TEDGlobal 2010
Jason Clay: How big brands can help save biodiversity
Jason Clay: 知名品牌如何幫助拯救生物多樣性
Filmed:
Readability: 3.7
497,249 views
世界自然基金會的Jason Clay，曾說服100家主要公司生產永續商品，他提到全球市場將為了保護地球，改變目前過份消耗的模式。聆聽他傑出的圓桌會議，是如何讓互為競爭敵手的大品牌公司，同意在讓他們的商品上架前，開始綠色消費革命的第一步。
Jason Clay - Market transformer
Jason Clay’s ideas are changing the way governments, foundations, researchers and NGOs identify and address risks and opportunities for their work. Full bio
Jason Clay’s ideas are changing the way governments, foundations, researchers and NGOs identify and address risks and opportunities for their work. Full bio
Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.
00:16
I grew up on a small farm in Missouri.
0
1000
3000
我成長於密蘇里州的一個小農場
00:19
We lived on less than a dollar a day
1
4000
2000
大概有15年的時間
00:21
for about 15 years.
2
6000
2000
我們一天的花費少於一塊美金
00:23
I got a scholarship, went to university,
3
8000
3000
我拿到獎學金，去上大學
00:26
studied international agriculture, studied anthropology,
4
11000
3000
學習國際農業學跟人類學
00:29
and decided I was going to give back.
5
14000
2000
我決定要回饋
00:31
I was going to work with small farmers.
6
16000
2000
我想跟小農們一起工作
00:33
I was going to help alleviate poverty.
7
18000
2000
想幫助消滅貧窮
00:35
I was going to work on international development,
8
20000
3000
想致力於國際發展
00:38
and then I took a turn
9
23000
3000
然而，最後我轉了個彎
00:41
and ended up here.
10
26000
3000
落腳於此
00:44
Now, if you get a Ph.D., and you decide not to teach,
11
29000
2000
不過，如果你拿到博士學位，不想教書
00:46
you don't always end up in a place like this.
12
31000
2000
不見得會像我這樣
00:48
It's a choice. You might end up driving a taxicab.
13
33000
3000
這是個人選擇。你也許到頭來去開計程車
00:51
You could be in New York.
14
36000
3000
也許會待在紐約
00:55
What I found was,
15
40000
2000
而我則是
00:57
I started working with refugees and famine victims --
16
42000
3000
開始跟難民及饑民一起工作
01:00
small farmers, all, or nearly all --
17
45000
3000
包括小農，及其他所有
01:03
who had been dispossessed and displaced.
18
48000
3000
一無所有無家可歸的人
01:07
Now, what I'd been trained to do
19
52000
3000
我所接受的訓練
01:10
was methodological research on such people.
20
55000
3000
為研究這些人的方法學
01:13
So I did it: I found out how many women
21
58000
3000
我曾研究有多少女性
01:16
had been raped en route to these camps.
22
61000
3000
在前往難民營的途上被強暴
01:19
I found out how many people had been put in jail,
23
64000
3000
有多少人坐過牢
01:22
how many family members had been killed.
24
67000
3000
多少家族成員被殺
01:25
I assessed how long they were going to stay
25
70000
2000
分析這些人將待多久
01:27
and how much it would take to feed them.
26
72000
2000
而我們需要多少食物才能餵飽他們
01:29
And I got really good at predicting
27
74000
2000
這讓我變得非常擅長於預測
01:31
how many body bags you would need
28
76000
2000
我們將需要多少屍袋
01:33
for the people who were going to die in these camps.
29
78000
3000
來處理將死於難民營中的人
01:36
Now this is God's work, but it's not my work.
30
81000
3000
這是神的工作，而不是我的
01:39
It's not the work I set out to do.
31
84000
3000
這不是我該做的事
01:45
So I was at a Grateful Dead benefit concert on the rainforests
32
90000
3000
在1988年，我去了死之華合唱團
01:48
in 1988.
33
93000
3000
在雨林辦的慈善演唱會
01:51
I met a guy -- the guy on the left.
34
96000
3000
我在那遇到相片左邊的這位仁兄
01:54
His name was Ben.
35
99000
2000
他叫做Ben
01:56
He said, "What can I do to save the rainforests?"
36
101000
2000
他問：「我該怎麼做，才能拯救雨林呢？」
01:58
I said, "Well, Ben, what do you do?"
37
103000
2000
我說：「這個嘛，Ben，你是做什麼的？」
02:00
"I make ice cream."
38
105000
2000
「我做冰淇淋。」
02:02
So I said, "Well, you've got to make
39
107000
2000
我說：「嗯，你一定得做個
02:04
a rainforest ice cream.
40
109000
2000
雨林口味的冰淇淋
02:06
And you've got to use nuts from the rainforests
41
111000
2000
用雨林特產的堅果
02:08
to show that forests are worth more as forests
42
113000
2000
來展現雨林的價值
02:10
than they are as pasture."
43
115000
3000
不僅在它的生產能力而已。」
02:13
He said, "Okay."
44
118000
2000
他說：「好。」
02:15
Within a year,
45
120000
2000
一年內
02:17
Rainforest Crunch was on the shelves.
46
122000
2000
「雨林堅果」上架了
02:19
It was a great success.
47
124000
2000
產品空前的成功
02:21
We did our first million-dollars-worth of trade
48
126000
3000
我們靠著每月貸款，在最後一周銷貨
02:24
by buying on 30 days and selling on 21.
49
129000
3000
賺進我們第一個一百萬的交易
02:27
That gets your adrenaline going.
50
132000
3000
這真是非常刺激
02:30
Then we had a four and a half million-dollar line of credit
51
135000
2000
接著，因為此時我們有能力還款
02:32
because we were credit-worthy at that point.
52
137000
3000
我們貸了450萬美金
02:35
We had 15 to 20, maybe 22 percent
53
140000
2000
攻下15%到20%，也許是22%
02:37
of the global Brazil-nut market.
54
142000
2000
的全球巴西豆市場
02:39
We paid two to three times more than anybody else.
55
144000
3000
我們比別的買家出價高出兩三倍
02:42
Everybody else raised their prices to the gatherers of Brazil nuts
56
147000
3000
其他人也跟進出高價
02:45
because we would buy it otherwise.
57
150000
3000
不然就會被我們買走
02:49
A great success.
58
154000
2000
這策略大為成功
02:51
50 companies signed up, 200 products came out,
59
156000
3000
有五十間公司簽約合作，推出兩百項產品
02:54
generated 100 million in sales.
60
159000
3000
賺進一億美金的利潤
02:59
It failed.
61
164000
2000
然而我們到底還是失敗了
03:01
Why did it fail?
62
166000
2000
為什麼呢？
03:03
Because the people who were gathering Brazil nuts
63
168000
2000
因為採收巴西豆的人
03:05
weren't the same people who were cutting the forests.
64
170000
3000
跟砍伐雨林的人不同
03:08
And the people who made money from Brazil nuts
65
173000
3000
而靠著巴西豆賺錢的人
03:11
were not the people who made money from cutting the forests.
66
176000
3000
也跟靠砍雨林賺錢的人不同
03:14
We were attacking the wrong driver.
67
179000
2000
所以，我們找錯對象了
03:16
We needed to be working on beef.
68
181000
2000
我們得解決牛肉的問題
03:18
We needed to be working on lumber.
69
183000
2000
我們得解決伐木的問題
03:20
We needed to be working on soy --
70
185000
2000
我們得解決黃豆的問題
03:22
things that we were not focused on.
71
187000
3000
這些我們沒有注意到的問題
03:25
So let's go back to Sudan.
72
190000
2000
回到蘇丹
03:27
I often talk to refugees:
73
192000
2000
我常跟難民們說
03:29
"Why was it that the West didn't realize
74
194000
3000
西方國家的人並不明白
03:32
that famines are caused by policies and politics,
75
197000
2000
饑荒其實是政治和政策問題
03:34
not by weather?"
76
199000
2000
而不是氣候問題
03:36
And this farmer said to me, one day,
77
201000
3000
有天，有個農夫跟我提了個
03:39
something that was very profound.
78
204000
2000
相當卓越的觀點
03:41
He said, "You can't wake a person who's pretending to sleep."
79
206000
3000
他說：「你不能叫醒一個正在假寐的人。」
03:44
(Laughter)
80
209000
2000
（笑）
03:46
Okay. Fast forward.
81
211000
3000
更進一步來說
03:49
We live on a planet.
82
214000
3000
我們住在這個星球上
03:52
There's just one of them.
83
217000
2000
眾多星球裡獨一無二的一個
03:54
We've got to wake up to the fact
84
219000
2000
我們得明白這個事實：
03:56
that we don't have any more
85
221000
2000
除了這資源有限的地球外
03:58
and that this is a finite planet.
86
223000
2000
我們沒有別的星球了
04:00
We know the limits of the resources we have.
87
225000
3000
我們得明白，我們手上的資源有限
04:03
We may be able to use them differently.
88
228000
2000
我們也許能以不同方式使用資源
04:05
We may have some innovative, new ideas.
89
230000
2000
就算我們有新想法，創造新資源
04:07
But in general, this is what we've got.
90
232000
2000
但大致來說，資源就是這麼多
04:09
There's no more of it.
91
234000
3000
沒別的了
04:12
There's a basic equation that we can't get away from.
92
237000
3000
有個基礎公式是我們無可避免：
04:15
Population times consumption
93
240000
2000
人口數跟資源消耗的乘積
04:17
has got to have some kind of relationship to the planet,
94
242000
3000
必須與這星球的資源量有相關性
04:20
and right now, it's a simple "not equal."
95
245000
3000
而目前，這兩者並不相當
04:24
Our work shows that we're living
96
249000
2000
研究顯示，我們消耗的資源
04:26
at about 1.3 planets.
97
251000
2000
為1.3倍個地球
04:28
Since 1990,
98
253000
2000
從1990年起
04:30
we crossed the line
99
255000
2000
我們就越過那條
04:32
of being in a sustainable relationship to the planet.
100
257000
3000
跟這個星球維持永續關係的線
04:35
Now we're at 1.3.
101
260000
2000
資源消耗量是地球的1.3倍
04:37
If we were farmers, we'd be eating our seed.
102
262000
3000
如果我們是農夫，我們已在殺雞取卵
04:40
For bankers, we'd be living off the principal, not the interest.
103
265000
3000
若是銀行家，我們本金已開始虧損，而非靠利息過日子
04:43
This is where we stand today.
104
268000
3000
這是我們的現況
04:46
A lot of people like to point
105
271000
3000
有很多人總是把問題
04:49
to some place else as the cause of the problem.
106
274000
3000
歸咎於其他的徵結
04:52
It's always population growth.
107
277000
2000
像是人口成長
04:54
Population growth's important,
108
279000
2000
人口成長是重要原因
04:56
but it's also about how much each person consumes.
109
281000
3000
但每個人的消耗量也很重要
05:00
So when the average American
110
285000
2000
當美國人生活的
05:02
consumes 43 times as much
111
287000
3000
平均消耗量為
05:05
as the average African,
112
290000
3000
非洲人的43倍時
05:08
we've got to think that consumption is an issue.
113
293000
2000
消耗的確是個問題
05:10
It's not just about population,
114
295000
2000
不光是人口數
05:12
and it's not just about them; it's about us.
115
297000
3000
也不光是別人的問題，問題是大家的
05:16
But it's not just about people;
116
301000
2000
這也不光是人的問題
05:18
it's about lifestyles.
117
303000
2000
問題在於生活方式
05:20
There's very good evidence --
118
305000
2000
有證據顯示─
05:22
again, we don't necessarily have
119
307000
2000
關於這點，我們還沒有
05:24
a peer-reviewed methodology
120
309000
2000
經同儕審查的調查方法
05:26
that's bulletproof yet --
121
311000
2000
來駁回反對意見─
05:28
but there's very good evidence
122
313000
2000
但是，有相當不錯的證據顯示
05:30
that the average cat in Europe
123
315000
2000
歐洲的貓其一生
05:32
has a larger environmental footprint in its lifetime
124
317000
3000
留下的環境足跡
05:35
than the average African.
125
320000
3000
比其非洲同類高
05:38
You think that's not an issue going forward?
126
323000
3000
你還認為這不是進行中的問題嗎？
05:41
You think that's not a question
127
326000
2000
你還認為這樣的問題不足以讓我們質疑
05:43
as to how we should be using the Earth's resources?
128
328000
3000
我們該如何使用地球資源嗎？
05:46
Let's go back and visit our equation.
129
331000
2000
回到之前提到的公式
05:48
In 2000, we had six billion people on the planet.
130
333000
3000
在2000年，地球上有60億人口
05:51
They were consuming what they were consuming --
131
336000
2000
他們消費的消費品恆定
05:53
let's say one unit of consumption each.
132
338000
2000
以每個人的消費量為一單位
05:55
We have six billion units of consumption.
133
340000
3000
全世界的消費量則為60億單位
05:58
By 2050,
134
343000
2000
在2050年
06:00
we're going to have nine billion people -- all the scientists agree.
135
345000
3000
所有的科學家都同意，人口數將來到90億大關
06:03
They're all going to consume twice as much as they currently do --
136
348000
3000
而此時的消費量將為現在的兩倍
06:06
scientists, again, agree --
137
351000
2000
科學家們也同意這點
06:08
because income is going to grow in developing countries
138
353000
3000
因為開發中國家的人民收入將為
06:11
five times what it is today --
139
356000
2000
今日的五倍
06:13
on global average, about [2.9].
140
358000
2000
全球平均消費量達今日的3倍
06:15
So we're going to have 18 billion units of consumption.
141
360000
3000
這讓全球總消費為180億個消費單位
06:19
Who have you heard talking lately
142
364000
3000
誰最近聽過一個演講告訴你
06:22
that's said we have to triple production
143
367000
2000
我們的食物產量和服務量
06:24
of goods and services?
144
369000
2000
必須增加三倍？
06:26
But that's what the math says.
145
371000
2000
這僅只是數學而已
06:28
We're not going to be able to do that.
146
373000
2000
我們沒辦法辦到
06:30
We can get productivity up.
147
375000
2000
我們能夠增加食物產量
06:32
We can get efficiency up.
148
377000
2000
我們可以增加產出效率
06:34
But we've also got to get consumption down.
149
379000
3000
但其實我們應該減少消費量
06:38
We need to use less
150
383000
2000
必須用更少的
06:40
to make more.
151
385000
2000
原料來生產
06:42
And then we need to use less again.
152
387000
2000
我們使用的資源得比今日少
06:44
And then we need to consume less.
153
389000
2000
我們得消費得更少
06:46
All of those things are part of that equation.
154
391000
3000
這些全是那個公式的一部分
06:49
But it basically raises a fundamental question:
155
394000
3000
然而，伴隨而來的是一個根本問題：
06:52
should consumers have a choice
156
397000
2000
消費者有永續發展、
06:54
about sustainability, about sustainable products?
157
399000
3000
永續生存的相關產品可選擇嗎？
06:57
Should you be able to buy a product that's sustainable
158
402000
2000
架上擺了永續、不永續的兩種產品時，
06:59
sitting next to one that isn't,
159
404000
2000
你會選擇永續商品嗎？
07:01
or should all the products on the shelf be sustainable?
160
406000
3000
或是架上所有的商品都得是永續商品？
07:06
If they should all be sustainable on a finite planet,
161
411000
3000
在這個資源有限的地球上，該怎麼做
07:09
how do you make that happen?
162
414000
3000
才能讓所有商品都是永續商品？
07:12
The average consumer takes 1.8 seconds in the U.S.
163
417000
2000
在美國，消費者花1.8秒決定買什麼
07:14
Okay, so let's be generous.
164
419000
2000
標準放寬一點
07:16
Let's say it's 3.5 seconds in Europe.
165
421000
3000
假設歐洲人花3.5秒做決定
07:19
How do you evaluate all the scientific data
166
424000
3000
我們該怎麼評估一項產品的
07:22
around a product,
167
427000
2000
所有科學資訊
07:24
the data that's changing on a weekly, if not a daily, basis?
168
429000
3000
產品數據每週、甚至是每日變動
07:27
How do you get informed?
169
432000
2000
我們該怎麼獲得這樣的資料呢？
07:29
You don't.
170
434000
2000
這是做不到的
07:33
Here's a little question.
171
438000
2000
還有個小問題
07:35
From a greenhouse gas perspective,
172
440000
2000
從溫室氣體排放的角度來說
07:37
is lamb produced in the U.K.
173
442000
3000
在英國養羊
07:40
better than lamb produced in New Zealand,
174
445000
2000
會比在紐西蘭養
07:42
frozen and shipped to the U.K.?
175
447000
3000
最後再冷凍運送到英國好嗎？
07:45
Is a bad feeder lot operation for beef
176
450000
3000
一個餵牛吃飼料的糟糕農場
07:48
better or worse than
177
453000
3000
和一個餵牛吃草的糟糕農場相比
07:51
a bad grazing operation for beef?
178
456000
2000
誰比較好？
07:53
Do organic potatoes
179
458000
2000
有機馬鈴薯的生產過程
07:55
actually have fewer toxic chemicals
180
460000
2000
會比傳統種植方式
07:57
used to produce them
181
462000
2000
使用更少的
07:59
than conventional potatoes?
182
464000
2000
有毒化學物嗎？
08:01
In every single case,
183
466000
2000
這些問題的答案
08:03
the answer is "it depends."
184
468000
2000
都是「看情況」
08:05
It depends on who produced it and how,
185
470000
3000
依照作物是由誰種出、如何種出
08:08
in every single instance.
186
473000
2000
答案就不同
08:10
And there are many others.
187
475000
2000
還有很多其他的情況
08:12
How is a consumer going to walk through this minefield?
188
477000
2000
像是：消費者如何避開這些地雷？
08:14
They're not.
189
479000
2000
才不呢
08:16
They may have a lot of opinions about it,
190
481000
2000
消費者或許有很多選擇
08:18
but they're not going to be terribly informed.
191
483000
3000
可是他們得到的訊息卻嚴重不足
08:21
Sustainability has got to be a pre-competitive issue.
192
486000
3000
永續發展得是個異業結盟的議題
08:24
It's got to be something we all care about.
193
489000
3000
這得是我們所有人共同關心的議題
08:29
And we need collusion.
194
494000
2000
我們需要串謀
08:31
We need groups to work together that never have.
195
496000
3000
讓從未合作過的廠商結盟
08:34
We need Cargill to work with Bunge.
196
499000
3000
像是食品業的Cargill跟Bunge
08:37
We need Coke to work with Pepsi.
197
502000
3000
飲料業的可口可樂跟百事可樂
08:40
We need Oxford to work with Cambridge.
198
505000
2000
互為死對頭的劍橋跟牛津大學
08:42
We need Greenpeace to work with WWF.
199
507000
2000
綠色和平組織(環保團體)跟世界自然基金會
08:44
Everybody's got to work together --
200
509000
2000
所有的人都必須合作
08:46
China and the U.S.
201
511000
2000
包括中國和美國
08:48
We need to begin to manage this planet
202
513000
2000
我們得開始處理地球的問題
08:50
as if our life depended on it,
203
515000
2000
因為這是我們賴以維生的星球
08:52
because it does,
204
517000
2000
事情就是這樣
08:54
it fundamentally does.
205
519000
2000
從根本來說就是這樣
08:56
But we can't do everything.
206
521000
2000
但是我們也不是什麼都攬在身上
08:58
Even if we get everybody working on it,
207
523000
2000
即使我們說服所有人共同解決問題
09:00
we've got to be strategic.
208
525000
2000
我們必須有策略
09:02
We need to focus on the where,
209
527000
2000
我們必須專注於問題在哪、
09:04
the what and the who.
210
529000
2000
問題是什麼、還有由誰來解決
09:06
So, the where:
211
531000
2000
關於「問題在哪」這點：
09:08
We've identified 35 places globally that we need to work.
212
533000
2000
我們已知全球有35個地點需要保護
09:10
These are the places that are the richest in biodiversity
213
535000
3000
這些都是生物多樣性最豐富、
09:13
and the most important from an ecosystem function point-of-view.
214
538000
3000
且對於生態系統功能很重要的地方
09:16
We have to work in these places.
215
541000
2000
我們得解決這些地點的問題
09:18
We have to save these places if we want a chance in hell
216
543000
3000
眾所周知，我們得保護這些地點
09:21
of preserving biodiversity as we know it.
217
546000
3000
迫切希望有機會拯救當地的生物多樣性
09:26
We looked at the threats to these places.
218
551000
2000
讓我們來看看是哪些因素威脅其環境：
09:28
These are the 15 commodities
219
553000
2000
圖上的15個商品
09:30
that fundamentally pose the biggest threats
220
555000
2000
根本上是這些地區最大的威脅
09:32
to these places
221
557000
2000
因為其製程造成的
09:34
because of deforestation,
222
559000
2000
去雨林化、土壤流失、
09:36
soil loss, water use, pesticide use,
223
561000
3000
灌溉、殺蟲劑的使用
09:39
over-fishing, etc.
224
564000
3000
跟過漁等
09:44
So we've got 35 places,
225
569000
3000
所以，我們有35個危險區域、
09:47
we've got 15 priority commodities,
226
572000
2000
15個商品
09:49
who do we work with
227
574000
2000
我們該找誰一起來
09:51
to change the way those commodities are produced?
228
576000
3000
改變我們製造這些商品的流程？
09:54
Are we going to work with 6.9 billion consumers?
229
579000
3000
我們需要69億名消費者的合作嗎？
09:58
Let's see, that's about 7,000 languages,
230
583000
3000
這牽涉到7000種語言
10:01
350 major languages --
231
586000
2000
350種主要語言
10:03
a lot of work there.
232
588000
2000
實行起來很費力
10:05
I don't see anybody actually being able
233
590000
2000
我不知道有誰真能
10:07
to do that very effectively.
234
592000
2000
有效率的達成這件事
10:09
Are we going to work with 1.5 billion producers?
235
594000
3000
還是，我們跟15億生產者合作呢？
10:13
Again, a daunting task.
236
598000
3000
一樣，似乎是個不可能的任務
10:16
There must be a better way.
237
601000
3000
應該有更好的方法
10:19
300 to 500 companies
238
604000
2000
有300到500家公司
10:21
control 70 percent or more
239
606000
2000
控制這15項商品
10:23
of the trade of each of the 15 commodities
240
608000
3000
七成以上的交易
10:26
that we've identified as the most significant.
241
611000
3000
我們認為這些公司造成的影響最為顯著
10:29
If we work with those, if we change those companies
242
614000
3000
如果我們跟他們合作，改變這些公司
10:32
and the way they do business,
243
617000
2000
跟公司從商的模式
10:34
then the rest will happen automatically.
244
619000
3000
剩下的會自動自發改變
10:38
So, we went through our 15 commodities.
245
623000
2000
一項一項研究這15項商品
10:40
This is nine of them.
246
625000
2000
其中有9個
10:42
We lined them up side-by-side,
247
627000
2000
我們擺在一起看
10:44
and we put the names of the companies that work
248
629000
2000
註明是哪些公司
10:46
on each of those.
249
631000
3000
製造它們的
10:49
And if you go through the first 25 or 30 names
250
634000
2000
當你看了25-30家
10:51
of each of the commodities,
251
636000
2000
這些商品的製造者
10:53
what you begin to see is,
252
638000
2000
你會發現
10:55
gosh, there's Cargill here, there's Cargill there,
253
640000
3000
欸！除了Cargill，還是Cargill
10:58
there's Cargill everywhere.
254
643000
2000
這些東西全跟Cargill有關
11:00
In fact, these names start coming up over and over again.
255
645000
3000
因為這些公司不斷出現在名單上
11:03
So we did the analysis again a slightly different way.
256
648000
3000
我們用了另一個稍微不一樣的方法分析：
11:07
We said: if we take the top hundred companies,
257
652000
3000
名單上頭100個公司裡
11:10
what percentage
258
655000
2000
有多少比例
11:12
of all 15 commodities
259
657000
3000
包辦這15項商品的
11:15
do they touch, buy or sell?
260
660000
3000
經手、購買跟轉賣？
11:18
And what we found is it's 25 percent.
261
663000
3000
約為25%
11:22
So 100 companies
262
667000
2000
所以，這100個公司
11:24
control 25 percent of the trade
263
669000
3000
控制了這星球
11:27
of all 15 of the most significant
264
672000
2000
15個最重要的商品
11:29
commodities on the planet.
265
674000
3000
25%的交易
11:32
We can get our arms around a hundred companies.
266
677000
3000
我們可以張開雙手擁抱這100間公司
11:35
A hundred companies, we can work with.
267
680000
3000
跟這100間公司合作
11:38
Why is 25 percent important?
268
683000
3000
為什麼這25%的交易重要？
11:41
Because if these companies demand sustainable products,
269
686000
3000
因為如果這些公司要求產品永續生產
11:44
they'll pull 40 to 50 percent of production.
270
689000
3000
就會有40%到50%的產品為綠色商品
11:48
Companies can push producers
271
693000
3000
生產者推動綠色消費
11:51
faster than consumers can.
272
696000
3000
會比消費者自發快
11:54
By companies asking for this,
273
699000
2000
當生產者有這樣的要求
11:56
we can leverage production so much faster
274
701000
3000
矯正生產過程的缺失
11:59
than by waiting for consumers to do it.
275
704000
2000
會比等待消費者主動消費來的更快
12:01
After 40 years, the global organic movement
276
706000
3000
全球的有機食物運動花了40年
12:04
has achieved 0.7 of one percent
277
709000
2000
也只讓有機食物佔
12:06
of global food.
278
711000
2000
全球食物0.7%的比重
12:08
We can't wait that long.
279
713000
2000
我們沒辦法等這麼久了
12:10
We don't have that kind of time.
280
715000
2000
我們沒有這樣的時間
12:12
We need change
281
717000
2000
我們需要
12:14
that's going to accelerate.
282
719000
3000
加速度的改變
12:17
Even working with individual companies
283
722000
2000
即使跟每一個公司合作
12:19
is not probably going to get us there.
284
724000
2000
或許無法讓我們達成目標
12:21
We need to begin to work with industries.
285
726000
3000
我們還是得開始跟產業合作
12:24
So we've started roundtables
286
729000
2000
因此我們召開圓桌會議
12:26
where we bring together the entire value chain,
287
731000
2000
聚集產業鏈中
12:28
from producers
288
733000
2000
所有的生產者
12:30
all the way to the retailers and brands.
289
735000
2000
品牌廠商跟經銷商
12:32
We bring in civil society, we bring in NGOs,
290
737000
2000
我們讓公民團體、非政府組織、
12:34
we bring in researchers and scientists
291
739000
2000
學者、科學家、
12:36
to have an informed discussion --
292
741000
2000
跟產業界一起進行討論
12:38
sometimes a battle royale --
293
743000
2000
─過程有時跟小說《大逃殺》很像─
12:40
to figure out what are the key impacts
294
745000
3000
來找出這些產品對環境的
12:43
of these products,
295
748000
2000
主要衝擊為何
12:45
what is a global benchmark,
296
750000
1000
全球的標準為何
12:46
what's an acceptable impact,
297
751000
2000
可接受的環境衝擊為何
12:48
and design standards around that.
298
753000
3000
並據此設計評量標準
12:52
It's not all fun and games.
299
757000
3000
這過程一點也不有趣，更不是遊戲
12:56
In salmon aquaculture,
300
761000
2000
針對鮭魚養殖業
12:58
we kicked off a roundtable
301
763000
2000
約在6年前
13:00
almost six years ago.
302
765000
2000
我們開了圓桌會議
13:02
Eight entities came to the table.
303
767000
3000
8個團體出席
13:05
We eventually got, I think, 60 percent
304
770000
2000
我想，最後我們集合了這個產業
13:07
of global production at the table
305
772000
2000
生產端的60%
13:09
and 25 percent of demand at the table.
306
774000
3000
跟消費端的25%
13:12
Three of the original eight entities were suing each other.
307
777000
3000
這8個團體中的3個當時正互相打官司
13:15
And yet, next week, we launch
308
780000
3000
然而一週後，我們還是推動了
13:18
globally verified, vetted and certified
309
783000
3000
全球皆同意、一體適用及認證的
13:21
standards for salmon aquaculture.
310
786000
3000
鮭魚養殖標準
13:24
It can happen.
311
789000
2000
這是可以辦到的
13:26
(Applause)
312
791000
7000
（掌聲）
13:33
So what brings
313
798000
3000
是什麼讓這8個立場不同的團體
13:36
the different entities to the table?
314
801000
3000
都出現在會議上呢？
13:40
It's risk and demand.
315
805000
2000
這其中有許多風險跟要求
13:42
For the big companies, it's reputational risk,
316
807000
2000
對大公司而言，可能會賠上商譽
13:44
but more importantly,
317
809000
2000
但更重要的
13:46
they don't care what the price of commodities is.
318
811000
2000
他們不在乎商品的價錢
13:48
If they don't have commodities, they don't have a business.
319
813000
3000
如果沒有商品，就沒有交易
13:51
They care about availability,
320
816000
2000
所以他們在乎的是商品的取得
13:53
so the big risk for them is not having product at all.
321
818000
3000
而對他們來說，最大的風險在於沒有產品
13:56
For the producers,
322
821000
2000
對製造商來說
13:58
if a buyer wants to buy something produced a certain way,
323
823000
3000
消費者希望購買以某些方式生產的產品
14:01
that's what brings them to the table.
324
826000
2000
是讓這些人來開會的動力
14:03
So it's the demand that brings them to the table.
325
828000
3000
是消費者的需求帶他們上會議桌
14:06
The good news is
326
831000
2000
好消息是
14:08
we identified a hundred companies two years ago.
327
833000
2000
根據兩年前調查選出的100間公司中
14:10
In the last 18 months, we've signed agreements
328
835000
2000
在過去18個月裡，有40家
14:12
with 40 of those hundred companies
329
837000
2000
跟我們簽署同意書
14:14
to begin to work with them on their supply chain.
330
839000
2000
願意跟我們合作改善供應鏈
14:16
And in the next 18 months,
331
841000
3000
在未來的18個月
14:19
we will have signed up to work with another 40,
332
844000
3000
我們將努力說服其他40家公司簽署
14:22
and we think we'll get those signed as well.
333
847000
2000
而我們認為，取得他們的同意書是沒問題的
14:24
Now what we're doing is bringing the CEOs
334
849000
2000
我們正努力讓這80間
14:26
of these 80 companies together
335
851000
2000
大企業的執行長合作
14:28
to help twist the arms of the final 20,
336
853000
3000
協助改變最後20家公司的觀念
14:31
to bring them to the table,
337
856000
2000
讓他們也願意參與這個會議
14:33
because they don't like NGOs, they've never worked with NGOs,
338
858000
3000
因為這些公司不喜歡，也從未跟非政府組織合作
14:36
they're concerned about this, they're concerned about that,
339
861000
2000
擔心這個，擔心那個
14:38
but we all need to be in this together.
340
863000
2000
但我們需要大家的共同合作
14:40
So we're pulling out all the stops.
341
865000
2000
所以我們得移除所有障礙
14:42
We're using whatever leverage we have to bring them to the table.
342
867000
3000
借力使力讓這些公司加入我們的行列
14:46
One company we're working with that's begun --
343
871000
2000
其中一間剛開始跟我們合作的公司
14:48
in baby steps, perhaps --
344
873000
2000
是也許還在蹣跚學步
14:50
but has begun this journey on sustainability is Cargill.
345
875000
3000
但已經走上製造永續商品旅程的Cargill
14:53
They've funded research that shows
346
878000
3000
其贊助的研究顯示
14:56
that we can double global palm oil production
347
881000
2000
未來20年，我們一棵樹都不需要砍
14:58
without cutting a single tree in the next 20 years,
348
883000
3000
就能讓全球棕櫚油的產量加倍
15:01
and do it all in Borneo alone
349
886000
2000
而且只要在婆羅洲
15:03
by planting on land that's already degraded.
350
888000
2000
已經荒蕪的地上種植棕櫚即可
15:05
The study shows that the highest net present value
351
890000
3000
研究顯示，棕櫚油淨產量
15:08
for palm oil
352
893000
2000
最高的地方
15:10
is on land that's been degraded.
353
895000
3000
為漠化區
15:13
They're also undertaking a study to look at
354
898000
2000
Cargill也正在研究
15:15
all of their supplies of palm oil
355
900000
3000
他們供應的所有棕櫚油
15:18
to see if they could be certified
356
903000
2000
可不可以得到認證
15:20
and what they would need to change in order to become third-party certified
357
905000
3000
及為了通過有公信力的第三者評鑑機構認證
15:23
under a credible certification program.
358
908000
3000
他們得做出哪些改變
15:27
Why is Cargill important?
359
912000
2000
為什麼Cargill如此重要？
15:29
Because Cargill has 20 to 25 percent
360
914000
2000
因為這家公司的全球棕櫚油市占率
15:31
of global palm oil.
361
916000
2000
為20%到25%
15:33
If Cargill makes a decision,
362
918000
2000
當Cargill下定決心
15:35
the entire palm oil industry moves,
363
920000
3000
整個棕櫚油生產工業、
15:38
or at least 40 or 50 percent of it.
364
923000
2000
或至少40%到50%會跟著改變
15:40
That's not insignificant.
365
925000
2000
這就不是件小事了
15:42
More importantly, Cargill and one other company
366
927000
2000
更重要的，Cargill跟另一家公司
15:44
ship 50 percent of the palm oil
367
929000
3000
提供中國一半的
15:47
that goes to China.
368
932000
2000
進口棕櫚油
15:49
We don't have to change the way
369
934000
2000
我們不需要改變任何一家
15:51
a single Chinese company works
370
936000
2000
中國公司的生產方式
15:53
if we get Cargill to only send
371
938000
2000
只要我們讓Cargill將
15:55
sustainable palm oil to China.
372
940000
3000
以永續生產的棕櫚油輸入中國
15:58
It's a pre-competitive issue.
373
943000
2000
這種進入市場前的產品改變
16:00
All the palm oil going there is good.
374
945000
2000
所有在中國的棕櫚油將是好油
16:02
Buy it.
375
947000
2000
可以放心購買
16:04
Mars is also on a similar journey.
376
949000
3000
Mars也朝著同樣的方向前進
16:07
Now most people understand that Mars is a chocolate company,
377
952000
3000
大部分的人都知道Mars是一家巧克力公司
16:10
but Mars has made sustainability pledges
378
955000
2000
但是Mars在永續議題上承諾
16:12
to buy only certified product for all of its seafood.
379
957000
3000
他們只購買認證的海鮮為原料
16:15
It turns out Mars buys more seafood than Walmart
380
960000
2000
因為生產寵物飼料
16:17
because of pet food.
381
962000
2000
Mars採買的海鮮比沃爾瑪還多
16:19
But they're doing some really interesting things around chocolate,
382
964000
3000
但Mars也針對巧克力生產進行一些有意思的計畫
16:22
and it all comes from the fact
383
967000
2000
這是因為Mars希望
16:24
that Mars wants to be in business in the future.
384
969000
3000
他們未來在市場上仍有競爭力
16:27
And what they see is that they need to
385
972000
2000
Mars注意到，他們需要
16:29
improve chocolate production.
386
974000
3000
改進巧克力生產的過程
16:32
On any given plantation,
387
977000
2000
在任何一塊農地上
16:34
20 percent of the trees produce 80 percent of the crop,
388
979000
3000
八成的可可豆只由兩成的可可樹生產
16:37
so Mars is looking at the genome,
389
982000
2000
於是Mars研究可可樹基因體
16:39
they're sequencing the genome of the cocoa plant.
390
984000
2000
為可可樹的基因定序
16:41
They're doing it with IBM and the USDA,
391
986000
2000
他們跟IBM和美國農業部合作
16:43
and they're putting it in the public domain
392
988000
2000
公開可可樹的基因序列
16:45
because they want everybody to have access to this data,
393
990000
3000
因為Mars希望所有人都能看到這些數據
16:48
because they want everybody to help them
394
993000
2000
讓大家都來幫助他們
16:50
make cocoa more productive and more sustainable.
395
995000
3000
使可可樹的產率提高，讓生產過程更永續
16:53
What they've realized
396
998000
2000
他們明白
16:55
is that if they can identify the traits
397
1000000
2000
如果能夠找到
16:57
on productivity and drought tolerance,
398
1002000
3000
產量高且耐旱的表型
17:00
they can produce 320 percent as much cocoa
399
1005000
3000
就能在目前四成的農地上
17:03
on 40 percent of the land.
400
1008000
3000
讓產率提高3.2倍
17:06
The rest of the land can be used for something else.
401
1011000
3000
這樣剩下的農地就能做為他用
17:09
It's more with less and less again.
402
1014000
3000
這更多的是關於省還要更省
17:12
That's what the future has got to be,
403
1017000
2000
我們的未來必須要這樣
17:14
and putting it in the public domain is smart.
404
1019000
3000
將資訊公開很高明
17:17
They don't want to be an I.P. company; they want to be a chocolate company,
405
1022000
3000
Mars不想當個智慧財產公司，他們想當個巧克力公司
17:20
but they want to be a chocolate company forever.
406
1025000
3000
但他們更想當個永續的巧克力公司
17:23
Now, the price of food, many people complain about,
407
1028000
3000
當許多人抱怨食物的價格時
17:26
but in fact, the price of food is going down,
408
1031000
3000
然而，怪的是，食物價格其實正在降低
17:29
and that's odd because in fact,
409
1034000
2000
這是因為，事實上
17:31
consumers are not paying for the true cost of food.
410
1036000
3000
消費者並沒有為食物真正的成本付出代價
17:34
If you take a look just at water,
411
1039000
2000
以四種常見的產品而言
17:36
what we see is that,
412
1041000
2000
當你去研究這些農產品
17:38
with four very common products,
413
1043000
3000
水的使用，你會知道
17:41
you look at how much a farmer produced to make those products,
414
1046000
3000
農夫用多少原料來生產這些產品
17:44
and then you look at how much water input was put into them,
415
1049000
3000
我們知道農夫生產這些商品使用的水量
17:47
and then you look at what the farmer was paid.
416
1052000
3000
也知道農夫的收入
17:50
If you divide the amount of water
417
1055000
2000
將水量除以
17:52
into what the farmer was paid,
418
1057000
2000
農夫的收入
17:54
the farmer didn't receive enough money
419
1059000
2000
你會發現，農夫的收入不足以負擔
17:56
to pay a decent price for water in any of those commodities.
420
1061000
3000
生產這些農產品時所需的水
17:59
That is an externality by definition.
421
1064000
2000
這就是所謂的外部效應
18:01
This is the subsidy from nature.
422
1066000
2000
即產品生產時，自然界付出的成本
18:03
Coca-Cola, they've worked a lot on water,
423
1068000
3000
可口可樂在水資源上下了許多工夫
18:06
but right now, they're entering into 17-year contracts
424
1071000
3000
現在，他們跟土耳其的農夫
18:09
with growers in Turkey
425
1074000
2000
簽下一紙17年的合約
18:11
to sell juice into Europe,
426
1076000
2000
以利在歐洲銷售他們的果汁
18:13
and they're doing that because they want to have a product
427
1078000
3000
之所以這麼做，是因為他們希望
18:16
that's closer to the European market.
428
1081000
2000
在接近歐洲市場處生產產品
18:18
But they're not just buying the juice;
429
1083000
2000
如此一來，他們不僅只是買果汁
18:20
they're also buying the carbon in the trees
430
1085000
3000
還省了將產品運送到歐洲時
18:23
to offset the shipment costs associated with carbon
431
1088000
2000
燃燒樹木釋放的碳足跡
18:25
to get the product into Europe.
432
1090000
3000
及其相關成本
18:28
There's carbon that's being bought with sugar,
433
1093000
3000
在我們買糖、咖啡、牛肉時
18:31
with coffee, with beef.
434
1096000
2000
都會有這樣的碳足跡
18:33
This is called bundling. It's bringing those externalities
435
1098000
2000
藉著外部成本內部化
18:35
back into the price of the commodity.
436
1100000
3000
商品價格將包含環境的外部成本
18:39
We need to take what we've learned in private, voluntary standards
437
1104000
3000
我們需要應用從世界最好的製造商那裡
18:42
of what the best producers in the world are doing
438
1107000
3000
學來的私人或公益團體制定的標準
18:45
and use that to inform government regulation,
439
1110000
3000
以型塑政府規範
18:48
so we can shift the entire performance curve.
440
1113000
3000
改變整個生產曲線
18:51
We can't just focus on identifying the best;
441
1116000
2000
我們不只得找出最好的產業
18:53
we've got to move the rest.
442
1118000
3000
還得改變其他的產業
18:56
The issue isn't what to think, it's how to think.
443
1121000
3000
重點不在於思考目的，而在於過程
18:59
These companies have begun to think differently.
444
1124000
2000
這些公司已經開始改變思考模式
19:01
They're on a journey; there's no turning back.
445
1126000
3000
他們走在改革的路上，沒有回頭的路
19:04
We're all on that same journey with them.
446
1129000
3000
我們也在同一條船上
19:07
We have to really begin to change
447
1132000
3000
我們得真正開始改變
19:10
the way we think about everything.
448
1135000
2000
我們看待萬物的方式
19:12
Whatever was sustainable on a planet of six billion
449
1137000
3000
能讓一個60億人口的星球永續發展的方式
19:15
is not going to be sustainable on a planet with nine.
450
1140000
3000
在90億人口的星球上是不會有一樣的效果的
19:18
Thank you.
451
1143000
2000
謝謝
19:20
(Applause)
452
1145000
3000
（掌聲）
ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Jason Clay - Market transformerJason Clay’s ideas are changing the way governments, foundations, researchers and NGOs identify and address risks and opportunities for their work.
Why you should listen
A senior vice president in charge of markets at the World Wildlife Fund (WWF-US), Clay's goal is to create global standards for producing and using raw materials, particularly in terms of carbon and water. He has convened roundtables of retailers, buyers, producers and environmentalists to reduce the impacts of producing a range of goods and to encourage environmentally sensitive practices in agriculture, aquaculture and industry. He thinks deeply about the evolving role of the NGOs in the 21st century, using venture philanthropy to make them more nimble and operating at the speed and scale of life on the planet today. Before joining WWF in 1999, Clay ran a family farm, taught at Harvard and Yale, worked at the US Department of Agriculture and spent more than 25 years working with NGOs.
Jason Clay | Speaker | TED.com