text:
Useful Links
Earth Law Center
- Date submitted: 1 Nov 2011
- Stakeholder type: Major Group
- Name: Earth Law Center
- Submission Document: Download
Full SubmissionSubmission by Earth Law Center to the U.N. Conference on Sustainable Development INTRODUCTION Earth Law Center is a 501(c)(3) public benefit organization dedicated to advancing Earth-based laws, economic structures, and governance systems that reflect the intrinsic rights of the natural world to exist, thrive and evolve. Earth Law Center staff has considerable expertise in advancing sustainable environmental laws and policies at the local, state and federal levels, particularly with respect to water and waterways. We welcome the opportunity to submit these inputs and contributions for inclusion in the compilation document that will advise the zero draft of the outcome document (Zero Draft) for the U.N. Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD or Rio +20). SUMMARY Earth Law Center urges decision-makers to highlight the following objectives in the Zero Draft, and to prioritize them for adoption and action at Rio +20: ? Support Earth-based governance, in particular by recognizing and implementing in law the rights of ecosystems and species to exist, thrive and evolve. ? Endorse and promote adoption of the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth and actively support its implementation globally. ? Re-define ?sustainable development? and the ?green economy? within the context of Earth-based laws and governance systems that recognize the rights of the natural world, rather than within the limited, injurious context of human-centered, unlimited economic growth and short-term, individual human gain. o To ensure this objective is achieved, re-name and re-focus ?sustainable development? as ?sustainable communities,? a term which includes both human communities and the wider communities of the natural world. o This re-focusing is needed to ensure that all elements of sustainable communities are considered. The current, market-based approach distorts communities to serve the economy. Elements of sustainable human communities include not just the economy, but also culture, societal/familial relations, healthy food, clean drinking water, sanitation, housing, necessary medical care, democratic governance, education, meaningful and appropriately rewarded labor, spirituality, civic duty, volunteerism, etc. Sustainable environmental communities similarly require healthy nutrients, clean water, biodiversity, restoration in the face of destruction, and thriving, connected habitats. The economy must be viewed as serving human and environmental communities, not the reverse. o Implementation strategies for these goals should also be identified and supported; including, for example, water rights held by waterways, agro-ecological methods of food production, and a global financial transaction tax to support strategy implementation. ? Refine the institutional framework to reflect Earth-based governance strategies that achieve ?sustainable communities.? The existing three pillars ? Environment, Society and Economy ? reflect false assumptions about the need for and likelihood of unlimited economic growth, and its place in a sustainable community. These assumptions must be reconsidered, and the three pillars should be revisited within the context of humans? actual interrelationships with other Earth inhabitants. A healthy environment is the most overarching need; without it, human society, and its subset the human economy, cannot function. A new, ?sustainable communities? institutional framework should be supported by nested structures, with environment supported by society, which in turn is supported by not only economy but also by the other elements of sustainable communities. As the last several decades have shown, tinkering with rather than ending our addiction to ecosystem- and species-fueled, ?unlimited? growth on a finite planet will inevitably fail. The focus now should be on reworking our overarching governance systems to embrace the goal of sustainable communities, rather than contorting our communities to serve runaway, increasingly destructive growth. We only avoid this necessary work with the proposed, misplaced focus on ?sustainable development? and ?green? economy as our end goals. By contrast, a successful, Earth-based governance system will necessarily include appropriate development within Earth?s limits, and a truly ?green? economy. Such an economy would implicitly accept humans? place within the interconnected web of our relationships with other Earth systems, rather than perpetuate our illusory mastery over them. Each of these points is discussed in more detail below. DISCUSSION Support Earth-based governance, in particular by calling for recognition and implementation in law of the rights of ecosystems and species to exist, thrive and evolve. Despite achieving some notable successes over the years, our current environmental laws and agreements, including past efforts of the UNCSD, have been unable to prevent increasingly grave challenges such as climate change, depleted waterways, and disappearing species and natural habitats ? all of which contribute to the growing human populations without clean water, safe shelter, healthy food or other basic necessities. These dilemmas result in large part because our overarching legal and economic systems treat the natural world as property that can be exploited and degraded, rather than as an integral ecological partner with its own rights to exist and thrive. They assume that the environment will be protected if humans take from it a little less, and a little less quickly. But this simply slows, never stops, the downward slide. The environment is increasingly registering its objections to this legal and economic mismatch. Climate change is the most direct protest, one that disproportionately impacts the most disadvantaged and marginalized human communities. Since we are inextricably intertwined with our environment, this trend does not bode well for us either. The false dogma of ?humans over nature? needs to shift to allow us to recognize our interconnectedness with the natural world and acknowledge its rights to exist and thrive. By creating a legal system that incorporates and respects ecosystem rights, we will prompt planning and actions that ensure that we truly live sustainably, for the benefit of all humans and of the natural world that sustains us. However, despite protestations to the contrary in the UNCSD draft documents and elsewhere, protection of nature is generally subsumed to the incessant driver of economic growth. Such anthropocentrism is out of step with science, and leads to a dangerously unbalanced relationship between humans and the rest of the community of life on Earth. The 2011 U.N. background report, Toward a Green Economy, illustrates the dilemma of attempting to improve environmental protection by further forcing environmental ?protection? efforts to fit within a market economy system that is causing the destruction. For example, the report asserts on page 15 that: the most prevalent myth [about ?greening? the global economy] is that there is an inescapable trade-off between environmental sustainability and economic progress. There is now substantial evidence that that the greening of economies neither inhibits wealth creation nor employment opportunities. The document is correct that there should be no trade-off between environment and economy, in that no economy can flourish without a healthy environment, on which we are utterly dependent. However, the document fails to ask the correct questions about how to address the current imbalance between an economy predicated on runaway growth and an environment being destroyed by that economy. Instead, it simply assumes without question that such an economy must continue; stating, for example, that such hesitant actions as ?market-based incentives? can be used to course-correct the incessant drive toward depletion of the natural world. The far better course would be to ask and analyze more searching questions about the kind of world that we want to achieve through these types of international exercises, and more narrow questions about related topics such as the nature of ?wealth creation? (that is, why we assume that wealth must be defined by current economic indicators rather than by other metrics, and why the increase in economic wealth must continue unabated). For example, as Polanyi posits in The Great Transformation, the distribution of good and services need not be for the purpose of maximizing economic wealth, but instead would be put to better use providing for biological and social needs. The failure to date of the process to ask and answer these types of searching questions results in a flawed strategic analysis that fails to examine necessary alternatives or provide appropriate metrics for assessing progress. As just one example, the Water chapter of UNEP?s Towards a Green Economy report lists indicators of ?progress towards a green economy? on page 121; of the five indicators listed, not one calls for measuring progress on improvements to waterway or water-dependent ecosystem health. This is particularly disturbing in light of the fact that the same report also points to an aggregate decline in waterway and aquifer health worldwide (page 130). Environmental health appears as a mere afterthought to the process of current efforts to further monetize the Earth?s systems. The end result will inevitably center on a haggling over the prices that stakeholders with funds are willing to pay, rather than a serious effort to assess what environmental health looks like and to determine how to change our lifestyles to reach and maintain that goal. Treating the environment as afterthought to pricing will be not only to the detriment of the natural world, but also to we humans who depend on it. We strongly recommend that the UNCSD and the Zero Draft raise and answer these searching questions, rather than defaulting to the process equivalent of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Only a governance system based on a humble acknowledgment of our place within a web of inter-relationships with other humans and natural world ? one that recognizes that a healthy Earth is fundamental to continued, flourishing human existence ? can be deemed ?sustainable.? An operating system premised on ?development? as the end goal of the exercise in defining ?sustainability? is not equipped to ask and answer the urgent questions about how we should conduct our lives in an era of growing scarcity. Accordingly, we urge decision-makers to include in the Zero Draft and to strongly support a system not of market-based governance, but of Earth-based governance, which recognizes the intrinsic value of the natural world apart from its benefit as a "resource" for human use. Such a governance system would respect Earth?s limits and would continually evolve to reflect new science on the workings and boundaries of Earth?s systems. It would incorporate an ongoing analysis of ethics for the purpose of developing decision-making criteria, such as use of the precautionary approach and assignment of the burden of proof in disputes. Finally, Earth-based governance would recognize and implement in law the rights of ecosystems and species to exist, thrive and evolve, including rights of ecosystems and species to representation at such international gatherings as UNCSD, and it would appropriately protect the environment?s right to restoration for human-caused destruction. The development and implementation of Earth-based governance will in time create its own feedback loop ? one where science and ethics drives law, which drives culture, which drives further evolution in law, science and ethics ? until the law and the culture meet, and we cannot envision a time where our laws relegated the natural world to second-class, ?property? status. Along this path, ?environmentalism? itself will evolve from a subset of the population acting to safeguard the planet, into a deeply-felt awareness in the hearts and minds of all individuals, an awareness that further guides our self-governance over how we live our lives and make our daily choices to achieve not only sustainable, but indeed flourishing, environmental and human communities. Endorse and promote adoption of the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth and actively support its implementation globally. As noted above, the false dogma of ?humans over nature? needs to shift to make way for a legal system that incorporates and respects ecosystem rights. Such a system is essential to prompt planning and actions that support sustainable communities, not simply continued infinite economic growth incorrectly characterized as ?sustainable.? Fortunately, models are cropping up for legal systems that can steer us in the right direction. For example, the Ecuadorian Constitution at Articles 71 and 72 endows the environment with inalienable rights to "exist, persist, maintain and regenerate its vital cycles, structure, functions and its processes in evolution." The Constitution further grants individuals the legal authority to defend these rights on behalf of the environment. This language acknowledges the interdependence between humans and environment, and respects both sides of that tightly-knit relationship. Its provisions were first tested in a successful case earlier this year, in which the court found that the Vilcabamba River?s constitutional right to flow had been violated by destructive road development practices, and ordered that the river?s flow be restored. The precedent set by the Ecuadorian Constitution also led to the adoption, led by Bolivia, of an international Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth. Following the failure of U.N. Conference of the Parties in Copenhagen to achieve meaningful progress in combating climate change, the Bolivian government organized an alternative conference for communities, NGOs, lawyers, academics, scientists and governments from around the world. This conference, held in Cochabamba, Bolivia in April 2010, was attended by 35,000 people from 140 countries. At the end, participants adopted a Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth, which recognizes Earth as a living being with rights to life, to the continuation of vital cycles and processes, and to restoration from destructive human activities. The Declaration was formally presented to the United Nations in an April 2011 General Assembly event, and provides a sound structure for establishing actions and strategies to achieve healthy, sustainable human and environmental communities. Accordingly, we urge UNCSD decision-makers to endorse and promote adoption of the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth in the Zero Draft, and to call for its active support and implementation globally. As Article 7 of the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth states: [t]he rights of each being are limited by the rights of other beings and any conflict between their rights must be resolved in a way that maintains the integrity, balance and health of Mother Earth. Human rights, including to a sustainable economy, must by definition be in harmony with Earth?s systems and consistent with the rights of nature to exist, thrive and evolve. The Declaration thereby appropriately seeks to rebalance our relationship with the Earth from one that is destructive to one that is mutually enhancing, for the benefit of the whole Earth community. Re-define ?sustainable development? and the ?green economy? within the context of Earth-based laws and governance that recognize the rights of the natural world. Re-name and re-focus ?sustainable development? as ?sustainable communities,? a term which includes both human communities and the wider communities of the natural world. As discussed above, Earth-based governance, rather than inherently flawed market-based governance, should be the focus of international decision-makers in ensuring the future well-being of people and ecosystems. It cannot be argued that current UNCSD efforts to better define ?sustainable development? and a ?green economy? are equivalent to ensuring the well-being of people and planet, because they fail to: (a) deeply question whether the current, injurious economic system is either beneficial and viable, or (b) consider different metrics for ensuring healthy people and planet. We accordingly challenge decision-makers to evaluate the flaws of the market-based approach by re-naming and re-focusing ?sustainable development? as ?sustainable communities,? a term that includes both human communities and the wider communities of the natural world. Only by changing the lens by which the analysis is conducted can we begin to see the inherent flaws and limitations of the current effort to contort environmental and societal well-being into a system focused on protecting markets and unending economic growth. This re-focusing is also needed to ensure that all elements of sustainable communities are considered; i.e., not just the market economy. Elements of sustainable human communities include not solely the economy, but also culture, societal/familial relations, healthy food, clean water, sanitation, housing, necessary medical care, democratic governance, education, meaningful and appropriately rewarded labor, spirituality, civic duty, volunteerism, interaction with the natural world, etc. Sustainable environmental communities similarly require healthy nutrients, clean water, biodiversity, restoration in the face of destruction, and thriving, connected habitats. The economy must be viewed as serving human and environmental communities, not the reverse, as is the case with the current effort and background documents. Examples of the Implications of a Misplaced Focus on Development over Sustainable Communities One example of the implications of the ongoing and expanded focus on economic development rather than sustainable communities is seen in the flawed definition of the ?green economy? itself, which fails to commit to successful, Earth-based sustainability. UNEP?s 2011 report, Towards a Green Economy defines a ?green economy? as ?one that results in ?improved human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities?? (page 16). This definition first clearly emphasizes human well-being over environmental health, disregarding the science and ethics of behaving as if the environment were our property rather than essential, connected partner on this Earth. Second, by failing to tackle the inherently flawed foundational assumption that continued economic growth is possible and desirable, the definition prevents meaningful progress in achieving well-being for all humans and human communities. Rather, in the words of the Occupy movement, it benefits the 1% at the expense of the 99%. Again, as we are all connected, this failure bodes ill for the population as a whole. Finally, unpacking this definition further, we see additional implications of a failure to consider grounding the economy in Earth-based governance, in that the definition side-steps achieving environmental health and settles instead for ?reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities.? Achieving an undefined ?reduction? in environmental injury can easily be achieved on paper to further serve runaway economic growth, with no meaningful, sustainable achievement of environmental health and sustainability in reality. The Water chapter of the Towards a Green Economy report further illustrates the practical implications of a ?green economy? that is neither ?green? nor protects the economy. Page 137 lists various strategies for enhancing water supplies and notes that each is ?consistent with the development of a green economy,? which it then defines as ?seek[ing] to minimise the impact of economic activity on the environment.? While minimizing the impacts of our current market economy on the environment is an essential first step, it should not be the end goal, particularly when that same economy is destroying essential waterways and aquifers (see, e.g., examples on page 131). Instead, the end goal should be a healthy environment, and by association healthy human communities. The current, narrow focus on the economy as the driver of success, rather than the reason for failure, will only continue to prevent us from seeing this basic end goal, to the detriment of all. A strategy-level example of the flaws in the proposed ?green economy? approach is the growing effort to use ?payment for ecosystem services? as a tool to achieve sustainability. While we should, of course, better appreciate the many benefits that ecosystems and species provide us, converting ecosystems and species into monetary values threatens to trap us in the same market-based web that created the environmental destruction that we are trying to prevent. If ecosystems or species are threatened, the argument broadly states, we should translate the issue to monetary terms and write a check, thus solving or avoiding the problem. However, this fails because of at least three unexamined logical and practical flaws. First, by subsuming the environment within the market economy, rather than appropriately nesting the economy within the overarching need for a healthy environment, ?payment for ecosystem services? (PES) will always prioritize market protection over the environmental health. Second, and as a practical matter, by monetizing the environment and its services, the argument shifts from environmental health to money and cost. The negotiation becomes not about ?how do we achieve environmental health,? but about ?how much are stakeholders are willing to pay and who will profit? ? an entirely different conversation that is unrelated to sustainability. Finally, the arguments for PES ignore the fact that water, in particular, is essential to life itself, and its acquisition cannot in many cases be subsumed within a simplistic ?willingness to pay? metric. This is particularly true for people on fixed, limited or no incomes, and for the environment, whose water needs are already marginalized by the report?s focus on human-centered market economics as the solution to human water needs. An application-level example of the flaws in the proposed ?green economy? approach is provided by Australia, referenced in the report as a potential success story due to its environmental water buy-back program (pages 142-143). However, since the release of Green Economy, the Australian National Water Commission released its own assessment of this National Water Initiative (Sept. 2011, http://www.nwc.gov.au/). This assessment characterizes the auditing and accountability safeguards around the $1.3 billion Aus spent to date to buy back water from farmers for the environment as ?weak,? and resulting in no detailed evidence that the buy-back has delivered ecological benefits. This is a particularly disturbing finding given the amount of public money spent to date, and the amount ($500 million Aus) still due to be spent this year. The report further finds that ?[t]he necessary science to link environmental watering with ecological outcomes is generally weak and there is a lack of transparent reporting results.? This unfortunately is not surprising given the blithely placed mistrust in the market to cure water ills. Unless the focus is on the waterways and aquifers themselves and their needs, science will take a back door to the market process, with inevitably disappointing results. The report finally concludes that the rapidly-expanding and essentially unregulated coal seam gas mining industry in Australia, which like its U.S. counterpart fracking uses enormous amounts of water, must be brought under the National Water Initiative ?as a matter of urgency.? Given the political and market pressure to expand coal seam gas mining in Australia, this advice is unlikely to be heeded soon. Again, the misplaced focus on markets distracts decision-makers and the public from the task at hand ? determining the existing desired health of waterways and aquifers, and governing ourselves accordingly. Such Earth-based governance includes allocating actual, enforced water rights to waterways for the water they need for their own survival ? not simply to serve human needs. One California-specific example of the costly implications of a misplaced trust in the market to solve water problems was uncovered in an investigative report by California journalist Mike Taugher. As discussed further in his multi-part report on ?Pumping Water and Cash from the Delta? (see, e.g., http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_12439808), the investigation uncovered significant manipulation of public funds set aside for environmental uses to enrich specific individuals and corporations, with little to no environmental benefit. An excerpt from the investigative report illustrates the inherent danger in relying on market-based solutions to redress the problems created by market-based strategies: As the West Coast's largest estuary plunged to the brink of collapse from 2000 to 2007, state water officials pumped unprecedented amounts of water out of the Delta only to effectively buy some of it back at taxpayer expense for a failed environmental protection plan, a MediaNews investigation has found. The "environmental water account" set up in 2000 to improve the Delta ecosystem spent nearly $200 million mostly to benefit water users while also creating a cash stream for private landowners and water agencies in the Bakersfield area. Financed with taxpayer-backed environment and water bonds, the program spent most of its money in Kern County, a largely agricultural region at the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley. There, water was purchased from the state and then traded back to the account for a higher price. . . . No one appears to have benefitted more than companies owned or controlled by Stewart Resnick, a Beverly Hills billionaire, philanthropist and major political donor whose companies, including Paramount Farms, own more than 115,000 acres in Kern County. Resnick's water and farm companies collected about 20 cents of every dollar spent by the program. Those companies sold $30.6 million of water to the state program, participated as a partner in an additional $16 million in sales and received an additional $3.8 million in checks and credits for sales through public water agencies, documents show. In summary, if the market system is our operating system, then its most talented manipulators will inevitably profit from it, at the expense of the environment and sustainable human communities. In other words, money will find a way to enrich, not to serve. We need an operating system premised on other metrics of what a flourishing life on Earth means to people and planet; one that does not relegate decision-making about the planet?s lifeblood ? water ? to those who have the money and associated power to decide. The Towards a Green Economy report offers up numerous other implications of the single-minded focus on the economy, including conclusions that arise in other ways from the report?s analytical blinders. As a final example, the report states without irony in the Water chapter on page 134 that ?[d]esalination has the advantage that it is climate independent.? By focusing only on costs, the report misses the otherwise obvious climate-related implications of desalination. These include not only desalination?s significant contribution to the greenhouse gas emissions that fuel climate change, but also the unknown implications of sea level rise on the siting of the ocean-side desalination facilities, infrastructure and transport systems. The report?s blithe conclusion also ignores the increasing inability of island nations to obtain the fuel needed to support desalination facilities due to both rising costs and to port facilities also impacted by sea level rise. A continued focus on the failed monetization policies of the past will only exacerbate such analytical and implementation problems. Only a careful, thorough assessment of the flawed operative assumptions that led us to a world where rivers now run backwards (page 131) will uncover long-term, sustainable solutions that ensure a healthy environment and healthy human communities. Examples of Strategies to Implement Earth-Based Governance that Support Sustainable Communities Earth Law Center accordingly urges decision-makers to include in the Zero Draft and support a re-focus on sustainable communities, which will yield the contours of a truly ?green? economy along with each of the other elements of sustainable human and environmental communities, as articulated above. Current economic metrics such as GDP only reinforce environmental and societal degradation at the hands of ever-increasing growth. Seeking the definition of an economy that fits within a larger definition of ?sustainable communities,? rather than one premised on infinite growth, requires a different judgment of economic welfare. For example, a number of U.S. towns and cities, including Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania with a population of over 300,000, have assessed the local environmental costs of further runaway economic growth and adopted laws that grant local control to prevent destructive new development. These laws also grant legal rights to the natural world to be healthy, thrive and evolve, which further support the municipalities? recognition of the value of a healthy environment and healthy communities apart from the monetary drive of the markets. Such communities and states around the world are fighting to regain control over their own, Earth-based definitions of ?sustainable,? efforts that should be encouraged by the UNCSD. The Zero Draft should include these and other implementation strategies consistent with a goal of ?sustainable communities? grounded in Earth-based governance. An additional example of such an implementation strategy involves allocations of water rights to waterways and aquifers in amounts sufficient to meet their environmental needs. The Towards a Green Economy report characterizes existing efforts in Oregon and Australia as allocation of such water rights (page 142; see also above discussion regarding Australia?s program). Both, however, in fact fall short in achieving this goal, in part because both are limited by the acquisition of sufficient funds to obtain the water needed for environmental sustenance. True water rights for ecosystems would depend only on the ecosystems? needs, not on the availability of funds to feed those needs. The funding becomes an impediment to achieving this goal because of society?s flawed operating assumption that water is property to be used for human benefit, as if humans were somehow separate from the rivers that they are draining to dust. Rivers have a right to flow, independent of human needs, and we must adjust ourselves accordingly or face the implications of those decisions in the form of increasingly disappearing supplies. In a related example, the U.N. General Assembly and the Human Rights Council have now both recognized the human right to water and sanitation; these mandates should similarly be strongly supported and advanced at Rio +20. However, is not possible to protect the human right to water and sanitation without recognizing the inherent rights of nature and other species to be healthy, thrive and evolve. Thus, protection of the human right to water first requires protection of waterway and aquifer health and the integrity of hydrologic cycles. However, the disturbing trend of corporate privatization of water impedes progress in this area. Resolution E/2005/29 calls upon the UNCSD to review the implementation of international water and sanitation decisions at its session in 2012 (p. 19, paragraph 4). The Council of Canadians? 2011 ?Review of Private Sector Influence on Water Policies and Programmes at the United Nations? found evidence of significant corporate lobbying and influence in past water-themed discussions and proceedings of the UNCSD, including during processes of the World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002. By addressing corporate pressures at Rio +20, decision-makers will have a greater opportunity to explore the full range of options that exist for addressing the global water Crisis, consistent with Earth-based governance. Other examples arise from consideration of the roles of the distribution of good and services. As noted above, this distribution process need not be for the purpose of maximizing wealth, but instead could be for the purpose of providing for biological and social needs ? that is, for global well-being. One example of such an implementation strategy that is consistent with Earth-based governance is promotion of agro-ecological methods of food production to replace the growing trend toward corporate food industrialization. In 2009, the International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development concluded that ?the way the world grows its food will have to change radically? and argued for an agro-ecological approach to food production as the most effective route to meeting the world?s increasing food needs. This four-year, UN-sponsored project included the work of 400 researchers and was funded by $12 million from the World Bank. Increasing concentration of the corporate industrial food complex causes environmental destruction, exacerbates land distribution inequalities and exacerbates poverty. We cannot continue to degrade our soil with genetically modified mono-crops and their requisite fertilizer-pesticide packages and expect soils to support yields to perpetually feed our growing population. Agro-ecological methods of food production sequester carbon in the soil, promote biodiversity and promote local food sovereignty, and should be supported in the Zero Draft. Finally, the World Bank and other international financial institutions have used the same flawed ideology that supports tax havens to promote lower tax structures in resource-rich developing countries. Implementation of an international financial transactions tax would raise much-needed funds for countering environmental destruction (such as climate change) and human poverty, and would help slow commodities speculation that has taken a significant toll on human and environmental victims. Refine the institutional framework to reflect Earth-based governance strategies that achieve ?sustainable communities.? The 1972 Stockholm Declaration articulated three ?pillars? to sustainable development: Environment, Society and Economy. The 1987 Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future further defined sustainable development as ?development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.? Though well-intentioned, these approaches have failed to achieve their objective of transforming environmentally destructive, market-based governance systems into sustainable, Earth-based governance, for the reasons discussed above. Indeed, the pace of climate change impacts, species and habitat devastation, and other environmental problems has increased over this time. We urge decision-makers to re-think both the purpose and structure of this institutional framework effort. First, as already addressed, the goal should not be one of only slightly curbing the runaway-growth market economy, but instead one of ensuring sustainable human and environmental communities served by a ?green? economy that accounts and respects for the limits of the Earth. Second, use of the three pillars implicitly assumes that each is equally significant in achieving sustainable communities. This assumption is contrary to science, which demonstrates our interconnectedness, and indeed contrary to economics, in which the current market-based growth is fueled by the continued availability of natural ?resources,? including a favorable climate. As just one example among uncounted others, in a 2009 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, scientists predict that climate change may cause yields of corn, soybeans, and cotton in the U.S. to decrease by as much as 80% by 2100. A healthy environment is simply essential to human survival and well-being. A different framework is needed, one that reflects both the reality of our interdependence and our Earth-based vision of healthy, sustainable human and environmental communities. The outer structure supporting the desired ?sustainable communities? goal should be Environment, given our dependence on healthy Earth systems for our own survival. The individual pillars supporting this outer Environment structure would be the various elements of a healthy environment, including sufficient healthy nutrients and clean water, biodiversity, restoration in the face of destruction, and thriving, connected habitats. Society necessarily follows as a nested framework structure within the outer Environment framework, where Society refers to human societies implementing Earth-based governance systems that support a flourishing planet. For instance, as Towards a Green Economy notes on page 19, ?the link between ecological scarcity and poverty is well-established?; this is true for Society as well, which is impacted directly and indirectly by rising poverty rates. Society is more than money or markets, and the proposed, Earth-based governance system should reflect all elements of thriving human societies. The internal pillars supporting Society should represent each of these elements, including but not limited to: culture, societal/familial relations, healthy food, clean water, sanitation, housing, necessary medical care, democratic governance, education, meaningful and appropriately rewarded labor, spirituality, civic duty, volunteerism ? and the economy, as just one of these numerous elements. Again from Polanyi: ?the control of the economic system by the market . . . means no less than the running of society as an adjunct to the market. Instead of economy being embedded in social relations, social relations are embedded in the economic system.? We made choices in arriving at the point now where the markets are running society and environment. We can choose differently, and re-envision a market that serves the planet as a whole, and sustainable communities in particular. In sum, we must not continue to contort our environmental protection efforts to meet the market economy. We need to reinvent the economy to reflect the fact that we are interconnected beings with our environment, and we must govern our behavior ? including our economic behavior ? accordingly. The primary impediment to success is the faulty underlying assumption that the environment is property to do with as we wish, to fuel the economic growth that we (again, wrongly) assume can and must continue unabated into the future. With the recommendations above, Rio +20 decision-makers can begin to rectify this foundational error and begin a road to planetary recovery and long-term sustainability. * * * As Ambassador Pablo Sol�n states in the 2011 book, The Rights of Nature: We are facing a debate in the United Nations among those that . . . advocat[e] the path of the market, [versus] the path of recognizing and respecting the larger system of the planet Earth on which we all live. . . . The future of humans and Nature depends on the path humanity chooses. Decision-makers have an unprecedented opportunity at Rio +20 to adopt Earth-based governance as the guiding operating system for a new ?sustainable communities? movement that reflects our interconnectedness with, and dependence on, the Earth?s natural systems. Earth Law Center urges decision-makers to incorporate the above inputs and contributions into the Zero Draft for this seminal event, launch this movement through strong public support for Earth-based governance, and work to ensure its implementation for the benefit of all Earth?s inhabitants. Thank you again for the opportunity to submit these comments. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us.


text:
All branches of Marin County Free Library will be closed on Monday, July 4 for Independence Day.
this installment covers a novel about the greedy rich, Anne Tyler's latest, and a new C.J. Box mystery!
The Darlings by Cristina Alger
Ahh, schadenfreude. So satisfying when the rich get theirs. In this case the Darlings are indeed the darling of NYC high society. Carter is a financier and his wife is deep in social circles. His son in law Paul, a lawyer, ends up working for the firm and two months into it, cracks appear: a ponzi scheme. Loyalties and cover ups tussle and there's corruption all around. Quite a surprise ending. I love to witness those who think they're on top shaken to their knees. And the press, as is often the case, blows the whistle. A lively read.
The Beginner's Goodbye by Anne Tyler
A new Tyler book is always cause for celebration. This one's quieter than most. Aaron and Dorothy have an almost accidental courtship for two previously solitary people. He works for the family vanity press which has developed a "Beginner's" series, everything from bird watching to heart attacks. Dorothy's a doctor. They don't seem romantic but have a solid bond, abruptly broken when a tree falls on their house and kills her. (Shades of the Wizard of Oz.) Aaron's flattened too, emotionally, until Dorothy's specter, in fleeting appearances, gets him in touch with what he had, what he lost, and what he might have done better. Meanwhile a romance is growing between Aaron's good-guy contractor Gil and his sister Nandina. Finally Aaron rejoins life--whew! What I love most about Tyler's books is the modest, unglamorous nature of her protagonists, with their quirks and private rituals.
Force of Nature by C. J. Box
I've been reading C.J. Box for years and this is his latest and very gripping indeed. I'm not sure how I got hooked originally, because very few of the coordinates match my usual reading tastes. But there's something about Joe Pickett, principled game warden in Wyoming and dedicated family man, that spoke to me. The terrain is wild and vividly described. His daughters, now teenagers, speak authentically. Arrogant, stupid sheriff McLanahan is still blowing hard and making his life a misery. And his fugitive friend, Nate Romanowsky, is facing a standoff with his arch enemy who now threatens everyone in Pickett's world as well. Nate's a falconer and there are many references to the art and sport, including "yarick," the ultimate primitive focus of a raptor at its peak. Yes, much of the action is formulaic, and Box gives us a bit too much detail about weaponry for my taste, but in the week I listened to this book on CD in my car, I looked forward to every mile on the road.
Back in October. How time flies...

subset: commoncrawl


text:
What can this 100% pure organic miracle food do for you and your dog?
Recommended dosage: 1 teaspoon (5ml) per 10 pounds (5kg) of body weight, or 1 tablespoon (15ml) per 30 pounds (13.6 kg) of body weight. Start slowly, for example, start at a quarter of this and build up slowly. Use similarly for cats and other animals. Our favorite method of dispensing: Simply place a tsp or so in the cupped palm of your hand and let the warmth of your hand melt the oil. Then let your pet lick the oil directly from your hand! Our pooches and kitties love it, and what a wonderful way to bond! Then rub any remaining oil on your own skin, and begin enjoying the benefits of soft, silky, skin! As with all new supplements, start with small amounts, such as 1/8 - 1/4 teaspoon per day for small dogs, puppies, cats and kittens and 1 teaspoon for large dogs. Gradually increase the amount every few days.
The CocoTheraphy Difference:All CocoTherapy coconuts are grown and harvested at their own USDA-organic inspected coconut plantation. They do not purchase coconuts from other non-inspected farms, where they have no control over the coconuts or the harvest times. A majority of coconut oil manufacturers (other brands) do not own coconut farms. Instead, they work with private-label manufacturing companies who purchase coconuts from a number of small independent farmers, who may or may not be USDA organic inspected farms.
Quality starts with the coconuts. From the careful selection of the coconuts used, to the methods used in creating the final product, CocoTherapy knows that their coconut oil is the purest, freshest, premium quality human-grade oil available.


text:
D'Amato Wins Yale Spring Opener
Princeton senior Bernie D'Amato won his second tournament as a Tiger Saturday, shooting 1-over to take the Yale Spring Opener title in New Haven, not far from his native Weston, Conn.
D'Amato shot a first-round 68 and followed it up with a 73 over the 36 holes played Saturday, allowing him to finish one shot ahead of co-runners-up Michael Kania and Steve Skurla. The two Villanova golfers helped the Wildcats take the team title at +23, nine shots ahead of Yale.
Princeton shot +38 as a team, tying with Temple for fourth. Nicholas Ricci (+12), Greg Jarmas (+13), Quinn Prchal (+15) and Joseph D'Amato (+24) rounded out the Princeton five. The Tigers were just six shots behind Yale on the Bulldogs' home course and finished two shots in front of Penn, five in front of Columbia, 15 in front of Brown, 20 in front of Dartmouth and 46 ahead of Cornell as seven Ivy teams were among a 14-team field that included a second group of Yale players that finished eighth overall.
Bernie D'Amato won the Classic at Shelter Harbor on Oct. 16, 2011 and is the last Tiger to win tournament medalist honors.
Princeton will return to action when it hosts its annual home invitational next weekend at Springdale Golf Club. Complete results from the Yale tournament are available at the PDF link on this page.
T4. Princeton 598 (+38)
1. Bernie D'Amato 68-73--141 (+1)
T23. Nicholas Ricci 79-73--152 (+12)
T25. Greg Jarmas 74-79--153 (+13)
T35. Quinn Prchal 73-82--155 (+15)
T58. Joseph D'Amato 85-79--164 (+24)


text:
Keep it simple and flaunt your Chicago Bears team spirit while maintaining the grace and beauty of your female figure with this Chicago Bears Longsleeve Tri-Blend T-Shirt. Featuring the Chicago Bears team graphic prominently displayed front and center, this Chicago Bears Longsleeve Tri-Blend T-Shirt is an absolute must-have in any woman's Chicago Bears apparel collection.
Enter full name. We'll ask for delivery information at checkout.
There are currently no items in your shopping cart.
Your web browser's "cookie" feature must be enabled to use the shopping cart. If you added an item and received this message, it is possible the cookie is being blocked. Please adjust your browser's privacy settings to allow acceptance of 1st party cookies and try again.
Web Development by Americaneagle.com 2016


text:
The English major prepares students for a wide array of career opportunities. Many English majors enter the workplace immediately after graduation, working in business, publishing, public service, government, teaching, or the communication field. Their strong communication and analytical skills make them adaptable to a variety of careers where such skills are essential, enabling them to move into management and leadership positions. Other students go on to advanced study: an English major is excellent preparation for continued graduate or professional training in areas such as English, law, political science/government, public administration, psychology, counseling, communications, and religious studies.
Dr. Christine Persak is the program coordinator for the B.A. in English. She advises all juniors and seniors, conducts final audits for graduation, and handles other program-related issues.


text:
Written by: P&N April 21 2010
Dear Mother Earth,
Happy Earth Day!
Love always,
PS: If you haven't checked out euphoriamaternity.com, then treat yourself and peruse their offerings, on this, YOUR day. The site provides you an extensive selection of eco-friendly nursing, maternity and baby (euphoriababy.com) options.
This family-owned business strives to reduce their carbon footprint and offer you an introduction to (and inspirationfor) living a greener lifestyle for you and your budding familia. We know you'd be so proud.
Are you looking for an adorable maternity organic top? Done!
We know you'll love and appreciate their site, not to mention their green consulting services and tips. Enjoy your day, buy yourself something special and keep in touch.


text:
If you are unemployed, underemployed, or simply looking for a better job, then you will want to attend our FREE Help and Hope Career Coaching Program offered by Catholic Charities Community Services.
Ann Ruecker, MPA, MA CPCC will provide you with:
• practical information
• follow up strategies that you can take with you and use the next day.
The program consists of:
• two group sessions
• and 1:1 optional follow ups
Part 1: Thursday, Aug 1st 7pm – 9pm AND
Part 2: Tuesday Aug 20th 7pm – 9pm
Location: Immaculate Conception Lower Church 53 Winter Hill Road, Tuckahoe, NY 10707
There is a $10 co-pay for each of up to three follow-up sessions.
You determine how many you need. Use the follow-up sessions to:
• refine your resume
• discuss interviewing strategies
• hone your job searching skills.
To register or for more information please call Karen Reynolds by dialing 914-476-2700.


text:
Displays test weight so there is no preweighing required
Moisture tester for 16 grains (program space for over 40). Scales can be easily updated with the included USB cord. Moisture tester unit features a large back-lit display and automatic temperature compensation. Includes four "AA" batteries, carrying case and USB cord. Imported.
2016 Master Catalog: Page 470


text:
I am excited to announce the Bruce/Brandon Fine Art Print. Click Here to view it in the store. This is a very special print to me. The print is based upon two well known images of my father and brother. When I say this piece, I fell in love with it. The combination of the two photos and the artistry of Troy Gua is truly awe inspiring. There is a fusion between my father and brother and yet each stand alone in the print. We are doing a limited edition of 250 prints. I will sign and number each archival quality print (each print was hand pulled by Sergei Lazutin, master printer and owner of Kolibri Art Studios).
We did a video about the piece as well in which I read a letter that Brandon wrote to our father when Brandon was only 7 years old. I also explain the print in greater detail. I hope you will take a minute to watch.
Thank you for your amazing support!


text:
With his trademark stance – head down, eyes focused, legs shoulder-width apart, right arm furiously strumming a low-slung Mosrite guitar – Johnny Ramone became a punk icon. He was the ultimate guitar antihero, shying from gratuitous solos and obscure voicings, preferring deliberate playing over the more familiar guitar histrionics of the late-1970s. Torn jeans, T-shirt and black leather jacket were staples of a look that became his understated hallmarks, a far cry from the flamboyant stage outfits that predominated popular music. His rapid-fire, down-stroked barre chords fostered a style that owed little in the way of influence to any other musician or group. For decades, his "buzzsaw" technique was the blaring force behind the Ramones' sound, spurring songs such as "Blitzkrieg Bop," "Glad to See You Go," "Sheena Is a Punk Rocker," "Rockaway Beach," "I Wanna Be Sedated," "Rock 'n' Roll High School," and "Do You Remember Rock 'n' Roll Radio?" On September 15, 2004, Johnny Ramone passed away after a prolonged battle with prostate cancer. He was 55.
Born and raised in New York City, Johnny Ramone found kindred spirits in bassist Dee Dee Ramone, singer Joey Ramone and drummer Tommy Ramone. The brash quartet hailing from Queens ignited the punk-rock movement in 1976 with their eponymous debut (pictured, left). Their short, combustible songs drew from the worlds of comic books, horror films, girl groups and garage rock. The band mixed humor and horror in equal measure and gave their urbanized fans a way to purge all the pent-up energy that comes from living in a concrete jungle. "The Ramones are American originals by being almost completely unoriginal at the same time," says Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum Curatorial Director Howard Kramer. "They were an incredible amalgam of junk culture - B-movies, go-go boots, Phil Spector records, the MC5, The Stooges, the New York Dolls and everything that was not stadium rock and roll. They made everything short, fast and loud – and that was actually a remarkable accomplishment." From their NYC epicenter, the band connected with a youthful underground that spanned the globe, as the first four Ramones albums – Ramones (1976), Leave Home (1977), Rocket to Russia (1977), Road to Ruin (1978) - incited a revolution in music and lifestyle. They launched the grassroots punk-rock movement in New York and London – the Clash were among those who paid heed when the Ramones first toured Britain – and helped downsize rock from arenas and stadiums to the more sensibly scaled environs of clubs and neighborhood holes-in-the-wall. Bands like Green Day, Offpsring and Blink-182 are inconceivable without the Ramones and British speed-metal luminaries Motorhead paid them tribute with a song, entitled "R.A.M.O.N.E.S.," that the Ramones themselves later recorded.
The Ramones spent much of their time on the road, performing nearly 2,300 concerts – roughly as many as the Grateful Dead, as ironic as that may seem - between their formation in 1974 and final show in Los Angeles on August 6, 1996. Joining Johnny Ramone on most those concerts was his Mosrite Ventures II guitar. "This was his number one, go-to instrument from 1979 to basically the end of the Ramones career."
WATCH: In this All Access video, Kramer talks more about Johnny Ramone and the guitar he used to help define the Ramones' sound.


text:
Leica Hints At New M Camera Coming June 11
Leica has updated its Facebook page with a header image hinting at a new camera, the Mini-M, coming June 11th. Details on the Mini-M are virtually non-existent. But the rumor mill seems to suggest that it's likely to be either a fixed-lens large sensor compact similar to the Sony RX1 or a live view M-mount camera.
Both scenarios have some validity to them. The large sensor compact segment, while not staggeringly popular with point and shoot consumers, has a place in the heart of many professionals and enthusiasts who cannot stomach the thought of accepting the limitations that a small-sensor brings. This is a mindset that has historically described Leica's core demographic. A live view M-Mount body would make a lot of sense as well, offering access to Leica's excellent lenses without the cost or complexity of the rangefinder assembly that many of today's younger photographers care little about.
Tags: Leica, m-mount, mini-m, Rangefinder


text:
Consider these points if you are you having trouble deciding on or committing to a major.
"I like so many things! I can't make up my mind what to choose! If I pick one, I'll be turning away from all these other things I want to do."
If this is your problem, ask yourself these questions:
"I've picked my major. I'll be great at it, everyone says so! I'm getting great grades and my professors are noticing my hard work and talent. So, why am I unhappy? Why do I feel like this is not what I really want to be doing? This isn't supposed to be happening!"
If this sounds like you, ask yourself these questions:
"I don't really see anything I'd really like to do! I'm having trouble deciding on a major because nothing really excites or interests me."
"I actually know what I love doing. There's just one problem. It is a completely impractical thing to want to do and my family isn't going to support me if I pursue that fantasy!"
*This information was adapted from Barbara Sher and Barbara Smith's book I Could Do Anything If I Only Knew What It Was: How to Discover What You Really Want and How to Get It.
If you want to talk about choosing a major or any other issues, call or stop by the Counseling Center for an appointment.


text:
It's a video streaming world out there, and I'm a video streaming girl. I've got my HDTV, iTunes, Apple TV, iPad, and Netflix account ramped up and ready to go at all times. But I've found that when it comes … Continue reading
how can I watch HULU RSS
Say goodbye to video streaming stop signs
Image source: http://www.sxc.hu/profile/mrceviz


text:
Are the rates on your website per person or per room?
All rates on our website are per room per night, unless stated otherwise.
Is breakfast included in the price?
Breakfast is an option at 12 Euros unless specified differently in your promotion package.
Are taxes included in the room rates?
Yes, all taxes are included in the room rate
Do you offer special discounts (for seniors, airlines employees, etc.)?
We provide the best available rates for the dates of your stay. Discounts are already included and therefore it is not possible to have any other discount on the confirmed price.
Will I get the same rates and availability on the Internet as I would if I called the reservations number?
Can I book discounted, special, corporate or group rates on the Internet?
No, you should contact our sales team at email@example.com for this inquiry.


text:
Prchal Posts Top-10 Finish at Brickyard in Georgia
Princeton freshman Quinn Prchal tied for eighth place in the 83-man field at the Brickyard Collegiate in Macon, Ga., which wrapped Sunday.
Princeton tied for 11th as a team among the 15 in the field. Georgia, the top-ranked team in the field at No. 5 in the Oct. 4 Golfweek rankings, won by 15 shots over 11th-ranked Georgia Tech, while Georgia State's Jonathan Grey and Georgia's Sam Straka finished atop the individual leaderboard at 8-under.
The tournament featured five teams in the Golfweek top 50 and 11 teams in the top 100.
Prchal finished at 3-under after entering the day in the No. 1 spot at 6-under. Prchal double-bogeyed his first hole and had three birdies and four bogeys in his final round.
The tournament is Princeton's second of the fall and first in a series of three straight weekends of play. Next weekend, Princeton will head to the Big Five Classic outside of Philadelphia a week before hosting the Ivy Tournament, a team match play event, at the TPC at Jasna Polana in Princeton.
Princeton's results for the weekend are below, and results for all players can be found here.
T11. Princeton 286-297-304--887 (+16)
T8. Quinn Prchal 69-69-75--213 (-3)
T46. Bernie D'Amato 71-77-75--223 (+7)
T54. Greg Jarmas 72-74-79--225 (+9)
T56. Nicholas Ricci 74-77-75--226 (+10)


text:
ZF-8273: setReturnPath overwrites setFrom in Zend_Mail_Protocol_Smtp
$mail = new Zend_Mail(); $mail->setFrom('email@example.com'); $mail->setReturnPath('email@example.com'); $mail->send( .. Zend_Mail_Transport_Smtp .. );
E-mail is being sent on email@example.com instead of email@example.com;
Zend_Mail_Transport_Smtp, line 203: $this->_connection->mail($this->_mail->getReturnPath());
Please fix.
Hi, Marcin.
Do you mean you find mail returns back when some error is happened? Or, you find [from] address is changed on your mailer?
Hi Satoru,
I mean that e-mail is sent from "email@example.com" instead of "firstname.lastname@example.com". I understand that e-mail should be sent from "email@example.com" with Return-Path header set to "firstname.lastname@example.com" - in case of error. Do I understand incorrectly?
Cheers, Marcin
I change code in SVN r18988 (trunk), 18989 (1.9 branch) .
You are correct, Marcin. For your purpose, getReturnPath() should be replaced with getFrom().
And I have a sadly information I must notice you :-( As it is pointed out in ZF-7008, setReturnPath can not work fine now.
The function is under consideration how to fix.
Hi Satoru, hi Marcin,
unfortunately this is broken now. The Return-Path has to be used as MAIL FROM: in the SMTP transport. So please undo your replacement of getReturnPath() with getFrom(), because it was working correctly before.
Thanks, Janis
Please present some code to reproduce, and describe the problem with that code. Thanks.
Zend_Mail_Transport_Smtp, line 203: was (correct): $this->_connection->mail($this->_mail->getReturnPath()); is now (incorrect): $this->_connection->mail($this->_mail->getFrom());
This results in always using the "Body-From" (From:-Header), as "Envelope-From" ("MAIL FROM:" SMTP command) and removes the possibility to use different Envelope-From and Body-From Addresses.
See RFC 2821 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bounce_address for reference.
Ouch. Will fix tonight.
It's still not fixed in trunk - and it breaks our mail code ;-)
ZF-8988 was opened because this was not actually a bug and the "solution" broke Zend_Mail to not be compliant with the RFC with the SMTP transport.
Closing this issue to avoid confusion -- see ZF-8988 for the fix.


text:
Friday, 10 February 2012
Not okay
There is of course also unintentional copying but it's usually less obvious, merely (subconsciously) taking influences from someone else's work and adding them to your basic stuff. I'm not a big fan of any type of copying but I think it's possible to honestly believe something was your own original idea when, in fact, it was something you saw and later forgot seeing. However, when your conscience is nagging about something you're about to do, it's generally a good idea not to do it.
Personal use is a different matter. I have no problem with people making their own version of something for their own personal use. Actually, I think it's awesome whenever people make stuff by hand. If I see something I like, need, and feel my crafty abilities are sufficient for, of course I'd rather make it myself than spend big bucks paying for it. And even if it's not about the money, I'd rather have something I made as long as I don't feel like I'm counterfitting stuff. "I could do that" -goggles are only for viewing stuff you don't make to gain financial profit. It's not the same to copy a lovely color combination from someone's outfit and use it on you book covers than to copy the colour scheme of another artist and use it to create the same type of art they do. There is a line what's good kind of inspiration and what isn't. It is a very hard line to draw but I think any artist with a little bit of self respect has a pretty good idea where it is.
Sorry about the long rant. I just think these are important matters. I'm a foolish girl for hoping people would treat each other better but it's a foolishness I'm not ready to give up.
9 comments:
Hi Kaija. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I know how awful it is to stumble upon your own work under someone else's name. For me, it has made me reconsider how I present and share work, both online and out in the real world. I'm sure it has all been a good learning for me, but it is tough and like you, I wish it hadn't been necessary. With my best wishes, Annie xReplyDelete
Kaija....no apologies necessary for the rant....you said things that definitely need to be said and you said them very eloquently. I'm sorry you have been made to feel this way and totally understand the frustration and loss....it certainly takes the wind out of your sails. Your work is so beautiful and delicate.....you must keep making it....we need your authenticity....the others who are appropriating your work will fall away. Cheers to you! PattiReplyDelete
These ARE important matters and you've expressed them well. Maybe someone who didn't get it before will read this and see the error of their ways.ReplyDelete
You do such beautiful work - it always takes my breath away.
I've noted a matchbox project in the blogosphere and wondered initially whether it was something you launched. It did make me think of your work, particularly your fabulously glorious advent matchboxes. I think you've just got to keep doing what you're doing. I have something very similar happening in my professional environment at the moment but it's not about a tangible thing I produce it's about how I deliver training. I got feedback from my trainees about this issue just recently. Made me feel like I was on the right path.ReplyDelete
Your rant is absolutely valid and I'm sorry that this happened to you. It's so complicated...I've talked to many an artist and teacher about this in the age of workshops, Etsy, blogs, etc. The consensus I hear is do what you do - the very best you can do it. Others may imitate or be inspired by, but they will never be you. I know teachers that give their every "trade secret" for that reason. They want to encourage artistic development and know that ultimately, no 2 people will ever produce the same. Dunno if that helps, but thanks for putting your thoughts and honesty out there.ReplyDelete
excellent point very well expressed and I couldn't agree more. I know how much time and commitment it takes to build a 'style', a concept. You put your whole self into it. Whatever you have seen, whatever inspired the writing of this post you can be sure that all genuine artists.....with a conscience.... are standing right beside you.ReplyDelete
- Anonymous12 February 2012 at 19:29
Kajia,those who copy your style will never have their own style,they will not get the happiness from creating.i think your excellent amazing designs are art,your work is a way to express your feel and share your thoughts with people who can understand you and appreciate you. I have followed your matchbox project from the start,and I know you have accumulated a lot from creating them,and finnally your own unique style of matchbox and books.ReplyDelete
Just keep creating more art works,try more,not give up. I think it is the best response to the copier. You have told me before through the e mail,and I am encouraged by your words,so this time you should keep making and creating:)
of course you are right. well said.ReplyDelete
Never be afraid be flattered you are the Artist they are the imitator. Since you are the origin of the idea you are always one step ahead.ReplyDelete
By the time they have imitated your idea you have left it in your creative wake long ago.
I never post new or current work I have no problem posting older work which I have finished with.
If I want to talk about current work I never reveal technique and will only show small parts of my work in progress.
Its hard if you are using social media to market your work you may want to rethink this if the lifting of your ideas becomes a big problem.
You can also add a snippet of code which stops people pinning your images if this is problem.
I completely sympathise with you Im not perfect either and often feel really insecure about using the internet as a platform for showcasing my work but the risk IS minimal and shouldnt cloud the otherwise wonderful experience that it provides us creative souls.
Helen :)


text:
Perry Lee Dunn
Position: RB
Height: 6-2 Weight: 210 lbs.
Born: January 20, 1941 in Natchez, MS
High School: Natchez
College: Mississippi (school history) (Dunn college stats)
Drafted by the San Diego Chargers in the 3rd round (24th overall) of the 1964 AFL Draft.
Drafted by the Dallas Cowboys in the 4th round (45th overall) of the 1964 NFL Draft.
Weighted Career AV (100-95-...): 8 (7842nd overall since 1950)
Other SR Links: College Football at Sports-Reference.com


text:
ARR-225 - AR-15 and M4 and M16 Golfball Launcher Threaded and Machined Out of Solid Stock
now this thing looks interesting?
i have a supply of blanks i got for nearly nothing that i use to seal the gas key with.
now an errant coyote getting smacked with a golf ball is an idea--LOL!:fruit:


text:
Quality CareFind out why Mayo Clinic is the right place for your health care. Make an appointment.
Meet the StaffFind a directory of doctors and departments at all Mayo Clinic campuses. Visit now.
Research and Clinical TrialsSee how Mayo Clinic research and clinical trials advance the science of medicine and improve patient care. Explore now.
Visit Our SchoolsEducators at Mayo Clinic train tomorrow's leaders to deliver compassionate, high-value, safe patient care. Choose a degree.
Professional ServicesExplore Mayo Clinic's many resources and see jobs available for medical professionals. Get updates.
Give to Mayo ClinicHelp set a new world standard in care for people everywhere. Give now.
Mayo Clinic offers appointments in Arizona, Florida and Minnesota and at Mayo Clinic Health System locations.
Subscribe to Housecall
Our general interest e-newsletter keeps you up to date on a wide variety of health topics.
Boils and carbuncles are painful, pus-filled bumps that form under your skin when bacteria infect and inflame one or more of your hair follicles.
Boils (furuncles) usually start as red, tender lumps. The lumps quickly fill with pus, growing larger and more painful until they rupture and drain. A carbuncle is a cluster of boils that form a connected area of infection under the skin.
You can usually care for a single boil at home, but don't attempt to prick or squeeze it — that may spread the infection. Call your doctor if a boil or carbuncle is extremely painful, lasts longer than two weeks or occurs with a fever.
Mayo Clinic does not endorse companies or products. Advertising revenue supports our not for profit mission.
Check out these best-sellers and special offers on books and newsletters from Mayo Clinic.
Any use of this site constitutes your agreement to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy linked below.
A single copy of these materials may be reprinted for noncommercial personal use only. "Mayo," "Mayo Clinic," "MayoClinic.org," "Mayo Clinic Healthy Living," and the triple-shield Mayo Clinic logo are trademarks of Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research.
We comply with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information: verify here.