Suffering

Wikipedia
: ^[2] Suffering is the basic element that makes up the negative valence of affective phenomena.

Merriam Webster

:  ^[1] the state or experience of one that suffers

A brief look at the days' news headlines, and it is not difficult to see; the impact of war, the struggle to pull people out of poverty, deteriorating environment, from glaciers to endangered species, disease, famine etc. And though the two definitions above both suggest that suffering is a human experience, not until Wikipedias' second explanation (listed above) do they infer suffering in the boarder sense of things not human as well.  This is the context in which this article is written.

This morning I woke up at approximately 4:00 a.m. EST, disturbed by the matter of suffering; different images and thoughts entering my mind about suffering from a historical perspective to modern day.  For over an hour I could not shake the visions and thoughts from my mind.  I don't generally have a propensity towards these thoughts, but they arise periodically; it is not an emotional struggle in the sense that it disturbs my thought process, but more along the lines of an overwhelming desire for a different sense of the human experience as it relates to all things that result in, interact with or are some part based on human actions as a causal factor of suffering.

After reflecting on a statement captured from a food critic on a local Boston radio show, a rather odd source to be sure; it helped create some context for this approach for suffering.  The essence of the food critic's argument was that farm-to-table  is a way of life and not a propaganda technique to get people or consumers in the restaurant.  We cannot use propaganda to end suffering. Authentically doing something about suffering actually holds  value.  Perhaps that is not the most productive way to put it, because there are multiple agents of change who "want to do something about it", but where does the real change occur?  What type of campaign, commitment, determination, endurance and perseverance would it take to ensure suffering comes to an end?  Can we achieve that?  Authenticity however, may suggest something all together different, a more active role in ending suffering.

By saying or assuming ending suffering is not possible, not related to personal injuries of course, then why would we attempt to change the course of events at all?  Does that result in some sort of fatalistic view that there is no hope.  Yet and still, even the sound of the word "hope", brings with it an air of never-going-to-happeness.  It is that very sense of jargon, and hyperbole that often results in the autonomic response of head-nodding.  Out of the jargon jar, and into a more productive script may be one possibility; that with a lot of will power, political effort and fundamental shift in the way humanity thinks about suffering and the ability to end it, that we perhaps will emerge on the other side.

This article will begin a short journey into my exploration of suffering, and what we will do, are doing and can do to end it.  My initial thoughts are that it requires a never ending effort, the kind of effort business people put into running their company, but with a different objective.

All of this begins with the belief that suffering exceeds all other priorities and that it is not limited to people, but animals, the environment or anything else that is subject to virulent exploitation by the human species.  Ending suffering is a way of life.

I look forward to discussions and insights.  I can also be reached on twitter @scotlandwillis

Water Whys

Why, is water so important in our life?  

Imagine if you decided to not consume or use anything that was related to water, for just one day:

*The most obvious exclusion would be drinking water- none of that.  On average an adult consumes about two liters of water per day;

*you would also have to stop eating that day; water is required to grow anything that grows from the earth, i.e. agricultural products;

*you'll have to turn off those lights also; coal fired powered plants use about 2.2 billion gallons of water each year (UCS); 

*you would have to decide not to drive that day, because : the amount of water used to manufacture a new car, including new tires? 39,090 gallons per car;

*chicken wings? water is used during the growing/production of a chicken? 400 gallons;

*Water required for irrigation (2005 estimates)  128 billion gallons of water per day.

Water under the bridge

Clearly, water is a key resource to everything we do.  It is important that we are more conscious about making wise consumer choices to avoid over use, of this precious natural resource.  Since only three percent of our earth's water resources is considered drinkable water understanding its scarcity is something we should be educated about, not threatened by.  This simply means as you are making your purchases, go the extra mile and let manufactures know by sending them an e-mail, calling customer service or contacting their head quarters, that you would like to know what steps they are taking to conserve water in their manufacturing and distribution process.

 


Certain arms of the government such as WETT, are looking at the value of water to the environment not just the value of water to for human consumption.  On their web site they state that their research will "...enable an environmentally and economically more appropriate evaluation by including quantified environmental benefits..."  This is an approach of internalizing the externality (or realizing the cost in other than dolar terms).

Putting your best foot forward

With so much effort into understanding water that is taking place behind the scenes, it is understandable why we need to know much more about the impact of our own consumption habits and usage regarding water.  There is not doubt that human related activity has an impact on water quality and availability; so we can make a conscious choice to change the impact we have by reducing and reusing water whenever possible.

Water availability is a real concern and there are a lot of good sites you can visit to understand more about it including: the U.S. Geological Survey; American Water Use; WETT (Water Energy Technology Team) and the radio active risks associated with Japan and our fish consumption.  You might also want to visit the World Health Organization's site to look at impacts around the world.

Ending on a memorable note; in the United States, we consume about 346,000 million (that's "346 hundred-thousand-million" gallons of water each day.

Let water why(s) help you become water wise.  It is a global issue, but the change begins with you.  

Happy drinking!  

Network Consumption

Utility optimization

By Scotland Willis

Like the nature of recycling and the concept of cradle to cradle, collaborative consumption looks at the advent of social sharing networks commonly known as peer-to peer (P2P) networks; people buying, selling, borrowing, and renting from one another thereby avoiding a retailer- optimizing the usefulness of products and services among individuals.  From Flicker to Facebook, from AirBnB to hundreds of peer-to-peer products and services; this newly defined (compliments of Ray Algar) phenomenon is growing in numerous directions. Collaborative consumption represents a new element in the economy producing a new consumer base that would exist on a much smaller scale without internet technology- the true fabric of P2P networking.  Communication via the internet allows billions of people across vastly different geographies (individuals and groups), the opportunity to connect around the utility of mutually beneficial goods and services.  Put simply you have something with excess surplus and I can utilize that excess surplus which will provide additional (or secondary) benefit to the original owner and primary usefulness to me.

This P2P activity is producing new entrepreneurs and generating revenue in the billions of dollars representing an emerging economic powerhouse while serving other benefits as well.  We are likely looking at the diminishing value of large spaces occupied by retailers who attempt to persuade people to consume new and "improved" products.  Algar sums it up best when he makes the inquiry “What happens when pricing insight becomes accessible and consumers begin to share knowledge?" Essentially people are better informed about products and services, while gaining access to previously hard to complex or out of reach resources.

Algar opened the portal for Rachel Botsman and co-author Roo Rogers to expound on the concept in their book What's Mine is Yours.  Botsman and Rogers do an excellent job exploring the connectivity and concepts therein, along with the economics and behavioral implications.

Here I simply add important-to-consider impact and implications of peer-to-peer (P2P).  It is important to further expand on this emerging phenomenon by building on valuable concepts that enhance the explanation of the P2P consumerism. My guess is that collaborative consumption will continue to evolve; it is not likely to diminish as the economy rebounds-- I see it as an emerging trend that sets new precedence.  Consumers and owners (not producers so not to confuse the concept with manufacturing) are identifying new approaches to usefulness for goods.  Consider this one of many developments that lie ahead for collaborative consumption.

Collaborative consumption embodies only part of what P2P is becoming.  There are a couple of elements that deserve to be addressed in the concept I call product utility optimization.  I use this term because what people's actions are demonstrating is that they are attempting to find creative ways to further utilize products or services.  From distributing workloads to distributing expenses; in some instances people are buying high ticket items, or perhaps making more efficient use of items they possess in communal ways.  One might think of P2P as the great equalizer-- peer utilization.

Wikipedia provides hundreds of millions of people around the world with access to encyclopedic information at no charge, arguably the most efficient benefit possible, consumers in turn of this information, volunteer donations (at least that is the hope).   In my opinion, the idea of collaborative consumption is more about optimization through networking services.  Wikipedia achieves this somewhat altruistically, which leads to the social concept.

As found  in Botsman and Rogers' research, there are thousands of opportunities entrepreneurs capitalizing on those opportunities that are creating this nurturing "groundswell" as they put it.  Some of the more popular P2P include Freecycle, Landshare (in Europe), Netflix, Kazza- too many to mention.  And while at one point, P2P was referred to predominantly in the technology circles such that Netscape created, it has grown into a much broader network where the landscape is accelerating the social fabric of P2P.  Facebook and Twitter are an example of P2P news and information sharing, where messages can be transmitted around the world at near light speed.  All of the aspects of P2P play a tremendously valuable role in society.

What is the social benefit?  One perspective is that it allows people to be equally privileged- an online egalitarian society ; if you can afford it you can have it; if you have access to information or resources you can share it.  No red tape and the all important “S” word simplicity!; perhaps in this case sharing.  The appeal is a combination of both along with other factors.

With product utility optimization the initial consumer may be making their purchase because their consumer surplus consist of functionality towards their need and not necessarily price; the secondary consumer is more likely seeking as their primary benefit a combination of  cost savings + social benefit.  In their mind they are achieving or exceeding the value the initial purchaser received if the product enables them to achieve full utility of that resource for their needs.

In a second example we can consider an individual who owns a condo.  Suppose they have an empty space and choose to make the space available on Airbnb (a P2P room and home sharing service that generates revenue for the owner).  The peer utility allows the peer owner to be matched with the peer user optimizing the empty space.  One generates revenue where there would have been none, the peer user benefits by utilizing a space at what is usually a much lower cost with much higher benefits than a comparative price they might have paid if choosing a traditional hotel.

Where does this lead us and what are other benefits?  Referring back to the cradle to cradle concept; reduce, recycle, reuse, repair (4R's) and Botsman says redistribute. At this point the product is changing ownership.  I believe redistribute is implicit in the reuse concept of the 3R's with the exception of when ownership is changing hands.  Nonetheless, we use fewer resources when we reuse products and thereby reduce the taxation on the natural resources and the environment that results from traditional approaches in consumerism i.e, reducing hyper consumption.

From a social perspective we have large groups of people from all around the world that can participate in the free market concept without a middle man and as mentioned earlier. In large groups many people can gain leverage to negotiate the price of products ranging from oil to televisions.  People also assemble around the notion of being able to utilize what they need most without assuming full responsibility for the expense i.e. Zip Car, kind of like a distributive welfare and accountability system.  The key word is system.   We are looking at an intricate network of multiple systems organized around the multiple needs of people, exponentiating the utility of a good or service.

These emerging industries are intricate systems of like minded people seeking take advantage of not just psychological surpluses in economic terms, but take advantage of the physical surplus that both the owner of an existing good and secondary consumer of that good acknowledge.  This product serves two utilities because it may no longer be of any use to the one, but an amazon.com can optimize its utility without that product going to waste, to the other peer, it results in a secondary value system.

Google does this by enabling share ware and non-proprietary or open source software- efficiency yields a social efficiency that results in less restrictive environments.  Less restrictive environments mean more people have access.  People who embrace this system seem to pursue and desire the liberal (from a non-political perspective) informal attributes.  With greater access to information they become resident experts which also requires an element of self confidence, something you don necessarily gain with retailers.

Trust is another concept that Botsman refers to as the cornerstone of collaborative consumption, and I agree.  While I am not suggesting definitively, that trusting people flock to this environment, I am suggesting that the trust profile (in part) make up a segment of the value added in a P2P environment. Though I would argue that when someone developes a rating system that tracks trustability and applies it to the general online population, the system will lose much of the character it currently enjoys.

Mike Reynolds, founder of Earthship Biotecture demonstrates many of these social value systems mentioned in this article in his architectual Earthship project, where individuals commit to contribute to building a community with little financial output in exchange for 1) preserving natrual resources and helping to build homes.   As in Earthship and other examples, people exchange and share resources with little more than a verbal agreement(ride sharing or swap tree), in all these examples trust is a paramount attribute.  The risk is relatively small compared to the percieved value of being a merchant, executing a trade or share, and successfully feeling like a part of a community without boarder relative to judging your personal character.

Unrestricted resources enable people to connect at low to no cost products which fosters a greater social network, it is an enabler which also fosters resulting in a more egalitarian marketplace.  Craigslist provides individuals with an endless resource to sell products or services, assemble around a common interest (e.g. ride sharing, match making etc).  There are very few restrictions (which have also resulted in legislative pressures to modify certain policies), but in general Craigslist is tremendously successful as their model operate world wide at zero or very modest cost to P2P users.  It is not unusual to find people gloating about how they found a car, lamp, plant, book or clothing on Craigs list free or inexpensively.  These borderless communal opportunities connect people in expansive ways, which people embrace the service and one another . Many price prohibitive barriers have been removed thereby creating greater access to a wider community of people.  People develop individual equity solely based on their results- a tremendous social value.

Peer to peer utility optimization, collaborative consumerism and whatever other language P2P networks might assume, it is anything but temporary.  P2P is a new and component to our society that is likely to improve society, the market place, the environment, and multitude of areas the have and have yet to be explored.  The trend of utility optimization is not new, some might recall a time when grand parents or earlier generations saved everything for another purpose; no this is simply a more innovative approach to allowing the world to look at yet another use for that galss jar.