith wrote: Commerce and manufactures can seldom flourish long in any state which does not enjoy a regular administration of justice, in which the people do not feel themselves secure in the possession of their property, in which the faith of contracts is not supported by law, and in which the authority of the state is not supposed to be regularly employed in enforcing the payment of debts from all those who are able to pay. Commerce and manufactures, in short, can seldom flourish in any state in which there is not a certain degree of confidence in the justice of government. ADAM SMITH, THE WEALTH OF NATIONS 862 (Edwin Cannan ed., 1973). 380. See 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE INDEX, supra note 98, at 10-11; 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY INDEX, supra note 97, at 17; Marc A. Levy, Corruption and the 2001 Environmental Sustainability Index, in GLOBAL CORRUPTION REPORT 2001 300 (Transparency International 2001); Measuring Nations' Environmental Sustainability, supra note 217, at 12, 18. See generally Klaus M. Leisinger, Multinational Corporations, Governance Deficits, and Corruption: Discussing a Complex Issue from the Perspective of Business Ethics, Remarks at the 9th Annual Conference of the European Business Ethics Network, Working Across Cultures, Frankfurt, Germany (Sept. 18-20, 1996). Globalization critics often contend that greater corruption follows in train with increased trade and investment. Recent results from an A.T. Kearney/Foreign Policy Globalization Index suggest, however, that globalization may have the opposite effect. A comparison of the Globalization Index rankings with Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index suggests that economic, social, and technological integration is in fact associated with cleaner government. See A.T. Kearney & Foreign Policy Magazine, Corruption and the Globalization Index, in GLOBAL CORRUPTION REPORT 2001 287 (Transparency International 2001). 381. As used here, the term "governance" when applied at the national level means the traditions and institutions by which authority in a country is exercised. It encompasses: the form of the political regime; the process by which authority is exercised in the management of the country's economic and social resources; and the capacity of governments to design, formulate, and implement policies and discharge functions. Some of the criteria thought to constitute good governance are: legitimacy of government; accountability of political and official elements of government; competence of governments to formulate policies and deliver services; and respect for human rights and the rule of law. In the global setting, the term "governance" generally refers to "the sum of the many ways individuals and institutions, public and private, manage their common affairs. It is a continuing process through which conflicting or diverse interests may be accommodated and co-operative action may be taken." BARBARA GEMMILL ET AL., DESIGNING A NEW ARCHITECTURE FOR GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE 1 (International Institute for Environment and Development 2002) (quoting Commission on Global Governance). As this is written, it is still unclear to what extent the WSSD will focus on progress, accomplishments, or failures since Rio, or whether it will focus on future needs and objectives. From the preparatory meetings that have been held thus far, however, it seems likely that measures to strengthen governance at the national, regional, and international levels will be part of the agenda. See CHAIRMAN'S PAPER, SECOND SESSION OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE FOR THE WORLD SUMMIT ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (2002) [hereinafter CHAIRMAN'S PAPER]. See also PROPOSAL FROM AUSTRALIA, CANADA, ICELAND, JAPAN, NEW ZEALAND, NORWAY, TURKEY AND THE UNITED STATES FOR NEW LANGUAGE TO BE INCLUDED IN SECTION VIII (2002) (calling for incorporation of language on strengthening governance at the national level as part of the outcomes of the WSSD). While the WSSD may not ultimately produce a significant reform proposal, it could contribute to an agreement on new processes and practical steps to move forward in this critical area. In addition to strengthening the system of international governance for sustainable development, the preliminary WSSD agenda is clustered around: (1) poverty eradication; (2) changing unsustainable patterns of consumption and production; (3) protecting and managing the natural resource base of economic and social development; (4) sustainable development in a globalizing world (including the promotion of corporate responsibility and accountability through initiatives such as the Global Reporting Initiative, and tools such as environmental management accounting and environmental reporting; encouragement of coordinated macroeconomic policy management at both national and international levels; promotion of a universal, rule-based, open, non-discriminatory, and equitable multilateral trading system; provision of government incentives to the private sector in developed countries to increase the flow of FDI to developing countries; and promotion of public/private partnerships and voluntary initiatives by which multinational companies are encouraged to assume their social, environmental, and economic responsibilities); (5) promoting health through sustainable development; (6) sustainable development of small island developing states; (7) sustainable development initiatives for Africa; and (8) means of implementation (including in the areas of finance, transfer of technology, science and education, capacity building, and information for decisionmaking). CHAIRMAN'S PAPER, supra. 382. Although the data collected to date is modest, early studies suggest that governance measures do a better job at predicting environmental performance outcomes than per-capita income, and that the rule of law, in particular, reveals a strong correlation with environmental performance. 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE INDEX, supra note 98, at 10-11 ("The conclusion is clear: environmental performance is strongly influenced by patterns of environmental governance, independently of levels of wealth. Furthermore, understanding the dynamics of environmental governance is enhanced by explicit consideration of the role of the private sector."); 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY INDEX, supra note 97, at 17: [The] strong relationship between competitiveness and good governance reinforces the conclusion that good economic management and good environmental management are related. . . . Corruption, civil liberties, and democratic institutions are also highly correlated with the overall ESI. These results tend to reinforce the suggestion . . . that those seeking to improve environmental performance should pay attention to the fundamentals of good governance. National Environmental Performance Measurement and Determinants, supra note 95, at 41 ("Preliminary evidence developed here suggests that countries would benefit environmentally from an emphasis on developing the rule of law, eliminating corruption, and strengthening their governance structures."); THE WORLD BANK, EXPANDING THE MEASURE OF WEALTH, INDICATORS OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (1997); THE WORLD BANK, WORLD DEVELOPMENT REPORT 1997: THE STATE IN A CHANGING WORLD (1997). On the need to improve governance at both the international and country level, see generally KLAUS M. LEISINGER, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND GOOD GOVERNANCE (Novartis Foundation for Sustainable Development 2002); KLAUS M. LEISINGER, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AT THE TURN OF THE CENTURY: PERCEPTION, REALITY, AND OUTLOOK (Novartis Foundation for Sustainable Development 2002); David Satterthwaite, Local Governance and Sustainable Development, in 2 THE FUTURE IS NOW FOR THE U.N. WORLD SUMMIT ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 7-20 (International Institute for Environment and Development 2001), available at http://www.iied.org/pdf/tfin_Volume2.pdf (last visited Mar. 5, 2002); Camilla Toulmin, Global Governance: Re-Designing the Global Architecture, in 2 THE FUTURE IS NOW FOR THE U.N. WORLD SUMMIT ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 73-80 (International Institute for Environment and Development 2001), available at http://www.iied.org/pdf/tfin_Volume2.pdf (last visited Mar. 5, 2002); CHAIRMAN'S REPORT, GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE DIALOGUE, GLAND, SWITZERLAND (June 20-21, 2001), available at http://www.yale.edu/gegdialogue/Chairmen's_edited.doc (last visited Mar. 19, 2002); Eileen Claussen, Global Environmental Governance, in U.S. POLICY AND THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT. MEMOS TO THE PRESIDENT 161, 167 (Donald Kennedy & John K. Riggs eds., Aspen Institute 2000). 383. See HERNANDO DE SOTO, THE MYSTERY OF CAPITAL: WHY CAPITALISM SUCCEEDS IN THE WEST AND FAILS EVERYWHERE ELSE (2000) (describing the value of property rights regimes and some of the barriers to their creation). 384. See UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME, DRAFT REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME GOVERNING COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE OPEN-ENDED INTERGOVERNMENTAL GROUP OF MINISTERS OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVES ON INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE (2002) (UNEP/IGM/5/2); United Nations Millennium Declaration, G.A. Res. 55/2, U.N. GAOR, 55th Sess., U.N. Doc. A/Res/55/2 (Sept. 18, 2000). The Bush Administration's Millennium Challenge Account endeavors to spur governance improvements in the developing world in exchange for increased official development assistance. See George W. Bush, Remarks on Global Development at the Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, D.C. (Mar. 14, 2002). 385. See THE BUSINESS CASE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, supra note 152, at 3, 12 ("Sustainable development is best achieved through open, competitive, rightly framed international markets that honor legitimate comparative advantages."); BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO THE OECD, INNOVATION AND GLOBAL SUSTAINABLE GROWTH 6-7 (May 2001) ("For business to maximize its contribution to sustainable development, it requires, among others, free and open markets, stable and predictable policy framework and trade and investment rules, and policies encouraging the swift dissemination of technology."); BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO THE OECD, COMMENTS ON OECD DRAFT REPORT POLICIES TO ENHANCE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (2001); Kathleen A. McGinty et al., American Bar Association Standing Committee on Environmental Law, Twenty-Fifth Annual Spring Conference on the Environment—Sustainable Development in the Americas: The Emerging Role of the Private Sector, 3 WIDENER L. SYMP. J. 423, 429-30 (1998). Poverty is a major barrier to sustainability, and poverty reduction improves the climate for doing business. See Lloyd Timberlake, A Piece of Cake, TOMORROW MAG., June 2001, at 10, 11. In addition, as Professors Prahalad and Hart point out, the 4 billion people "at the bottom of the pyramid," represent a significant market opportunity. Prahalad & Hart, supra note 81, at 55. See also Stuart Hart, The Bottom of the Pyramid, TOMORROW MAG., Jan./Feb. 2001, at 9; Bjorn Stigson, Sustainability through the Market, Remarks at Knowledge and Learning for a Sustainable Society, Goteborg, Sweden (June 14, 2001). 386. See Kirk R. Smith, Environment and Health, in U.S. POLICY AND THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT: MEMOS TO THE PRESIDENT 91, 99-102 (Donald Kennedy & John K. Riggs eds., Aspen Institute 2000). 387. BLUEPRINT 2001, supra note 348, at 17-18. 388. See id. at 18; ECO-EFFICIENCY: CREATING MORE VALUE WITH LESS IMPACT, supra note 152, at 29; BUILDING ON CONSENSUS, supra note 128, at 37-42; William C. Clark, America's National Interests in Promoting a Transition to Sustainability, in U.S. POLICY AND THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT: MEMOS TO THE PRESIDENT 183, 196-97 (Donald Kennedy & John K. Riggs eds., Aspen Institute 2000); Eileen Claussen, Global Environmental Governance, in U.S. POLICY AND THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT: MEMOS TO THE PRESIDENT 161, 167-69 (Donald Kennedy & John K. Riggs eds., Aspen Institute 2000); A NEW CONSENSUS FOR PROSPERITY, supra note 128. See also Presentations by Daniel Esty, Halina Ward, and Antonio Benjamin among others, at Sustainable Justice 2002: Implementing Sustainable Development Law, Centre for International Sustainable Development Law in Partnership With the United Nations Environment Programme, Montreal, Canada (June 13-16, 2002) (for details on the conference, see http://www.cisdl.org/conference/index.html (last visited Apr. 30, 2002). 389. See BLUEPRINT 2001, supra note 348, at 18; A NEW CONSENSUS FOR PROSPERITY, supra note 128. 390. See A NEW CONSENSUS FOR PROSPERITY, supra note 128 (calling on government to create "full opportunity for . . . businesses . . . to participate in and influence the natural resource, environmental, and economic decisions that effect them"). 391. Initiatives such as the Seven Principles of Environmental Stewardship negotiated by the United States and Mexico, available at http://www.usmcoc.org/pro/env4.html (last visited Mar. 1, 2002), deserve institutional support and follow-through. See generally Lawrence I. Sperling et al., The Seven Principles of Environmental Stewardship for the U.S./Mexico Business and Trade Community: Tools and Strategies for Implementation, INT'L ENVTL. L. COMM. NEWSL. (ABA Section of Env't, Energy, and Resources), Apr. 2000, at 26; U.S., Mexico Agree to Promote Environmental Stewardship for Industry, BUS. & THE ENV'T (Cutter), Sept. 1999, at 12. 392. BLUEPRINT 2001, supra note 348, at 18. See Garten, supra note 62, at 50 ("Both business and government should rethink their political approach to globalization, aiming to add a more humane element to it, with more emphasis on environmental cooperation, education, and training non-U.S. work forces, and the creation of social safety nets in less-developed countries."); Henri-Bernhard Solignac Lecomte, Capacity-Building and Technical Assistance [32 ELR 10937] for Developing Countries After Doha, BRIDGES BETWEEN TRADE & SUSTAINABLE DEV. (ICTSD), Jan. 2002, at 3; TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE AMERICA, supra note 347, at 88-90; OUR COMMON FUTURE, supra note 10, at 230-32. See also CAPACITY BUILDING IN NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF 17 COUNTRIES (H. Weidner & M. Janicke eds., 2002). In some cases, countries that are arguing for greater contributions (and in a few instances even reparations) from business toward sustainable development could bolster their argument by demonstrating greater willingness to make needed changes in their governance. 393. See THE STEWARDSHIP PATH, supra note 355, at 12-14; TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE AMERICA, supra note 347, at 47 and 55-56; Sustainable Development as a Framework for National Governance, supra note 3, at 81; Pollution Control and Sustainable Industry, supra note 11, at 101; BUILDING ON CONSENSUS, supra note 128, at 43; A NEW CONSENSUS FOR PROSPERITY, supra note 128 (calling on government to ensure that all Americans have equal access to education and lifelong learning opportunities that will help them understand the concepts involved in sustainable development); PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABILITY: AN AGENDA FOR ACTION (1996) [hereinafter EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABILITY]. 394. See THE STEWARDSHIP PATH, supra note 355, at 22; A NEW CONSENSUS FOR PROSPERITY, supra note 128. 395. For discussion of the role of the public in promoting sustainable development, see generally Melinda L. Kimble, Shifting Our Focus At Rio + 10, in ALI-ABA COURSE OF STUDY: INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 48 (Apr. 2002); THE STEWARDSHIP PATH, supra note 355, at 7-12 (with recommendations on how to increase community involvement); Sustainable Development as a Framework for National Governance, supra note 3, at 40-42. 396. See OECD, Information and Consumer Decision-Making for Sustainable Consumption (2002), at http://www.olis.oecd.org/olis/2001doc.nsf/c5ce8ffa41835d64c125685d005300b0/430e15f0a139f309c1256b80003cd858/$ FILE/JT00122724.PDF (last visited April 6, 2002); ECO-EFFICIENCY: CREATING MORE VALUE WITH LESS IMPACT, supra note 152, at 29; Genot et al., supra note 41, at 301 ("Consumers. . .are potentially the most powerful ally in promoting the concept of sustainable development."); Andrew King & Sara Baerwald, Using the Court of Public Opinion to Encourage Better Business Decisions, in BETTER ENVIRONMENTAL DECISIONS: STRATEGIES FOR GOVERNMENTS, BUSINESSES AND COMMUNITIES 309 (K. Sexton et al. eds., 1998). See generally Tamar Hahn, The Missing Link, TOMORROW MAG., Apr. 2002, at 40. 397. See ECO-EFFICIENCY: CREATING MORE VALUE WITH LESS IMPACT, supra note 152, at 29. 398. See id.; HAUSKER, supra note 348, at 18. 399. See Fred Scherlinder Dobb, Paper Presented at Environmental Policy and Process: New Directions or Staying on Course, National Association of Environmental Professionals 26th Annual Conference, Arlington, Va. (June 24-28, 2001). 400. See Next Generation Environmental Management Techniques, supra note 167. The negotiation, agreement, and ratification of conventions, the application of laws and regulations, and their impact on sustainable development will be the focus of a major side event at the WSSD: EnviroLaw Conference 2002, Johannesburg, South Africa (Aug. 22-25, 2002). For details, see http://www.envirolawsolutions.org/ (last visited Apr. 30, 2002). 401. See J.B. Ruhl, The Seven Degrees of Relevance: Why Should Real-World Environmental Attorneys Care Now About Sustainable Development Policy?, 8 DUKE ENVTL. L. & POL'Y F. 273 (1998). This support might include working with local public officials on the design and language of municipal sustainability codes and Agenda 21 plans. Two forums for discussion and evaluation of these issues are the Climate Change and Sustainable Development Committee, see http://www.abanet.org/environ/committees/climatechange/home.html (last visited Feb. 6, 2002), and the International Environmental Law Committee, see http://www.abanet.org/environ/committees/intenviron/home.html (last visited Feb. 6, 2002), of the American Bar Association (ABA) Section of Environment, Energy, and Resources (SEER). Both committees collaborated with the Environmental Law Institute to present a seminar on Sustainable Development and the Environmental Practitioner in Washington, D.C., on December 17, 2001. The two committees will examine the outcome of the 2002 WSSD as part of SEER's 10th Annual Fall Meeting, to be held in Portland, Oregon, on October 9-13, 2002. Both committees also publish newsletters and occasional white papers on related issues. The International Environmental Law Committee of the ABA Section of International Law and Practice, see http://www.abanet.org/intlaw/home.html (last visited Feb. 6, 2002), also devotes some attention to sustainable development in its programs and publications, see The World Summit on Sustainable Development: Expectations and Possibilities, ABA Section of International Law and Practice, International Environmental Law Committee, Washington, D.C. (May 2, 2002)), as does the ABA Standing Committee on Environmental Law, see http://www.abanet.org/publicserv/environmental/home.html (last visited Feb. 25, 2002). 402. The American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Environmental Law has dedicated a portion of its website to resources, including contacts and information on the running of a sustainable law office. See http://www.abanet.org/greenteam/welcome.htm (last visited Feb. 19, 2002). 403. See Mark Goldfus, Merrill Lynch, Remarks at On the Road to Johannesburg: Implementing Sustainability Across Global Operations, World Environment Center, New York City, N.Y. (Apr. 23, 2002); FINANCING CHANGE, supra note 9, at 116. See also PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS, THE ROLE OF AUSTRALIA'S FINANCIAL SECTOR IN SUSTAINABILITY (2001). Guidelines established by The World Bank, the Export-Import Bank of the United States, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), the Inter-American Development Bank, and other international financial institutions, in theory if not always in practice, can shape business sustainability in the context of projects and activities abroad. See generally Andrei D. Barannik & Robert J.A. Goodland, The World Bank's Environmental Assessment Policies: Review of Institutional Development, in SUSTAINABLE BANKING, supra note 187, at 316; Kate Kearins & Greg O'Malley, International Financial Institutions and the Three Gorges Hydroelectric Power Scheme, in SUSTAINABLE BANKING, supra note 187, at 348; Ian Johnson, The World Bank and Sustainable Development, 2 INT'L REV. ENVTL. STRATEGIES 201 (2001); Green Nexus, supra note 107, at 904 n. 12 (citing numerous recent sources); GUNTHER HANDL, MULTILATERAL DEVELOPMENT BANKING: ENVIRONMENTAL PRINCIPLES AND CONCEPTS REFLECTING GENERAL INTERNATIONAL LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY (2002); ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES (Walter Wehrmeyer & Yacob Mulugatta eds., 1999); McGinty et al., supra note 385. The World Bank Institute's corporate responsibility initiative is described at http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/todayarticles/whats_new02Jan11.htm (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). The controversy surrounding OPIC's financial support of Enron's 390-mile pipeline from Bolivia to Brazil through the Chiquitano Dry Natural Forest is examined in James V. Grimaldi, Enron Pipeline Leaves Scar on South America, THE WASH. POST, May 6, 2002, at A1. 404. See FINANCING CHANGE, supra note 9, at 117-30. Like UNEP's Financial Institutions Initiative discussed infra at note 405, the UNEP Insurance Initiative provides a valuable forum to compare experiences and share ideas on the role of insurance firms in promoting business sustainability, as well as on the implications of sustainable development for insurers. For further background on the UNEP Insurance Initiative, including meeting proceedings and other publications, see http://unepfi.net/iii/index.htm (last visited Feb. 5, 2002). 405. See generally Green Nexus, supra note 107 (analyzing the role of private financial services in greening the firm); Niki Rosinski, Financial Markets and the Strategic Challenge of Corporate Sustainability, J. CORP. CITIZENSHIP, Autumn 2001, at 32; SUSTAINABLE BANKING, supra note 187, at 166; JEUCKEN, supra note 141; Benjamin J. Richardson, Financial Institutions for Sustainability, 8 ENVTL. LIABILITY 52 (2000); ECO-EFFICIENCY: CREATING MORE VALUE WITH LESS IMPACT, supra note 152, at 29; Marcel H.A. Jeucken, The Changing Environment of Banks, GREENER MGMT. INT'L, Autumn 1999, at 21; Christopher Bray, Lending Policies and Practices, Presentation at the Fourth International Roundtable Meeting on Finance and the Environment: Profitability and Responsibility in the 21st Century (Sept. 1998); Evan C. Henry, Environmental Priorities of American Banking, Presentation at the Fourth International Roundtable Meeting on Finance and the Environment: Profitability and Responsibility in the 21st Century (Sept. 1998); Franz Knecht, Environmental Challenges in Banking—Issues, Solutions, Results, Remarks at a Seminar on the Financial Services Sector and the Environment, Helsinki School of Economics and Business Administration and the Finnish Environmental Management Association (Jan. 20, 1998); Russell S. Frye, The Role of Private Banks in Promoting Sustainable Development, From Outside Counsel's Perspective, 29 LAW & POL'Y & INT'L BUS. 481 (1998); CANNIBALS WITH FORKS, supra note 146, at 364-66; Sven M. Hansen, Sustainable Banking: A Swiss Banker's Perspective, CORP. ENVTL. STRATEGY, Spring 1996, at 67, 68; Lynn Johannson, Greening the Zebra: The Role of Financial Institutions in Promoting Sustainability, TOTAL QUALITY ENVTL. MGMT., Spring 1996, at 121; FINANCING CHANGE, supra note 9, at 77-97 (1996). UNEP's Financial Institutions Initiative, founded in 1991, plays a prominent role in identifying relevant environmental issues and provides a forum [32 ELR 10938] for thoughtful debate and exchange of ideas on the subject of sustainable finance. Its annual roundtable meeting reports are an invaluable resource (see, e.g., UNEP, FINANCE INSTITUTIONS INITIATIVES ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL ROUNDTABLE CONFERENCE ON FINANCE AND THE ENVIRONMENT, GLOBALIZATION AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES FOR THE FINANCIAL SERVICES SECTOR (2000); UNEP FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS INITIATIVE, FIFTH INTERNATIONAL ROUNDTABLE MEETING ON FINANCE AND THE ENVIRONMENT: NEW ROLES IN THE RACE TO SUSTAINABILITY (1999); UNEP FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS INITIATIVE, FOURTH INTERNATIONAL ROUNDTABLE MEETING ON FINANCE AND THE ENVIRONMENT: PROFITABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY IN THE 21ST CENTURY (1998); UNEP FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS INITIATIVE, THIRD INTERNATIONAL ROUNDTABLE MEETING ON FINANCE AND THE ENVIRONMENT: THE ENVIRONMENT AND FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE (1997); UNEP FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS INITIATIVE, PRIVATE SECTOR INVESTMENT FLOWS AND THE ENVIRONMENT: DEFINING THE OPPORTUNITIES AND ISSUES (1995)), as is JOHN GANZI & ANNE DEVRIES, CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE AS A FACTOR IN FINANCIAL INDUSTRY DECISIONS: STATUS REPORT (Environment & Finance Enterprise 1998) (prepared for EPA). UNEP's surveys of bank environmental management practices have also made an important contribution to our understanding of the "state of the art." See UNEP & PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS, UNEP FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS INITIATIVE 1998 SURVEY (1999) [hereinafter UNEP FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS INITIATIVE 1998 SURVEY]; UNEP, GLOBAL SURVEY: ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES AND PRACTICES OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES SECTOR (1995). For further background on UNEP, see Mike Kelly & Ari Huhtala, The Role of the United Nations Environment Programme and the Financial Services Sector, in SUSTAINABLE BANKING, supra note 187, at 390; UNEP, FINANCIAL SERVICES AND THE ENVIRONMENT: QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS (1998), and the materials on the UNEP Financial Institution Initiative website, at http://unepfi.net/fii/index.htm (last visited Feb. 6, 2002). Two other initiatives also emphasize the relationship between financiers and sustainable development. The first is the Finance Institute for Global Sustainability (FIGS), a nonprofit group that assists organizations in understanding the correlation between sustainability and improved financial performance. For information on FIGS, see http://www.figsnet.org.html (last visited on Feb. 5, 2002). In addition, the WBCSD has launched a project on Sustainability and the Financial Sector, exploring: (1) the business case for sustainability considerations in the financial sector; (2) the corporate social responsibility of financial institutions, e.g., the point at which the responsibility of the institution financing a controversial project ends and the customer's responsibility starts; and (3) how the sector should handle and manage relationships with stakeholders. See Bjorn Stigson, Making the Business Case, SUSTAINABLE BUS. INVESTOR-AM. (Sept. 2001) at http://www.sbi-a.com/sept2001/wbcsd.htm (last visited Mar. 29, 2002). 406. See ECO-EFFICIENCY: CREATING MORE VALUE WITH LESS IMPACT, supra note 152, at 29. A January 1999 survey of 63 signatories to the UNEP Financial Institutions Initiative Statement on Sustainable Development found that "the most significant obstacle cited to advancing integration of environmental issues into credit. . .analysis was the translation of environmental impacts into financial implications." UNEP FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS INITIATIVE 1998 SURVEY, supra note 405, at 2. Similarly, almost 80% of companies responding to a 2001 PricewaterhouseCoopers survey "cited 'the ability to link sustainable development to financial success' as one of the key obstacles to embedding the concept within their organization." MINING & MINERALS SUSTAINABILITY SURVEY, supra note 10, at 11; see id. at 21 (Around three quarters of respondents stated that "the greatest challenge to embedding sustainable development is the difficulty in linking it to financial success."). On the communication of environmental and sustainability performance to the financial markets,see KEMP, supra note 84, at 51-54 (summarizing recent studies); STALKING THE ELUSIVE BUSINESS CASE FOR CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY, supra note 7, at 23 ("It is up to those companies that believe they are creating value through sustainability strategies to clearly articulate that value to investors and financial analysts."); Robert A. Axelrod, Brave New Words: The Financial Value of Environmental Communications, 9 ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT. 1 (2000); Leslie Carothers, When Will Stock Analysts Notice?, ENVTL. F., July/Aug. 1999, at 12; Andrea Spencer-Cooke, Shades of Pink and Green—Financial Markets Have Yet to Get Serious About the Environment, TOMORROW MAG., July/Aug. 1999, at 8; Teaching the Capital Markets to Recognize and Reward Sustainable Corporations, BUS. & THE ENV'T, Sept. 1998, at 2; Linda Descano & Bradford S. Gentry, Communicating Environmental Performance to the Capital Markets, CORP. ENVTL. STRATEGY, Spring 1998, at 15. 407. ECO-EFFICIENCY: CREATING MORE VALUE WITH LESS IMPACT, supra note 152, at 29. See discussion of the Dow Jones Sustainability Indexes, supra note 187. On the role of the rating services, see FINANCING CHANGE, supra note 9, at 152-64. 408. Green Nexus, supra note 107, at 899, 914-16. See JEUCKEN, supra note 141, at 118-47. See generally ASSOCIATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IN BANKS, SAVINGS BANKS, AND INSURANCE COMPANIES & GERMAN FEDERAL MINISTRY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, NATURE CONSERVATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY, TIME TO ACT: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IN FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS (1998) [hereinafter ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IN FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS]; Johnine J. Brown, Progress in Reducing Lender Liability Under Environmental Law, BANKERS MAG., July/Aug. 1996, at 30. A January 1999 survey of 63 signatories to the UNEP Financial Institutions Initiative Statement on Sustainable Development found that only 20% of organizations have "formally integrated environmental risk into overall strategic credit. . .management." UNEP FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS INITIATIVE 1998 SURVEY, supra note 405, at 2. 409. See generally Green Nexus, supra note 107, at 917-21. An organization's implementation of ISO 14001 or EMAS should not be used as a substitute for a bank's environmental risk assessment. Rather, such activities should inform the institution's own evaluation. The approach suggested by Peter Charnley, formerly senior environmental manager of Nat West Group (now part of Royal Bank of Scotland), is logical and appropriate: If a company has a formal management system such as ISO 14001 for addressing its environmental impacts and risks, then it helps toward a positive rating. . . . We regard a formal EMS as an indicator of something positive about the company, generally indicating that the management team is taking systematic steps to control its overall liabilities. Quoted in Christopher Sheldon, Money Makes the World Go Green, BUS. STANDARDS, July/Aug. 1999, at 10. When incorporating ISO 14001 into financial assessments, financiers should examine the scope of the borrower's EMS certification or self-declaration, the legitimacy of the certification or self-declaration, the design of the system, and whether implementation of the management system imposes costs on the borrower or provides the borrower with financial benefits that, individually or in the aggregate, could materially affect the organization's competitive position. See Green Nexus, supra note 107, at 920-21. On EMAS and financiers, see WALTER KAHLENBORN & DAVIDE DAL MASO, THE ECO-MANAGEMENT AND AUDIT SCHEME: A NEW OPPORTUNITY FOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS (European Commission 2001). 410. See JEUCKEN, supra note 141, at 83-117. There are a number of examples of efforts by financial services firms to carve a niche in the environmental investment product arena. See, e.g., Stefan Schaltegger & Frank Figge, Sustainable Development Funds: Progress Since the 1970s, in SUSTAINABLE BANKING, supra note 187, at 203; Andreas Knorzer, The Transition From Environmental Funds to Sustainable Investment: The Practical Application of Sustainability Criteria in Investment Products, in SUSTAINABLE BANKING, supra note 187, at 211. One of the more recent is the launch by Nikko Asset Management of its Global Sustainability Fund, which will invest in companies (from more than 20 countries) that are "environmentally conscious, socially responsible and financially effective." Graham Cooper, Nikko Goes Global With New Green Fund, ENVTL. FIN., Dec. 2000/Jan. 2001, at 10 (quoting Takejiro Sueyoshi, executive vice-president of Nikko Asset Management). The announcement of the Global Sustainability Fund comes on the heels of Nikko's enormously successful Eco Fund launched in August 1999, which invests only in Japanese companies and yet has already attracted a total of $ 1 billion. Id. For broader insight into factors motivating such product strategies, see David Horlock, Capturing Emerging Global Sustainability Markets, Remarks at The Finance Sector in Asia-Pacific: The Business Case for Sustainability Performance, Manila, Philippines (Apr. 2001). 411. See Marc Leistner, The Growth and Environment Scheme: The EU, the Financial Sector and Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises as Partners in Promoting Sustainability, in SUSTAINABLE BANKING, supra note 187, at 372. 412. Green Nexus, supra note 107, at 921-23. See JEUCKEN, supra note 141, at 148-59. Financiers should consider adopting and practicing the UNEP Financial Institutions Initiative Statement on Sustainable Development (as revised Jan. 1997), available at http://unepfi.net/fii/english.htm (last visited Feb. 6, 2002). A January 1999 survey of 63 signatories to the UNEP Financial Institutions Initiative Statement on Sustainable Development found that 69% of organizations have an internal corporate environmental policy in addition to the UNEP Statement. Commitments tend to concentrate on "legal compliance with environmental regulations and the consideration of the environmental within core financial products and services as well as own business operations." UNEP FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS INITIATIVE 1998 SURVEY, supra note 405, at 2. With regard to internal operations, [32 ELR 10939] most survey respondents concentrate on energy and water use, recycling, suppliers, and property management. Id. at 8. A small number of banks and other financial institutions have implemented EMS to reduce the environmental impact of internal operations (and in some cases, the environmental impact of suppliers). See JEUCKEN, supra note 141, at 161-69; Heinrich Hugenschmidt et al., Sustainable Banking at UBS, in SUSTAINABLE BANKING, supra note 187, at 43. Union Bank of Switzerland, Bank of America, Credit Suisse Group, and Duetsche Bank to name four examples, have created and implemented EMSs to address both positive and negative environmental impacts arising out of, for example, employee use of materials, energy, and water, purchasing decisions, office siting and operation, and automotive fleet management. In Europe, and to a far lesser extent the United States, financial institutions are evaluating whether ISO 14001 could serve as a useful framework upon which to center such efforts, and if so, whether certification to the specification is in their interest. Credit Suisse Group took the step of certifying its own EMS to ISO 14001 in April of 1997, Union Bank of Switzerland became the first financial institution to have a worldwide EMS certified to ISO 14001 in May of 1999, and Deutsche Bank became the first German commercial bank to have an ISO 14001 EMS in 1999. In December of 2001, FleetBoston Financial became the first bank in the world to endorse the Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies (CERES) Principles and the Financial Institutions Initiative Statement on Sustainable Development. 413. Insurers should consider adopting the UNEP Insurance Initiative Statement of Environmental Commitment, available at http://unepfi.net/iii/statemen.htm (last visited Feb. 5, 2002). 414. In some situations, implementation of an independently verifiable standard such as ISO 14001 can serve as a vehicle for communicating environmental accomplishments to stakeholders, adding a patina of credibility to assertions found in environmental reports. See JEUCKEN, supra note 141, at 172-82, 188-90; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IN FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, supra note 408, at 8-9. Financial institutions face increasing pressure from governments and stakeholders to improve their reporting of environmental issues. See Kaisa Tarna, Reporting on the Environment: Current Practice in the Financial Services Sector, in SUSTAINABLE BANKING, supra note 187, at 149. A consortium of seven large firms, known as the Forge Group, issued a report in November 2000, entitled Guidelines on Environmental Management and Reporting for the Financial Services Sector, that will serve as the foundation of a UNEP project to develop globally applicable guidelines on environmental reporting for the financial sector. The report, which offers guidance on the reporting of both the direct impact of financial firms' own operational activities and the indirect impact stemming from their lending and investment decisions, is available at http://www.abi.org.uk/forge/ForgeText.pdf (last visited June 15, 2001). A separate report prepared by a group of Swiss and German institutions aims to assist harmonization of reporting practices by the financial sector by identifying a set of five key environment indicators: know-how; training; auditing; integration of environment into the core business; and environmentally oriented services. See generally David Robson, Finance Firms Offered Help With Reporting, ENVTL. FIN., Dec. 2000/Jan. 2001, at 9. 415. Not surprisingly, like financiers, insurers have been closely analyzing the climate change threat and related risks, as well as the possible implications of the Kyoto Protocol. See generally EVAN MILLS ET AL., U.S. INSURANCE INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVES ON GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 2001) (LBNL Rep. No. 45185), available at http://eetd.lbl.gov/CBS/PUBS/Climate_report.pdf (last visited Feb. 7, 2002); Josef Janssen, Risk Management of Investments in Joint Implementation and Clean Development Mechanism Projects (2001) (master's thesis at University of St. Gallen); CLIMATE CHANGE AND INSURANCE (Chartered Insurance Institute 2001), available at http://www.cii.co.uk/climate.html (last visited Feb. 7, 2002); Matthew Paterson, Risky Business: Insurance Companies in Global Warming Politics, GLOBAL ENVTL. POL., Nov. 2001, at 18; Julian E. Salt, Climate Change and the Insurance Industry, 7 CORP. ENVTL. STRATEGY 146 (2000); Stephanie Dunstan, Insurers Can Kick Start Kyoto, ENVTL. FIN., May 2000, at 27; Adam Whitmore, Compulsory Environmental Liability Insurance as a Means of Dealing With Climate Change Risk, 28 ENERGY POL'Y 739 (2000); Josef Janssen, Implementing the Kyoto Mechanisms: Potential Contributions by Banks and Insurance Companies, 25 GENEVA PAPERS ON RISK & INS. 602 (2000); Julian Salt, Why the Insurers Should Wake Up, ENVTL. FIN., Sept. 2000, at 24; U.S. EPA, PREPARING FOR GLOBAL WARMING, SMART INSURANCE (2000), available at http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/publications/outreach/strategy/smart_insurance.pdf (last visited Feb. 7, 2002); R. S. J. Tol, Climate Change and Insurance: A Critical Appraisal, 26 ENERGY POL'Y 257 (1998); Anthony Michaels et al., Climate Science and Insurance Risk, NATURE, Sept. 1997, at 225. 416. See Payne et al., supra note 11, at 20-21; ECO-EFFICIENCY: CREATING MORE VALUE WITH LESS IMPACT, supra note 152, at 29; Corporate Environmentalism, Sustainability, and Management Studies, supra note 173, at 55, 71-73; Conclusion: Implications for Management Practice, Education, and Research, supra note 195, at 259, 269-75; THE ROAD TO SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: A SNAPSHOT OF ACTIVITIES, supra note 128, at 23-25; A NEW CONSENSUS FOR PROSPERITY, supra note 128. This education would include school curricula incorporating eco-efficiency concepts and practices. ECO-EFFICIENCY TASK FORCE REPORT, supra note 128. A key player in this effort is Second Nature, a non-profit organization that works with colleges, universities, and professional schools to incorporate sustainability concepts into teaching, learning, research, interaction with the community, and campus operations. See http://www.secondnature.org/ (last visited Jan. 17, 2002). For commentary and reports on needed improvements to education on sustainable development, see http://www.secondnature.org/resource_center/resource_center_writings.html (last visited Mar. 21, 2002). 417. Correspondence with Richard Pastor, President, National Association for Environmental Management (Apr. 11, 2002). 418. Environmental and sustainability issues are slowly finding their way into the curricula at colleges and graduate business schools in the United States and abroad. See generally Delyse Springett & Kate Kearins, Gaining Legitimacy? Sustainable Development in Business School Curricula, 9 SUSTAINABLE DEV. 213 (2001); Megan DeYoung & Amy Sprague, Sustainability by Example: MBAs Experience the Value of an Environmental Business Plan, 8 CORP. ENVTL. STRATEGY 300 (2001); Tom Klusman, Making Business Accountable: A Look at the Best Business Schools for Social and Environmental Responsibility, SUSTAINABLE BUS. INSIDER, July 2000, at 3 (providing an overview of new social and environmental programs, courses, and organizations being developed at business schools around the country); Raymond Benton Jr. & Sarah E. Cottle, How Well Do Universities Prepare New Environmental Managers?, ENVTL. PRACTICE, Sept. 2000, at 247; Andrew Hoffman, Environmental Education in Business School, 41 ENV'T 4 (1999); Dianna Johnson & Beth Beloff, Educating Future Leaders for a Sustainable Path, ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT., Spring 1998, at 31; Elisabeth K. Ryland, Greening Business Education: Teaching the Paradigm, 22 J. MGMT. ED. 320 (1998); Corporate Environmentalism, Sustainability, and Management Studies, supra note 173, at 55; Julie Jubier, Educating Environmental Managers for Tomorrow, EPA J., Spring 1995, at 31; Paul Shrivaastava, Greening Business Education: Toward an Ecocentric Pedagogy, 3 J. MGMT. INQUIRY (1994); Katherine S. Mangan, The Greening of the MBA, CHRON. OF HIGHER ED., Nov. 2, 1994, at A19 ("Many [business] schools that once ignored environmental issues are now viewing them as an essential component of a business education."); A. Pham, Business Schools See Green, BOSTON GLOBE, June 28, 1994, at 35; Thomas N. Gladwin, The Global Environmental Crisis and Management Education, TOTAL QUALITY ENVTL. MGMT., Autumn 1993, at 109 (considering the role of the business school curriculum and management education in the shift toward global sustainability); A.J. Barnes & J.K. Ferry, The Environment in the Business School Curriculum, BUS. HORIZONS, Mar./Apr. 1992, at 3 (criticizing business schools for having been late to recognize the importance of environmental issues); G.P. Rands, Environmental Attitudes, Behaviors, and Decisionmaking: Implications for Management Education and Development, in THE CORPORATION, ETHICS, AND THE ENVIRONMENT (W.M. Hoffman et al. eds., 1990); James E. Post, The Greening of Management, ISSUES IN SCI. & TECH., Summer 1990, at 68; Julie A. Cohen, Teaching Environment to the B-Schools, MGMT. REV., June 1990, at 30. For case studies, see ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: READINGS AND CASES (Michael V. Russo ed., 1998); FOREST L. REINHARDT & RICHARD H.K. VIETOR, BUSINESS MANAGEMENT AND THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT: CASES AND TEXT (1996); ALAN R. BECKENSTEIN ET AL., STAKEHOLDER NEGOTIATIONS: EXERCISES IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (1996); FREDERICK J. LONG & MATTHEW B. ARNOLD, THE POWER OF ENVIRONMENTAL PARTNERSHIPS (1995); ROGENE A. BUCHHOLZ ET AL., MANAGING ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: A CASEBOOK (1993). Cases may also be located on the Internet at the Websites of the WRI Management Institute for Environment and Business, see http://www.wri.org/wri/meb/guide/gde.html (last visited Aug. 24, 2001), the University of Michigan Center for Sustainable Systems, see http://www.umich.edu/%7Enppcpub/resources/3_5_NPPC_frametop.htm (last visited Aug. 24, 2001), and the International Institute for Management Development, see http://www02.imd.ch/research/projects/index.cfm?projectID=164# (last visited Feb. 26, 2002). The WBCSD website offers two introductory courses built around sustainable development scenarios: the "Global Scenario Challenge" and the "Sustainable Business Challenge." In the view of the WBCSD and its members, these courses represent the minimum level of knowledge corporations expect from their employees as well as from students graduating from business schools and universities around the world. The content covers the key issues and trends, [32 ELR 10940] policy topics, emerging themes and business concepts for the 21st century. See http://www.wbcsd.ch/course/index.htm (last visited Mar. 5, 2002). In 1998, the World Resources Institute's (WRI) Management Institute for Environment and Business (MEB) conducted its first survey of leading U.S. graduate business schools about the activities in their MBA curricula pertaining to the environment. JENNIFER FINLAY ET AL., GREY PINSTRIPES WITH GREEN TIES: MBA PROGRAMS WHERE THE ENVIRONMENT MATTERS (World Resources Institute 1998). Of the 50 respondents to the survey, 37 schools reported including some environmental subject matter in their MBA programs, though only 16% of the 37 had incorporated business/environment subjects into their core curricula beyond ethics, law, and public policy courses. More than half of the 37 schools offered more than one elective that focused on business and the environment. By the second survey, only a modest 20% of schools indicated that they integrated social/environmental topics in their MBA programs. See JENNIFER FINLAY & JUDITH SAMUELSON, BEYOND GREY PINSTRIPES: PREPARING MBAs FOR SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP (World Resources Institute 1999); Rick Bunch, Building Strategic Education Alliances, New Century Enterprises: WRI's Third Annual Sustainable Enterprise Summit (Oct. 1999). WRI released its third and most recent survey of the state of environmental management and sustainability education with the Aspen Institute Initiative for Social Innovation through Business in October of 2001. JUDITH SAMUELSON ET AL., BEYOND GREY PINSTRIPES 2001 (World Resources Institute & Aspen Institute 2001), available at http://www.beyondgreypinstripes.org/pdf/beyondgreypinstripes.pdf (last visited Mar. 21, 2002). Of the 122 schools that responded, 82 reported that they offer some courses on sustainability or the environment and business. Id. at 5. U.S. programs at the cutting edge in incorporating social impact management in their MBA programs were the Harvard Business School, Loyola Marymount University's College of Business Administration, the University of Michigan Business School, and Kenan-Flagler Business School. U.S. programs at the cutting edge in incorporating environmental management in their MBA programs were George Washington University's School of Business and Public Management, the University of Michigan Business School, Kenan-Flagler Business School, and the Yale School of Management. Id. The survey found that while some of the schoolsare doing extremely innovative work, very little "is being done to integrate a broad vision of social or environmental stewardship into required MBA course work or to explore these dynamics through rigorous research." Id. 419. A poll of MBA students and graduates released in January 2002, by the Aspen Institute suggests tomorrow's business leaders crave information about how to manage social and environmental impacts. ASPEN INSTITUTE: WHERE WILL THEY LEAD?: MBA STUDENT ATTITUDES ABOUT BUSINESS AND SOCIETY (2002) (executive summary available at http://www.aspeninst.org/isib/pdfs/sas.pdf (last visited Mar. 19, 2002)). The Aspen Institute's survey of over 2,200 MBA students from 13 major international business schools revealed that students believe they could, and would, provide more balanced leadership than business leaders do today by giving greater consideration to social and environmental concerns. Id. Students also indicated that they would like their business schools to show them how fulfilling social responsibility—as both an internal and external issue—is financially beneficial and would like to see it incorporated in the core curriculum. Id. 420. Over the last several years, a small number of national and international research networks have sprung up to explore business environmental/sustainable development issues in the academic setting. One of the most significant of these is the Greening of Industry Network, formed in 1989. The MEB, formed in 1990 and now part of the WRI, is also a major player in the dissemination of best practices and teaching tools. Another important network is Organizations and the Natural Environment (ONE), a special interest group of the Academy of Management, formed in 1994. (For further discussion of the contributions of these and other groups and academic institutions to corporate sustainability, see Appendix 7, Key Players in Business Sustainability. ONE seeks to: (1) promote scholarship on business and sustainability topics among its members and to provide a channel for such scholarship via Academy paper sessions and symposia; (2) develop a network of scholars interested in these topics through electronic media and social gatherings at the Academy annual meetings; (3) promote environmental management policies and practices for the Academy itself by educating other Academy members as appropriate; and (4) encourage scholars and students in related business disciplines and in related non-business disciplines, e.g., environmental sciences, environmental engineering, environmental law, and environmental ethics, to participate in the Academy and to work with practitioners in these fields to promote environmentally sensitive policies and practices worldwide. ONE Mission Statement, at http://www.rit.edu/slrbbu/ONEmission.html (last visited Mar. 1, 2002). A third program, Bridges to Sustainability, seeks to foster sustainable development through innovative partnerships between universities and industry, and through educational programs emphasizing practical solutions and leadership development. See http://www.bridgestos.org/index.htm (last visited Mar. 5, 2002). Some American companies also participate in the International Institute for Management Development Forum for Corporate Sustainability Management, based in Lausanne, Switzerland. Corporations participate in the forum to learn ways to derive competitive advantage from sustainability. Projects underway at the Forum include research into managing stakeholder dialogue, driving sustainability through leadership, and linking sustainability to business performance. (For further details, see http://www02.imd.ch/research/projects/index.cfm?projectID=164 (last visited Feb. 26, 2002)). 421. This definition should be informed by the context of sustainable development for their company, industry, markets, and communities in which they operate globally. See Prahalad & Hart, supra note 81, at 65; Richard MacLean, Sustainable Development: Walking the Sustainable Development Talk to Achieve Business Value, ENVTL. PROTECTION MAG., Sept. 2001, at 48, 49; Sustainability and Enterprise, supra note 10, at 197, 208; POLTORZYCKI & SHOPLEY, supra note 50, at 6 (of respondents, 75% pointed to their company's vision and strategy as the starting place for improvement toward sustainable development); Pollution Control and Sustainable Industry, supra note 11, at 101, 104. Dissatisfied with the Brundtland definition, Procter & Gamble prefers to approach sustainable development as ensuring "a better quality of life for everyone, now and in the future." Market Opportunities Lure US Companies to Sustainable Development, BUS. & THE ENV'T (Cutter), Apr. 2001, at 7. 422. Beyond Greening, supra note 62, at 71. 423. Id. 424. Correspondence with Andrew Hoffman, Assistant Professor, Organizational Behavior Department, Boston University School of Management (July 23, 2001). 425. See Richard MacLean, What's the Winning Strategy?: The Competitive Game Plan for Sustainable Development, ENVTL. PROTECTION, Jan. 2001, at 55, 56; Richard MacLean, Sustainable Development: Walking the Sustainable Development Talk to Achieve Business Value, ENVTL. PROTECTION, Sept. 2001, at 48, 49; Richard MacLean, Metrics Matter, EM MAG., Aug. 2000, at 11, 12. 426. POLTORZYCKI & SHOPLEY, supra note 50, at 8. The issue of sustainable development has entered the rhetoric of modern business but has yet to become part of the realm of core business issues driven by the business environment. Correspondence with Andrew Hoffman, Assistant Professor, Organizational Behavior Department, Boston University School of Management (July 23, 2001). 427. See Katherine Reed, Staff Vice President, 3M Environmental Technology and Safety Services, USA, Involving Employees in Sustainability: Critical Success Factors, Remarks at Globe 2002, Vancouver, Canada (Mar. 13-15, 2002); WHITING & BENNETT, supra note 7, at 12-13; DAY & ARNOLD, supra note 140, at 42; CANNIBALS WITH FORKS, supra note 146, at 276-301 (on the critical roles of the board of directors). 428. See THE BUSINESS CASE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, supra note 152, at 5. 429. See generally Bebbington, supra note 9, at 128, 136-43 (exploring the need to mesh eco-efficiency and "eco-justice" in fashioning a business response to sustainable development); SUSTAINABILITY THROUGH THE MARKET, supra note 117, at 15-19. 430. Sustainability does not mean that no pollution takes place but rather that steps are taken to ensure pollution is kept to a level that the Earth can absorb. Although it is impossible to determine this point at the company level (since, e.g., the absorption capacity is influenced by the absorption capacity of all companies), indicators can be developed to measure the sustainable level of pollution per company. JEUCKEN, supra note 141, at 44; see sources on sustainability indicators cited supra, note 217. 431. See POLTORZYCKI & SHOPLEY, supra note 50, at 6 (of respondents, 58% recognized innovation in technologies and processes as a potential route to sustainable development, while 37% saw product development as a critical pathway). See generally ECO-EFFICIENCY: CREATING MORE VALUE WITH LESS IMPACT, supra note 152, at 29; THE STEWARDSHIP PATH, supra note 355, at 24; OUR COMMON JOURNEY, supra note 217, at 309-13; RECOMMENDATIONS, supra note 58, at 8. 432. See Interview with W. Burton Hamner, President, Hamner & Associates LLC (Sept. 4, 2001); Bridging the Gap, supra note 174, at 52 (from the point of view of the managers of a firm, the central question in evaluating an environmental policy is whether the benefits to the firm outweigh the private costs to the firm of internalizing environmental costs. To answer this question, they need information about the environmental costs of their current activities, the private costs of reducing their adverse environmental impacts, and their prospects for recovering some of those private costs from customers or other economic factors. THE STEWARDSHIP PATH, supra note 355, at 23; TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE AMERICA, supra note 347, at 42-45. See generally Governments Eager to Spur Corporate Environmental Accounting, BUS. & THE ENV'T (Cutter), Mar. 2001, at 2. 433. See generally William McDonough & Michael Braungart, The Next Industrial Revolution, ATLANTIC MONTHLY, Oct. 1998, at 82; Joseph Fiksel, The Emergence of a Sustainable Business Community, Presentation at CHEMRAWN IV, Boulder, Colo. (June 11-13, 2001), at http://www.battelle.org/environment/lcm/chemrawn.pdf (last visited Mar. 5, 2002) (describing Ford's Rouge Plant in Dearborn, Michigan). 434. See Michael Porter, Preface to TOMORROW'S MARKETS, supra note 67, at 5; Joseph W. Dorsey, Sustainability and the Specter of Corporate Responsibility: Where Is the Green?, paper presented at Environmental Stewardship: Rebuilding and Maintaining America's Resources, National Association of Environmental Professionals 27th Annual Conference, Dearborn, Mich. (June 23-26, 2002); Stephen Viederman, Multinational Corporations and Sustainable Development, BUS. & THE ENV'T (Cutter), May 1998, at 5; THE INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS LEADERS FORUM, INTERNATIONALISING THE COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT OF U.S. MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS: A DISCUSSION PAPER (1995). 435. Correspondence with Hilary Bradbury, Assistant Professor of Organizational Behavior and Associate Director of the Weatherhead Institute on Sustainable Enterprise, Weatherhead School of Management, Case Western Reserve University (Sept. 13, 2001); Interview with W. Burton Hamner, President, Hamner & Associates LLC (Sept. 4, 2001); Next Generation Environmental Management Techniques, supra note 167. See generally MINU HEMMATI, MULTI-STAKEHOLDER PROCESSES FOR GOVERNANCE AND SUSTAINABILITY: BEYOND DEADLOCK AND CONFLICT (2002); Beyond Shell: Profile of Mark Moody-Stuart, ENVTL. FIN., Feb. 2002, at 36 ("In nearly all cases, it's not business alone—it's business working with NGOs and communities that generates progress."); Rondinelli, Making Eco-Efficiency the Foundation of Environmental Policy Reform, supra note 117, at 40-41; Richard MacLean, Sustainable Development: Walking the Sustainable Development Talk to Achieve Business Value, ENVTL. PROTECTION, Sept. 2001, at 48, 49; THE BUSINESS CASE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, supra note 152, at 8; SUSTAINABILITY THROUGH THE MARKET, supra note 117, at 20-23; ROWLEDGE ET AL., supra note 114, at 37; BUILDING ON CONSENSUS, supra note 128, at 21-26 (summarizing lessons learned under the Common Sense Initiative, Project XL, and other initiatives); FINANCING CHANGE, supra note 9, at 76 (1996); EPSTEIN, supra note 15, at 17-22; A NEW CONSENSUS FOR PROSPERITY, supra note 128. U.S. EPA's Sustainable Industry Partnership Program, see http://www.epa.gov/sectors/sipp.html (last visited May 1, 2002), provides a useful platform but should be broadened, and lessons learned should be more widely disseminated. The GRI is a promising intersectoral partnership involving business, NGO, and multilateral participation. Some businesses are also beginning cooperate with one another and with local communities in eco-industrial parks designed to share resources, such as materials, water, energy, infrastructure, with an eye toward achieving economic gains, improved environmental quality, and equitable enhancement of human resources. See CANNIBALS WITH FORKS, supra note 146, at 237-38; BUILDING ON CONSENSUS, supra note 128, at 31-35; THE ROAD TO SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: A SNAPSHOT OF ACTIVITIES, supra note 128, at 13-16. One major theme at the WSSD is likely to be partnerships, or at least achievement of commitments to form "partnerships," between governments, businesses, and other organizations to pursue specific, measurable progress toward sustainability goals. WHY BUSINESS SHOULD CARE, supra note 4, at 3. On a related note, the International Chamber of Commerce and UNEP will be presenting World Summit Business Awards for Sustainable Development Partnerships to recognize effective partnerships between business (a company or association) and other organizations (a government agency, interest group, charity, etc.) that result in innovative approaches to advance sustainable development and set positive examples for others. See http://www.iccwbo.org/sdcharter/corp_init/awards/sd_award.asp (last visited Feb. 19, 2002). 436. See WHITING & BENNETT, supra note 7, at 15; STALKING THE ELUSIVE BUSINESS CASE FOR CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY, supra note 7, at 23; Green Nexus, supra note 107, at 899, 916 n.47; ECO-EFFICIENCY: CREATING MORE VALUE WITH LESS IMPACT, supra note 152, at 29; Sustainability and Enterprise, supra note 10, at 197, 208; THE STEWARDSHIP PATH, supra note 355, at 24; ENVIRONMENT: VALUE TO BUSINESS, supra note 141, at 39-47 (surveying best practices in both internal and external environmental communications); FINANCING CHANGE, supra note 9, at 69-75 (1996); RECOMMENDATIONS, supra note 58, at 8. NGOs will continue to call for measures to enhance corporate accountability. See, e.g., Jeffrey Barber, Remarks at Sustainable Development and the Environmental Practitioner, Environmental Law Institute, Washington, D.C. (Dec. 17, 2001); Jeffrey Barber, ISF and NGO Taskforce on Business and Industry, Corporate Accountability and the World Summit on Sustainable Development, Remarks at the Centre for Energy, Petroleum and Mineral Law and Policy, University of Dundee, Scotland, UK (Aug. 30, 2001), at http://isforum.org/tobi/reports/ca-wssd.aspx (last visited Feb. 7, 2002); NGO TASKFORCE ON BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY, MINDING OUR BUSINESS (Feb.-Mar. 1997), available at http://isforum.org/tobi/reports/minding/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). On the repercussions of Enron's implosion for corporate accountability, see John Herzfeld, Private Sector Cooperation, Accountability Emerging as Johannesburg Summit Themes, 25 INT'L ENVTL. REP. (BNA) 149 (Feb. 13, 2002). 437. See THE BUSINESS CASE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, supra note 152, at 9 ("Informed, responsible, and knowledgeable consumer choice helps achieve sustainability through the market via a triple-win: by improving quality of life for consumers, by reducing environmental and social impacts, and by increasing the market share of sustainably minded companies."); SUSTAINABILITY THROUGH THE MARKET, supra note 117, at 24-28; Sustainability and Enterprise, supra note 10, at 197, 208. 438. See ROWLEDGEET AL., supra note 114, at 56-57 (describing Volvo's employee education program); TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE AMERICA, supra note 347, at 40-41; Toward Sustainable Production and Consumption: A Conceptual Framework, supra note 9, at 75, 92-93; CANNIBALS WITH FORKS, supra note 146, at 362-64; KRUT, supra note 10, at 52-54 (finding limited coverage of this area in industry codes and charters); A NEW CONSENSUS FOR PROSPERITY, supra note 128 (encouraging businesses to form partnerships with federal, state, and local governments to develop and implement coordinated strategies supporting education for sustainability); EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABILITY, supra note 393. 439. This could include mentoring suppliers and small businesses, using knowledge and information to help other companies contribute to sustainable development. See Genot et al., supra note 41, at 297; CANNIBALS WITH FORKS, supra note 146, at 361-63. 440. Correspondence with Lester B. Lave, Professor of Economics and Finance, Carnegie Mellon University (Feb. 27, 2002). 441. See POLTORZYCKI & SHOPLEY, supra note 50, at 7 (of survey respondents, 17% believed companies should be prepared to get out of certain businesses altogether in order to live up to claims of support for sustainable development). See also JEUCKEN, supra note 141, at 51: The key issue for companies on the path to sustainable business is: Are they targeting a maximum level of market breadth or profit, approaching sustainability in such a way that a maximum profit is producedwithin the legal strictures, or are they prepared to impose sustainability criteria on themselves of such a nature that they accept a smaller market and less profit in the short term if need be? 442. Martin, supra note 212, at 73. 443. Id. at 74. 444. See id. at 69, 74: The net impact of globalization on the supply of responsible corporate behavior has yet to be calculated, of course, but it is apparent that companies from countries with robust civil foundations will determine the outcome. If their practices average up civil foundations worldwide, globalization advocates will be vindicated in their belief that increased international economic activity can address some of the world's most difficult development problems. On the other hand, a corporate race to the bottom would succeed only in averaging down civil foundations and confirming the most lurid fears of globalization opponents. See also Joseph Fiksel & Diane Guyse Fiksel, From Here to Sustainability: A Global Perspective, CHEMISTRY BUS., Apr. 2001, at 11, 12 ("Multinational corporations have the necessary resources and economic influence to help realize the sustainable development vision, and in the process they may radically alter their perceived role in society—becoming champions of a new vision for the planet."). 445. See Mark Line et al., The Development of Global Environmental and Social Reporting, 9 CORP. ENVTL. STRATEGY 69, 73-75 (2002); Financial Markets and Corporate Environmental Results, supra note 7, at 58-59. For other assessments of recent environmental and sustainability reporting by companies, see sources cited supra note 141. 446. For sampling of critiques and allegations involving business "greenwashing," i.e., efforts by companies to portray themselves as being environmentally responsible for the purpose of improving stakeholder relations without significantly improving actual performance, see generally Rio + 10 and the Corporate Greenwash of Globalisation, EUR. CORP. OBSERVER NEWSL. (Corp. Eur. Observatory), June 2001, available at http://www.xs4all.nl/ceo/observer9/greenwash.html (last visited Mar. 22, 2002); NEW ECONOMIC FOUNDATION, CORPORATE SPIN: THE TROUBLED TEENAGER YEARS OF SOCIAL REPORTING (Aug. 2000), available at http://www.neweconomics.org/uploadstore/pubs/doc_2811200045047_New%20Eco%20Text.pdf (last visited Mar. 21, 2002); JAMES RIDGEWAY & JEFFREY ST. CLAIR, A POCKET GUIDE TO ENVIRONMENTAL BAD GUYS (1999); SHARON BEDER, GLOBAL SPIN: THE CORPORATE ASSAULT ON ENVIRONMENTALISM (1997); JED GREER & KENNY BRUNO, GREENWASH: THE REALITY BEHIND CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTALISM (1996). 447. See Presentations by Kerrie Laughlin, Penny Bonda, Paul Reynolds, and others, Transparency: Corporate Communications in a Globalized Economy: Greenwashing or Genuine Storytelling, at CERES 2001 Conference, What Is Global Citizenship?: Society in an Era of Rapid Change, Atlanta, Ga. (Apr. 5, 2001); Ulrika Wennberg, Sustainability Reporting—Beyond Greenwash, Presentation at the 7th European Environmental Roundtable on Cleaner Production, Lund, Sweden (May 2-4, 2001); Dick MacLean, Making the Move From Spin to Strategy, CORP. STRATEGY TODAY, Oct. 2001, at 14. 448. See 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE INDEX, supra note 98, at 11; THE BUSINESS CASE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, supra note 152, at 3. See generally U.S. Council on International Business, Comments on the Issues for Discussion at the OECD Roundtable on Sustainable Development, Improving Synergy Flows Between ODA and FDI to Developing Countries: A Business Perspective, Paris, France (Feb. 28-Mar. 1, 2002) (on file with author); Corporate Demeanor Is Best Barometer of Environmental Protection, BUS. & THE ENV'T (Aspen), Mar. 2002, at 8-9 (governance underpinnings now appear "to be very significant in terms of environmental outcomes. And right there, among the critical factors is the role of the private sector. Where there is a significant environmental focus in the private sector, you have a very significant response") (quoting Daniel Esty). 449. See U.N. DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC & SOCIAL AFFAIRS, BUSINESS AND THE UNITED NATIONS: PARTNERS IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (1999), available at http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/tech/tsd1.pdf (last visited Mar. 1, 2002). 450. Interview with W. Burton Hamner, President, Hamner & Associates LLC (Sept. 4, 2001). See Claude Fussler, Shaping a Deal for the Johannesburg 2002 Summit, Remarks at the High Level Seminar on Globalisation, Sustainable Development and the EU's External Policies, Green Globe Task Force/World Wide Fund for Nature, Brussels (Oct. 22-23, 2001); Eileen Claussen, Global Environmental Governance, in U.S. POLICY AND THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT: MEMOS TO THE PRESIDENT 161, 170 (Donald Kennedy & John K. Riggs eds., Aspen Institute 2000); DAVID WALLACE, SUSTAINABLE INDUSTRIALIZATION 69-72 (1996) ("By building relationships not only with local firms but with society more widely—through schools, public planning authorities, with regulatory bodies, and so on—MNCs can be of major benefit [to developing countries] with perhaps very little effort on their part."). See also Charles R. Hadlock, Multinational Corporations and the Transfer of Environmental Technology to Developing Countries, INT'L ENVTL. AFF., Spring 1994, at 160. 451. See Glen Dowell et al., Do Corporate Global Environmental Standards Create or Destroy Market Value?, 46 MGMT. SCI. 1059 (2000) (analyzing stock performance of firms and concluding that companies that adopted a single stringent environmental standard have much higher market values than those companies that do not). On the need to achieve "functional equivalency" in global operations, see Frank B. Freidman, Managing Environmental Operations in a Foreign Country, Remarks at Remarks at International Environmental Law: Annual Advanced Course of Study, ALI-ABA and the Environmental Law Institute, Washington, D.C. (Apr. 4-5, 2002). Amy Brown & April Streeter, Destination Anywhere, TOMORROW MAG., May/June 2000, at 8. See also Audun Ruud, Environmental Management of Transnational Corporations in India—Are TNCs Creating Islands of Environmental Excellence in a Sea of Dirt?, 11 BUS. STRATEGY & THE ENV'T 103 (2002) (discussing how and to what extent local environmental practices at affiliated units of transnational corporations are influenced by headquarters). 452. See THE BUSINESS CASE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, supra note 152, at 11; ECO-EFFICIENCY: CREATING MORE VALUE WITH LESS IMPACT, supra note 152, at 29; DAY & ARNOLD, supra note 140, at 54. 453. See KRUT, supra note 10, at 79-82 (reviewing provisions of Agenda 21 on international environmental support activities and evaluating treatment of this area in industry codes). On business efforts in preparation for the WSSD, see supra note 4. 454. See generally LEO MARX, THE MACHINE IN THE GARDEN: TECHNOLOGY AND THE PASTORAL IDEA IN AMERICA (2000). 455. On the interconnection of technology and industrialization, and its impact on the environment, see David S. Landes, THE WEALTH AND POVERTY OF NATIONS (1998); Jared Diamond, GUNS, GERMS, AND STEEL (1997). 456. SOMETHING NEW UNDER THE SUN, supra note 100, at 360-61. 457. Id. at 361. 458. See Bjorn Stigson, New and Emerging Technologies and Sustainable Development: The Business-Science Linkage, Remarks at the U.N. Forum for Business and Science, Beijing, China (Apr. 15, 2002), available at http://www.wbcsd.ch/newscenter/speeches/it/bjoern-20020425.pdf (last visited May 3, 2002); KLAUS M. LEISINGER, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AT THE TURN OF THE CENTURY: PERCEPTION, REALITY, AND OUTLOOK (Novartis Foundation for Sustainable Development 2002); JULIAN L. SIMON, THE ULTIMATE RESOURCE (1996). Durwood Zaelke and Steven Andersen examine recent technology breakthroughs, and the potential environmental benefits of such advances, in INDUSTRY GENIUS: INVENTIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (forthcoming 2002). 459. Perhaps Lowy and Wells will prove prescient in their prediction that "the next decade is likely to see continuous progress toward an integrated management system and triple bottom line governance that will make commonplace tomorrow what leading companies are striving for today." LOWY & WELLS, supra note 147, at 18. 460. See Correspondence with Dennis A. Rondinelli, Glaxo Distinguished International Professor, Management, Kenan-Flagler Business School, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (Feb. 18, 2002). 461. Mass Market Paper Bestseller List, PUBLISHERS WKLY. (week of Mar. 4, 2002). The film version of The Fellowship of the Ring has already grossed an additional $ 520 million overseas, making it the fifth highest grossing film in history. 462. On the theme of industrialization and pollution in Tolkien's trilogy, see http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ngbeyond/rings/influences.html#indust (last visited Jan. 28, 2002); PATRICK CURRY, DEFENDING MIDDLE EARTH: TOLUENE, MYTH, AND MODERNITY (1997). 463. J.R.R. TOLKIEN, LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING 60 (2d ed. 1965). 464. Id. 465. See Tom Shippey, Temptations for All Time, TIMES LITERARY SUPP., Dec. 21, 2001, at 16, 17. 466. Business leaders recognize that we are only at the beginning of the journey. Of the companies that responded to Arthur D. Little's 1999 survey, only 17% saw themselves as "well down the road" to integrating sustainable development into their business strategy or operations. Nearly one-half saw themselves as making some progress while under a quarter of companies surveyed "were just beginning to explore the possibilities." POLTORZYCKI & SHOPLEY, supra note 50, at 4. Of the companies furthest along in the area of sustainable development, most were businest in traditional environmental areas such as pollution prevention, environmental auditing, and energy efficiency, with only the exceptional organizations utilizing more progressive tools/methodologies such as performance measurement, DfE, closed-loop systems, organizational learning, life-cycle assessment, supply chain management, industrial ecology, eco-efficiency tools, and cost accounting. Id. at 4-5. 467. The usual inertia is compounded by the legal structure of, and current political dynamic in, the United States. As Gary Bryner observed, "sustainable development requires a comprehensive policy response, but [the U.S.] political system is so divided by federalism, the separation of powers, and other institutional devices, that coherent policy efforts seem impossible in the absence of a national crisis." Bryner, supra note 346, at 302. 468. As elegantly phrased by Stuart Hart, "beyond greening lies an enormous challenge—and an enormous opportunity. The challenge is todevelop a sustainable global economy; an economy that the planet is capable of supporting indefinitely." Beyond Greening, supra note 62, at 67. As eloquently expressed by Edward O. Wilson, a "conservation ethic is that which aims to pass on to future generations the best part of the nonhuman world. To know this world is to gain a proprietary attachment to it. To know it well is to love and take responsibility for it." What Is Nature Worth?, supra note 106, at 39. 1. Available at http://www.iccwbo.org/sdcharter/charter/principles/principles.asp (last visited Aug. 14, 2001). See generally Lee M. Thomas, The Business Charter for Sustainable Development: Action Beyond UNCED, 1 REV. EUR. COMMUNITY & INT'L ENVTL. L. 325 (1992). 1. GLOBAL REPORTING INITIATIVE (GRI), SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING GUIDELINES ON ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND SOCIAL PERFORMANCE (2000), available at http://www.globalreporting.org/GRIGuidelines/June2000/June2000Guidelines8X11.pdf (last visited Jan. 10, 2002). The figure of 100 companies is based solely on a count of firms listed on the GRI website—there may well be others. Of the companies listed as adhering to the GRI Guidelines, 20 are from the United States, 5 from France, 1 from Costa Rica, 17 from Japan, 20 from the United Kingdom, 5 from Germany, 4 from Canada, 4 from Australia, 7 from the Netherlands, 9 from Sweden, 4 from South Africa, 4 from Finland, 1 from Brazil, 1 from Denmark, 1 from Spain, 1 from Italy, and 2 from New Zealand. For further discussion of the guidelines, see generally Disclosure Guideline Calls for Patience and an Open Mind, BUS. & THE ENV'T (Aspen), May 2002, at 2. Martin Holysh, Corporate Manager, Sustainable Development, Suncor Energy, Inc., Using the GRI Guidelines to Produce a Sustainability Report: The Opportunities and the Challenges, Remarks at Globe 2002, Vancouver, Canada (Mar. 13-15, 2002); John Elkington, The Global Reporters, Presentation at GEMI 2001: An Odyssey to Environmental Excellence, Baltimore, Md. (Mar. 19-20, 2001), at http://www.steeleweb.com/graphics/gemi_files/workshop_07/tranparency_elkington.ppt (last visited Mar. 7, 2002); Allen L. White, GRI and the Transparency Initiative, Presentation at GEMI 2001: An Odyssey to Environmental Excellence, Baltimore, Md. (Mar. 19-20, 2001), at http://www.steeleweb.com/graphics/gemi_files/workshop_07/transparency_white.ppt (last visited Mar. 6, 2002); WHITING & BENNETT, supra note 7, at 19: Our core mission is to develop, disseminate, and maintain globally applicable guidelines for reporting on the economic, environmental, and social performance of corporations, governments, and nongovernmental organizations. We seek to make sustainability reporting as routine and credible as financial reporting in terms of comparability, rigor, and verifiability, and to elevate sustainability practices worldwide to a level equivalent to financial reporting. (quoting Allen White); Mark Brownlie, The Business Case for Sustainability Reporting, Presentation at Corporate Environmental and Sustainability Reporting: A New Look for the Information Age, Vanderbilt Center for Environmental Management Studies (May 2001), at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/vcems/cesr2/markbrownliepresentation.pdf (last visited Jan. 10, 2002); Dennis M. Hussey et al., Global Reporting Initiative Guidelines: An Evaluation of Sustainable Development Metrics for Industry, ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT., Autumn 2001, at 1; Grades Vary for Users of Global Reporting Initiative, BUS. & THE ENV'T (Cutter), Jan. 2001, at 5; A "Watershed Moment" for GRI, INT'L ENVTL. SYS. UPDATE (CEEM), Dec. 2000, at 3; Bill Birchard, One Size . . . Fits Some, TOMORROW, Nov./Dec. 2000, at 55; Donald Sutherland & Graham Cooper, GRI Moves Up a Gear, ENVTL. FIN., Apr. 2000, at 18; Players React to Revised Guideline for Sustainability Reporting, BUS. & THE ENV'T (Cutter), Sept. 2000, at 6; John Wilson, Toward a Kinder, Gentler GRI?, BUS. & THE ENV'T (Cutter), June 1999, at 6. 2. The April 1, 2002, Draft Guidelines may be reviewed at http://www.globalreporting.org/GRIGuidelines/2002/DraftSRG2002.pdf (last visited Apr. 2, 2002). 1. See International Organization for Standardization (ISO), http://www.iso.ch/iso/en/ISOOnline.frontpage (last visited Jan. 10, 2002); ISO Technical Committee on Environmental Management (TC207), http://www.tc207.org/ (last visited Jan. 12, 2002). 2. See American National Standards Institute, http://web.ansi.org (last visited Jan. 12, 2002). 3. See generally Frank B. Friedman, ISO 14001 and Related Environmental Management System Developments, INT'L ENVTL. L. COMM. NEWSL. (ABA Section of Env't, Energy & Resources), Sept. 2000, available at http://www.abanet.org/environ/committees/intenviron/newsletter/sept00/fried.html (last visited Jan. 12, 2001); DAVID L. GOETSCH & STANLEY DAVIS, ISO 14000: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (2000); Paulette Stenzel, Can the ISO 14000 Series Environmental Management Standards Provide a Viable Alternative to Government Regulation?, 37 AM. BUS. L.J. 237 (2000); Z. Rezaee & R. Elam, Emerging ISO 14000 Environmental Standards: A Step-by-Step Implementation Guide, 15 MANAGERIAL ACCT. J. 60 (2000); Aseem Prakash, A New-Institutionalist Perspective on ISO 14000 and Responsible Care, 8 BUS. STRATEGY & THE ENV'T 322 (1999); Christopher L. Bell, Bench Test, ENVTL. F., Nov./Dec. 1999, at 46; JOHN VOORHEES & ROBERT A. WOELLNER, INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RISK MANAGEMENT: ISO 14000 AND THE SYSTEMS APPROACH (1998); INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR STANDARDIZATION, ISO 14000: MEET THE WHOLE FAMILY (1998), available at http://www.iso.ch/iso/en/iso9000-14000/pdf/iso14000.pdf (last visited Jan. 12, 2002); S. WAYNE ROSENBAUM, ISO AND THE LAW: LEGAL GUIDE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT STANDARDS (1998); Donald A. Carr & William L. Thomas, Devising a Compliance Strategy Under the ISO 14000 International Environmental Management Standards, 15 PACE ENVTL. L. REV. 85 (1997); Rafe Petersen, ISO 14000 Internet Databases, 3 ENVTL. LAW. 613 (1997); Marc J. Epstein & Marie-Jose Roy, Using ISO 14000 for Improved Organizational Learning and Environmental Management, ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT., Autumn 1997, at 21; Burton Hamner, A Strategic Approach to ISO 14000, CORP. ENVTL. STRATEGY, Winter 1997, at 47; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS AND CLEANER PRODUCTION (Ruth Hillary ed., 1997); GREGORY P. JOHNSON, ISO 14000 EMS AUDIT HANDBOOK (1997); MOVING AHEAD WITH ISO 14000: IMPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (Philip Marcus & John Willig eds., 1997); Ted D. Polakowski & Laurence Mach, ISO 14000 Certification: Lucent Technologies Microelectronics Group's Strategic Choice, CORP. ENVTL. STRATEGY, Winter 1997, at 55; DENNIS SASSEVILLE ET AL., ISO 14000 ANSWER BOOK: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT FOR THE WORLD MARKET (1997); ISO 14001 AND BEYOND: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS IN THE REAL WORLD (Christopher Sheldon ed., 1997); Robert Stephens, Government Has No Choice but to Get Involved, ENVTL. F., Nov./Dec. 1997, at 30; IMPLEMENTING ISO 14000; A PRACTICAL, COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE TO THE ISO 14000 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT STANDARDS (Tom Tibor & Ira Feldman eds., 1997); ISO 14000 CASE STUDIES: MODELS FOR IMPLEMENTATION (Mark Baker ed., 1996); Henry R. Balikov & Patrick O. Cavanaugh, What We Need to Know About ISO 14000, NAT. RESOURCES & ENV'T, Spring 1996, at 64; Christina C. Benson, ISO 14000 International Standards: Moving Beyond Environmental Compliance, N.C. J. INT'L L. & COM. REG. 307 (1996); THE ISO 14000 GUIDE (Joseph Cascio et al. eds., 1996); THE ISO 14000 HANDBOOK (Joseph Cascio ed., 1996); Craig P. Diamond, Voluntary Environmental Management System Standards: Case Studies in Implementation, TOTAL QUALITY ENVTL. MGMT., Winter 1995-1996, at 9; TOM TIBOR & IRA FELDMAN, ISO 14000: A GUIDE TO THE NEW ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT STANDARDS (1996); Wayne Tusa, Understanding and Implementing ISO 14000—Part I, 7 N.Y. ENVTL. L. 37 (1996); W.M. VON ZHAREN, ISO 14000 UNDERSTANDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS (1996); Stephen A. Watson, Business Implications of Implementing ISO 14000, ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT., Autumn 1996, at 51; Craig D. Galli, ISO 14000 and Environmental Management Systems in a Nutshell, UTAH B.J., Dec. 1996, at 15; SUZAN L. JACKSON, ISO 14000 IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE: CREATING AN INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (1996); Kerry E. Rodgers, The ISO Environmental Standards Initiatives, 5 N.Y.U. ENVTL. L.J. 181 (1996); Dennis A. Rondinelli & Gyula Vastag, International Environmental Standards and Corporate Policies: An Integrative Framework, 39 CAL. MGMT. REV. 106 (1996); Robert J. Fowler, International Environmental Standards for Transnational Corporations, 25 ENVTL. L. 1 (1995); Marc E. Gold, ISO 14000: A New Global Business Benchmark, 10 ENVTL. COMPLIANCE & LITIG. STRATEGY, May 1995, at 1; Gabriel G. Crognale, Environmental Management: What ISO 14000 Brings to the Table, TOTAL QUALITY ENVTL. MGMT., Summer 1995, at 5; BRIAN ROTHERY, ISO 14000 AND ISO 9000 (1995); Christopher L. Bell & James L. Connaughton, New Global Standards May Guide Industry on Environmental Issues, NAT'L L.J., Sept. 6, 1993, at S2. 4. On the implementation of ISO 14001 in the United States and abroad, see generally Eric W. Welch, Voluntary Adoption of ISO 14001 in Japan: Mechanisms, Stages, and Effects, 11 BUS. STRATEGY & THE ENV'T 43 (2002); Jonas Ammenberg et al., Auditing External Environmental Auditors—Investigating How ISO 14001 Is Interpreted and Applied in Reality, 8 ECO-MGMT. & AUDITING 183 (2001); Jesus Angel del Brio & Beatriz Junquera, Level of Implementation of the ISO 14001 Standard in Spanish Industrial Companies, 8 ECO-MGMT. & AUDITING 193 (2001); R.V. Jayathirtha, Combating Environmental Repercussions Through "TQEM" and "ISO 14001," 10 BUS. STRATEGY & THE ENV'T 245 (2001); W.M. VON ZHAREN, ISO 14001: POSITIONING YOUR ORGANIZATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SUCCESS (2001); AVROM BENDAVID-VAL & NICHOLAS P. CHEREMISINOFF, GREEN PROFITS: THE MANAGER'S HANDBOOK FOR ISO 14001 AND POLLUTION PREVENTION (2001); MARILYN R. BLOCK, INTEGRATING ISO 14001 INTO A QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (2001); O. Boiral, ISO 14001 Certification in Multinational Firms: The Paradoxes of Integration, GLOBAL FOCUS, Spring 2001, at 79; David Burdick, American and European ISO 14001 Accreditation Requirements and Their Influences on Registrar Practice and Environmental Performance, 8 CORP. ENVTL. STRATEGY 65 (2001); M. DeMendonca & T.E. Baxter, Design for Environment (DfE): An Approach to Achieve the ISO 14001 Certification, 12 ENVTL. MGMT. & HEALTH 51 (2001), at 51; A.J. EDWARDS, ISO 14001 CERTIFICATION: STEP-BY-STEP (2001); STEPHEN TINSLEY, ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLANS DEMYSTIFIED: A GUIDE TO ISO 14001 (2001); MARILYN R. BLOCK, IDENTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS AND IMPACTS (2000); Robin Shoal, ISO 14001 Environmental Management Systems—Hype or Hope?, ENVTL. PRACTICE, Dec. 2000, at 291; Leonardo J. Cardenas, Is ISO 14001 Compatible With the CEC Guidelines for EMSs?, INT'L ENVTL. SYS. UPDATE, Sept. 2000, at 16; JASON MORRISON ET AL., MANAGING A BETTER ENVIRONMENT: OPPORTUNITIES AND OBSTACLES FOR ISO 14001 IN PUBLIC POLICY AND COMMERCE (Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment, and Security 2000); Dennis A. Rondinelli & Gyula Vastag, Panacea, Common Sense, or Just a Label? The Value of ISO 14001 Environmental Management Systems, 18 EUR. MGMT. J. 499 (2000); ALAN SCHOFFMAN & ALLAN M. TORDINI, ISO 14001: A PRACTICAL APPROACH (2000); J.G. Ferrante & J. Cotter, The ISO 14001 Environmental Management System: A Prescription for Environmental and Financial Health, ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT., Autumn 1999, at 63; JOHN KINSELLA ET AL., HANDBOOK FOR IMPLEMENTING AN ISO 14001 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: A PRACTICAL APPROACH (EMCON 1999); R. Krut & J. Strycharz, ISO 14001 and Design for the Environment: A Strategy for Proactive Design in Building Design, Construction and Renovation, GREENER MGMT. INT'L, Winter 1999, at 69; JENNIFER NASH ET AL., ISO 14001 AND STARTRACK: ASSESSING THEIR ROLE IN ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT (National Academy of Public Administration 1999); THE BOTTOM LINE: HOW TO BUILD A BUSINESS CASE FOR ISO 14001 (Pam Parry ed., 1999); Jason Switzer et al., ISO 14001 and Environmental Goal Setting: Promises Kept, ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT., Winter 1999, at 1; GAYLE WOODSIDE & PATRICK AURRICHIO, ISO 14001 AUDITING MANUAL (1999); VINCENT ZOTTOLA, THE ISO 14001 IMPLEMENTATION TOOL KIT (1999); John Voorhees, Global Environmental Solutions: Management Systems and Synchronicity, 28 STETSON L. REV. 1155 (1999); O. Boiral & J.M. Sala, Environmental Management: Should Industry Adopt ISO 14001?, BUS. HORIZONS, Jan./Feb. 1998, at 57; O. Boiral, ISO 14001: Against the Tide of Modern Management?, J. GEN. MGMT., Autumn 1998, at 35; G. Hasek, ISO's Green Standard Takes Root (ISO 14001), INDUS. WK., Feb. 16, 1998, at 39; D. Holt, The Perceived Benefits of an Environmental Management Standard, 4 BUS. PROCESS MGMT. J. 204 (1998); RIVA KRUT & HARRIS GLECKMAN, ISO 14001: A MISSED OPPORTUNITY FOR SUSTAINABLE GLOBAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT (Earthscan 1998); RANDY ROIG & ANTHONY SAPONARA, ISO 14001 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS: A COMPLETE IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE (1998); Douglas A.J. Taylor, Is ISO 14001 Standardization in Tune With Sustainable Development? Symphony or Cacaphony?, 13 J. ENVTL. L. & LITIG. 509 (1998); William L. Thomas, Achieving and Maximizing ISM Code Compliance With ISO 14001, ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT., Summer 1998, at 9; GAYLE WOODSIDE ET AL., ISO 14001 IMPLEMENTATION MANUAL (1998); Christopher R. Bell, The ISO 14001 Environmental Management Systems Standard: A Modest Perspective, 27 ELR 10622 (Dec. 1997); Lynn L. Bergeson & Jill M. Palmer, ISO 14001: A Checklist for Counseling Clients, CORP. LEGAL TIMES, May 1997, at 26; MARILYN R. BLOCK, IMPLEMENTING ISO 14001 (1997); S. Graff, ISO 14000: Should Your Company Develop an Environmental Management System?, INDUS. MGMT., Nov./Dec. 1997, at 19; A.M. Hormozi, ISO 14000: The Next Focus in Standardization, SAM ADVANCED MGMT. J., Summer 1997, at 32; Riva Krut, ISO 14001: Strategic Issues for Corporate Environmental Leaders, CORP. ENVTL. STRATEGY, Spring 1997, at 61; Robert A. Reilly, The New Paradigm: ISO 14000 and Its Place in Regulatory Reform, 22 J. CORP. L. 535 (1997); ISO 14001 AND BEYOND: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS IN THE REAL WORLD (Christopher Sheldon ed., 1997); William L. Thomas, Using ISO 14001 to Comply With the Management System Requirements of the U.S. EPA's RMP Rule and the EU's Seveso II Directive, EUR. ENVTL. L. REV., Dec. 1997, at 337; Danja van der Veldt, Case Studies of ISO 14001: A New Business Guide for Global Environmental Protection, ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT., Autumn 1997, at 1; Anton G. Camarota & Mary S. Dymond, ISO 14001: A Systems Approach to Managing Environmental Risk, ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT., Winter 1996, at 23; Donald A. Carr & William L. Thomas, ISO 14001 Sets a Global Environmental Standard, NAT'L L.J., July 8, 1996, at C2; Harris Gleckman & Riva Krut, Neither International Nor Standard: The Limits of ISO 14001 as an Instrument of Global Corporate Environmental Management, GREENER MGMT. INT'L, Apr. 1996, at 111; Carey A. Matthews, The ISO 14001 Environmental Management System Standard: An Innovative Approach to Environmental Protection, 2 ENVTL. L. 817 (1996); Deborah A. Tansey & Marc H. Wendell, ISO 14001 EMS Implementation Planning, ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT., Winter 1996, at 1; Christopher R. Bell, ISO 14001: Application of International Environmental Management Systems Standards in the United States, 25 ELR 10678 (Dec. 1995); W. LEE KUHRE, ISO 14001 CERTIFICATION: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS (1995); W. Lee Kuhre, ISO 14001 Certification: Environmental Management Systems in Accordance With the ISO's Draft Standards Is Not Necessarily Costly, and Could Yield Other Benefits as Well, NAT'L L.J., July 24, 1995, at B5. 5. See generally David V. Morrow & Dennis A. Rondinelli, Adopting Corporate Environmental Management Systems: Motivations and Results of ISO 14001 and EMAS Certification, EUR. MGMT. J. (forthcoming 2002); Certifying Conformance—Without a Certificate, INT'L ENVTL. SYS. UPDATE (CEEM), Mar. 2002, at 12; Frank B. Friedman, To Certify or Not Certify—Political and Strategic Issues of the ISO 14001 Registration Process, INT'L ENVTL. SYS. UPDATE (CEEM), June 2001, at 16; M.P. Miles et al., Marketing and Environmental Registration/Certification: What Industrial Marketers Should Understand About ISO 14000, 26 INDUS. MARKETING MGMT. 363 (1997). See also RICHARD N.L. ANDREWS ET AL., THIRD-PARTY AUDITING OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS: U.S. REGISTRATION PRACTICES FOR ISO 14001 (National Academy of Public Administration 2001) (analyzing registration practices and trends). 6. Certification to ISO 14001 Continued to Sparkle in 2001, ISO 14000 UPDATE (Aspen), Apr. 2002, at 3. While ISO 14001 registrations and implementation continue to grow internationally, ISO is in the process of revising the standard to make it more "user friendly" and more compatible with ISO's quality management standard, ISO 9001: 2000. See generally Christopher R. Bell, Clarifying ISO 14001—The Road to a Better Standard?, INT'L ENVTL. SYS. UPDATE (CEEM), June 2000, at 14. A Committee Draft of ISO 14001 could be released for comment to members of Technical Committee 207 in 2002. Potential alterations include a number of textual changes for clarity, several definition modifications, and clearer language for issues such as "significant aspects" and "objectives and targets." The ISO 14001 revision is scheduled for completion in early 2004. 7. See generally Terry A. Mors, Integrating ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 Systems: An Auditor's Perspective, Paper Presented at Environmental Stewardship: Rebuilding and Maintaining America's Resources, National Association of Environmental Professionals 27th Annual Conference, Dearborn, Mich. (June 23-26, 2002); David Vincent Kraus & Jennifer L. Kraus, Limiting Exposure to Collateral Liability Associated With ISO 14001 EMS Audits, 8 CORP. ENVTL. STRATEGY 242 (2001); L.B. Cahill & T. Woollard, Challenges of Meeting ISO 14000 Auditing Guidelines: Audit Programme Gaps, 6 ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT. 61 (1997). ISO is preparing a new standard for auditing quality and/or EMS within its ISO 9000 series, a set of generic, internationally recognized standards for quality management. The standard, ISO 19011, would guide conduct of internal or external quality and environmental audits, and is intended to streamline audit functions within organizations and provide additional flexibility to audit programs. Publication of this document is expected in mid-2002. See Dick Hortensius, What's to Know About the New ISO 19011 Draft Standard?, INT'L ENVTL. SYS. UPDATE (CEEM), July 2001, at 16. For background and guidance on the ISO 9000 series, see generally CHARLES A. CIANFRANI ET AL., ISO 9001: 2000 EXPLAINED (2d ed. 2001); ISO 9000: 2000: THE ROUTE TO REGISTRATION (Jason Hart ed., 2001); DAVID HOYLE, ISO 9000 QUALITY SYSTEMS HANDBOOK: ISO 9000: 2000 VERSION (4th ed. 2001); JEANNIE KETOLA & KATHY ROBERTS, ISO 9000: 2000 IN A NUTSHELL (2d ed. 2001); Jeanne Ketola & Kathy Roberts, Demystifying ISO 9001: 2000, QUALITY PROGRESS, Sept. 2001, at 65; RAYMOND J. MURPHY, IMPLEMENTING AN ISO 9001: 2000 QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: INCLUDING SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS (2001); ERIC H. STAPP, ISO 9000: 2000: AN ESSENTIAL GUIDE TO THE NEW STANDARD (2001); Duke Okes, The Long-Term Impact of ISO 9000: Changing Perspectives, Roles, and Organizations, 55 ANN. QUALITY CONGRESS PROC. 279 (2001); RAY TRICKER ET AL., ISO 9001: 2000 IN BRIEF (2001); JOSEPH J. TSIAKALS ET AL., ISO 9001: 2000 EXPLAINED (2d ed. 2001); Tony Wright, ISO 9001 Without Tears, QUALITY PROGRESS, Aug. 2001, at 57; JAMES KOLKA, ISO 9000: A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE (1998); JAMES S. DAVIES, ISO 9000 MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS MANUAL (1997); BRIAN ROTHERY, ISO 14000 AND ISO 9000 (1995). 9. See generally Dick Hortensius, What Is the New Environmental Assessment of Sites and Organizations?, INT'L ENVTL. SYS. UPDATE (CEEM), Dec. 2001, at 10. 8. See generally Kyle W. Lathrop & Terence J. Centner, Eco-Labeling and ISO 14000: An Analysis of U.S. Regulatory Systems and Issues Concerning Adoption of Type II Standards, 22 ENVTL. MGMT. 163 (1998). 10. See generally K.E. Lokkegaard, ISO 14031 Used as a Tool in ISO 14001 or as an Alternative for a Simple EMS, GREENER MGMT. INT'L, Winter 1999, at 79. 11. See HANDBOOK ON LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT: OPERATIONAL GUIDE TO THE ISO STANDARDS (Jeroen B. Guinee ed., 2002). An ISO technical report on integrating environmental aspects into product design, ISO 14062, is also in development and could be released in late 2002 or early 2003. See WG 3 Turns Corner With ISO 14062, INT'L ENVTL. SYS. UPDATE (CEEM), Dec. 2001, at 6. 1. For information onthe U.S. Department of Energy's Center of Excellence for Sustainable Development, see http://www.sustainable.doe.gov/ (last visited Jan. 18, 2002). 2. See http://www.federalsustainability.org/about/aboutfns.htm (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 3. See, e.g., U.S. EPA Region 3, Center for Sustainability, at http://www.epa.gov/region3/sdwork/index.htm (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 4. See Cal/EPA Environmental Management and Sustainability Program, at http://www.calepa.ca.gov/EMS/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002), and the Sustainable Silicon Valley Project, at http://www.calepa.ca.gov/ems/siliconems/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). See generally Dave Block, California Agency Supports Sustainable Business Growth, IN BUS., Jan./Feb. 2001, at 16. 5. See http://www.csg.org/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 6. See http://www.sso.org/ecos/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 7. See http://sustainable.state.fl.us/fdi/fscc/gcsf/gcsfmain.htm (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 8. See Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Pollution Prevention and Sustainability Program, at http://www.pca.state.mn.us/programs/p2-s/index.html (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 9. See http://www.iwrc.org/mswgroot/mswg.htm (last visited Nov. 15, 2001). 10. See New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Silver and Gold Track Program for Environmental Excellence, described at http://www.state.nj.us/dep/opppc/silver.html (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 11. See NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES, ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY REPORT, available at http://www.p2pays.org/ref/07/06568/agencies/denr/agency_Denr_report.htm (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 12. See Description of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Sustainability Programs and Projects, at http://www.deq.state.or.us/programs/sustainability.htm (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 13. See Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Clean Texas Program, describedat http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/exec/sbea/cleantx/index.html (last visited Feb. 7, 2002) (recognizing companies that commit to sustainability). 14. See VERMONT AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES, STRATEGIC PLAN: 2001-2005, available at http://www.anr.state.vt.us/stratpln/goal1.html (last visited Feb. 7, 2002) (describing Vermont's sustainability goals). 15. See generally COMMISSION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COOPERATION, A SHARED VISION: TOWARD SUSTAINABILITY IN NORTH AMERICA (1997) (examining the role of the commission in promoting sustainability in the region). 16. On the activities of the Organization of American States' to promote sustainable development, see http://www.oas.org/assembly/GAAssembly2000/GAsustainable.htm (last visited Feb. 26, 2002). 17. See http://www.cepaa.org/ (last visited Jan. 18, 2002). 18. See http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/ (last visited Jan. 18, 2002). 19. An invaluable resource for researching the various organizations involved in this area is MICHAEL J. KANE, RESOURCES FOR PROMOTING GLOBAL BUSINESS PRINCIPLES AND BEST PRACTICES: A DIRECTORY OF PEOPLE, ORGANIZATIONS, AND WEB SITES (2002). 20. See http://www.greenseal.org/ (last visited Mar. 1, 2002). 21. See http://www.awma.org (last visited Oct. 1, 2001). 22. See http://www.auditing-roundtable.org/ (last visited Oct. 1, 2001). 23. Business Action for Sustainable Development is a joint initiative launched by the International Chamber of Commerce and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development to present company perspectives at the WSSD in Johannesburg. See http://www.basd-action.net/index.shtml (last visited Jan. 18, 2002). 24. See http://www.bsr.org/ (last visited Aug. 14, 2001). 25. See http://www.brtable.org/issue.cfm/4/yes/0 (last visited Aug. 14, 2001). 26. See http://gemi.org/ (last visited Aug. 13, 2001). The Global Environmental Management Institute (GEMI) is presently working on a new tool to promote corporate sustainability, scheduled for release in June 2002. Correspondence with George Nagle, Corporate Director, Environmental, Health & Safety, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (Feb. 22, 2002). The planning tool will assist managers who want to establish baseline performance, assess opportunities, set goals, and evaluate progress toward sustainability. See Market Opportunities Lure U.S. Companies to Sustainable Development, BUS. & THE ENV'T (Cutter), Apr. 2001, at 7. The group's Environmental Self-Assessment Program (1st ed. 1994) is based on the International Chamber of Commerce Business Charter for Sustainable Development. See C. Fitzgerald, GEMI's Environmental Self-Assessment Programme, 2 TOTAL QUALITY ENVTL. MGMT. 209 (1992/1993). On other activities of GEMI, see generally Richard J. Guimond, Sustainable Growth: Business Creating "New" Global Wealth for the 21st Century, 24 Int'l Env't. Rep. (BNA) 669 (Aug. 8, 2001); Susan Moore, GEMI: Business Helping Business in the Twenty-First Century, ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT., Summer 2000, at 63; T. Kelly, Global Environmental Management Initiative, QUALITY PROGRESS, Apr. 1991, at 26 (describing establishment of GEMI). On the GEMI Sustainable Development Work Group, see Market Opportunities Lure, supra. 27. See http://www.globalff.org/ (last visited Feb. 1, 2002). Future 500 is a global network of companies, including Coca-Cola, Ford Motor Company, Hewlett-Packard, Nike, Collins & Aikman, Coors, who are seeking to learn how to maximize their triple bottom lines, i.e., their economic, social, and environmental performance, simultaneously. 28. See http://www.globalmining.com/index.asp (last visited Jan. 18, 2002); R. J. McNeilly, Executive Director and President, BHP Minerals, The Global Mining Initiative: Changing Expectations—Meeting Human Needs and Aspirations, Remarks at 2000 Minerals Industry Seminar, Minerals Council of Australia (June 7, 2000), available at http://www.wbcsd.ch/newscenter/speeches/mining/MNGlobal.pdf (last visited Jan. 18, 2002). For details on the 2002 Global Mining Initiative Conference, see http://www.gmiconference.com (last visited Jan. 18, 2002). 29. See http://www.naem.org/ (last visited Jan. 22, 2002). 30. See http://www.naep.org/ (last visited Jan. 22, 2002). 31. See http://www.pwblf.org/csr/csrwebassist.nsf/content/fl.html (last visited Feb. 8, 2002). 32. In 1999, the American Chemistry Council extended the guidine principles of Responsible Care (R) to encompass environmental, social, and economic considerations. See Joseph Fiksel & Diane Guyse Fiksel, From Here to Sustainability: A Global Perspective, CHEMISTRY BUS., Apr. 2001, at 11, 12. For further discussion, see generally BLAIR W. FELTMATE & CLAUDETTE COFTA, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT. A VALUE DRIVER FOR BUSINESS 5 (American Chemistry Council 2001); Blair W. Feltmate, Sustainable Development: A Value Driver for Business, CHEMISTRY BUS., Apr. 2001, at 15; Barry D. Solomon & James R. Mihelcic, Environmental Management Codes and Continuous Environmental Improvements: Insights From the Chemical Industry, 10 BUS. STRATEGY & THE ENV'T 215 (2001); Peggi Peacock, Window of Opportunity, TOMORROW MAG., Dec. 2001, at 74; Ernest D. Weiler et al., Responsible Care (R) Programs for Hazardous Chemicals, ENVTL. QUALITY MGMT., Spring 2001, at 41; Andrew King & Michael Lenox, Industry Self-Regulation Without Sanctions: The Chemical Industry's Responsible Care (R) Program, 43 ACAD. MGMT. J. 698 (2000). For insight into the transformation of chemical firms' views on environmental issues over time, see Andrew Hoffman, Institutional Evolution and Change: Environmentalism and the U.S. Chemical Industry, 42 ACAD. MGMT. J. 351 (1999); ANDREW J. HOFFMAN, FROM HERESY TO DOGMA: AN INSTITUTIONAL HISTORY OF CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTALISM (1997). 33. See http://www.americanplasticscouncil.org/ (last visited Feb. 8, 2002). The council's environmental programs are described at http://www.americanplasticscouncil.org/apcorg/environment/environment.html (last visited Feb. 8, 2002). 34. On the American Forest and Paper Association's Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI), see http://www.afandpa.org/forestry/sfi_frame.html (last visited Jan. 18, 2002); SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY INITIATIVE PROGRAM (2002), available at (last visited Jan. 18, 2002). See also SFI PROGRAM SIXTH ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT, available at http://www.afandpa.org/forestry/sfi_frame.html (last visited Jan. 18, 2002). 35. See http://www.semichips.org/abt_issues_environment.cfm (last visited Feb. 8, 2002) (describing the Association's environmental initiatives). 36. See http://www.world-tourism.org/frameset/frame_sustainable.html (last visited Feb. 8, 2002) (describing the organization's sustainable tourism programs). See also WORLD TOURISM ORGANIZATION, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF ECOTOURISM: A COMPILATION OF GOOD PRACTICES (2d ed., 2002); WORLD TOURISM ORGANIZATION, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF TOURISM: AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY (1999); WORLD TOURISM ORGANIZATION ET AL., AGENDA 21 FOR THE TRAVEL AND TOURISM INDUSTRY (1996). 37. See http://www.wttc.org/ (last visited Feb. 8, 2002). The council's policy framework for sustainable tourism development is encompassed within Seven Strategic Priorities. See http://www.wttc.org/stratdev/ (last visited Feb. 8, 2002). The seventh area priority is promoting responsibility in natural, social and cultural environments. The council: is committed to improving the environmental performance of the Travel & Tourism industry: first, through "Agenda 21 for Travel & Tourism," a policy framework developed in partnership with the World Tourism Organization and the Earth Council as a result of the Rio Earth Summit; second, with the Green Globe initiative, a global corporate and destination management system to promote sustainable tourism; and third, with ECoNETT, an internet-based tool which provides an extensive information resource on all tourism and environmental issues. The [council] seeks to implement these Strategic Priorities by encouraging closer collaboration between all interests from both the public and private sector. Id. See also http://www.wttc.org/stratdev/sustainable.asp (last visited Feb. 8, 2002) (describing the council's sustainable tourism initiatives). 38. See http://www.svn.org/ (last visited Feb. 8, 2002). 39. The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) comprises approximately 150 international companies whose leaders are committed to the pursuit of sustainable development. See discussion supra notes 4 and 61. Some of the WBCSD member companies headquartered in the United States include 3M, Alcoa, AT&T, Caterpillar, ChevronTexaco, Coca Cola, Dow Chemical, Dow Corning, DuPont, Eastman Kodak, Ford, General Motors, International Paper, Johnson & Johnson, Procter & Gamble, and S.C. Johnson. See http://www.wbcsd.ch/ (last visited Jan. 16, 2001). On the activities and projects of the WBCSD, see generally WBCSD, ANNUAL REVIEW 2001 (2001), available at http://www.wbcsd.ch/newscenter/reports/annualreview/ar2001.pdf (last visited Mar. 5, 2002); WBCSD, TEN YEARS OF ACHIEVEMENT: ANNUAL REVIEW 2000 (2000); Lloyd Timberlake, A Piece of Cake, TOMORROW, June 2001, at 10 (examining the history of the WBCSD and its predecessor, the BCSD); Stephan Schmidheiny, The Business Logic of Sustainable Development, 27 COLUM. J. WORLD BUS. 18 (1992); STEPHAN SCHMIDHEINY ET AL., CHANGING COURSE: A GLOBAL BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE ON DEVELOPMENT AND THE ENVIRONMENT (1992). 40. See http://www.envirobank.org (last visited Feb. 5, 2002). 41. See http://www.figsnet.org.html (last visited Feb. 5, 2002). 42. For information on the activities of the Inter-American Development Bank's Sustainable Development Department, see http://www.iadb.org/sds/index.htm (last visited Feb. 5, 2002). 43. See http://www.nadbank.org/ (last visited Feb. 5, 2002). 44. See http://unepfi.net/fii/index.htm (last visited Feb. 5, 2002). 45. See http://unepfi.net/iii/index.htm (last visited Feb. 5, 2002). 46. See, e.g., The World Bank Institute (WBI), at http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). The WBI's corporate responsibility initiative is described at http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/todayarticles/whats_new02Jan11.htm (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 47. See http://www.sustainability-index.com/ (last visited Feb. 8, 2002). 48. See http://www.globalreporting.org/ (last visited Feb. 8, 2002). 49. See http://www.innovestgroup.com/ecovalue_ie.html (last visited Feb. 8, 2002). 50. See http://www.irrc.org/ (last visited Feb. 8, 2002). 51. See http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/estema1 (last visited Feb. 8, 2002). 52. See generally Rob Lake, Civil Society, Business, and Sustainable Development: Regulating (Almost) Without the Regulation, in EARTH SUMMIT 2002; A NEW DEAL 169 (Felix Dodds ed., 2001); NANCY T. KONG ET AL., MOVING BUSINESS/INDUSTRY TOWARD SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION: THE ROLE OF NGOS (International Institute for Management Development 2001) (Working Paper 2001-08); ELIZABETH R. DESOMBRTE, DOMESTIC SOURCES OF INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY: INDUSTRY, ENVIRONMENTALISTS, AND U.S. POWER (2000); JOSEPH M. PETULLA, AMERICAN ENVIRONMENTALISM: VALUES, TACTICS, PRIORITIES (2000). 53. See http://www.anped.org/index.php?a=1&b=10 (last visited Jan. 18, 2002). 54. See http://www.aspeninst.org/ (last visited Mar. 5, 2002). 55. See http://www.enviro-innovate.org/ (last visited Mar. 5, 2002). 56. See http://www.ceres.org/ (last visited Feb. 8, 2002). 57. See http://www.csdngo.org/ (last visited Mar. 5, 2002). 58. See http://www.ecouncil.ac.cr/ (last visited Jan. 18, 2002). 59. Environmental Defense has combined with The Pew Charitable Trusts in this project to promote partnerships between business and the environmental community. See http://www.environmentaldefense.org/alliance/ (last visited Jan. 18, 2002). 60. See Forest Stewardship Council, Principles and Criteria, at http://www.fscoax.org/principal.htm (last visited Sept. 13, 2001). 61. See http://www.field.org.uk/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 62. See Friends of the Earth, Corporate Accountability, Wall Street, and the Environment, at http://www.foe.org/international/corp_acc/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 63. See http://www.globe2002.com/ (last visited Sept. 12, 2001). 64. See http://www.green-alliance.org.uk/GreenGlobeTaskForce.htm (last visited Sept. 12, 2001). 65. See http://www.informinc.org/ (last visited Sept. 12, 2001). 66. See http://www.ictsd.org/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 67. See http://www.iied.org/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 68. See http://www.iisd.ca/wssd/portal.html (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). The work of the IISD Consultative Group on Sustainable Development Indicators may be found at http://iisd1.iisd.ca/cgsdi/default.htm (last visited Mar. 20, 2002). 69. See http://www.lead.org/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 70. See http://isforum.org/tobi/ (last visited Jan. 22, 2002). 71. RING is a group of 14 research and policy organizations seeking to promote sustainable development through collaborative research, dissemination, and policy advocacy. See http://www.ring-alliance.org (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 72. See http://www.rmi.org/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002) (describing the Rocky Mountain Institute's Natural Capitalism business model). 73. See http://www.riia.org/ (last visited Jan. 22, 2002). 74. See http://www.schumacher.org.uk/homepage.htm (last visited Jan. 22, 2002). 75. See http://www.channe11.com/users/tellus/ (last visited Feb. 26, 2002). Information on the Tellus Institute's Business and Sustainability Group is available at http://www.tellus.org/b&s/index.html (last visited Feb, 26, 2002). 76. See http://www.transparency.org/ (last visited Feb. 26, 2002). 77. See http://www.wec.org/ (last visited Feb. 26, 2002). 78. See WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE, WRI & Business (outlining programs), available at http://www.wri.org/pdf/corporate_brochure.pdf (last visited Jan. 17, 2002). On WRI's Sustainable Resources Program, see http://www.wri.org/sep/index.html (last visited Jan. 17, 2002). WRI's annual sustainable enterprise summits focus on various practical challenges in business sustainability, and methods leading companies are employing to surmount them. The agenda and presentations from the Fifth Annual Sustainable Enterprise Summit, The Next Top Line: Sustainability as a Business Driver (Dec. 5-6, 2001), are available at http://www.wri.org/wrisummit/2001agenda.html (last visited Jan. 17, 2002). The organization also charts the progress of sustainability education at the graduate business school level through its periodic reports. See WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE & ASPEN INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL INNOVATION THROUGH BUSINESS, BEYOND GREY PINSTRIPES (2001), available at http://www.beyondgreypinstripes.org/pdf/beyondgreypinstripes.pdf (last visited Jan. 17, 2002). WRI's Management Institute for Environment and Business' Business-Environment Learning Leadership (BELL) initiative encompasses a broad range of activities to improve the quality of business school education on environmental issues, including curriculum resources, e.g., teaching cases, guides, syllabi, technical assistance, conferences and workshops, and materials exchange. See http://www.wri.org/meb/bell2.html (last visited Jan. 17, 2002). The agenda from the 2001 BELL Conference, Digital Technologies and the Environment: New Challenges and Pathways to Sustainability, Philadelphia, Pa. (July 19-21, 2001), is available at http://www.wri.org/meb/bell2001.html (last visited Jan. 17, 2002). Finally, WRI's Pathways website provides access to a library of presentations on selected topics of sustainable business strategy and corporate change. See http://pathways.wri.org/ (last visited Mar. 18, 2002). 79. See, e.g., the WWF Sustainable Commerce program, described at http://www.worldwildlife.org/commerce/ (last visited Feb. 26, 2002). 80. See http://www.csrwire.com/page.cgi/events.html (last visited Jan. 17, 2002). 81. Forbes and Forbes.com have partnered with the U.S. Council for International Business and World Communication Works to develop a special advertising supplement and website to promote corporate responsibility and sustainable development. The Forbes supplement (reminiscent of The Next Bottom Line: Making Sustainable Development Tangible, an advertising supplement released by Business Week in conjunction with its May 3, 1999, issue), scheduled to be published in the September 2, 2002, issue, will focus on the international business aspects of corporate responsibility and sustainable development. The supplement will also serve as a key element in a new website dedicated to corporate responsibility and sustainable development: the Corporate Responsibility and Sustainable Development Network (CRSDN.com). 82. See http://www.greenbizletter.com/ (last visited Jan. 17, 2002). 83. See http://www.greenatworkmag.com/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 84. See http://www.jgpress.com/inbusine.htm (last visited Feb. 26, 2002). 85. See http://www.sbi-a.com/ (last visited Mar. 29, 2002). 86. See http://www.tomorrow-web.com/ (last visited Feb. 26, 2002). Tomorrow Magazine will be publishing a special issue for the WSSD to be distributed to subscribers and delegates at the Summit. 87. See http://www.ciel.org/Tae/World_Summit_2002.html (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 88. See http://www.rmmlf.org/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 89. See http://www.cnt.org/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 90. See http://www.i4sd.org/index2.html (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 91. See http://www.iclei.org/iclei.htm (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 92. See http://www.iula.org/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 93. See http://www.lgc.org/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 94. See Joint Center for Sustainable Communities, at http://www.naco.org/programs/comm_dev/center/index.cfm (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 95. See http://pti.nw.dc.us/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 96. See http://www.partnerships.stockholm.se/index.html (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 97. See http://www.sustainable.org/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 98. See http://www.uli.org/DK/index.cfm?CFID=223086&CFTOKEN=3443263 (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). See also THE PRACTICE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (Douglas R. Porter ed., Urban Land Institute 2000). 99. See http://www.fmcu-uto.org/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 100. See http://www.rit.edu/-slrbbu/ONE.html (last visited Aug. 23, 2001) (includes news and information, including copies of the ONE Newsletter). 101. See http://www.bridgestos.org/index.htm (last visited Mar. 5, 2002). 102. See http://www.ce.cmu.edu/GreenDesign/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 103. See http://www.clarku.edu/departments/marsh/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 104. See http://www.ciesin.org/ (last visited Aug. 23, 2001). 105. See http://ncseonline.org/dep/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2002). 106. See http://www.law.gwu.edu/csrg/ (last visited Aug. 23, 2001). 107. See http://www.globe.gov/ (last visited Feb. 12, 2002). 108. See http://www.greeningofindustry.org/ (last visited Feb. 12, 2002). 109. See http://www02.imd.ch/research/projects/index.cfm?projectID=164 (last visited Feb. 12, 2002). 110. Id. 111. On the Alliance for Global Sustainability, a collaborative effort among MIT, the University of Tokyo, and the Swiss Federal Institutes of Technology, see http://globalsustainability.org/ (last visited Feb. 12, 2002). 112. See http://www.stern.nyu.edu/bes/ (last visited Feb. 12, 2002). 113. See http://www.secondnature.org/ (last visited Jan. 17, 2002). 114. See http://www.azintl.edu/ (last visited Feb. 12, 2002). 115. See http://css.snre.umich.edu/ (last visited Feb. 12, 2002). 116. See http://www.iiiee.lu.se/ (last visited Feb. 12, 2002). 117. See http://www.vanderbilt.edu/vcems/about.html (last visited Mar. 29, 2002). 118. In addition to the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy's work on the Environmental Sustainability Index and the Environmental Performance Index, discussed at supra notes 218-31, the school's Global Environmental Governance Project, at http://www.yale.edu/gegdialogue/ (last visited Feb. 12, 2002), provides a meaningful opportunity for experts from business, policymaking, academic, and other circles to explore issues of international environmental governance. 119. See http://dr.ssb.yorku.ca/sea.nsf/ (last visited Mar. 29, 2002). In addition, see the York Centre for Applied Sustainability, at http://dr.ssb.yorku.ca/sea.nsf/IFS?OpenFrameSet (last visited Mar. 29, 2002). 32 ELR 10873 | Environmental Law Reporter | copyright © 2002 | All rights reserved |