Rosie Inman-Cook, manager of The Natural Death Centre (NDC), reflects: “When I first started out with this and people asked what I did in a social situation, I really struggled with it, because I wanted to just say that I buried people in shallow graves in the woods.”

At that time very few people were aware of green or natural burial, or that it was feasible and legal. But that was nearly twenty years ago, when there were just 50 natural burial sites.

The latest issue of Resurgence & Ecologist magazine is out now!

Today, says Inman-Cook, there are well over 300.

Natural burial

There are effectively two types of natural burial ground in the UK, according to the NDC, which runs the Association of Natural Burial Grounds to ensure that sites are well run.

There are ‘deep green’ sites, where embalming is not allowed and bodies are placed in caskets made of biodegradable material such as wicker, or wrapped in a simple shroud.

At the other end of the spectrum there are sites where a tree is planted but no other environmentally friendly rules apply. Settings can range from mown wild-flower meadows to woodland, field sites where new woodland is being established, or more manicured parkland.

The sites are run by landowners such as farmers, charitable trusts and non-profit organisations, and many local authorities are now setting aside parts of municipal cemeteries for this type of burial.

However, Inman-Cook warns that some large companies have spotted the trend and set up burial grounds that are much more commercialised, so people should go and visit before booking.

Traditional burials

Natural burials have several benefits for the environment over cremation or traditional burial in a cemetery, according to proponents of nat­ural burial.

Cremation uses fossil fuels to reduce a body to ash, and this is estimated to release more than 270,000 tonnes of CO2 annually in the US alone. It also releases particulates such as nitrogen oxide, and mercury from dental fillings, though some countries require crematoria to have filters to reduce these emissions. Formaldehyde used in embalming can also cause pollution.

Traditional burial also has a large footprint. The Green Burial Council, which certifies sites in the US, estimates that each year North Americans use 6 million metres of wood, 20 million litres of embalming fluids, 1.5 million tonnes of reinforced concrete, 15,000 tonnes of copper and bronze, and 58,500 tonnes of steel in traditional burials.

The natural burial movement has now spread around the world. In Europe, many countries have laws that currently prevent natural burial, but the Netherlands does not, and has seen a growth in the practice.

Joyce Sengers is the founder of De Utrecht Natural Burial Ground, one of around 15 such sites in the Netherlands. She cites various reasons for a trend towards natural burial, including the fall in churchgoing, meaning that there are many people looking for alternative ways to bury the dead. At the same time, the number of natural burial grounds is increasing as landowners look for other sources of income, she says.

Grave maintenance 

The De Utrecht site is located on a former conifer plantation, and since it was set up around five years ago it has been transformed into a Nature reserve featuring moorland, wetlands, a shady wood, a light wood and a birch forest. Ceremonies can be held by a lake or on the edge of the birch forest.

Sengers said: “People like it, especially because it’s so simple and they don’t have to do grave maintenance. It’s also a nice place to visit – you don’t go to visit a two-square-metre plot where the body is: you go to the whole woodland, where you can go for a walk.”

Natural burial has also become popular in the US. Sites certified by the Green Burial Council have grown from one in 2006 to more than 300 today.

However, a not-for-profit organisation in Washington State is hoping to take the concept a step further with a completely new method of disposing of human remains. The concept was developed by architecture graduate Katrina Spade when she started thinking about what would happen to her body after she died, and was disappointed with the traditional options of burial and cremation, in terms of both the environmental impact and the lack of involvement of friends and family.

Spade was inspired by a method that has long been used to speed up the natural decomposition of deceased farm animals. Her organisation has developed a process known as recomposition, using the same principle to dispose of human remains. It is modelled on green burial, but is designed for cities where land is scarce.

Natural recomposition 

In this process, the body would be placed in a vessel containing woodchips, alfalfa and straw, to which oxygen would be added to create the perfect environment for naturally occurring microbes and beneficial bacteria, Spade explains.

After about 30 days, the body, including bones and teeth, would have broken down to create a nutrient-rich soil. The family could then use the soil to grow plants or trees, or it could be donated to conservation projects in nearby Puget Sound.

The ritual around death, which is “an incredible moment that we all share”, has been diluted by the traditional funeral industry, Spade believes. “Cremation is often very industrialised – it’s kind of a transactional practice. When you strip ritual from this really important event, it bolsters our denial of death. We push it to arm’s length.”

At a facility run by Spade’s organisation Recompose, family and friends of the deceased could not only view the body, but also wash, shroud and prepare it for burial.

A bill to legalise recomposition is due to be considered by Washington State legislators this year.

Innovative ideas

Spade is optimistic that it will pass, since residents in the state tend to be environmentally conscious and open to innovative ideas. In addition, there is awareness among politicians that a growing population needs more options, as burial space is limited.

Recompose is keen to help other areas follow suit, both in the US and worldwide, once the concept is up and running in Washington. The organisation has had enquiries from countries including Brazil, Mexico and Australia.

“Death is part of a beautiful natural cycle,” says Spade. “In a forest, organic material grows and then decomposes, and becomes the basis for all new life. That cycle is quite perfect – how practical and how beautiful to be able to create soil out of the dead.”

This Author 

Catherine Early is chief reporter for the Ecologist. This article was first published in Resurgence & Ecologist magazine. 

Image: Capsula Mundi, Francesco D’Angelo. 

Michael Gove certainly talks a good game. In the Environment Secretary’s speech to the 2019 Oxford Farming Conference he espoused views that would sit favourably in any green forum: “Beef or soybeans produced to scale on land in other countries that have been cleared of vast hectares of forests may appear cheap but in fact such food is costing the earth.”

The government has announced a seven-year transition period for agriculture, beyond the 21-month transition period set out in the EU Withdrawal Agreement, to enable farmers to plan ahead. And with an ordered departure you would surely expect to see a stop to the inefficient area-based payments which reward the rich and hold back small-scale farming initiatives.

So with the best of a bad lot as Environment Secretary, and two thirds of EU regulatory environmental protections already enshrined in UK law, is farming really in danger from Brexit – deal or no deal?

Regulatory ‘lite’

If you look closer at the much vaunted Green Brexit, Gove’s realpolitik dictates non-legally binding measures which override policy promises and easy soundbites.

The draft Environment Bill, announced by Theresa May last July and to be published in full this September, is regulatory ‘lite’: the proposed Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) will be hamstrung by having the government deciding its budget and appointing its officials.

What could have been a truly independent body with members elected or chosen without government interference and a budget set to its own strictures is now far from that.

On top of that lack of independence comes a lack of proper authority, so that post-Brexit, the policing of environmental protections – currently undertaken by the European Commission – will be passed to a body with an inability to even levy fines.

Take air pollution – in 2017 the UK faced daily five-figure fines from the European Commission for flouting EU limits for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) levels. Who would hold the government fully to account to the same extent post-Brexit?

Environmental law

Tom Fyans, Director of Campaigns and Policy at the Campaign to Protect Rural England, told The Ecologist: “We are seriously concerned that the proposed Office of Environmental Protection (OEP) will lack the true independence required to hold the government to account.

“While it has some useful legal powers, there are significant unanswered questions regarding its relationship with the planning system, when decisions are in breach of environmental law, and how it will engage with climate change – the greatest threat to the countryside. “

He added that future environmental priorities like targets for improvements to air and water quality required “much more work”.

Lexiters might see the loss of the EU Commission’s mandate over the UK in this area as no bad thing, pointing for example to the collapse of the Greek environmental regulatory system following EU banking institutions’ ‘attack’ on Greece post-2009. 

Some environmentalists are sceptical of the EU’s claims to be the environment’s best champion, and claim that it caused among other things: attacks on and privatisations of Greek national parks; mass sell-offs of public land; a rush of predatory development, particularly on islands and coasts, leading to ecological as well as social ruination.

New technologies 

Dave Bangs, author of three books on the South Downs and Surrey Weald and a leading naturalist and botanist put it this way: “Most of the wildlife professionals are focused on the enviro-regulatory measures … which are sticking plasters on an abscess. I voted Brexit because the EU is a cabal of corporations and their political infrastructure. 

“It has nothing to do with democracy and nothing to do with internationalism. Look at Schengen, look at the Mediterranean mass drownings. I’ve been an internationalist all my life … for a socialist united states of Europe, not a gang of robber barons.”

In terms of food production he asks what could be worse than the Common Agricultural and Fisheries policies, “denuding our seas and exacerbating ‘abandonment’ and hyper-intensification of farmed land”.

In the wider world there is a tendency to techno-fixes that Gove is fully signed up to. So use of artificial intelligence, sophisticated analysis of big data, drone development, machine learning and robotics and most controversially, gene editing (GM crops) – all are supported by the Environment minister as “a way to escape from the bureaucratic straitjacket of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and develop a more vibrant farming sector with access to technologies”.

Using these techniques will form the next phase in farming – “a revolution”, no less, which the “EU is turning its back on” and will – he argues –  “allow us to dramatically improve productivity on traditionally farmed land not least by reducing the need for labour, minimising the imprint of vehicles on the soil, applying inputs overall more precisely, adjusting cultivation techniques more sensitively and therefore using far fewer natural resources, whether carbon, nitrogen or water, in order to maximise growth”.

If you were to try to sell  this to small-scale organic farmers in the UK or subsistence farmers in China and India they all point to methods passed down from generation to generation looking to work in concert with nature rather than seeking to squeeze the last drop out of her while putting in the bare minimum. 

Agro-industrialisation

On the flip side Gove’s latest pronouncements include coded warnings to climate change deniers of the Trump and Bolsonaro ilk: the earlier stated reference to forest clearance costing the earth and then this concerning US agro-industrialisation: “We must maintain our own high environmental and animal welfare standards, and we must not barter them away in pursuit of a necessarily short-term trade-off”.

The UK would be forced (under WTO rules) to make unsatisfactory deals with countries like Australia and the US if it loses a significant tranche of EU market share due to the import and export tariffs. This would entail less stringent animal welfare regulations. 

Consider the potential imports of chlorinated chicken from the US, a practice currently banned in the UK over concerns that by washing carcasses with chlorine you fail to kill all salmonella and because this process acts as an incentive for poorer hygiene standards in animal rearing. 

Bacteria are more prevalent in US flocks due to extreme intensification methods which have seen 15,500 mega farms or Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) established coast to coast.  

Just one of these huge operations is capable of housing up to 1.7m birds crammed into inhumane cages and aircraft hangar-like sheds. In the UK there are currently just shy of 800 of these. The question being asked by animal welfare groups is, do we really want closer economic ties like these?

Free movement

In terms of UK farming itself, post-Brexit, Gove touts Environmental Land Management (ELM) contracts which are payment by results-based initiatives like planting and managing species rich meadows.

These ELMs ARE being piloted over the next two years in Norfolk, Suffolk and Yorkshire, AND  will provide farmers “with a pipeline of income to supplement the money they make from food production, forestry and other business activities”.

They are the government’s answer to the Common Agricultural Policy’s (CAP) agri-environment schemes which, according to Gove, have been “overly bureaucratic and inflexible and have impeded innovation for farmers who are passionate about the environment and want to see real change”. 

However, the overall success of ELM contracts will be blighted once EU farming subsidies are gone and the EU farm workers’ free movement stymied. Farmland is set to become the worst-hit sector in the entire UK residential and commercial property sector, according to property experts Savills, falling by 3.6 percent per year on year.

So some in the farming industry are asking how many of us will have the luxury of set asides when the economic reality will be hitting home?

Maximising growth 

Gove’s ‘maximising growth’ mantra will will surely be jettison a more accommodating farming approach based on the sound ecological principles of agro forestry; soil health; water quality and pollinator habitat improvement; support of the organic movement; landscape restoration and biodiversity enrichment; and improvements in public access to the countryside. 

In its place UK farming faces less biodiversity and more monoculture spurred on by technical advances which dispense with the husbandry of 60 years ago, reliant upon deep ecological ties with the land as well as an intuitive grasp of the seasons and the integral part played by insects, birds and wildlife.

The driver to all this, financing the farming sector, has led Gove to promise the same spend on farm support after leaving the EU up to the end of this parliament, granting a “greater degree of security over future funding for farming than that enjoyed by any other existing eu nation”.

But even if he delivers on this promise – and let’s not forget how his former boss David Cameron promised the ‘greenest government ever’ – will the continued payments really deliver sufficient environmental, as opposed to agri-business, benefits?

And how long will Gove last anyway in these politically unstable times where days of a here today, gone tomorrow politician will surely be just round the corner. How long before normal service is resumed and he’s replaced by a more compliant, agro-industrialist in the Owen Patterson mould?

No deal

Which leads us back to the question, will the UK be worse off agriculturally and environmentally when it comes to Brexit? All the signs seem to point to yes, whether we have a no deal or an ordered Brexit.

In the event of no-deal we would face a loss of trade and concomitant closer alliances with countries like Australia and the US with their poorly regulated food and farming industries.

And in the event of a ‘deal’, and the ordered roll out of the Office of Environmental Protection, this body would in fact have less authority and independence than the European Commission. 

Staying in through a successful Remain vote in a second referendum may well be the best bet for the environment, if it came to pass.

This Author

Jan Goodey is a freelance writer on environmental matters working mainly for The Ecologist.

Our nation has a long history of scientific innovation that has produced the computers that run our businesses, new discoveries in medicine that can extend our lives, and rockets that take us to distant worlds in search of other life.

In short, science is our best hope to enable informed choices about our future. Big ideas like president Roosevelt’s New Deal also gave our nation hope for reversing the downward economic spiral of the 1930s with government programmes that still benefit us today. However, when it comes to a safe climate, science and policy have operated in a vacuum.

The Green New Deal in Congress provides an opportunity for bringing both science and policy together in shaping a sustainable future for our nation that avoids a pending crisis to the planet’s life support systems if we do not act boldly and promptly.

Earth stewardship

For decades, scientists have been monitoring the planet’s life support systems using satellite images of how we are transforming forests, rivers and oceans over vast areas, and thousands of instruments around the globe to track the climate.

Reading these signals like the warning lights on a car’s dashboard, 1,700 eminent scientists were alarmed enough to issue a warning in 1992: “A great change in our stewardship of the earth and the life on it is required,” it stated, “if vast human misery is to be avoided.”

A second warning was issued in 2017 that the planet’s climate and natural systems were indeed worsening. It was signed by more than 21,000 scientists from 184 countries.

Referring to these same signals, Sir David Attenborough, the 92-year-old naturalist and broadcaster, a man not given to drama or hyperbole, opened the UN’s Katowice Climate Conference in December 2018 by stating: “If we don’t take action, the collapse of our civilizations and the extinction of much of the natural world is on the horizon.”

Fortunately, forward-thinking members of Congress recently introduced a bold resolution that responds to the climate challenge at scale. Aptly named a Green New Deal, it is as ambitious as president Roosevelt’s New Deal in the 1930s. It comprehends the magnitude of the climate threat humanity faces, and we see it as a sign of realism – not radicalism – that the problem is viewed in its totality and with urgency.

Comprehensive response

The Green New Deal recognizes that environmental policies are an important part of a broader social and economic fabric that must work together to transition the economy to renewable energy empowered by innovation, a “green” workforce, and proactive businesses.

While there are gaps to be filled, by calling for carbon-free energy, clean air and clean water and an economic system that addresses inequalities, the proposal is the most comprehensive response yet to the scientists’ warnings.

As daring and impudent as a moonshot, the Green New Deal is a breath of fresh air in changing the political conversation to how we should quickly address the climate crisis. As a first priority, there is an urgent need for Congress to follow up with immediate legislation to curb greenhouse gas emissions with a fair, equitable and effective scheme for carbon pricing and by enlisting nature in comprehensive climate solutions.

Recent experience shows what can be accomplished in transforming the energy sector. In 2009, Congress included $90 billion for renewable energy research and development in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

Wind and solar energy grew from 2 percent of America’s total energy production then to 10 percent in 2017. The energy sector’s carbon dioxide emissions dropped 28 percent, despite a rising population and a larger economy.

Important outcomes

National forest roadless areas and older forests on public lands also need to be protected as climate insurance. These pristine areas absorb massive amounts of carbon dioxide, helping to cool the planet, and they provide clean drinking water to millions of citizens that will only become even more precious with extended droughts.

Tidal wetlands and mangroves buffer communities from rising seas and they too need to be properly stewarded and restored. Agricultural lands can do their part in storing more carbon in soils through minimum tillage and providing wildlife habitat with landowners rewarded through Farm Bill incentives.

In sum, the Green New Deal is a means for leveraging these important outcomes.

Guided by science, policy makers now need to solicit input from social-environmental justice, labour and other organizations to fine-tune and activate the Green New Deal as a unique opportunity to turn the planet’s warning lights off. It’s the best deal we have for a safe climate, equitable society, and thriving planet.

These Authors

William J. Ripple, PhD is distinguished professor of ecology at Oregon State University, and was the lead author of the 2017 ‘World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice’. Dominick A. DellaSala, PhD, is chief scientist at Geos Institute, Ashland, Oregon, and has over 200 science publications. He has also been an expert witness at forest and climate change hearings. Franz Baumann, PhD, is former United Nations assistant secretary-general, and a visiting research professor at New York University.

This article first appeared on Climate Home.  

Those of you who have come across Mac Macartney, founder of Embercombe – the leadership and education centre in Devon – will know that he is a world-class storyteller who communicates with power and profundity.

The Children’s Fire, about his midwinter pilgrimage across Britain, is so much more than one man’s quest.

The latest issue of Resurgence & Ecologist magazine is out now! 

It’s our story: the story of Britons, Europeans, Indigenous and all Earth people. It’s also a story about the epicentre of Druidic Celtic society, the holy isle of Mona (Anglesey), revered by Britons, feared by Rome.

Fresh history 

This small, accessible book is a portal: a way into subconscious recesses; a reverie of immense relevance to today’s malaise; a portrayal of humanity’s innate desire to live with meaning; and our search for the sacred grail, to see with new eyes.

Mac Macartney has spent his life on such a quest, a life rich with tumbling twists and tales of courage and fear, threshold crossings and new beginnings.

He was mentored by Indigenous elders over many years and has acquired profound insights into the questions of our time. His life passion is to share a new narrative of sustainability, awakening a fresh yet ancient story about how we become more human in our more-than-human world:

“All parts of the emerging new story are about integration, collabor­ation, inclusion and wholeness … We have to bring all of Nature to our altars, and acknowledge the sacred in ordinary, everyday living. 

“We are being asked to imagine ourselves anew, to accept and grow our talents without collapsing into the arms of hubris.”

Deep within the story of Britain – and the west – is a psychic wound. This wound needs to be aired and attended to for healing to occur.

Forgotten story

Through the pages we reach upstream to sense the fecund cosmology of our animist past, and swim downstream to today’s pathology of our psychology. There is prescient wit and wisdom at every turn. It’s a floor-stomping rage of a read that throws anthropocentric materialism to landfill.

The antidote to today’s malaise: the Children’s Fire – elegant in its simpli­city and pragmatism. It’s a pledge each of us can make deep in our hearts, if we dare comprehend the implications. It originates from Native American chiefs:

“No law, no decision, no commitment, no action, nothing of any kind will be permitted to go forth from this council that will harm the children, now or ever.” The time has come to rekindle the Children’s Fire, and dare to make this pledge.

Beware, though: this book is not for the faint-hearted. It’s radical and raw. But if you wish to experience a gruelling, gut-wrenching quest in the comfort of your armchair, nested next to the fire, around the hearth, it’s one for you. I shall give the final words here to the author:

“We are a people walking home. We are searching the threads of a broken and forgotten story. It may be new, but in most respects I think it is the renewal of something that we once held close to our hearts and vivid in our imagination … [where] we allow the full recognition of sacredness in all aspects of life and living – then, then we will skim the voyage across the water to the far shore.” 

This Author 

Giles Hutchins is the author of The Illusion of Separation (Floris Books, 2014) and other books. This article was first published in Resurgence & Ecologist magazine. 

French parliamentarians scrapped plans for a tax on unsustainable palm oil in 2016 after being warned by France’s government that passing the law could lead to the execution of a French citizen in Indonesia.

A former minister described the warning as “possible blackmail” and said it had swung the decision against the tax.

The warning to French MPs came amid intense negotiations between Indonesia and France over the fate of Serge Atlaoui, a French citizen imprisoned in Indonesia on drugs charges in 2007.

Oil tax

A former diplomat said that a French delegation left a meeting with the Indonesian government where both the palm oil tax and the death penalty were discussed wondering if the Indonesians “had just made a threat or not.”

The news, based on discussions with French politicians, officials and diplomats, was reported by DeSmog for the first time in the English-speaking press.

Palm oil is “a major contributor to global warming”, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists, as current production methods require the destruction of swathes of carbon-rich forests and peatlands.

In the summer of 2016, France’s general commission for sustainable development considered a law to tax environmentally unsustainable palm, palm kernel and copra oils at €30 per tonne in 2017, rising to €90 in 2020.  

The move was strongly opposed by the world’s largest palm oil producers, Indonesia and Malaysia.  

Imprisoned citizen 

Before the vote on 22 June 2016, Delphine Batho, a French MP and former Ecology Minister, said a note from the French government was passed around MPs at a meeting of the sustainable development committee.

According to Batho, the note said it was possible that Serge Atlaoui, a French citizen imprisoned in Indonesia on drug offences in 2007, could be executed if the planned tax failed to be dropped.  

Answering questions by email, the former Ecology Minister said: “This note was intended to convince members not to vote for the amendments. In the meeting, there was unfortunately a turnaround because the parliamentary majority followed this instruction.”

The French newspaper Liberation reported last June that Batho recalled some MPs having access to a French government note citing threats against French prisoners held in Indonesia.

Liberation quoted another French MP, Geneviève Gaillard, saying that the French foreign office and the Prime Minister’s office asked her to backtrack on the palm oil tax move. She reflected, “It disturbed me a lot to know that the life of that man depended on my decision.”

Strong lobbying

In correspondence with us, Batho described the threat as “possible blackmail”.

On June 22 2016, Batho gave a speech in the National Assembly denouncing “unacceptable pressures exerted on France” over the palm oil tax, without specifying what these were. “We are legislating with the knife at our throat,” she said.

When a delegation from the Indonesian embassy came to France’s Environment Ministry for a meeting ahead of the vote, one French official recalled to DeSmog: “they said that palm oil was a very important subject for them, as the death penalty could be for France.” The official remembered: “We didn’t think about it until after the meeting, when we wondered if they had just made a threat or not.”

A French government adviser at the time said that threats against Atlaoui had been “negotiated directly into bilateral meetings” at diplomatic level, and that it was “credible” to assume that the threats involved had changed the French government’s position.

The National Assembly eventually scrapped the planned tax, with Reuters reporting “strong lobbying from producing countries” on the issue.

Morally incorrect

The 2016 palm oil tax plan came just over a year after Indonesia executed eight people imprisoned for drug offences, including seven foreign nationals. In 2015, Atlaoui won a last-minute reprieve after heavy diplomatic pressure from the French government. He remains on death row today.  

The French government declined to comment for this story.

A spokesperson for the Indonesian government denied that the palm oil tax plan and Ataloui’s situation were related:

“We do not comment on issues and reports based on speculative assessments. We deem it morally incorrect, irresponsible and misleading for any coverage that attempts to link the two issues together. Such reporting will benefit none. We trust that you will continue to remain objective, accurate and fact based in your reports.”

In December 2018, France’s National Assembly changed course, voting to stop palm oil in biofuels counting toward green energy targets and to remove tax incentives for adding palm oil to diesel on environmental grounds.

The move by French politicians was followed by a European Commission decision to label palm oil biofuels as unsustainable, which should mean that most palm oil in biofuels will not count towards EU renewable energy targets.

Excessive deforestation

In March 2019, the European Commission published guidance that palm oil cultivation results in excessive deforestation, and that its use in transport fuels should be phased out.

However, campaigners say the law is at risk of being watered down by the European Commission after pressure from Malaysia and Indonesia. The rules exempt palm oil from smallholders or produced on “unused” land.

In recent years, southeast Asia’s palm oil sector has become dependent on EU demand for palm to fill petrol tanks, now the most popular use for the commodity in Europe.

This Author

Joe Sandler Clarke is a journalist with UnEarthed, and tweets @JSandlerClarke. This article first appeared at Desmog.uk.

‘Power, Nature, Culture and Society’ was a platform at a major conference on design and sustainability  held at London College of Fashion (LCF).  

Attending an intensive two-day event is a luxury to anybody who isn’t a student, academic or staff journalist. But much of the conference was radical – at last!

The event proved surprisingly upbeat, and revealed a new world of possibilities and cutting edge technologies.

Sustainability activism

Attendees and presenters from as far afield as India, Japan and the United States presented alongside European institutions, also out in force. Their talks were crammed with progressive ideas, as well as  investigative research that revealed how this subject has developed as an area worthy of ecological, environmental and political significance.

Transgressive in its behemoth approach, this was a conference with a difference and an unabashed audience.

Noticeably, certain speakers from the more established and luxury brands were received with an audible gasp of exasperation and cynicism. Time to cue you know who.

An honorary of fashion sustainability and activism and a former student at  designer Katherine Hamnetts was once shunned by the greater industry, which now see her embraced as the ‘High Priestess’.

Hamnetts work in this arena spans several decades, most notoriously taking centre-stage in 1984 with her anti nuclear statement T-shirts of protest, provocation and politics. Cue present-day sustainability and Hamnetts related response ”Slogans are fine but we need action now and it needs to be dramatic”.  Ever outspoken, she quickly dismissed Donatella Versace’s recent sustainability award, with a hiss of caustic hilarity. 

Experimentation and cooperation 

Met with a rapturous response especially from the many students in attendance, the field of force that is

Hamnett exhaled a hurricane of cynicism throughout her interview, and stressed the persistence of many in the industry who do not want to deal with the environmental, human and animal issues relating to fashion. She was received by rapturous applause, particularly by students. 

She argued: ”There’s a conspiracy to do nothing”. Perhaps then, a slogan T-shirt could read HUNG LIKE HAMNETT,  because we need more ballsy women in this challenging field.

However, activism and education and bringing change, plus there is willing from areas of the industry, particularly from some of those at the very top. Watch this space.

There needs to better dialogue, action, experimentation and cooperation, which may not necessarily come from expected sources. The conference offered a mosaic of considerations in sustainable fashion and some stand out talks.

New skin

Ever aware of alternatives to animal skin, a fascinating presentation under the ‘Natures  Materials’ section, Istituto Marangonis Kirsten Scott (no relation!) spoke about ‘tree skin’ from a holistic study of trees in Uganda.

Their work is surely ‘fashion forward’ in its feasibility and approach to sustainable luxury.

Ten apprentices and artisans work with their bark ‘cloth’, which also is fully compostable and has antibacterial properties. It is a wonder material that’s used to wrap bodies as it preserves decomposition. 

Conversant clothing

With few exceptions, it’s a sad truth that the notion of fashion and ageing make for an uncomfortable pairing on several levels. This project offers ingenuity and hope in an area worthy of greater attention and respect.

Japan represented some startling and heartening endeavours, exploring ways of communicating and sharing knowledge, creating  holistic environs and using manga cartoons.

Most notably the Daijiros Mizunos work which could surely be termed ‘conversant clothing’. A garment with sensor pockets for cameras and collars fitted microphones that ‘talk’ to the wearer, intent on enhancing well-being and aiding the ageing.

The talk ‘Speculative, Fashionable, Wearable, Engaging Fashion Design with Wearable Tech for the Sustainable Future’ emphasised facilitation and the role emerging designers can play in promoting positive partnerships, in this case with ATAP Google Lab.

Mizuno pragmatically proclaimed, after going to Google HQ in San Francisco, that “They are the tech experts, but we are the designers who work well collaboratively”.

Sophisticated ethnography

Catherine Glover from Northumbria University produced a polished and professional presentation on the Tweed Run. A sophisticated ethnography and narrative enquiry on an annual heritage cycling event, where attendees and participants ‘dress up’ in period clothing.

Glover participated by wearing her husbands Grandfathers ‘plus fours’ (or knickerbockers). Her presentation emphasised: “Tweed is the original technical material; Thorn-proof, weatherproof and waterproof”. 

Tweed is a material making a comeback due to its endurance and efficiency, and helping heritage designers to regain a platform.

Glover regards herself as a contemporary communicator and professional marketer. Her own style and notable presentation offer progressive insight.

Fashion revolution 

Edwina Ehrman, senior curator on the Victoria & Albert museum’s exhibition ‘Fashioned from Nature’, spoke of the importance of making their exhibition deliberately uncomfortable for people, as well as examining the many and consistent abuses toward animals for fashion.

The exhibition premièred prototypes which could revolutionise the field. Ehrmans talk was ell-received and impressed the audience, as did Orsola de Castros from ‘Fashion Revolution’ with an impassioned appeal for action.

‘Power, Nature, Culture & Society’ welcomed topics as diverse as ‘Culture and Spirituality’. Noteworthy contributors such as Elsa Parente and Miguel from Portugal’s ‘Co-curating a Fashion System’ presentation, and Sara Caravagnero from Italy’s Red Cross were very well received. 

Caravagnero’s remarkable work on disability – an under-represented area in the industry – was potent and pertinent. Her presentation was resolutely fuelled by optimism and opportunism as the ‘take-away’ elements in an arena which can at times, frustrate and deflate.  

This Author

Wendyrosie Scott is an anthropologist and journalist focusing on design and creative communities. She looks at the positive partnerships between lifestyle trends & the natural world.

Image: Bukomansimbi organic tree farmers association laying bark cloth to dry.

There is an emerging trend for manufacturers to develop their own sustainable sourcing models, inspired by Fairtrade and consumer demand for ethically-sourced products. Even the likes of Tesco and Sainsbury’s are following suit.

While a proactive commitment to sustainable sourcing is to be applauded, setting up an entirely new sourcing model – and doing it well – is no mean feat. I speak from experience of converting English Tea Shop to run on a Creating Shared Value model throughout our supply chain from seed to cup.

The impact of creating and implementing our own sourcing model has been profound, not only for the farmers but for our business and all those in our community, or our Prajāva as we like to call it. I want to share some of the key things I’ve learnt about setting up a sourcing model, based on my experience over the years.

Clear motivations

The very first step should be asking yourself why you’re setting off on this path. Is it to help support and share value with those in your supply chain? Is it to improve transparency?

Is it to have a more secure and reliable supply chain? Is it so you can source increasingly high-quality produce? Is it because ethical sourcing is important to your customers? Is it to be better for the environment? Is it all of the above?

What’s important is considering what long-term outcomes you want to achieve, both for your business, and for those in the supply chain.

Start small

Unless you’re starting a new business, it’s likely best to take a long-term approach to sourcing.

Having direct relationships with producers is both essential and time-consuming, and building close relationships even more so.

It may be best to start working with one producer or co-operative under your model, or on one project, and to grow from there. 

Strong Prajāva

Prajāva is the Sri Lankan word for community and taking a wide view of who this includes is vital.

Creating shared value throughout a supply chain takes a great deal of thought – and it’s surprisingly easy to do the wrong thing when trying to do the right thing.

That’s why close relationships are so important – you have to have an innate understanding of what people want and need, rather than just doing what you think they need. The stronger your Prajāva, the better placed you will be.

Business people

This is one of the absolute best ways of sharing value through your supply chain. For us, this means helping our farmers to improve the quality and quantity of their yield through support education and a trusted route to market rather than just paying a minimum price.

For those who work in our factories, we have a profit-sharing initiative called Big Game which involves them in programmes such as open book management, knowledge sharing and budget games with the goal of making English Tea Ship a significantly employee-owned business.

This ultimately drives employee engagement and increases productivity too – there has now been a 31 percent increase in value added per employee since The Big Game initiative was introduced.

Without wanting to be too trite about it, helping people help themselves is much more sustainable and powerful.

Measuring and monitoring 

If you’re going it alone, you need to find a robust way of benchmarking the outcomes of your model. Failing to do so could cause more harm than good. 

This could involve developing a framework for measuring social and economic impact for your investments and efforts and then tracking how business is directly and indirectly impacted as a result of such social progress.

Shared value

Creating a sourcing model is not without its ups and downs and there are times when commercial realities come knocking that can put you in difficult positions.

My advice would be to focus your sourcing model on creating shared value – that is, value for people throughout your supply chain, but also for your business.

For me, this is what makes a model truly sustainable in that it is then protected from short-termism during leaner periods. 

As our society becomes even more ethically-minded, it will soon be the norm for businesses to adopt and drive growth through sustainable sourcing models.

We’ve already seen a good selection of early adopters make their mark, and I hope that the fruitful results produced will encourage others to take a leap of faith.

This Author

Suranga Herath is a global expert on the tea industry, and CEO of English Tea Shop, one of the world’s leading organic tea businesses which brings high quality, ethically-sourced tea to customers all over the world.

Image: © Bauer Media/Homes to Love. 

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is always working to increase construction practices that address health and safety hazards.

The NIOSH Construction Program works through every stage of development – from pre-design to design, construction, occupancy and eventual demolition, the safety of people in the area remains a top priority.

NIOSH is not the only group in the United States pushing for safer conditions for construction workers. While worksites have improved in the past, how things are built is under constant transformation.

In this case, switching to green, eco-friendly building designs have been both a good and bad thing for construction workers. While the general point is to ensure the health of people throughout the building’s life, some of the practices are new and not yet mastered.

Green positives

All construction can be a dangerous business. Just because the building is environmentally friendly doesn’t mean it’ll be safer to build from the label alone. Work has to be put into the project for everything to come out right with everyone’s well-being in mind. However, green buildings and construction can make sites safer for workers.

The NIOSH Office of Construction Safety and Health, along with the United States Green Building Council, has developed a concept called Prevention through Design, or PtD. This concept, explained in two webinars, covers the prevention of occupational injuries, illnesses, fatalities and exposures on the worksite. PtD is there to minimize risks during the design phase of buildings by changing equipment, tools, processes and anything else to make the job safer.

Through PtD, workers eliminate hazards as early as possible. This can easily be implemented through green construction, as everything to make the building green is decided upon during the design phase. The premises, structure, equipment, machinery, substances and other parts of construction all have to be taken into account for both reasons.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) states that green construction is “the practice of creating structures and using processes that are environmentally responsible and resource-efficient throughout a building’s lifecycle.” While also being considered as high performance and sustainable, green buildings are also meant to be better for durability, comfort and the economy.

Occupational and environmental health can benefit each other by working together. As of 2011, 71 percent of construction businesses claimed to use at least one piece of technology or practice that was green while over half reported being involved with energy and waste efficiency.

The Bureau of Labor and Statistics estimates that about 100 construction workers are killed each year. Going off this figure, the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) finds that 55 percent of those fatalities happen on the worksite rather than anywhere else. Construction is a dangerous job either way, but finding new innovations to make the work safer is worth trying out, which is one reason why green building continues to gain traction.

Green negatives

The Identification of Safety Risks for High-Performance Sustainable Construction Projects study looked into construction projects with the United States Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, or LEED, certification. LEED remains the largest program in America for certifying green buildings.

In the study, dozens of designers and contractors were interviewed, each with an average of 100 traditional construction jobs and about four LEED jobs. Out of the results, 12 LEED guidelines lead to an increase in safety risk compared to non-LEED.

A lot of the problems have to do with height coupled with unfamiliar, new technology. The high-risk tasks include constructing atria and installing solar panels. This has been attributed to the 24 percent increase in falls.

There are also more electrical currents near unstable soils and an increased use of heavy equipment on LEED projects. Even wastewater technologies have about 14 percent more exposure to harmful substances.

The Bureau of Labor and Statistics also conducted the Occupational Employment Statistics, or OES, survey. Along with the O*NET green occupational categories, about 90 percent of the construction workforce is now employed in green-related industries. Again, the increased risk of falls is a big factor when dealing with solar or wind power, as well as skylights or atriums. They also found extra exposure to hazardous materials because of weatherization.

Some other hazards not previously considered were from cement, concrete, terrazzo and insulation exposure to silica, coal ash and nanomaterials. In addition to material hazards, injuries continued to happen in green worksites. While these are all important problems to consider, the situation doesn’t have to be like this.

Safety First

The executive director of the Center for Construction Research and Training, Peter Stafford, noted that “with proper layout of the worksite, recyclables can be sorted safely and efficiently. With properly scheduled breaks for hydration, a reflective roof doesn’t have to mean trips to the hospital. And with proper fall protection, solar panels can reduce our dependence on fossil fuels without risking workers’ lives.” Simply put, new technology brings new safety measures.

Construction can be a dangerous job, especially when negligence is involved.

While green construction has new problems to overcome, they aren’t much worse than the issues already presented, and they’re better during the long run.

New safety measures need to be implemented for these different processes, and proper training must be conducted. With knowledge and the correct tools, risks can be lowered for everyone’s peace of mind.

This Author

Emily Folk is a conservation and sustainability writer and the editor of Conservation Folks.

Kindness is a delicate thing – as soon as you try to ‘operationalise’ it, or scale it up, something of its essence is lost. It brings to mind an image of a wild animal being brought into captivity.

In an older people’s ward a terminally ill man commented that he appreciated a nurse making him a hot chocolate after she’d finished her shift. He felt that she went out of her way to be kind to him, he felt that he mattered, and he was touched – “She sort of broke the rules for me.”

The new issue of Resurgence & Ecologist magazine is out now!

The well-intentioned ward manager responded to this by introducing a ‘hot chocolate round’ as part of the routine care on the ward; it became part of the ‘machinery’ of care rather than an act of spontaneous kindness.

Common humanity 

Health care is a calling to so many people who are led by an instinctual, natural kindness. We believe that the act of caring is an invitation to engage with distress, disease and death, which in itself carries a necessary emotional cost.

Caring cannot work in relieving pain and suffering unless the person being cared for can see an impact on the carer. This connection is the psychological and spiritual basis of transformation in suffering.

Touching and being touched by the heart and mind of another creates the connection that enables relief and comfort. This happens from the cradle to the grave as all of us seek recognition and understanding in the responses of others. It is part of our common humanity.

Organisations can become structured to protect staff from some of the painful realities of people’s lives. For example, an emphasis on checklists of questions can bring apparent structure and certainty, rather than connecting with patients on an equal human level and responding to whatever comes up.

A perceived need for staff to have a sense of detachment (often described as ‘being professional’) carries a risk of disengagement from the feelings necessary to build compassionate relationships with patients and colleagues.

Emotional detachment 

Part of professionalism is an intention to ensure that individual preferences and personal connections don’t cloud the process of objective, equitable decision-making. However, this emotional detachment can be at the heart of systemic care failings.

To care, we need to feel, but feelings can sometimes invite us down unhelpful paths. Feelings without thought can mean that sometimes we react in a totally inappropriate way, without consideration for others.

The solution is to bring conscious awareness to feelings so that we can be aware of the emotion before we act and consider whether this is the best way to respond to the situation. This is a skill that people can learn and develop.

At a local level, reflective practice sessions or mindfulness groups might offer protected spaces for thinking and being, and not ‘doing’ all the time – spaces where our own and others’ vulnerabilities can be acknowledged and embraced.

Feelings can be combined with thoughts. Individuals and teams are increasingly encouraged to reflect on what matters to them, as a way to reconnect with core values. Our experience is that sessions like these can be useful but are tough to set up and maintain. Also, they can have much in common with the way that individual therapy functions as a sticking-plaster for wider social issues. We must consider the ecology of the whole health-care system.

Nurturing relationships 

To care is an interpersonal matter that involves empathy, warmth and genuineness. These vital human qualities are the easiest things to experience subject­ively, but in a health-care system that values objective outcomes the spiritual essence of care can become lost or diluted. 

Care can only be as good as the mental state of the carer, and the mental state of the carer depends in turn on the support and nourishment of the working environment.

Carers need nurturing relationships with other people so that their own energy can be constantly replenished. For this to happen, the needs of caregivers have to be recognised and the working environment has to be designed to meet them, in line with fundamental psychological needs.

What we call a ‘psychologically safe’ health-care environment is one in which everyone feels a sense of involvement; an environment where conversations routinely happen whose purpose is to talk through difficult feelings so that people feel refreshed and re-energised to carry on; an environment where not only the patients feel remembered and held in mind, but also the staff.

One of the most practical steps, therefore, in ensuring good-quality care is to care for the care staff as human beings too. Simple behaviours that create psychological safety include conversational turn-taking, empathy and a freedom to “say what I think without fear”.

Compassionate work 

We must be able to talk about what is messy or sad with openness, to embrace hard conversations with colleagues (for example in team meetings) with whom we are having difficulty. We acknowledge that these behaviours require some time, and that health care is fast-paced and highly pressured. We lose so much when our focus is on efficiency and protocols.

Care can only be as effective as the state of mind of those providing it. This means limiting the factors that expend emotional energy, and bolstering those who supply it.

This task cannot be left to self-care or individual ‘resilience’: it requires the whole organisation to provide a system of sustaining supportive relationships.

If patients feel heard, cared for, engaged with on a human level, they are more likely to feel that they had a positive experience of health care and perhaps will feel more supported to self-manage and be more in control of their health.

This becomes more possible, we believe, if carers are maintained in a state of mind where there is the energy, focus and time to really engage with patients. This means that we cannot care for patients unless we also care for their carers. In human health, the most powerful factor is caring relationships.

By honouring those relationships, we will optimise health outcomes, enable more compassionate work environments, and genuinely improve efficiency.

These authors

Charlie Jones is a clinical psychologist at North Bristol NHS Trust. Martin Seager is a clinical psychologist/adult psychotherapist. This article was first published in Resurgence & Ecologist magazine. 

Image: Julie Delton. 

A vast newly-planted forest and enchanting wildflower meadows are growing alongside pockets of ancient bluebell woodland and old hedgerows near densely populated areas in Hertfordshire.

In the spring and summer, fields after fields are covered with blue, yellow, red, pink, purple and white wild flowers, undulating in the wind.  There are tracks for horses and bicycles and even a yoga grove, but also miles of solitary muddy paths. It is a haven of peace and beauty for wildlife and people.

Ten years ago, none of this was there: low-grade farmland stretched as far as the eye could see.

Realising dreams

In 2008, the Woodland Trust acquired 347-hectare of arable land in Sandridge with an ambitious plan to launch the largest tree-planting scheme in the country.

Louise Neicho, who has been the Woodland Trust’s Site Manager from the start of the project, said that Heartwood Forest is “the fulfilment of a dream for us – to create England’s biggest new native woodland. We wanted to plant a forest of trees on a truly landscape scale and make a difference to wildlife and nature – but also to the hundreds of thousands of people we could inspire.”

Some 140,000 people per year are now visiting the forest and Heartwood Forest has been selected as one of the trust’s Top Ten Destination Sites.

Each of the 600,000 trees there has been planted by some 45,000 volunteers, including more than 17,000 school children. Neicho said: “So many people have been involved from the local community and further afield – school children, businesses, religious groups, the public and our very own volunteers.”  

They have also planted new wildflower meadows, open grassland and a 600-tree community orchard, which includes many old Hertfordshire varieties of apple, pear and cherry, as well as plum, medlar, apricot and quince. An arboretum has also been created – the only one known in the UK to contain all 57 of our native tree species. 

Increased biodiversity 

The trees have had remarkable effects on wildlife – including doubling bird numbers and increasing butterfly populations by 160 percent, as well as encouraging the arrival of new species such as the water shrew, barbastelle bat, common lizard and grasshopper warbler. 

To date, 27 species of butterfly have been recorded and 87 species of bird, including owls, linnets, skylarks, buzzards, kestrels and a rare sighting of a great grey shrike. The linnet is one species that particularly thrives there – in six years linnet sightings have increased by 250 percent, bucking a national trend decrease. 

Surveys have also recorded 62 species of woodland mammals such as voles, badgers, deer and mice. In the insect kingdom, the exotic-looking but non-poisonous wasp spider is new to the site. 

These regular surveys are conducted by volunteers from the Hertfordshire Natural History Society to enable the Woodland Trust to chart populations of plants and wildlife during changes to the site.

Neicho added: “These surveys illustrate the impact that planting new woodlands can make, even in short space of time. [The Woodland Trust] has achieved something amazing, a green and natural place where everyone can find space, peace, wildlife and miles of beautiful young woodland to explore.”

This Author 

Veronique Mistiaen is an award-winning journalist writing about the environment, international development, human rights and social issues. She blogs at The Right Human and she tweets at @VeroMistiaen.

Image: Judith Parry.