Grist Talks to Jonathan Franzen

I have not yet picked up Jonathan Franzen's new novel Freedom, but it is getting rave reviews among Overbrook staff who have! Aside from being touted as a great novel with an engrossing story, Freedom is being praised for its merits as an honest and rousing profile of the contemporary environmentalist struggle. Franzen himself is an avid birder, and talks to Overbrook grantee Grist's Amanda Little about the inevitable conflict weathered by conservationists who live in contemporary society, yet rail against the negative impacts our lifestyles inflict on natural surroundings. Franzen tells Little of his own personal transformation from environmental cynic to optimistic lover of birds.

From the Grist interview:

A. I used to have a really angry, despairing sense that the world is screwed, that people have screwed the world, and so we should just let it all end. Let's have the great plague that will reduce the population by 90 percent, and let the land regenerate and nature catch its breath. I've moved away from that sort of deep-ecological extremism, which I found to be not personally tenable. It was time for me to stop thinking about apocalypse, time to move to New York City, time to start enjoying life. And from there I moved on to loving wild birds, which was a much more positive mode of engagement. I started to think, what can we do for wild birds right now? I don't want these particular species to disappear. So what can I do practically? If you're trying to save your child's life, you might make certain compromises that you would have found morally insupportable at a younger age. Love leads to pragmatism in a way that anger doesn't.



Click here to read the whole interview.

Happy holidays!

December 2010 Human Rights Program Grants

At its last Board of Directors meeting of 2010, The Overbrook Foundation's Human Rights Program awarded $485,000 in grants to 13 organizations in the categories of Reproductive Rights, Trafficking, International Human Rights, Movement Building and "Other."

For its work supporting Reproductive Rights, Overbrook awarded grants to three organizations: a $40,000 grant to Groundswell for the Catalyst Fund, a $40,000 grant to the Third Wave Foundation for its Reproductive Health and Justice Initiative and a $30,000 grant to the Western States Center for its program, Uniting Communities, Advancing Strong Families. In support of its anti-trafficking work, the Foundation also awarded a $30,000 grant to the Freedom Network for its project, Training, Advocacy, and Mentoring: A Comprehensive Approach to Human Trafficking and Modern Day Slavery.

In support of International Human Rights, the Foundation awarded a $40,000 grant to Front Line, for its work protecting Latin American Human Rights Defenders, a $30,000 grant to Reporters Without Borders for its work fighting for press freedom in Latin America, a $40,000 grant to Global Fund for Children and a $50,000 grant to Disability Rights International for its Americas Advocacy Initiative.

In the Foundation’s category of Movement Building grants, four organizations received support, including a $40,000 grant to the Center for Community Change for general operating support, a $10,000 grant to Demos for the continued support of Jared Duval’s book Next Generation Democracy: What the Open Source Revolution Means for Privacy, Politics and Change, a $50,000 grant to New Press for their work in progressive book publishing, and a $50,000 grant to People for the American Way for its Youth Leadership Program.

One other grant not in a specific program area that was awarded was a $35,000 grant to Channel Thirteen/WNET for the Online Education Guide to WIDE ANGLE: Women, War & Peace.

If you’re interested in learning more about what these organizations do, click on the links above to learn more.

December 2010 Environment Program Grants

At its last Board of Directors meeting of 2010, The Overbrook Foundation's Environment Program awarded $730,000 in grants yesterday to 12 organizations in the categories of Latin American Biodiversity Conservation, Sustainable Production and Consumption, Media, and "Other." Eleven are either renewals or from organizations previously funded, and one is a first-time request.

For its work supporting Latin American Biodiversity Conservation, the Foundation awarded $135,000 in grants. Organizations awarded were: AlTROPICO, for its work consolidating the Cotacachi Cayapas Ecologica Reserve and Chachi territories in Ecuador; Amazon Watch, for its work protecting the Ecuadorean rainforest from oil exploitation; IMAFLORA, for its work promoting sustainable cocoa harvesting in Brazil; and the ISEAL Alliance, for its work clarifying and lending credibility to sustainability standards.

For its Sustainable Production and Consumption work, the Foundation awarded $500,000. Organizations awarded were: As You Sow, for its corporate watchdog work promoting shareholder action for sustainable production and consumption; Catalog Choice, for expansion of its work to reduce paper waste and combat climate change; Clean Air-Cool Planet, for the expansion of its Community Catalyst Fund; GreenBlue, for general support of its projects in packaging, sustainable product design, greener chemicals and more; ioby.org, for the redevelopment of its web platform, crucial to its operations; and the Mayor's Fund to Advance New York City, for the continuation of GreeNYC's project to identify and implement the most effective greenhouse gas-saving behaviors for NYC residents.

For its work supporting Public TV, Radio and Other Media, the Foundation awarded $35,000 to Island Press for continued general support of its environmental science and conservation publications and for its outreach efforts.

The Environment Program also supported the Gulf Coast Fund for Community Renewal and Ecological Health for its work helping grassroots, local communities in the Gulf Coast region respond to the ongoing effects of the BP oil spill disaster.

Once again, the diversity of its grantees reflects the Environment Program's commitment to conservation and innovation. Click on the links above to learn more about these wonderful organizations!

Measuring a Plastic Footprint

Just as the term "carbon footprint" has become common in the business and consumer lexicon, a new footprint (one we also want to shrink!) is on the horizon. Through an alliance between The Association for Sustainable and Responsible Investment in Asia, the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, and Overbrook grantee Project Kaisei's co-founder Douglas Woodring, the Plastic Disclosure Project will provide a centralized web space for the tracking and reporting of plastics.

Kicked off by former President Bill Clinton at an opening plenary of the Clinton Global Initiative earlier this fall, the Plastic Disclosure Project will encourage awareness of the ubiquitous use and "linear system" trashing of plastics, and the vast environmental impacts of this practice. (Check out the difference between a linear system and a closed loop system on Overbrook grantee Story of Stuff's online glossary.)

Disclosure and comparisons of plastic footprints among companies will encourage investors and stakeholders to value their brands not just in terms of today's profits, but also in relation to toxicity, pollution, waste, and human health. Annual surveys of industry participants will be voluntary, with the hope that new businesses will join once the value of PDP becomes clear to investors and consumers. The first go-'round for the PDP will create a baseline for waste, design inputs, and recycling rates, and subsequent surveys will compare plastic footprints between years and among participants.

Why is the Plastic Disclosure Project necessary? The PDP site relays the following information, showing that even modest cut-backs in plastic footprints could yield significant results:


"Industry estimates state that 300 million tons of virgin plastic are made every year. If just one tenth of one percent can be saved through efficiencies, better design, or increased recycling, then 3 million tons could be saved, which is roughly what some conservative estimates say are floating in the middle of the Pacific Ocean."

A yearly summary report of the PDP will be available online to industry groups, governments, educational institutions and the public.

Mayors Commit, Sending a Pre-Cancun Message

One week before the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Cancun, over 130 mayors from cities all over the world signed a voluntary pact to reduce greenhouse gases and adapt to climate change. The World Mayors Summit, which convened in Mexico City yesterday, aims to set climate change mitigation and adaptation goals for global cities that are, in the words of the pact, "measurable, reportable and verifiable." Cities that sign the pact will join an online registry where climate data, goals and progress will be logged and easily accessed by government officials as well as city residents.

After sustaining the disappointment of a lackluster Copenhagen agreement, (described here, post-Copenhagen, on Grist.org), city leaders from around the world decided their constituents could no longer wait for national leaders to act. The timing of the Mayors' agreement immediately preceding Cancun could inspire (or possibly shame) global leaders into taking concrete action against climate change. At the very least, if no binding treaty comes out of Cancun, the mayors are hoping for increased financial support, and the open acknowledgment that climate change has become an overwhelming issue requiring immediate, ongoing, large-scale attention.

A Wall Street Journal article from last month describes the "peer pressure" element of environmentally friendly behaviors. Researchers found that people respond most effectively, and in greatest numbers, when their behaviors are compared to those of their peers. Signs on doors informing homeowners they should use fans instead of air conditioning on hot summer days were most effective when they used an "everyone's doing it" approach as opposed to a "use a fan to reduce your greenhouse gas emissions" approach. The mayors' online registry of city climate data could benefit from that psychology. Cities that can track their own progress in relation to others' will, with luck, have a similarly persuasive effect.

As the UN Climate meeting in Cancun approaches amidst a sea of bad news, the Mayors Summit is a sign that tides may be turning.

Story of Stuff Project Launches a New Video

In collaboration with the Electronics TakeBack Coalition and Free Range Studios, the Story of Stuff Project launched its newest video early this week: The Story of Electronics.

Following in the footsteps of the Project's previous four videos, (click here to browse and watch them all), the Story of Electronics pulls no punches in its explanation of the "designed for the dump" mentality under which computers, phones, power cords -- you name it -- are manufactured. The video also illuminates some of the toxic chemicals used to make these devices, and calls into question what really happens when a computer is "recycled." Project creator, spokeswoman and movie star Annie Leonard tells it all with humor and ease.

Another Setback for Renewables

The Wonk Room posted a run-down late last week (cross-posted here by Overbrook grantee Grist.org) on the prospective Republican Representatives vying to lead the House Energy Committee. Until now led by Representative Henry Waxman, co-author with Rep. Edward Markey of last year's ACES (American Clean Energy and Security Act), the House Energy Committee had been poised to influence substantive change in the Federal regulation of greenhouse gases. Not so any longer -- perusing the cast of characters lining up to fill Waxman's spot, it is a disheartening day for environmentalists and businesses promoting renewable energy.

Michigan Representative Fred Upton, as the most senior member of the contenders, is a likely choice to head the House Energy Committee. Although Upton is not a blatant climate change denier, he has characterized proposed energy legislation as "job-killing," and his top donors are energy utilities. Other contenders are John Shimkus, who described proposed climate legislation as a threat greater than terrorism and war, Cliff Stearns, an ardent proponent of drilling in ANWR and Joe Barton, the Texas Republican who bizarrely apologized to BP this summer for what he perceived to be unfairly harsh treatment by Congress in the aftermath of the Gulf disaster.

This news coupled with two New York Times stories this weekend prove once again the growing need for grassroots watchdogs and activists. One article discusses the competitive trouble wind power companies are having against fossil fuel utilities, because the upfront costs of wind are higher. A line from the story explains, "a growing number of projects are being canceled or delayed because governments are unwilling to add even small amounts to consumers’ electricity bills." This, while consumers seem willing (if chagrined) to pay steadily rising bills for cable television.

The other weekend Times story profiles individuals who, in exchange for payment, have leased their private land to oil companies for hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," one of the most environmentally-destructive methods of extracting oil and natural gas there is. Read about fracking here on Overbrook grantee Earthworks' web site.

It seems as though a main obstacle to weaning off of fossil fuels toward a renewable economy is, once again, the behavior and attitudes of consumers and voters. A challenge for environmental groups in coming years will be to shift focus away from the instant gratification of cheap energy, (which, considering oil spills, blow-outs, carbon emissions, deleterious health effects and more, is far from "cheap") toward a longer-term view of the greater benefits to come through clean energy. This is no easy feat in the midst of an economic crisis, for sure. But once voters begin to view a clean environment, health, and greater savings over time as rights and expectations rather than special "perqs," national energy trends will surely change, along with the congressmen and women who represent us.

Changing the Climate Conversation

In a new study out of the University of Michigan, researcher Andy Hoffman attempts to answer the question many conservationists have been asking: why, with scientists worldwide corroborating that climate change is: 1) happening, and 2) caused by human activity, are people so slow to demand policy and behavioral change? Scientists have been researching and quantifying climate change scenarios for decades, yet comparatively little has been investigated from a sociological standpoint. And with today's election predictions warning of a U.S. government even more resistant to greenhouse gas regulations, it may be time to try a new angle in communicating climate change. Perhaps it has been a cultural issue all along, rather than a scientific one.

Hoffman compares lackadaisical responses to climate change to societal battles we've already fought in this country, battles such as the abolition of slavery or the sweeping bans on public smoking. While allowing slavery exists in a whole other realm of offense than public smoking, Hoffman bundled the two examples because they both represent practices that at one time were common, accepted, and economically beneficial to some. Both smoking and slavery took years to overcome, and continued as accepted practices even after large factions of the public denounced them.

"The issue was not just whether cigarettes cause cancer. It was whether people believed it. The second process is wholly different than the first," Hoffman said.

Hoffman is hoping conservationists can look back at these two examples to inform the fight against climate change. The issue now is not whether biking to work or weatherizing your home make a difference, the issue is whether people believe it.

The National Academy of Sciences recently published a similarly-focused study, a series it calls "America's Climate Choices." Risk communication relating to climate change has been comparatively ignored, so the NAS determined to get to the bottom of the societal factors that have been preventing meaningful progress. One of the study's findings describes the majority of Americans as feeling apathetic about their own contribution to mitigating climate change, while a significant percentage (though at 34 percent far from a majority) described themselves as "disengaged," "doubtful" or "dismissive" of the idea of climate change.

One recommendation from the study is to change the way climate change action is framed, to emphasize immediate individual benefit. For example, a person trying to lose weight would be more likely to bike to work if the action were framed as saving emissions as well as preventing obesity, rather than serving only as an altruistic act with long-term results that are unmeasurable on an individual basis.

Another recommendation from the NAS study is for local, web-based movements to keep up the good work. When people see others in their own communities making positive change, they are more likely to step up and pitch in. And while individual actions can feel like a drop in the bucket, people do have quite an influence on emissions in their daily lives. The Environmental Health Perspectives article on "America's Choices" quotes a finding by Michael Vandenbergh, director of the Climate Change Research Network at Vanderbilt University: eight percent of the entire world's total emissions come from individual households in the United States.

It seems like some facts should be able to speak for themselves. But as skeptics abound, it may be time to change the conversation.

Sustainability Victory for Seattle and Overbrook Grantee

Due to long-term goals and often complex measures of success, many sustainability and conservation projects tend to progress slowly and incrementally. So a clear "green victory" is always cause for celebration -- and even more so when an Overbrook Foundation Environment grantee is at its center!

The Product Stewardship Institute, supported for the first time by Overbrook in June of this year, just participated in a major victory for resource conservation in Seattle. The City Council passed a phone book opt-out ordinance last night, requiring directory publishers to pay for phone book recycling costs and making it easy for consumers, through a registry, to prevent unwanted yellow pages from appearing on their doorsteps. Seattle's is the nation's first phone book opt-out program, and with vigilance its influence will spread to other cities.

Overbrook directed its PSI funding last June toward the consumer opt-out campaign for phone books, a project PSI has been working on for a number of state and local governments since 2006. Although Seattle passed legislation the battle continues; it is estimated that discarded phone books account for 660,000 tons in the waste stream each year, and opt-out programs are critical for saving trees and money spent on recycling costs.

Catalog Choice, also an Overbrook grantee, partnered with PSI on the phone book registry.

Read the Seattle City Council ordinance here.

Environment Program Grants Awarded September 2010

At its September 2010 Board Meeting and Retreat last week, The Overbrook Foundation's Environment Program awarded $583,400 in grants to 10 organizations in the categories of Latin American Biodiversity Conservation, Sustainable Production and Consumption, and Public TV, Radio and Other Media. Nine are either renewals or from organizations previously funded, and one is a first-time request.

For its work supporting Latin American Biodiversity Conservation, the Foundation awarded $158,400 in grants. Organizations awarded were: Nature and Culture International, for its expansion of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) and carbon financing programs in Ecuador; the New York Botanical Garden, for its work creating a certification program and tree species inventory in Brazil; and People and Plants International, for its biodiversity conservation and sustainable community work in central Mexico.

For its Sustainable Production and Consumption work, the Foundation awarded $345,000. Organizations awarded were: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE), to further its continued research on consumer behavior and sustainability; Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA), for the continuation of its work advancing a new materials economy in the United States; Global Green USA, for the expansion of its Coalition for Resource Recovery's paper food packaging recycling program; ForestEthics, for general operating support of its work promoting sustainable forestry; Health Care Without Harm, for its Healthier Hospitals Initiative; and The Story of Stuff, for continued operating support of The Story of Stuff Project.

The Environment Program also supported the Consultative Group on Biological Diversity for the development of a communications framework to address the problem of ocean acidification.

Once again, the diversity of its grantees reflects the Environment Program's commitment to conservation and innovation. Click on the links above to learn more about these wonderful organizations!

Environment Viewed in Opposition to Economy

As the international community faces mounting costs of oil spill clean-ups, unseasonable natural disasters and health issues linked to toxic air and water supplies, the perpetuation of the idea that going green is bad for the economy is perhaps one of the worst examples of doublethink. But increasingly, shifting away from fossil fuels and toward clean, renewable energy systems is pitted against the more immediate gratification of economic gain.

An article in today's Independent quotes New Economics Foundation policy director Andrew Simms decrying this reality: "We have submitted control over our own environmental destiny to a set of economic ideas that parade as if they were unquestionable, natural laws," Simms said.

Simms seems to be hitting on a troubling zeitgeist shift concerning environmental stewardship. While converting to a green economy could spur job creation and ultimately save money, the message that conservation is fiscally irresponsible is increasingly pervasive. Last week's New York Times quotes a spokesman for emerging Republican leader John Boehner attempting to reassure voters Boehner is not concerned with "environmentalists who support job-killing policies."

Organizations like Overbrook grantee Green For All have the facts to refute such statements. Check out their blog post on China's wind energy initiative (quickly on its way to surpassing the United States) here.

Grist, also an Overbrook grantee, referenced stories from the Associated Press and the Wall Street Journal proving fears of catastrophic job loss from a drilling moratorium in the Gulf were unfounded. (Not to mention BP's exploitative use of prison labor to work on clean-up efforts instead of paying newly out-of-work locals a fair wage!)

Last Friday, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund hosted an informational session on the Ecuadorian government's unprecedented new program to "keep the oil in the soil." The Yasuni-ITT initiative will prevent drilling in the incredibly biodiverse Yasuni National Park, if the international community will repay Ecuador half the forgone funds it would have gained from drilling and exporting. Minister of Heritage Maria Fernanda Espinosa explained the $3.6 billion fund will be used to convert Ecuador to a green energy economy. Success of the Yasuni plan has yet to be proven, but its implementation could signify the beginning of a needed backlash to the erroneous "green=poor," or "green=job-loss" mentality. Amazon Watch, yet another Overbrook grantee, has been monitoring the Yasuni initiative from the beginning.

Federal Agencies Submit Sustainability Plans

The White House released the Federal Agency Strategic Sustainability Performance Plans yesterday, with the goal of melding environmental, economic and energy goals to reduce emissions, create jobs and save taxpayers money. This marks the first time ever that federal agencies will submit sustainability goals, but it won't be the last. Following an executive order from October 2009, the agencies will have to set a greenhouse gas emissions target for 2020 and submit a plan for sustainable use of energy, fuel and water, to be updated annually and submitted for review to the Office of Management and Budget.

The Federal Government is the single largest energy consumer in the United States, with about half a million buildings and even more vehicles operating for a federal agency. About 2 million civilians are employed by the government. With luck, the new Sustainability Performance Plans will do more than set goals for government agencies -- the plans could also bring a new consciousness to agency employees. The ubiquity of Federal employees throughout the country could extend this commitment to sustainability to their home lives and behaviors as consumers. Either way, it is heartening to see the Federal Government "walking the walk," so to speak, in support of sustainability.

For a list of all the agencies involved and a look at the individual sustainability plans, click here.

A study just out of the Cambridge Conservation Initiative argues along the same lines, namely that conservation must be incorporated into the daily patterns and thought processes of consumers if any progress is to be made. Conservation must be viewed as a "global public good," according to the study, if biodiversity loss is to be stopped. It must go beyond policy and extend to individual's every-day choices. See the Eurekalert press release here.

A Tribute to Franz Schurmann

The following is reprinted with permission from New America Media. It is a tribute to Franz Schrumann, the co-founder of Pacific News Service:

Franz Schurmann, the foremost scholar of communist China during the Cold War, an early opponent of the US war in Indochina, and the co-founder of Pacific News Service, died at his home in San Francisco on Aug. 20. The cause was advanced Parkinson’s disease and Alzheimer’s disease. He was 84.

Schurmann taught history and sociology at UC-Berkeley for 38 years. Nevertheless, he chafed against the confines of the academy, and preferred to describe himself as an explorer-journalist rather than as an academic. He was fluent in 12 languages.

His first great exploration was a trip on horseback through Afghanistan in the late 1950s—a journey of two years that led Schurmann to discover what, until then, had been considered by anthropologists a mythical tribe of blue-eyed, blond-haired Mongols who descended from the military expeditions of Genghis Khan. (“The Mongols of Afghanistan”, 1962)

In contrast to the Cold War polemics that dominated China studies in the U.S., “Organization and Ideology of Communist China” (1968) drew heavily on Schurmann’s interviews of Chinese refugees in Hong Kong—interviews that enabled him to convey to western readers how Chinese society and governance truly worked.

Schurmann’s knowledge of the histories and cultures of the Far East gave him an expertise within the anti-war movement few other critics of American foreign policies of the time commanded. In 1966, he coauthored, with Reginald Zelnik and Peter Dale Scott, “The Politics of Escalation”, documenting a parallel chain of command operating within the US military and intelligence agencies that intended to thwart White House diplomacy.

An inveterate reader of the world press, Schurmann often told the story of a great WWII spy whose primary sources were daily newspapers. Schurmann tracked the rise of the post-Cold War global economy in “The Logic of World Power” (1974) and went on to challenge the almost universal demonization of Richard Nixon by America’s intelligentsia with “The Foreign Politics of Richard Nixon” (1987).

Despite the acclaim his early writings had achieved, and his reputation as a rigorous if provocative scholar and thinker, no one would publish Schurmann’s Nixon book, until Seymour Martin Lipset intervened on the book’s behalf. Even then, the book – which credited Nixon rather than Kissinger with Machiavellian brilliance in creating the architecture of the post-Cold War world-- never won an audience among official Nixon watchers, let alone academics.

Schurmann’s last book, “American Soul” (2001) was a personal narrative, a view of the world from 29th Avenue in San Francisco, at the shore of the Pacific. He described an America that was transforming the world and being transformed by the emergence of a one-world culture and economy.

Herbert Franz Schurmann was born on June 21, 1926, in New York City and raised with his younger sister, Dorothy, in Bloomfield, Conn., just outside Hartford. He described his childhood home in “American Soul” as divided by silences that resulted from the meeting of separate cultures. His father –a migrant tool and die maker from Slovenia—had found work in Germany, Poland, Greece and Italy before immigrating to America. His mother fled starvation and the chaos of post-WWI Germany and found work as a housemaid with a German Jewish family in New York.

Schurmann, inheriting his father’s gift for languages, absorbed the languages of the immigrant families of Hartford. He recalled fondly his Italian godmother, his French Canadian friends, and the meals served forth at his “Polish mother’s” table.

A combative misfit at school, he papered his bedroom walls with maps of the world and kept a meticulous stamp collection. His father died when he was fifteen. He left high school early with a scholarship to Trinity College in Hartford. But he was a working-class commuter student, and he felt out of place.

During WWII, he was drafted and assigned to language school. While waiting in line to get his papers, he switched places with a Japanese-American soldier and ended up studying Japanese instead of German. Shipping off from San Francisco, he joined the US occupation forces in Japan, where he worked as a censor in the offices of a Japanese newspaper. He would later recall this as the beginning of his fascination with newspapers.

Thanks to the GI Bill, he entered Harvard after his discharge to pursue a doctorate in Asian studies, without ever having earned an undergraduate degree. While in the army, he formed what would be a lifelong friendship with a fellow draftee, Stefan Brecht, son of the German playwright Bertolt Brecht and the actress, Helene Weigel. During summer breaks from Harvard, where the younger Brecht was also a graduate student, the pair would hitchhike to Santa Monica to join the Brecht household. Schurmann’s intellectual life, he later would say, began at the Brechts’ dining room table, in conversation with Thomas Mann and other European intellectuals who had forged an exile colony in and around Hollywood.

For his Harrvard Ph.D., Schurmann translated into English the Chinese Mongol dynastic tracts. Schurmann returned to Japan after completing his doctorate to study Chinese agricultural economics for a year at Kyoto University. A two-year fellowship allowed him to pursue his studies of the Mongol tribe in Afghanistan and later to learn Turkish and Persian in Istanbul. He lived for a time in Paris, before returning to the United States, to San Francisco, which he remembered from his Army days.

“My life was a series of fortunate accidents,” he would later recall, describing how a visit to UC Berkeley led to an offer by the Dept. of Oriental Studies to teach Turkish and Persian, filling in for a professor who was on sabbatical. Schurmann subsequently earned a tenured appointment in both sociology and history.

Schurmann’s work on Communist China and the accuracy of his prediction of a Sino-Soviet split prompted offers from RAND and US intelligence agencies. But the growing US involvement in Vietnam caused him to become a critic of U.S. foreign policy.

A founding member of the Faculty Peace Committee at UC Berkeley in the fall of 1964, Schurmann immersed himself in the nascent anti-war and Free Speech movements. He gave—along with anti-war intellectuals like Noam Chomsky, Richard Barnett, Seymour Melman and Richard Falk – an intellectual backbone to the movement. In the spring of 1968, he traveled to Hanoi with Mary McCarthy for a two-week fact-finding trip at the invitation of the North Vietnamese government. Deplaning later in Phnom Penh, Schurmann’s belligerant confrontation with US Ambassador William Sullivan over America’s secret war in Laos earned him headlines at home: “UC Berkeley Professor Squares off with US Ambassador” (Time Magazine). On his return, he was debriefed by Sen. J. William Fulbright, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. “The government is perpetuating so many lies,” Schurmann reported. “I wish it were that simple,” Fulbright responded (according to Schurmann). “The government lies so much it no longer can tell the difference between what’s a lie and what’s the truth.”

To promote independent research and writing, Schurmann founded the nonprofit Bay Area Institute and later, with a former student, Orville Schell, the Pacific News Service, in 1970. After President Nixon’s breakthrough diplomacy to China and the subsequent end of the Indochina War, Schurmann expanded the scope of his inquiries beyond East Asia to domestic affairs, especially the transformation of American cities with the onset of the global economy. A background session with Huey P. Newton about Newton’s upcoming trip to China led to an intellectual assocation. Schurmann wrote the introduction to Newton’s book, “To Die for the People.”

Schurmann’s devotion to Pacific News Service reflected his passion for newspapers. In 1974, his partner, Sandy Close, a former Hong Kong-based journalist and founder of the Flatlands newspaper in Oakland, California, took over the news service. For more than 35 years the couple ran PNS as a shared enterprise.

Schurmann’s columns reflected the range of his inquires – he translated the poetry scrawled by student demonstrators on the walls of Tiananmen Square; he analyzed the manifesto of the Taliban, which he translated from Pashtun long before the group had even surfaced as a political movement of interest to the US press; he warned in 1996 of the spreading of desertification of the globe: “I can taste the sand of the Gobi Desert on the streets of San Francisco.”

A one-time director of the Center for Chinese Studies at UC-Berkeley, Schurmann bridled at any official designation of himself as a “China expert”—as if such a designation would proscribe his intellectual freedom.

“I’ve moved on,” he would say, restless as always to resume his intellectual journey—to quantum physics, and then—in the early 1990s—to the study of written Arabic and to Islam. He mastered the script sufficiently to be able to read the Koran and the Arab language press which became his source of information for hundreds of columns, tracking the spread of militant Islam and America’s deepening engagement with the Muslim world.

Schurmann retired from UC Berkeley in the mid-1990s, a move he believed would free him to travel and to write. Stung by the rejection of his writing on Nixon by the East Coast publishing world, he slowly cut his ties to academia and many intellectual circles. Though in the 1960s Time named him one of America’s 50 most influential thinkers, by the 1990s he returned to his roots—traveling, observing, listening. His late travels took him to Latin America, Africa, India and China. On his last trip to China, Franz was accompanied by his younger son, Peter, and his son’s friend, a fellow New York bike messenger at the time, a young man with bright red hair who towered over everyone they met.

He mentored colleagues at PNS—from noted author and essayist Richard Rodriguez to young writers at YO! and the Beat Within, more than a dozen of whom shared, at various times, the Schurmann’s home. He served as the intellectual inspiration for the founding of New America Media by his partner, Sandy Close. “Franz was constantly shifting and expanding his lens, drawing on his readings of foreign-language media. PNS would never have made the breakthrough to NAM had it not been for his example,” said Close.

In those same years, not a day passed when he did not walk miles through San Francisco, often walking the eight miles from his home in the Sunset to the PNS offices downtown in less than 90 minutes.

Schurmann gradually withdrew to his study, acquiring an early facility with the computer and masking the onset of Alzheimer’s disease with a prodigious flow of ideas. His last five years were lived in seclusion, though he was visited faithfully by many students and PNS colleagues, even after he could no longer communicate. “This thinker and explorer whose gift was his ability to listen and learn from so many ordinary people all over the world finally retreated to the world of his mind, a universe by itself,” said Close.

Schurmann is survived by his partner of 42 years, Sandy Close; two sons, Mark Anderson Schurmann of Olympia, Washington; and Peter Leon Schurmann and his wife Aruna Lee,and grandson Leon of San Francisco; a sister, Dorothy Schurmann of Oakland; and a godson, Hanif Bey of San Francisco.

Update from the Community Catalyst Fund

Last December, Overbrook grantee Clean Air-Cool Planet launched the Community Catalyst Fund, a small grants program for sustainability projects in Connecticut, New York and New Jersey involving environmental preservation and energy-use reduction in small towns. Since then the CCF has been working hard to get the word out to grassroots organizations, many of which just need that extra little push to make great strides forward. Read below for an update on a star CCF project, cross-posted from Clean Air-Cool Planet's blog:

Community Catalyst Fund helps Groton student garden expand and grow

By Chad Devoe
Guest Blogger
Groton Central School, Groton, NY

Groton Central School is a rural district in the Finger Lakes Region of New York, with an enrollment of about 1,000 students. 2010 represented the third growing season for the GCS “Student Farm”. A year prior to its inception, we started a school-wide composting program (“Rot-in-Groton”) and composted on-site behind the school.

People started asking what would be done with the finished compost and a school garden seemed like the logical answer so students could see and take part in the complete recycling loop. We started with a 25’ x 25’ plot of grass that was roto-tilled into a decent garden. It was a rough and weedy start but it paved the way for future improvements. The garden attracted many volunteers since this was (and still is) the only community garden in Groton.

“Rot-in-Groton” Composting Video (dated back a few years)

Teachers and students volunteered their time as well as the Groton Girl Scout Troop, Rotary Club, and Youth Department to improve this valuable asset. Some produce was (and still is) used at the student-run Groton Farmer’s Market. Most produce, however, is planned so that harvest occurs in spring and fall so as much food as possible is used in the school cafeteria, offering students fresh and local organic produce at no additional charge to them. This year we are providing lettuce, spinach, garlic, melons, string beans, peas, winter/summer squash, beets, corn, potatoes, peppers, onions, and tomatoes to the cafeteria. Our food service director is very supportive and appreciative of our efforts since he is a gardener himself. Some preparation will be done by study hall students this year to minimize any extra work for the food service workers. This is a great learning experience in itself.

After two successful growing seasons, it was time for an expansion of the garden so that we could make a larger impact on cafeteria food choices. Clean Air-Cool Planet’s Community Catalyst Fund helped bring about major improvements this year including a 20’ hoop house so we could extend our growing season by at least two months, a garden expansion to 45’ x 45’ with 23 raised beds, a new fence and gate, and the beginning of a fruit orchard. Additionally, the high school has added a 1/2 year science/health elective titled “Food, Land, and You”.

Learn more about raised garden beds from Earth Easy

This spring-semester class will focus on gardening and our food supply through the lens of sustainability. Funding will go towards purchasing supplies for this hands-on class including canning materials, fresh produce and ingredients for healthy cooking recipes, and seeds. These improvements would not have been possible without this funding! Future plans are to expand the fruit orchard, establish a bed of asparagus, and further integrate garden-based education into the curriculum.

NRDC Asks Government to Strengthen Seafood Safety Regulations

The Natural Resources Defense Council, an Overbrook grantee, sent letters yesterday to the Food and Drug Administration and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association, demanding more stringent data and criteria for the safe consumption of Gulf seafood. The letters, signed by almost two dozen Gulf Coast organizations, also asked for full disclosure of everything the government agencies discover and decide about Gulf seafood in the wake of the BP oil disaster.

NRDC's letters come only a couple of weeks after the federal government declared much of the oil gone, either through skimming, use of dispersant chemicals or natural evaporation. Non-government scientists say that assessment is not completely incorrect, but does depend on consensus around the definition of the word "gone." Even non-scientists had reason to question the government statement after spending a spring and summer watching millions of gallons gush unfettered into the Gulf. Surface oil that broke up and sank to deeper waters may be out of sight, but is it truly "gone?"

Scientists who were not involved in the government study are currently doing their own research. Marine scientist Charles Hopkinson, asked by CNN about NOAA's statement said, "That is just absolutely incorrect in the opinion of the scientists."

When oil sinks its deleterious effects may not be as visible, but they are equally destructive. Oil degrades more slowly at colder temperatures found below the surface, and plankton at the base of the food web are vulnerable, affecting every step along the food chain.

Scientists at the Universities of Georgia and Florida have found evidence of oil in the soil of an undersea canyon in the Florida panhandle, as well as poisoned plankton. The next step in their research will be to determine whether that oil can be linked to the BP spill.

In the meantime, shrimping season is open and new fishing areas are being reopened every day. Can we trust government pronouncements that the seafood is safe to eat, when NOAA asserts most of the oil of the months-long spill is "gone?" NRDC, along with Gulf Coast communities, is making sure we all reach agreement, at least on the word "safe," when it comes to seafood.

AC Culture and Global Warming

An article out of The Independent today looks that the increasing ubiquity of air conditioning worldwide, and its implications for increased greenhouse gas emissions and related warming.

Artificial cooling is becoming a status symbol in developing countries, where individual home units are among the most common purchases once people reach a certain income bracket. Air conditioner use in China tripled between 1997 and 2007, and India is expected to dump at least ten times more energy into air conditioning by 2020 than it did in 2005. A growing urban population that increasingly equates manufactured temperature with status and luxury does not bode well for the planet's already record, rising temperatures.

But before pointing fingers, it's important to recognize the United States as the biggest culprit in over-use of air conditioning, a one-time luxury that has somehow become a "necessity" Americans demand. Americans eat up 15 percent of our country's annual energy consumption just on cooling homes, office buildings, shopping malls, movie theaters, etc, etc. This is the highest rate of energy consumption for air conditioning in the world, more than all of the combined energy used to fuel the entire African continent!

As we shiver "luxuriously" in our office buildings, homes and shopping malls, and Dubai's in-progress Palazzo Versace promises the world's first air conditioned beach, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association is coming out with some sobering (if not unexpected) news. Click here for NOAA's State of the Climate Global Analysis, which tells us in no uncertain terms that June 2010 was the warmest month on record, as well as the 304th consecutive month with a global temperature above the 20th Century average.


Most Americans have had the experience of shivering inside on the hottest days of summer, bringing sweatshirts or scarves to movies, office buildings and restaurants. Scientist Stan Cox, author of the book Losing Our Cool, makes a case for going ac-free, something that has become increasingly (and perplexingly) unthinkable in the US and beyond.

New Video Out from Story of Stuff

Overbrook grantee The Story of Stuff project released its newest video yesterday, The Story of Cosmetics (storyofcosmetics.org).

Read the promo from The Story of Stuff web site here:


Check out storyofcosmetics.org on July 21 to see our latest film about how major loopholes in U.S. federal law allow the $50 billion beauty industry to put unlimited amounts of chemicals into personal care products with no required testing, no monitoring of health effects and inadequate labeling requirements—making cosmetics among the least-regulated consumer products on the market. Think twice before putting on that lipstick, you might be putting on lead!

Congratulations to Annie Leonard and her team! Click here for a recent profile on Leonard in the LA Times.

The Next Class of Progressive Women’s Voices

Good news for some great progressive women!

The Women’s Media Center (WMC) is pleased to announce the second class of its Progressive Women’s Voices (PWC) program for 2010. Now in its third y ear, Progressive Women’s Voices is an intense media training and outreach program that involves in-person intensive training, weekly interview practice, and ongoing WMC strategy and support.

In 2010, the WMC will host three Progressive Women’s Voices training classes. Each class will include ten women from around the country trained over two separate weekends in New York City. Travel, accommodation, and training expenses are paid for completely by the WMC.

Progressive Women’s Voices is the premier media and leadership training program serving women in our country. In two years, the Women’s Media Center has intensively trained 60+ women who reflect diversity visibly absent from the mainstream media within important conversations around national security, health care, immigration, workplace policy, reproductive rights, climate change, and other issues that fill the headlines every day.

With training from The Women’s Media Center, PWV experts have been featured in the Washington Post, The New York Times, Elle, New York magazine, USA Today, Forbes, Variety, Mother Jones, the Wall Street Journal, Slate, Salon, The New Republic, the Los Angeles Times; by the Associated Press and Reuters; on Good Morning America, CNN, MSNBC, CBS Nightly News, Fox News, ABC News, CNBC, Bill Moyers, numerous NPR shows; and within hundreds of other top-tier media outlets.

To see the great women chosen for the program this year, click here. Interested in participating for a future program? Click here to get information on when you can apply to join a future class.

Ray of Hope in New Ocean Policy

The Obama administration announced the final recommendations of its ocean policy task force yesterday, the culmination of a year of research and negotiation between science, recreation, economic activity and military operations in the nation's oceans, coastlines and Great Lakes. The task force recommends the creation of a National Ocean Council, marking the first time ever a comprehensive federal body will govern ocean policy.

Perhaps the most groundbreaking detail of this news is not the Council itself, but the integrative approach it will take. Under the National Ocean Council, nine regional groups comprised of state, federal and tribal leaders will make recommendations based on marine spatial planning, a way of "zoning" waterways and coastlines. This ecosystem-based evaluation method will monitor activities including offshore drilling and military exercises in the interest of marine conservation, for the first time creating a comprehensive legal framework for ocean, coastal and Great Lakes conservation that prioritizes marine life.

For example, after considering scientific and economic recommendations, a group might allocate a certain coastal area for wind farms, certain areas or seasons for naval exercises, certain areas for offshore drilling, etc. Areas that are not specifically allocated would be off limits to those activities. In a breath of fresh air for conservationists and marine scientists, a bulleted objective of the Ocean Council (from the Council on Environmental Quality's initial press release) promises the new plan "Ensures science-based information is at the heart of decision-making." Read the full press release here.

BP Attempts "Final" Cap; Residents Hope for the Best

After a seemingly endless series of bad news, BP is installing what could be the final sealant cap to plug the estimated 60,000 barrels of oil gushing each day into the Gulf of Mexico. The previous cap stopped about 15-16,000 barrels a day, which flowed unfettered over the weekend after BP removed the old cap to make way for the new one.

A blog post today on the New York Times web site addresses a growing conflict between local officials on the Gulf Coast and the Army Corps of Engineers. Local officials, led by Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, claim the Army Corps is shutting down their plans to mitigate the effects of the spill without offering any solutions. The Army Corps, yet to regain the trust of New Orleanians after Hurricane Katrina, rejected a plan to dump 100,000-plus tons of limestone into Barataria Bay, an estuary leading from the Gulf to New Orleans through a web of inlets. The Army Corps claims this plan will ultimately be more destructive than the spill, since it will exacerbate already-occurring erosion. But local government officials feel frustrated and hamstrung, unable to act.

In the meantime, as BP promises to cap the leak and local officials struggle to find common ground with the federal government, people living in all the Gulf Coast states are feeling grave repercussions, economically and emotionally. A heart-wrenching story in the St. Petersburg Times details the immediate lifestyle changes being felt by residents of Pensacola, Florida. In one particularly poignant analogy, Times writer Craig Pittman quotes coastal geologist and Florida resident James "Rip" Kirby III: "When your entire way of life is built around seeing how the seasons change here, the things you do here, the things you eat, that's the reason you live here -- and all of that is dying slowly before your eyes. It's like checking an elderly relative into a rest home and knowing they're not going to come out."

Click here for a series of blog posts on various aspects of the oil spill from ProPublica.

National Public Radio Covers the Gulf Oil Spill

As we move into month three of the Gulf oil spill, the Foundation continues to watch the continuing and intensive coverage of this serious crisis. The Foundation has been particularly attuned to National Public Radio’s environmental coverage over the past few months.

NPR has been on the story 24/7, with two reporters and one producer in the Gulf at all times, and additional reporters, editors, producers and digital media staff rotating into the Gulf or working from other locations. Its coverage comes out of NPR’s National desk, as well as from its science, economics and investigative units, and it has reported well over 300 stories on social, economic, political and environmental issues related to the spill, most on Morning Edition and All Things Considered, with 13 and 12 million weekly listeners respectively. In sum, they are bringing the full force of NPR’s broadcast and digital power to bring the American public this story.

NPR’s science correspondent Richard Harris was the first to cast serious doubts on BP’s characterization of how bad the spill was. Harris not only broke the news that the oil is leaking at rates ten times greater than official estimates, but his story has also made a difference in the tone and substance of the federal response, and has contributed to the establishment a government-appointed task force of scientists whose job is to come up with a more definitive figure of the amount of oil that has spilled. Here is Richard Harris with a recent update on the rate of the spill.

Yuki Noguchi, one of NPR’s business correspondents, brought home the complexity of the situation with this moving piece about the owners of a franchise gas station, who are paying the price for BP affiliation. And here’s more of Noguchi’s coverage of small businesses with a link to her story this morning on Morning Edition how business is melting away for Gulf Coast ice houses.

You can also take a look at this story by NPR’s veteran science correspondent Elizabeth Shogren on how the spill is affecting sea turtles in the Gulf. Or this in-depth discussion on Talk of the Nation on how to put a price on BP’s responsibility for reparations. There is so much exceptional coverage, and it can all be accessed on npr.org.

At NPR, they are reaching beyond its current dedicated resources to bring the public the depth and breadth of this story.

Climate Experts Talk Tipping Points

A recent survey published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences journal asked 14 of the world's top climate scientists what they think the next 200 years have in store for planet Earth. Complete agreement on future scenarios was neither reached nor expected, but the group agreed on one point: at current "business as usual" rates of greenhouse gas emissions, the globe will exceed the worst-case-scenario proposed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its last Assessment Report. Work is currently underway on the IPCC's fifth report, due out in the fall of 2014.

The PNAS survey measures the level of consensus within the climate science community, which has weathered a tough year. (Both Climategate and increasing numbers of skeptics have undermined public response to the threats of climate change.) Science, by nature, is never 100 percent certain about anything, but the survey shows a clear trend among the top researchers working on climate. All agreed the Earth is approaching a tipping point at which significant shifts in the way our climate system functions will be both inevitable and irreversible. Within the next 100 years, the scientists agreed, the globe's average temperature will reach levels we have not seen in the past 10,000 years, around the time human culture became agrarian.

The concentration of carbon dioxide in the earth's atmosphere has now reached about 380 parts per million -- that's about 100 ppm higher than before the Industrial Revolution. According to Dr. Myles Allen, a climate researcher who participated in the survey, our current emissions trajectory will take us to an inevitable height of 1,000 ppm by 2200. Although sobering, there is at least some hope to be found in this dire prediction:

"The emissions that commit you to 1000 ppm in the year 2200 actually occur mostly over the next 50 years," Allen said. "The emissions decisions we make over the next 50 years commit us to the climate we're going to have to deal with (in) 150 years time -- that's the point."

Scientists agree that even if we stopped all global emissions today, the planet would still continue to warm since emissions and temperature, while linked, do not rise simultaneously. (One of the best analogies I've heard was in a lecture by James White, Director of the Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research and professor at the University of Colorado. White compared greenhouse gas emissions and temperature to two prisoners handcuffed together. Ghgs run forward, and yank lagging temperature ahead.)

The good news in Allen's statement is that it is not yet too late to make some positive change. While future warming is inevitable, a 1,000 ppm future is simply unacceptable. It can be prevented, but only if nations work together -- now -- to intelligently and deliberately craft climate policy.

Environment Grants Awarded in June 2010

At its June 2010 Board Meeting last week, The Overbrook Foundation's Environment Program awarded $745,000 in grants to 15 organizations in the categories of Latin American Biodiversity Conservation, Sustainable Production and Consumption, and Public TV, Radio and Other Media. Eleven are either renewals or from organizations previously funded, and four are from organizations new to Overbrook. See Elizabeth's last post for a description of the Human Rights Program's grantmaking at the June meeting.

For its work supporting Latin American Biodiversity Conservation, the Foundation awarded $325,000 in grants. Organizations awarded were: Earthworks, for its campaign to clean up destructive mining practices; Ecosystem Sciences Foundation, for its Payment for Watershed Services program in Mexico, Environmental Investigation Agency for its continued work in forest governance; Fundacion Cordillera Tropical for its community conservation work in Ecuador; Pronatura Noroeste A.C. for its campaign to stop an environmentally destructive tourist development in Mexico; Rainforest Action Network for its continued work protecting tropical forests and acting as watchdog of large corporations.

For its Sustainable Production and Consumption work, the Foundation awarded $330,000. Organizations awarded were: Borealis Centre for Environment and Trade Research, for its work conducting research and providing strategy for environmental organizations waging corporate campaigns; Clean Production Action for its work providing safer options to the electronics industry; Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy, for its work building a Zero-Waste city; Product Stewardhsip Institute, Inc., for its campaign to help consumers opt-out of phone book deliveries; Root Capital, for its work providing loans to small businesses promoting conservation in Ecuador and Mexico; the Tides Center for the Funders Workgroup for Sustainable Production and Consumption; Urban Green, the New York chapter of the U.S. Green Building Council.

The Environment Program also supported Grist.org, frequently referenced in this blog for its wry and incisive reporting on environmental issues, and NPR for its environmental content, a joint grant with the Human Rights Program.

Of course all descriptions above are extremely brief and hardly do these great organizations and projects justice! Follow the links to learn more about them, or click here to be directed to The Overbrook Foundation web site.

Reactions to President Obama's Speech

Updates on Environment Program June 2010 grants are to come!

But for the day after President Obama's speech on the oil spill in the Gulf, I thought it best to post a short listing of reactions in the media. In the address, the President linked the spill to the two wars we are fighting overseas, referred to a nation-wide "addiction to fossil fuels," and called for more investment in renewable energy. Some critics thought he was too reserved, others felt he used the spill as an excuse to promote his new energy policy. The only consistency among the reactions was that no one seemed completely pleased.

David Roberts of Grist, an Overbrook grantee, agreed with many environmentalists that Obama was not specific enough in his plans for clean-up and future energy solutions. But one triumph that many overlooked, Roberts said, was Obama's omission of nuclear, domestic drilling and "clean" coal as part of the energy-mix coneversation. In past speeches, the President has included these as part of our energy future. This time, he emphasized renewables and energy efficiency, perhaps hinting toward a sharper shift in the way we define "clean" and "independent" energy. Read Roberts' post here, along with responses from Grist readers.

The Huffington Post was less positive. Look here for their take, along with links to other opinions, media outlets, and a full transcript and video of the speech.

Look here for an LA Times conglomeration of Senators' Twitter comments during the speech.

Click here to access the New Orleans Times-Picayune, with updates on the spill from their own backyards.

Human Rights Grants Awarded In June 2010

Last week on Wednesday, the Overbrook Foundation held its June 2010 Board Meeting and approved approximately $1.4 million in its Environment and Human Rights Program. I’m going to blog today about some of the organizations that the Foundation looks forwarded to partnering with in next year from its Human Rights Program.

In support of its Human Rights work, the Board approved 15 grants under the categories of domestic human rights, international human rights, reproductive rights, LGBT rights and movement building. Eleven of the proposals were for continued support of existing organizations or projects previously supported by the Foundation.

In its International Human Rights work, the Foundation awarded grants to four organizations: WITNESS for promoting video advocacy in the Americas, Human Rights Center for its International Human Rights Fellows Programs, Human Rights First for protecting human rights defenders in Latin America, and Conectas, for enhancing access to justice for vulnerable groups in Brazil. The total amount awarded was $175,000.

Under its Gender Rights Program, the Foundation also awarded a total of $165,000 in grants to International Planned Parenthood, Freedom to Marry, Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, and a first time grant to Search for Common Ground.

In the Domestic Human Rights category, the Board awarded a total of $240,000 in grants. Recipients include The Innocence Project, Breakthrough, a first time grant to the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and The Public Interest Projects for the US Human Rights Fund.

In its Movement Building category, Overbrook awarded three grants totaling $100,000; grants were awarded to the American Constitution for Law and Policy, a first time grant for the nonprofit news organization Mother Jones for reporting on domestic human rights and a renewal grant to The Women’s Media Center.

Lastly, there was also a shared grant between the Environment and Human Rights Program to National Public Radio for their continued coverage of environmental and human rights issues on NPR News.

In total, the Human Rights Program awarded $710,000 in grants in June. If you’re interested in seeing a complete list of grants awarded by the Foundation in 2010 (as well amount awarded), please click here, which will take you to our website.

In the next few days Samantha will blog about some of the grants awarded from the Foundation’s Environment program, so stay tuned!

WITNESS Video on Elder Abuse on Link TV - Tonight!

WITNESS’ recent video, “An Age of Justice: Confronting Elder Abuse in America” - supported in part by the Overbrook Foundation - will broadcast on Link TV starting tonight –Tuesday, June 15th, at 8:30pm EST.

The film is a joint effort of WITNESS and its partner the National Council on Aging (NCOA) to empower older Americans and others who care about them to speak out against elder abuse in the U.S. It also marks a significant advocacy success. The film's screenings on Capitol Hill played a role in our Federal government’s signing the Elder Justice Act (EJA) into law as part of the comprehensive health reform legislation in March!

It is estimated that as many as five million Americans aged 65 or older have suffered abuse of some sort, including physical, emotional, sexual, and financial abuse. Elder abuse cuts across gender, social, racial, ethnic, economic and geographic lines but, unlike with child abuse and domestic violence, there has been no Federal legislation to protect our oldest citizens until passage of the EJA.

“An Age of Justice” features moving stories of elder abuse recorded by video advocates across the U.S. In addition to Link TV’s nationwide broadcast on television and on its website, www.linktv.org/programs/age-for-justice, WITNESS and NCOA have launched an awareness-raising initiative, with community-based organizations and senior centers across the country hosting screenings. Visit www.elderjusticenow.org/host-a-screening for more information.

Make sure to watch (or set your DVR)!

Making Philanthropy More Participatory

Note: This is a cross posting. The original post was written for the Communications Network and can be found here.

Last week I attended the 2010 Personal Democracy Forum. The event, which is held every year in New York City, is one of the leading conferences dedicated to exploring technology’s impact on politics, government, and society. Individual presentations, conversations, and panel discussions focus on different ways technology is (or should be) opening government, electoral politics -- and even the nonprofit world -- to provide more opportunities for citizen participation.

A Friday afternoon session, “Philanthropy 2.0: How Foundations are Opening Up and Innovating,” explored how some foundations, especially newer ones, are making efforts to engage more of the public, as well as their grantees, in their work. The panel featured Ellen Miller, co-founder and executive director of the Sunlight Foundation, (full disclosure, she’s my mother) Kari Saratovsky, vice president of Social Innovation at The Case Foundation and Stacy Donohue, director of investments at Omidyar Network (ON). It was also moderated by Chris Gates, executive director of Philanthropy for Active Civic Engagement.

Because it's such a new term, Philanthropy 2.0 may not be that well understood (yet) by many in the philanthropic community, so this panel provided a great opportunity to begin introducing it to a wider audience. For those who haven’t heard of this before, I’ll run down some of the basics. In its simplest terms, Philanthropy 2.0 refers to the “democratization of philanthropy,” including providing opportunities for individuals to participate in decisions about how foundations allocate resources. The term also underscores a belief in and commitment to increased transparency and a desire for greater partnerships among foundations themselves and the organizations in which they invest.

Each of the presenters talked about some of the ways their organizations were implementing elements of Philanthropy 2.0. For example, Sunlight publishes all its grant awards and provides information about organizations it receives funding from on the foundation's website. The Case Foundation's Saratovsky discussed how foundations can democratize philanthropy through challenges, competitions, and what also might be called "crowd sourcing." ON's Donohue told the audience that Omidyar regards the organizations its supports more as “partners" than grantees. As a result, along with its grantmaking, the foundation focuses on the sustainability, value and scale of these partner organizations.

After the panel, it hit me: Philanthropy 2.0 is all about communication. Whether it's how foundations can be more open with the public, or with the organizations they support, communication is key to doing those things well. It also became obvious to me that you cannot have Philanthropy 2.0 unless your communications are clear, effective, and honest. Thus, as foundation communicators, we have a central role to play in ensuring the Philanthropy 2.0 becomes the norm in our organizations. We can also play an important role helping implement new communications technologies that make it easier for foundations to operate more openly and to invite more people to participate in their work. And while we might find it easy to use these tools, we have to be sensitive that some of our non-communications colleagues may need a little more time to get used to them and figure out how they can best apply them to their work.

None of this is will be accomplished fast or easily. As one audience member asked during the question and answer session: "How do established foundations see Philanthropy 2.0, and how likely are they to begin adopting this new way of thinking and acting?" The ultimate answer to that question depends to some degree on what we, as communicators, do to help keep the spotlight on the benefits of working in these new ways and encouraging more discussion about this topic within our organizations.

I'm ready for Philanthropy 2.0. How about you?

New York to Mandate E-Waste Recycling

Governor Paterson has signed legislation requiring producers of electronic waste to collect and recycle their products, making New York the 23rd state to pass an e-waste recycling law. The new law, effective April 1st 2011, will require manufacturers to recycle amounts proportional to what they produce, based on a three-year sales average. Producers will also be required to report on their progress annually to the Department of Environmental Conservation.

Although New York has been slow to adopt an e-waste law, the new legislation was built on successes of the 22 other states already on board. Kate Sindig of the Natural Resources Defense Council, a current Overbrook grantee the Environment Program has supported for work on e-waste legislation, called the new law "arguably the most progressive electronics recycling law in the country." Read Kate's post on the NRDC staff blog here.

Products covered under the law include TVs, computers, keyboards, cables, mice and printers. Taxpayers and municipalities will not only be relieved of the financial burden of collecting and recycling electronics, but amounts of toxic chemicals and metals that leach into waterways when electronics are trashed will also be reduced. Putting the end-of-life responsibility back on producers is also expected to clean up the materials they use to make the electronics in the first place. And starting January 1, 2015, it will be illegal for consumers in New York to throw electronics in landfills.

Many manufacturers would like to see a federal law as opposed to a patchwork of rules governing e-waste in different states. But as more states sign on, momentum will surely build toward more comprehensive legislation. With 23 states in, we're almost halfway there!

Culture or Science to Prevent Disaster?

As we enter the sixth week of oil gushing unfettered into the Gulf of Mexico, some scientists and sociologists are asking how we (BP executives and Minerals Management Services employees who ignored safety warnings and consumers of petroleum alike) allowed this disaster to happen in the first place. Surely all of us, some more explicitly than others, anticipated the dangers of drilling at such unprecedented depths. And because of our addiction to gas-powered vehicles and petroleum-based products, all of us have contributed in our own ways to the series of events leading to the now unstoppable plume of oil. If we have the technological capability to drill 32,000 feet into the ocean floor, why are we not directing that capability full force toward the development of cleaner, less risky energy sources?

Research out of the University of Alberta attempts to answer this question. In his "System Failure: Oil, Futurity and the Anticipation of Disaster," author Imre Szeman found that consumption behaviors and views toward oil exploration generally do not change, even when people are confronted with sound scientific evidence linking disastrous environmental affects to fossil fuels.

Szeman breaks this disconnect down to three common rationalizations: 1) the idea that oil exploration equals economic security, and therefore is worth the risk; 2) the "eco-apocalypse" idea that freezes people's actions with its enormity; and 3) the phenomenon of what Szeman calls "technical utopianism," a blind faith that no matter what happens, improved future technologies will sweep in to clean up any messes we make.

Szeman concludes that shifts in behaviors concerning the health of the planet must be addressed anew, and not by piling on more science. Environmental stewardship is now a cultural and sociological issue, Szeman believes, and will not be improved on a large scale until it is addressed as such.

An article in last Sunday's New York Times touches on the third point of Szeman's triangle of environmental disconnect: technical utopianism. Elisabeth Rosenthal's "Our Fix-It Faith and the Oil Spill" addresses this problem, and ends with a quote from the physicist/philosopher Richard Feynman: "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled."