There's a deeper, darker recession that has been stealthily growing
since long before the Lehmans and Madoffs of this world were consumed
by their own greed. No doubt the financial crisis will affect many of
us over the coming years. Its speed, coupled with the related financial
tendrils that creep into many of our lives are surely cause for
concern. Yet there is another financial disaster occurring that we've
largely ignored as we've gorged on cheap money. One that's less easily
solved, taking place far from the trading desks and skyscrapers - the
environmental crisis.

In a world shamelessly obsessed with economic value, the reasons for
protecting the environment still make economic sense. When you factor
in the value-added services, such as providing clean water and
absorbing carbon-dioxide, it is calculated we lose $2-5 trillion
annually through forest loss. That’s just forests. There's climate
change, which could risk reducing global GDP by 20% according to the
Stern Review, coupled with marine issues, pollution, water shortages,
and desertification - to name but a few. By some reports, the annual
(yes, annual) loss in ecosystem services from biodiversity loss could
exceed €14 trillion by 2050.

It's hard to fully comprehend the value of our natural resources. After
all, it's rather difficult to pay off your credit-card bills in stag
beetles, or take a redwood down to your local store. Yet we must be
mindful of the value in mother nature's store. Most of us can put a
price on a pint of milk or a jar of honey because these natural
products have woven their way into our consumptive cycles. But what of
the value of poison ivy, jellyfish and slugs? Even if an acre of
rainforest is worth more to us intact rather than in flat-pack boxes,
how do we make that value apparent and accessible to would-be loggers?
Is it possible, or do we need governments to make that determination,
regardless of localized pressures? Not only might it take many years
for a responsibly-managed forest to release the same value that might
be captured in a day's logging, but the value might be almost
impossible to perceive, such as in the case of absorbing carbon-dioxide.

Yet perceptions of value are changing. We've begun to try to quantify
and value some of the wider externalities of our actions, such as by
considering the 'triple-bottom-line' impacts, measuring 'ecosystem
services', or by studying cradle-to-cradle models. Economists such as
Lord Stern have tried, with some success, to influence climate change
policy at a global level by examining the holistic economics - despite
the costs involved, the few immediate or local benefits, and the
ownership issues (or lack of them) that might provoke a 'tragedy of
commons'. A more comprehensive valuation process is emerging, which
represents a return to wisdom. Lets heed that wisdom.

Wisdom is defined in the dictionary as, 'the quality of having
experience, knowledge, and good judgment'.  Wikipedia states it is, 'an
ideal that has been celebrated since antiquity as the knowledge needed
to live a good life'. Sadly, we often ignore our wisdom. True wisdom
implies understanding nature's interconnectedness and, most
importantly, making decisions based on deep, ancient experience, rather
than acting, or reacting, in the short-term. I believe that if we ask
individuals, organizations and governments to utilize greater wisdom,
we'll start to maximize true value.

For example, if the marine life in an ecosystem grows by 10% a year and
the catch expands by 15% per year, the system will eventually collapse
- with that in mind, it's fairly easy to determine a 'wise' course of
action. We should accept nothing less. When we do the math and look at
the immediate value realized from catching the 15%, versus the the
compound growth that would occur with say a 5% yearly catch, it's even
easier to make a decision that incorporates 'experience, knowledge and
good judgment'. Another example might be a forest that supports a
community that would otherwise be displaced and attracts sustainable,
long-lasting income through tourism or careful resource use. If that
value is many times greater and employs and sustains more people than
the immediate value gained through logging, once again it's easy to be
wise. Both examples play out daily, yet there are too many smart people
who continue to make irrational decisions. There must be greater
economic accountability for their foolishness.

It's not just politicians and civil servants, but organizations that we
need to ask to tap into their inherent, but under-utilized wisdom.
Trends indicate that organizations with the strongest CSR agendas and
deep, sustainable principles outperform those that lack these values.
Look at the economic benefits of GM's ecomagination campaign, or how
well Patagonia, The Body Shop or Innocent Drinks, Timberland are doing.
Google, ever-keen to remain at the forefront, offers subsidies to
employees buying hybrids, serve organic sustainable foods in their
cafes and have been making inroads through Google.org. These companies
understand the economic benefit this brings in terms of the quality of
employees they can attract. Those with far-reaching sustainability
agendas are not only tapping into a zeitgeist, but are getting better
value from their people, their products and often their customers.

We should also look more closely at what constitutes economic
'development' and 'progress'. By way of example, the book 'Ancient
Futures', by Helena Norberg-Hodge details changes in the Ladakhi
culture, who until recently lived in almost perfect symbiosis with
their surroundings. Westernization, under the cloak of development, has
resulted in a higher GDP, but it has also led to rapid social and
environmental deterioration in Ladakh. If a holistic economic study was
conducted, assessing the true social and environmental costs of
development, I wonder whether the deterioration in ancient wisdom has
caused a reduction in overall value in the region. For example, a
diesel powered mill in Ladakh brings with it economic value that
displaces subsistence farming (which has no apparent value), but when
we realize that diesel must be bought, parts replaced, pollution is
caused, and people are put out of work - then the overall value
contributed might be negative, even if more money is traded.  It seems
that in our relentless drive to develop our world according to the
latest fad, we continually overlook ecosystems that are far more
developed than anything we can create, and often destroy things of far
more value.

It's time for each and every one of us - from presidents to farmers,
executives to village elders - to follow our internal compasses and
exercise our wisdom. If you face a tough decision, go walk amongst
nature as the seasons change, as they have for millions of years, and
bring yourself back to act on the real crisis at hand.

Tom Savage is the founder of Bright Green Talent (www.brightgreentalent.com), an ethical green recruitment business. He is also the author of a blog on simplicity (www.simpletom.co.uk).

Share